October 12, 2010 MinutesCITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
October 12, 2010
After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on
Tuesday, October 12, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall.
PRESENT: Council Member Watts, Council Member Heggins, Council Member Gregory,
Council Member Engelbrecht, Council Member King and Mayor Burroughs.
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Kamp
1. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the Council agenda
process.
City Manager Campbell stated that Council had requested this item when some of the recent
meeting started getting long. Today's discussion would center on a discussion of the purpose of
city council meetings; examine the current agenda process; brainstorm potential options,
suggestions or ideas for improvement; provide direction to staff and/or reach consensus on a
process going forward.
Purpose of city council meetings - The primary function of a city council meeting was to
conduct the formal business of the city of Denton. It also provided a forum for open dialogue
among members of the council and staff, provided a forum for citizen comment regarding the
business of the city government and made formal policy decisions by approving or denying
ordinances, resolutions, etc.
Current agenda process - The current agenda process was governed by the Council's Rules of
Procedure which contained the basic elements of work session, closed meetings and regular
meetings. Some potential changes might require a change in the Rules of Procedure.
Efficiencies currently in place - Efficiencies in place included (1) informal reports, (2) the
Consent Agenda, (3) provided concise information in a standard format in the form of the
Agenda Information Sheet, (4) included presentations such as power points in the backup, and
(5) enforced time limits for presenters/speakers.
Options, suggestions, ideas for improvement - (1) Re-format the agenda in terms of (a) include
citizen appearances at/near the beginning of the agenda to accommodate citizens. Citizens
wishing to address consent items or items for individual consideration would be limited to a total
of xx minutes per person. Comments would be received from the citizens before the Council
took up the Consent Agenda or individual items. (b) Citizen addressing items not on the agenda
and who had not so addressed the Council within the previous xx months (all others who had
signed up with City Secretary would speak at the end of the agenda).
Other options included (2) permit citizen comments on zoning cases only during open public
hearings. It was unusual to allow citizen input on public hearings after the public hearing had
been closed and could present a problem with both sides not being noticed. If public input was
desired at future meetings, don't close the public hearing. (3) Withhold substantive questions of
staff regarding public hearings until after the applicant had presented the case and citizens had
addressed council. (4) Announce that non-speaker card submitted for public hearings would be
entered into the record but refrain from reading those cards during the hearing.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 12, 2010
Page 2
Council Member King asked if individuals not in attendance could have cards submitted for
them.
Campbell stated that the Rules of Procedure prohibited that.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked about individuals who came to the meeting but who had to
leave before their item was considered.
Mayor Burroughs felt that scenario was allowed but that it was not right to submit cards with
people's names of those who were not there.
Campbell continued that another issue was to (5) limit the number of public hearings on agenda
to four. That could be a plus or minus depending on how many cases were in the zoning process.
(6) Post public hearings to follow the Consent Agenda, Items for Individual Consideration and
citizen appearances. That would get all topics done before getting to the public hearings. (7)
Limit complex work sessions to the 2nd Tuesday sessions such as bike paths, gas wells, DTIP,
etc. (8) hold zoning case hearings on 2nd Tuesday meetings only. Zoning cases would be the
only items on the agenda. (9) Set an ending time for city council meeting at which time the
meetings would be recessed to another date.
City Attorney Burgess stated that the Open Meetings Act allowed the Council to recess the
meeting to the next day. If it were to go to another date, the meeting would have to be reposted.
Campbell continued with options and suggestions. (10) Re-assess the summer recess, and (11)
consider all Closed Session items that related to action items at the first of the Closed Session to
assure adjournment/recess of the Closed Session by 6:25 p.m.
Mayor Burroughs stated that re-opening public comment on zoning cases where the public
hearings had been closed should probably not be done. The public comment section was over
and Council should not have received comments again.
Council Member Engelbrecht stated that frequently happened in zoning cases because Council
would suggest that the developer go back to make changes. If changes were made, residents
should have another opportunity to speak on a plan that was different than before.
Council Member Gregory stated that if the riles were followed, something needed to be done
with the public hearing rather than close it.
Mayor Burroughs stated that if the Council was going to send the item back for public comment,
the public hearing should be reopened.
City Manager Campbell stated that the discussion should be limited to that issue and not rehash
everything.
Mayor Burroughs stated that if Council realized that it was going to table and continue an item,
they should think about what they were going to do and perhaps allow the public hearing to be
re-opened for future citizen comment.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 12, 2010
Page 3
Council Member Watts felt that an item for a public hearing had almost two segments. One was
for staff presentation and public input and the second was for council discussion. He questioned
if a public hearing that had been closed but still needed discussion could be listed as a public
hearing but not receive public input rather than have it listed under Items for Individual
Consideration.
City Attorney Burgess stated that public hearings with zoning cases were a creature of state law
and local ordinance. There was the factor of the ability of the public to speak and the impact of
citizens to make comments. There was also the factor of publication and obligation to notify so
as the Council looked at an item it might want to consider for additional public comment as a
part of zoning case but not part of blue card process, it might consider continuing the item and
public hearing and leave it open and re-open it at the next meeting. If the public hearing was
closed, it could not be reopened as it would be a violation of state law.
Mayor Burroughs asked if there could be a separate agenda item indicating that the public
hearing had been closed and it was a separate item to be listed as a continuance of debate.
Council would have the option at that time to table, re-open the public hearing or not give back
to the public and council just needed more debate.
City Attorney Burgess indicated that could be done.
Council Member Gregory stated that he found it helpful when the applicant changed a request to
hear more input from citizens because the change might be significant enough that it might have
other consequences for people. He was not sure he would want to limit comments only to the
Blue Cards.
Mayor Burroughs felt that there were two circumstances when dealing with public hearings and
it would be difficult to make an automatic rile regarding them. One circumstance dealt with
making changes to a proposal during the public hearing and whether to table the item or continue
having discussion on it. In that circumstance, it would be better to reopen the public hearing and
continue it to another meeting. The second circumstance was more technical in nature and could
be continued with no public input to be accepted.
Council Member Gregory expressed concern about limiting public hearings to the second
Tuesdays of the month. Developers were sometimes under time constraints and limiting public
hearings to one meeting a month might present a hardship.
Campbell stated it could create a hardship on developers and on staff to schedule those types of
meetings.
Council Member Gregory stated he was not in favor of that option.
Mayor Burroughs suggested that if a meeting was loaded with zoning cases and some cases were
ready that they be considered on a 2nd Tuesday meeting to relieve time for the next meetings.
Campbell stated that staff would have to look at that option in terms of publishing notices. There
might be a problem with scheduling on a short notice.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 12, 2010
Page 4
Council Member Watts stated that Council might come a point where 2" d Tuesday meetings
might have to be changed to action meetings in order to get business done. He was in agreement
with the option to move complicated items to the 2nd Tuesday meetings and waiting to ask staff
questions until citizens had input in public hearings. He was also in favor of not announcing
non-speaker cards during the meeting but rather put them in the official record of the meeting.
Council Member Engelbrecht stated that someone could read the number of cards in favor and
the number of cards in opposition.
Campbell stated that staff would indicate the total number of cards and indicate the number in
favor and the number in opposition.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with that option.
Council Member Gregory suggested setting up two times for citizen reports. One at the
beginning for people to make comments about the Consent Agenda with a limit of 5-7 speakers
and limit the speakers to those who had not spoken to Council in the last six months.
Mayor Burroughs suggested having public comments on the Consent Agenda during the Work
Session because that was when Council discussed it. Then Council could pull an item during the
regular meeting because of earlier commentary.
Council Member Gregory cautioned that the Work Session might start at 3:00 in the afternoon
and some citizens might not be able to attend the meetings. He suggested limiting the comments
to a set number of minutes.
Mayor Burroughs suggested a total of three minutes at the Work Session to bring up why a
Consent Agenda item was an issue and then the item could then be pulled if needed.
Council Member King stated that an individual who worked might not be able to make an early
meeting and would not be heard.
Council Member Gregory stated that he appreciated that concern but there always would be
people who would not be able to attend a meeting.
Council Member Watts asked if there was a way to limit speakers either by time or number of
items.
Mayor Burroughs asked about the legality of timing of public comments.
City Attorney Burgess stated that it was not a state law issue but was in the Council's Rules of
Procedure. The overall issue was a First amendment question and when a time was created for
public comment to be sure it was not a restriction on speech.
Mayor Burroughs suggested trying the procedure and see how it worked and how difficult it
might be.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 12, 2010
Page 5
Campbell stated that the first item on the Work Session would be modified to indicate that there
was an opportunity to speak at that time.
Council Member Gregory stated that it needed to be clear that this was not an attempt to stifle
public input but rather a way to be more convenient for public comment.
Mayor Burroughs agreed that it would also be more meaningful when the public comment was
given.
Campbell stated that then there would be no comment at the 6:30 meeting for public comment on
the Consent Agenda
Council Member King noted that he liked all of the suggestions except for the setting of an
ending time for the meeting.
Mayor Burroughs suggested putting public hearings at end of the meeting and splitting citizen
reports. It was good to have a meaningful time for citizens to speak but he didn't want to have
repeaters speaking all the time at the beginning of the meetings. He suggested having a first
session of citizen reports at the beginning of the meeting with three speakers scheduled on a first
come first served basis and who have not spoken to Council in the past six months or a year, just
as long as they were not repetitive speakers. When the first three speakers were scheduled,
everyone else who wanted to do a citizen report would be at the end of the meeting. Reports
would be limited to four minutes.
Council Member Heggins asked about the times when Council spoke too long. She suggested
Council condense comments and not speak so long.
The Council's consensus for the options included: (1) public comments on Consent Agenda
items would be taken during the Work Session with comments limited to three minutes per
speaker. There would be no citizen comments during the regular meeting on Consent Agenda
items. (2) Citizen reports would be split with a time at the beginning for up to three speakers
who had not spoken to Council in the past six months and a limit of four minutes for the report.
All others would be at the end of the meeting. (3) Council would decide during the meeting on
whether or not more citizen input would be needed for a public hearing and would either close
the public hearing and not receive further public comment or re-open the public hearing and
continue it to a future meeting. (4) Council would withhold substantive questions of staff during
public hearings until after the applicant had presented his case and the citizens had addressed
Council. (5) Non-Speaker comment cards would be entered into the record but not read during
the meeting. The cards would be passed around for Council to read should they desire to do so.
(6) There would be no limiting the number of public hearings on a particular agenda. (7) Public
hearings would be posted after the Consent Agenda, Items for Individual Consideration and
public comments. (8) Complex work session items would be scheduled as much as possible on
2" d Tuesdays. (9) Additional zoning cases could be scheduled for a 2" d Tuesday session as an
option but additional staff input was needed in this area. (10) There would be no setting of an
ending time for the meetings. (11) An additional meeting would be scheduled for July to help
limit the length of the July/August meetings. (12) Staff would work with the Close Meeting
schedule to try and schedule items that related to action items at the first of the Closed Session to
try and adjourn the Closed Meeting by 6:25 p.m.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 12, 2010
Page 6
2. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the Employee Healthy
Incentives Program.
Scott Payne, Risk Manager, stated that the cost to provide comprehensive health care benefits
continued to increase each year. Staff was looking at ways to deal with these rising costs. Over
the past five years, the City had increased member deductibles and the copayments for urgent
care facilities, the emergency room and specialist office visits. The City had also made changes
to the prescription drug program by increasing the copayments for some medications. The City
moved from a fully-insured health program to a self-funded program that had saved an estimated
$2.6 million when compared with the equivalent premiums the city would have paid if remained
fully-insured. The City's Healthy Incentives Program was an attempt to motivate employees to
change their behavior when it came to their health by offering financial incentives to motivate
them into a more active role.
Kari Zika, Benefits Administrator, presented information and statistics on why it was important
to focus on wellness. She also reviewed risk factors for every 100 employees. The first step in
the program was to educate the employees and to communicate the message of wellness to
employees.
Step 2 involved getting numbers in terms of blood pressure and cholesterol. This was a service
that was provided through the annual Wellness and Benefits Fair. Employees could also get their
numbers from their own physician.
Step 3 of the program was to complete an on-line health assessment through United Health Care.
Those employees who completed the assessment would receive a $120 differential in premiums
for next year. The assessment would provide a personal results report, an opportunity to enroll in
online coaching programs, and an opportunity for telephone-based health coaching programs.
The Planning for the Future portion of the program involved continuing the Healthy Incentives
Program for 2012, increasing premium differentials, adding additional measures to qualify for
the premium reductions and the addition of an employee Health and Wellness Clinic. It was the
hope that employees would take advantage of this opportunity to improve health and be
rewarded with lower premium costs.
Council Member Gregory suggested that staff consider adding walking or biking to work to the
list of incentives.
Council Member Gregory asked about employee privacy in terms of the screening and the
information that was collected about employees.
Payne replied that Denton Regional collected the blood samples and mailed the results to the
employees. In terms of the on-line assessment, staff would only receive aggregate numbers and
no information on individuals.
Council Member Engelbrecht asked about vending machines that would dispense healthy foods
such as juices and fruits.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
October 12, 2010
Page 7
Payne stated that he had looked at that a number of years ago but no vendor would provide it as
it was too hard to keep fresh food in it. There was a lot of waste and was not cost effective.
Mayor Burroughs suggested having a city sponsored 5k run/walk and co-sponsor it with a
charitable organization. He had been approached by Seniors in Motion to do such a program
before the start of the Arts and Jazzfest. He asked about the possibility of the Council opting in
to the City's health benefits group. They would pay their way the same as the employees did.
Council Member Watts suggested moving forward with the clinic. He asked if employees would
also receive incentives if they used the clinic.
Payne stated that there would be no cost to employees who used the clinic.
Council Member King asked what portion of the premium an employee only paid.
Payne stated that an employee on the lower plan did not pay anything and the cost went higher
with the increase in the type of plan.
Council Member King felt that until employees paid a larger portion of their health insurance
there was no incentive to do better with their costs.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:12 p.m.
MARK A. BURROUGHS
MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
JENNIFER WALTERS
CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS