Loading...
Minutes January 13, 2003CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 13, 2003 After determining that a quorum was present, the City of Denton City Council convened in a Work Session on Monday, January 13, 2003 at 11:00 a.m. in the City Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Brock; Mayor Pro Tern Burroughs; Council Members Fulton, McNeill, Montgomery, and Phillips. ABSENT: Council Member Redmon 1. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding a review of the Boards/Commissions. Mike Conduff, City Manager, presented information regarding the formalizing of practices that had been followed in the past several months. He stated that the Council's jobs were to determine the vision for the city; articulate the outcomes; delegate authority; and monitor results. He stated that Council should focus on the tasks that only the Council could do; set the outcomes; and delegate activities to others. The roles of the boards included advising the Council to help the Council do its job such as the Planning and Zoning Commission and Traffic Safety Commission, advising the staff to assist in achieving outcomes such as the Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board. A question Council could ask was whom was the board advising in this situation. Council appointed boards could spend more time on issues; focus on details, and hear more input than the Council. A good governance agreement to follow that supported the theory was that Council set aims and outcomes; all boards worked under the Council authority; and Council supported the decisions of the boards. A question to ask when considering an issue was if the board recommendation furthered Council outcomes. If the answer were yes, were the board and staff in agreement - was the information the same and was the information received individually by the Council or were presentations made before the Council? If the answer to those questions was yes, the Council should approve the board recommendation. If the answer was no, the Council should remand the issue with comments back to the board for the board to understand the new information instead of overturning the decision by the board. If the board and staff agreed, the item should be placed on the consent agenda if allowed; if the item required a public hearing, was there new information? If not, the board recommendation should be supported if no new information were presented. If the board and staff disagreed, it was suggested that the item be placed on the regular agenda, the Council listen to the input; and if the Council agreed with the board; support the board recommendation. If the council disagreed with the board and agreed with staff, the item should be remanded to the board with comments to help the board understand the issue. Advantages to this procedure included the empowerment of the boards, it allowed Council to focus on outcomes, the participants knew where to invest their time, and provided consistency to the process. Conduff suggested that if the Council were in agreement with this procedure, sessions should be held with keyboards to talk about the process and philosophy; include community education in process; and try it. Mayor Pro Tem Burroughs stated that he liked the idea of meeting with the various boards and felt it could be done once a year with the board that provided more input to Council and perhaps every two years with those boards that did not provide as much input to Council. He felt that City of Denton City Council Minutes January 13, 2003 Page 2 with a severe split in the vote, it was not valuable to send an item back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. There may be some circumstances when a board did not have a good sense on the outcome of an issue and needed council guidance. It might be burdensome to remand in some circumstances. Council Member McNeill stated that there may be a 5-2 Planning and Zoning Commission vote for approval but Council might be concerned that the Commission did not look at certain issues or that the board missed the mark. Council Member Fulton felt that the decision needed to be with the Council. There was too much on the Consent Agenda and rubber-stamping of board decisions. Some boards members felt that they were being misdirected from staff and not getting full information. Council was elected to make the decisions. Mayor Brock felt that it helped to have the transcription of the Planning and Zoning Commission minutes and that it provided an opportunity to ask for additional information. She felt the board/commission members should be encouraged to review information and ask for additional information that might not be there. Council Member McNeill stated that he liked the process as described and that the process was described in the Charter. If Council received information that the Planning and Zoning Commission members did not have, it would be a legitimate reason to send the item back to the Commission. Council Member Fulton felt that the public was not being properly informed on the Council's actions, especially with items on the Consent Agenda. City Manager Conduff suggested that the Council needed to determines its role. If that role were to educate the community, it would have to be determined how to do that. He felt there were lots of ways for the community to become educated and get information. Council Member Phillips felt that the Council had empowered its boards to look at many of the details and that Council did not have to do that. Council Member McNeill felt that there were many opportunities for the public to address their concerns to Council. He felt that the process described was the best utilization of the boards and of the Council's time. Council needed to listen to the boards. If not, all of the boards should be abolished and Council would do the roles. He questioned if there were too many boards or commissions, if there might be a need to combine some, change some roles, or change whom the board/commission reported to. Mayor Brock did not see any boards that could be eliminated. She felt that the Council should appoint the members to the boards even if the board made recommendations to staff. Council rated the boards and commissions in terms of reporting structure: "A" reported to Council, "B" reported to staff, and "C" other. The "A" category included the Human Services Advisory Board, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Public Utilities Board. The "B" category included the Civil Service Commission, the Library Board, and the Parks, Recreation City of Denton City Council Minutes January 13, 2003 Page 3 and Beautification Board. It was felt that some boards were both "A and B" and included the Airport Advisory Board and the Community Development Advisory Committee. Boards that fell in the "C" category included the Construction Advisory and Appeals Board, the Denton Housing Authority, the Historic Landmark Commission, TMPA and the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Council discussed the appointing process for the boards and commissions. It was noted that in some cities, appointments to boards and commissions in the "B" and "C" categories were delegated to staff with direction on geographic representation, demographic representation and set criteria for appointment from council. Consensus of the Council was to continue to make its own appointments. Council would welcome recommendations from staff for appointments especially in the "B" and "C" categories. Consensus of Council was to move forward with the joint sessions with the boards to discuss the process, how the boards were doing and how was Council treating the board's recommendations. The Planning and Zoning Commission would have a separate meeting as they provided the most input to council. One meeting would be scheduled with the Human Services Committee and the Community Development Advisory Board. Another meeting would be scheduled with the Airport Advisory Board and the Public Utilities Board. These meetings would be scheduled within the next 90 days. After that, meetings with the chairs of the "B and C" boards would be scheduled. Council also discussed the possibility of combining boards such as the Traffic Safety Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding a review of the Council Rules/Procedures. City Manager Conduff questioned if any of the Council had concerns with the Council' s Rules and Procedures. Council Member McNeill asked about the electronic use for council concerns. City Manager Conduff replied that it was rarely used. Council commented that requests were sometimes made during the meetings in order to let citizens know that the Council was addressing their concerns. Council also discussed various sections of the rules and procedures including citizen report, speaker cards, and presentations by members of Council and printed/typewritten ordinances for Council review. 3. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding a review of the City Council retreat. Betty Williams, Director of Management and Public Information, presented a strategy review of methods to overcome barriers to success. Council discussed whether or not there was a need for a lobbyist on the state level. Consensus of the Council was that as the City utilized a specialized lobbyist when needed, had a staff person who was a registered lobbyist and Council attended legislative sessions when needed, there was City of Denton City Council Minutes January 13, 2003 Page 4 no need for a lobbyist on the state level at this time. Consensus of Council was that most of the issues were well in the works. Council Member Phillips left the meeting. 4. The Council considered appointment of a Council Member as coordinator for the Council's Adopt-A-Spot. Consensus of Council was to appoint Council Member Fulton as the coordinator. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:15 p.m. EUL1NEBROCK MAYOR CITY OFDENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS