Loading...
April 11, 2006 Minutes CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 11, 2006 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in Closed Session on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Brock; Mayor Pro Tem McNeill; Council Members Heggins, Kamp, Montgomery, Mulroy, and Thomson. ABSENT: None In keeping with the provisions of the Public Power Utility Closed Session items, a vote was taken to determine that the item listed in 1.B.1. was an electrical competitive matter. Mulroy motioned, Kamp seconded to approve the item for a Closed Session discussion. On roll vote, Heggins ÐayeÑ, Kamp ÐayeÑ, McNeill ÐayeÑ, Montgomery ÐayeÑ, Mulroy ÐayeÑ, Thomson ÐayeÑ and Mayor Brock ÐayeÑ. Motion carried unanimously. Council convened into Closed Session at 4:08 p.m. to discuss the items listed below. 1. Closed Meeting: A. Consultation with Attorney Î Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 1. Consulted with the CityÓs attorneys on legal issues, and receive legal advice regarding proposed amendments to the codes, ordinances and standards concerning multi-family uses, mixed uses, exactions and impact fees, design standards, and the Comprehensive Plan. \[**Before the City Council (ÐCouncilÑ) may discuss, deliberate, vote, or take final action on this agenda item posted as an Ðelectric competitive matterÑ under the provisions of Texas Government Code Section 551.086(c) relating to ÐPublic Power UtilityÑ items, and the Council must make a good faith determination by a majority vote of the members of the Council that this agenda item is an Ðelectrical competitive matter,Ñ and satisfies the requirements of Texas Government Code Section 551.086(b)(3). A vote must be taken. The vote shall be taken during the Closed Meeting and shall be included in the certified agenda or the tape recording of the Closed Meeting. If the Council fails to determine by a majority vote of its members that this particular agenda item satisfies the requirements of Section 551.086(b)(3), then the Council may not discuss, deliberate or take any further action on that agenda item in its Closed Meeting.\] B. Deliberations regarding certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters Î Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086 1. Received a presentation from DME staff regarding public power and business matters regarding the pending request for proposals, and information and analysis regarding power purchase contracts; and discussed, deliberated, considered and provided staff with direction regarding such matters. 2. Received a report and held a discussion of the electric customer and megawatt-hour forecasts. City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 2006 Page 2 C. Consultation with Attorney Î Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 1. Consulted with the CityÓs attorneys regarding legal issues, including defense of pending litigation filed by JNC Denton Partners, LLC, associated with annexation of real property in the CityÓs northern ETJ, under Annexation Case No. A05-0002, along with other legal issues related to the annexation, including zoning, land use and subdivision controls, plat applications, annexation plans, development agreements, annexation agreements, service plans, utility service, and legal issues implicated by alternative proposals advanced by individuals owning property within the proposed annexation area. A public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the CityÓs attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas or would jeopardize the CityÓs legal position in any administrative proceedings or potential litigation. Following the completion of the Closed Session that ended at 5:35 p.m., the Council convened in nd a 2 Tuesday Session. 1. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding strategies for maintaining and revitalizing neighborhoods. Rick Jones, Fire Marshal, and Lancine Bentley, Parks Area Program Manager, presented strategies for maintaining and revitalizing neighborhoods. Portions of the presentation included council direction, response to community issues, multiply year process, multiple department involvement and long-term solutions. Council Member Kamp left the meeting. The International Property Maintenance Code set minimum property maintenance standards, was a centralized code, was specific to the Denton community, would be reviewed and modified on a regular basis and was consistent with other adopted codes. The IPMC recommendations included adopting the IPMC as amended, amending the IPMC to include codes found in the Denton Code of Ordinances and Denton Development Code and including additional provisions. Those additional provisions would include garage sales, storage of solid waste carts, PODS, outside storage, temporary carports, number of vehicles, general penalty for violations, single- family certificate of occupancy renewal, and a multi-family licensing inspection program. A schedule and process for adoption of the IPMC would include public input and education, a review by the Construction Advisory and Appeals Board, a review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council review. IPMC resource recommendation included the addition of two Code Officers for the 2006-07 budget proposal. Property Assessment Survey Î The Property Assessment Survey established base-line information for exterior structure evaluation and nuisance violations. This would be an approximate 5+ month process with a cost estimate of $80,000-$100,000. Rental Inspection Program Î The Rental Inspection Program was a multi-family licensing and inspection program, and a single-family certificate of occupancy renewal program. The Multi- City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 2006 Page 3 Family Licensing and Inspection Program was an annual licensing and inspection program of exteriors of all multi-family properties and up to 10% of unoccupied multi-family interiors. Fees st and revenue included $12.60 per unit annual licensing fee, no fee for initial inspection or 1 re- nd inspection, $20 for 2 re-inspection of un-remediated violations not to exceed $40 per unit. This would produce an estimated annual revenue of $231,895. Resource recommendations included four additional Code Enforcement officers, vehicles, office and training costs with an annual expense of $283,000 for the first year. Single-Family Certificate of Occupancy renewal Î This program would deal with internal and external inspections with a change of occupancy. It would involve unoccupied inspections and a certificate of occupancy issued to the owner of the property. Fees and revenue would include a $12.60 fee per year for single-family rentals, $25.20 per year for duplex rentals with no inspection or re-inspection fees. Resource recommendations included two additional Code Enforcement officers, vehicle, office and training costs. Substandard Housing Î The first recommendation for this program was to complete the property assessment survey. Repair and rehabilitation compliance would be done through Code Enforcement. Resource recommendations included two additional Code Enforcement officers, vehicles, office and training costs. Summary of recommendations for 2006-07: (1) adopt IPMC, (2) conduct a property assessment survey, (3) hire two additional Code Enforcement officers and (4) begin the substandard housing program with prioritization of substandard housing and the hiring of one Code Enforcement Officer. Summary of recommendations for 2007-08: (1) rental property inspection program with the hiring of 4 Code Enforcement officers, continue to review and update the IPMC and continue the implementation of the Substandard Housing Program. 2008-09 summary recommendations: (1) continue rental property inspection program, (2) hire two Code Enforcement Officers, and (3) continue Substandard Housing Program with the hiring of a second Code Enforcement Officer. Council discussion Î There was a need to look at the property ownerÓs perspective with the right amount of regulation for desired outcome for property standards. Public input and education was needed before starting the process Î need stakeholderÓs buy-in before implementing the process. Search out groups for that type of input. Commitment was needed by Council to work these suggestions into the budget Î need conceptual buy-in and keep process going to meet with various community groups. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the staff recommendations. 2. The Council received a report, held a discussion and provided staff direction concerning a Lawn and Landscape Irrigation and Water Waste Ordinance. Dave Wachel, Water Utilities Coordinator, presented background information on the lawn and landscape irrigation ordinance. It was recently updated to comply with a series of bills passed to fulfill a statewide water conservation initiative mandated in 2003. The lawn and landscape ordinance was intended to minimize water in landscape irrigation. Initially the ordinance was to City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 2006 Page 4 have been implemented in two phases. However staff was suggesting implementing the ordinance in 2006 due to the possibility of a continued drought and suggestions by council members to begin implementation. Council Member Kamp returned to the meeting. Elements of the ordinance would include no outdoor watering with sprinklers during certain times of the day, requirements for new irrigation systems, prohibition of outdoor watering during any form of precipitation, and enforcement of the ordinance by a system of warnings followed by fines for continued or repeated violations. There would also be a water waste component to the ordinance, which would prohibit leaking outside faucets, leaks on customer service lines and excessive leakage of interior plumbing. The first year of implementation would only have warnings issued. Council discussion Î Not sure if want to terminate water service as the final penalty for repeated violations, consider the continued doubling of fines instead. Not in favor of freeze/rain sensor requirement as that was too much governmental control. Most new systems now have those types of sensors included in the system. Consider dropping off some of the warnings issued over a period of years for better enforcement. Do not include the termination of service, rather double the fines and then see how it goes. Consensus of the Council was to eliminate the termination of service and add the doubling of the fine again with an additional warning also added. 3. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the Water, Wastewater, and Solid Waste Forecasts. This item was not considered. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. _____________________________ _____________________________ EULINE BROCK JENNIFER WALTERS MAYOR CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS