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