Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2004-06-29 Agendas CITY OF NORTH RICH LAND HILLS PRE-COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 29, 2004 - 5:45 P.M. For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall - Pre-Council Chambers 7301 Northeast Loop 820. NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 1. Discuss Items from Regular June 29, 2004 City Council MeetinQ (5 Minutes) 2. IR 2004-069 Appointment to Big Fossil Watershed Policy Committee (5 Minutes) Senior Tax Freeze Options (Limitation of Municipal Tax on 3. IR 2004-071 Homesteads of Disabled and Elderly) (45 Minutes) 4. Adjournment *Closed due to subject matter as provided by the Open Meetings Law. If any action is contemplated, it will be taken in open session. , ,., (PO~TED "t' ~;"~ ~ -- Date S.lb ~tA T~ ~~¿:)'a ~ . ,...- -'-~~'''',.., .. ,... "....,~._."",."".\ ..-.~......_- 06/29/04 City Council Agenda Page 1 of 3 p, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 29, 2004 - 7:00 PM For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall Council Chambers 7301 Northeast Loop 820, at 7:00 p.m. The below listed items are placed on the Agenda for discussion and/or action. 1. Items on the consent agenda will be voted on in one motion unless a Council Member asks for separate discussion. 2. The Council reserves the right to retire into executive session concerning any of the items listed on this Agenda, whenever it is considered necessary and legally justified under the Open Meetings Act. 3. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need assistance should contact the City Secretary's office at 817-427-6060 two working days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 1. Call to Order 2. Invocation - Councilman Whitson 3. Pledge - Councilman Whitson 4. Special Presentations Yard of the Month - Bill Stewart, Keep North Richland Hills Beautiful Commission 5. Citizens Presentation 6. Removal of Item(s) from the Consent AQenda 7. Consent a. Minutes of the June 14, 2004 Council Agenda Meeting GN 2004-050 b. 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant and Setting Public Hearing - Resolution No. 2004-040 PU 2004-030 c. Extension of Contract with Deloitte & Touche, LLP for Professional Auditing Services and Approve Resolution No. 2004-041 06/29/04 City Council Agenda Page 2 of 3 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN Public Hearing and Consideration of Proposed 8. GN 2004-051 Text Revisions to Ordinance No. 1847 Zoninq Ordinance Regarding the Amount of Time to Appeal Decisions Rendered by the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Clarifying the Amount of Fines for Conviction of Persons Found in Violation of the Zoning Ordinance and Eliminating the 10 Day Publication Period for Consideration of Text Amendments by Planning and ZoninQ Commission - Ordinance No. 2787 9. GN 2004-052 Appointments to Council Committees / Boards 10.GN 2004-053 Appointments to Civil Service Commission 11. GN 2004-054 Appointment of One Board Delegate to Reinvestment Zone No. 1 and Two Board DeleQates to Reinvestment Zone NO.2 12. GN 2004-055 Appointments to Boards/Commissions (Place 4 and Alternate / Ex Officio positions) 13. GN 2004-056 Public Hearinq on Senior Tax Freeze 14. GN 2004-057 Consider Resolution Calling Election to Submit Senior Tax Freeze - Resolution No. 2004-042 15. GN 2004-058 Consider Ordinance Enacting Senior Tax Freeze - Ordinance No. 2789 16. Action on Any Item Discussed in Executive Session listed on Pre-Council AQenda 17. Information and Reports - Councilwoman Johnson 18. Adiournment (PO~TED 4 .~~, 04 --¡:,. 06/29/04 City Council Agenda Page 3 of 3 Date . 5', liD ~rv\ Time µQ-. CIt.V S<=ta'!l (). _ µ~VLÁ~ ~,~) -,_.~.......-. INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR 2004-069 ~ Date: T Subject: June 29, 2004 Appointment of Alternate to Big Fossil Watershed Policy Committee In November 2000 Oscar Trevino and Joe Tolbert were appointed by former Mayor Scoma to serve as the city's representative and alternate representative to the Big Fossil Watershed Policy Committee. The alternate position is now vacant and Mayor Trevino will be appointing Councilman Welch as the City's alternate representative. Respectfully submitted, gdl/lÆti~~ Patricia Hutson City Secretary ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS ......._~- 11Fo'kMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL No. IR#2003-Q71 -c~ Date: June 29, 2004 T Subject: Limitation of Municipal Tax on Homesteads of Disabled and Elderly In September 2003, Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment that authorized a local option tax freeze on residential homesteads of persons disabled or 65 years of age or older (seniors). In North Richland Hills, 85% of the voters in this election voted in support of making this a local option decision. To implement this amendment, the Texas Legislature adopted H.B. 136 during the 78th Legisiative Session. H.B. 136 adds Section 11.261 to the Tax Code allowing municipalities, counties, and junior college districts to implement the freeze on or after January 1, 2004. The freeze has generated considerable interest from senior citizen organizations in the Northeast Tarrant County area. On May 24, 2004, CouncU discussed what options were available on the tax freeze. Discussion was held as to whether or not Council could initiate an election on the tax freeze. The City Attorney advised there was uncertainty as to whether a Council could call for such election without a petition and another City had asked for an Attorney General's opinion on this. To date the Attorney General's Office has not issued an opinion on this matter. We also discussed the options of a non-binding election, a petition being submitted by citizens, and Council encouraging initiation of a petition. Consensus at that meeting was for staff to gather information to be presented to Council at the second meeting in June so that Council could then decide how to proceed. The objective of this report is to provide Council the basic facts about the tax freeze and to discuss the City's options. Before proceeding, it is important to note that State Law currently protects seniors and disabled homeowners from losina their homes due to tax delinauency. A person disabled or 65 years of age or older may file a Tax Deferral Affidavit with the Tarrant Appraisal District, which allows deferral of all tax payments until the applicant no longer owns or lives in the home. Comments have been made that the tax freeze is necessary to protect seniors and disabled persons from losing their homes. This is not the case as taxing entities cannot file suit to foreclose on a home protected through "tax deferral." The County Tax Collector indicates this is not a complicated process. Facts about the Senior and Disabled Tax Freeze: · The State Law allowing the tax freeze option took effect January 1, 2004. · The freeze is local option. not mandated. It may be implemented by the Council through ordinance or by election if 5% of the City's registered voters sign a petition requesting such election. As of May 2004, there were 37,234 registered voters in the City, which means signatures of approximately 1,860 registered voters would be needed to move forward with an election. If action is taken prior to January 1, 2005, the freeze would take effect in 2004. · The tax freeze works by ensurina that a senior or disabled person will not have a municipal tax bill any hiaher than what was paid in the 1 st year in which the tax freeze was implemented and/or the homeowner turned 65 or became disabled. There is one exception; taxes may go up if improvements are made to a r~sidence. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS '-- -\..- , ~ Assuming the City implemented the tax freeze in 2004, a senior or disabled person payina '. ~4bo for City taxes in that same year would not be reauired to pay more than that amount in subseauent years unless improvements are made to his/her home. If improvements are made, then the person would pay $400 in taxes plus the appropriate amount of taxes on the separately valued improvements. The sum of these two would then become the new frozen amount. ',-- · The tax freeze is not actually a "freeze." A senior or disabled person's tax liability can increase if improvements are made to his/her home (as stated above). On the other hand, his/her tax liability may decrease as dictated by declinina property values and/or the City's reduction of its property tax rate. · A tax freeze granted to an eligible senior or disabled person may be passed on to their survivina spouse if the surviving spouse is 55 years of aae or older at the time of the eligible person's death. · If an NRH resident benefiting from the freeze moves to a different home in NRH, then he/she will be able to carry .the freeze to the new home at the same percentaae. For example, if a resident's taxes are frozen at $100, but the resident would have paid $400 without the tax freeze, the percentage of tax paid is 25%. If the taxes owed on his/her new home are $1,000, the new frozen tax amount would be $250, or 25% of $1,000. If a qualifying individual moves from another city to NRH, the freeze offered by the other city would not apply in NRH. The individual's freeze would begin at the full taxable value of that house. · The tax freeze is leaallv independent of the senior and disabled tax exemption that NRH already offers. Therefore, neither, one, or both can be administered locally. · Unlike the City's senior and disabled exemption currently in place, the tax freeze may not be repealed or rescinded subsequent to its implementation. '- Options For Review As mentioned above, the freeze is local option legislation and is independent of the senior and disabled exemption. So, several options are available to provide tax relief for qualifying senior and disabled residents. Below you will find explanations for 5 options identified. A list of pros and cons is provided for each option. An illustrative section follows which shows the financial impact of each option on taxpayer liability and the City's revenue stream. It is important to note that NRH residents also have the ability to evaluate options and move forward through petition for election and a favorable vote. Option 1 - Maintain status quo by continuing forward with the City's $36,000 senior and disabled exemption without implementing the freeze. Pros ~ This is the least costly option for the City over time. ~ This option would allow the City to maintain its ability to increase or hold the exemption steadY as economic conditions dictate. ~ This option can be viewed as equitable - the City would be providing like exemptions to all seniors and disabled residents. ~ No administrative action would be necessary to continue at our current exemption level. ~ Impact of school finance reform could be considered before moving forward with the freeze. ,- > 'Cons ~ This option can be viewed as inequitable - residents with similar property values can have differing tax liabilities based on whether or not they are seniors or disabled. "- Option 2 - Adopt the tax freeze beginning in tax year 2004 and repeal the senior and disabled exemption effective tax year 2005. Pros ~ This would "grandfather" the senior and disabled exemption for all eligible persons living in the City prior to January 1, 2005. That is, those taxpayers that currently qualify and those that qualify in 2004 for the senior and disabled exemption will have their tax liability "frozen" with the exemption in place. ~ All senior and disabled homesteads would benefit from the freeze as soon as is legally possible. Cons ~ The City would lose revenue policy flexibility. Once the freeze is in place it can not be removed. ~ The City would forego revenue growth opportunity while current expenditure levels continue to expand with inflation. ~ Citizens would not be sharing in an equitable or equal basis in providing public services by granting some citizens larger tax reductions. .,- ~ Seniors are treated the same regardless of ability to pay, thereby the possibility of some individuals getting greater benefits exists. ~ This option may be viewed as inequitable -- some residents will benefit from the expired exemption while some will not and residents with similar property values can have differing tax liabilities based on whether or not they are seniors or disabled. ~ Property taxes are a more economically stable source of revenue than sales taxes for NRH. The City's property tax revenue tends to remain fairly constant during downturns in the economy while sales taxes are more heavily impacted. So, this option would reduce the overall stability of the City's revenue stream by cutting into the growth potential of the more reliable source. ~ The freeze may provide incentive for seniors and disabled to move to NRH if not all surrounding cities adopt freeze ordinances. This could be considered a weakness of this option because the City would lose additional revenue growth opportunity as the number of senior and disabled homesteads increases. Option 3 -Implement the tax freeze and repeal the exemption in 2004. Pros ~ The City would receive additional revenue in the next few years, which could be used to offset associated losses in subsequent years. ___ ~ All senior and disabled homesteads would benefit from the freeze as soon as is legally possible. > All seniors and disabled would be treated equally as no homeowner would be "grandfathered" with the current senior and disabled exemption. Cons > The City would lose revenue policy flexibility. Once the freeze is in place it can not be removed. > The tax ceiling would reduce revenue growth opportunity in the future while current expenditure levels continue to expand with inflation. > All senior and disabled taxpayers would lose their current exemption benefit and their tax liabilities would most likely increase in 2004. > As explained in option 2, the long-term stability of the City's revenue stream would be weakened. ~ This option may be viewed as inequitable - residents with similar property values can have differing tax liabilities based on whether or not they are seniors or disabled. > Inequity as stated in Option 2 of seniors receiving benefits without regard to income. Option 4 -Implement the freeze in 2004 and carry the current exemption' forward. Pros > This option can be viewed as equitable - all seniors and disabled would continue to receive like exemptions. > All senior and disabled homesteads would benefit from the freeze as soon as is legally possible. Cons > This is the most costly option for the City. > This option may be viewed as inequitable - residents with similar property values can have differing tax liabilities based on whether or not they are seniors or disabled. > The City would lose revenue policy flexibility. Once the freeze is implemented it can not be removed. > Comments in Option 2 (cons) would also apply to this Option. > As explained in Option 2, the long-term stability of the City's revenue stream would be weakened. > Inequity as stated in Option 2 of seniors receiving benefits without regard to income. Option 5 - Make adjustments to the senior and disabled exemption in the future to maintain an acceptable ratio of exemption to average home value, which is currently 33%. To maintain the 33% ratio over the next 5 years, the City would need to adopt senior and disabled exemptions equal to $37,300 (FY 2004/05), $39,200 (FY 2005/06), $41,200 (FY 2006/07), $43,200 (FY 2007/08), and $45,400 (FY 2008/09). Pros > City would retain revenue policy flexibility. > This option would continue to provide tax relief to seniors and disabled residents. In fact, exemption revisions in the future could be made to closely resemble the tax freeze. r ~ W()uld allow other cities to "test run" the freeze allowing NRH to learn from their results before moving forward. ~ Impact of school finance reform could be considered before moving forward with the freeze. Cons ~ Residents may petition for an election to implement the freeze at any time in the future. If the freeze received a favorable vote, then the City would be required to "grandfather" exemptions at much higher levels than our current' exemption of $36,000. If so, this could become extremely costly for the City. Over time, the combination of a higher exemption plus a tax freeze could become the most costly option for the City. Financial Impact of Options Table 1, shown below, represents averaae estimated annual tax bills for senior and disabled residents oiven the options described above. Table 2 shows the annual cost to the City associated with each of the options presented. Finally, Chart 1 (attached) provides a visual representation of the annual cost to the City.through 2025 for each option. Most importantly, the chart shows that implementation of the tax freeze becomes increasingly costly for the City in each future year. . Table 1 2003* 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 $320 $340 $370 $400 $430 $460 320 340 340 340 340 340 320 550 550 550 550 550 320 340 340 340 340 340 320 340 350 370 390 410 * The average 2003 tax bill was calculated as follows: Average Senior & Disabled Homestead Less Residential Homestead Exemption (15%) Less Senior & Disabled Exemction Equals Taxable Value Divided by $100 and Multiplied by Tax Rate ($0.57) $ 108,602 (16,290) (36.000) $ 56,312 $ 320 Table 2 Same Options FY FY FY FY FY FY 5-Yr Described 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total Above o tion 1 $605,000 $620,000 $640,000 $645,000 $650,000 $660,000 $3,820,000 o tion 2 605,000 620,000 705,000 795,000 890,000 990,000 4,605,000 o tion 3 605,000 ° 85,000 175,000 270,000 370,000 1,505,000 o tion 4 605,000 620,000 725,000 815,000 920,000 1,030,000 4,715,000 o tion 5 605,000 620,000 695,000 740,000 780,000 830,000 4,270,000 Assumptions used to create Tables 1 and 2 above and the attached Chart 1 include: a beginning averaae senior/disabled homestead value equal to ,$108.602; a projected 5% arowth rate in average homestead values; and the continuation of the City's $0.57 per $100 property tax rate. Estimated senior arowth rates for North Richland Hills were also factored into these estimates using demographic projections located at the North Central Texas Council of Governments' (NCTCOG) website. Staff believes using the assumptions listed above along with demographic projections provides the most accurate financial forecast. Even so, we recognize that other approaches to calculatina the financial impact of the senior and disabled freeze may be used. For example, total appraised values could be used in place of average homestead values. Also, a 7% growth rate in senior and disabled property values might be considered a more reasonable assumption. And, an average senior and disabled residence growth rate could be used in place of demographic forecasts. Table 3, below, represents the estimated annual cost of the senior and disabled freeze utilizing 7% growth in senior and disabled appraised values and a fixed 2% growth rate in the number of senior and disabled homes. The figures represented in table 3 were also calculated assuming the continuation of the $36,000 senior freeze, as· was done in option 4 shown above. Table 3 Alternate Forecasting Method Results FY FY FY FY FY FY 5-Yr 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total $605,000 $620,000 $744,000$877,300 $1,020,533 $1,174,415 $5,041,248 Summary & Observations The City now has the option of "freezing" senior and disabled ad valorem tax liabilities. The tax freeze is independent of the senior and disabled exemption we currently offer. So, the City can offer the exemption, freeze, or both to qualifying individuals. Under the freeze, tax liabilities only increase if property improvements are made and tax liabilities can decrease as dictated by appraised values and/or the City's tax rate. Following are conclusions and observations based upon the facts regarding the senior/disabled tax freeze matter: · Implementation of the freeze will be more costly to the City in the lona term than continued use of the exemption in terms of both revenue growth and the City's ability to manage revenue policy. · Current exemption offered to senior and disabled residents represents approximately 2ft, on the City's tax rate. · Option 4 above that continues the current exemption plus providinq for the tax freeze will have minimal affect the first two years, but will create reduced property tax revenue of $425,00 annually, or 1 ~¢ on the tax rate within five years. · Option 4 reduces revenues by 71% from current to 5 years (from $605,000 to $1,030,000). · Cumulativelv Option 4 will provide ,$895.000 less revenue to provide public services than continuing the current senior exemption. This represents 3¢ on the tax rate. · Option 4 provides tax relief of $140 annually ($11.67 monthly) to senior/disabled citizens over the current exemption provided - $320 now versus $460 paid on $108,602 property value. · Implementation of the freeze likely will have an impact on the City's debt retirement plans and other financial forecasts. The freeze was not factored into these plans and it is worth noting that the lost revenue from the freeze will need to be made up through increased sales tax earnings, higher fees, a reduced level of services, a higher tax burden placed on non-senior/disabled residents, or some other way. If the freeze is implemented, the City can expect to see the most impact in future years. . Implementation of the freeze in 2004 will have no impact on FY 2004/2005 revenue. The reduced revenue will be increasingly noticed in each subsequent fiscal year as shown in the attached Chart 1. Regardless of which option may be chosen in the future, the City will be able to continue offering tax savings to senior and disabled residents. . Seniors and disabled citizens are protected from losina their homes for inability to pay taxes; there is a tax deferral program to enable senior/disabled to remain in their homes. We have attempted to examine as many options and scenarios as possible to be realistic and assist Council in reviewing this important matter. We will be prepared to discuss this further at the June 29 pre-council work session. Respectfully Submitted, ~-~~ Larry J. cunnin~ham Ul City Manager Attachment 1 19è 1.0 0<7 =t:I: c: -(..::y 0 :.¡::¡ c.. 0 Þè + 0<7 -(..::y <7è 0<7 ¡ -(..::y c: 0 :.¡::¡ °è c.. ....... ~ 0 (1) 0<7 t .- -(..::y .- 0 0 cP¿ ..... 0<7 >< ..... ca f/ -(..::y I- 0 C"') =t:I: 0 &} c: "C 0 0<7 :.¡::¡ (1) - c.. ca -(..::y 0 - ..Q ..... ca C ÞL (1) f/ 0<7 .- C -(..::y u c} N C 0<7 =t:I: c: - -(..::y 0 :.¡::¡ '- - 0.. 0 ca 0 .- :s + c c (1) t/) cPa V<7 ..... -(..::y =t:I: c: 0 :.¡::¡ 19a 0.. 0 V<7 t -(..::y A. 0 0 0 0 0 0 V<7 0 0 0 0 0 0 ffl- -(0 0 0 0 0 0 ~- ô ô ô ô ô 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 q q IÓ ..,f c<'i N ..... ..... ffl- ffl- ffl- ffl- ffl- ffl- I Attachment 2 Senior & Disabled Exemption 10 Year History 1995 $29,000 1996 $29,000 1997 $29,000 1998 $29,000 1999 $29,000 2000 $32,000 $3,000 10.34% 2001 $35,000 $3,000 9.38% 2002 $35,000 2003 $36,000 $1,000 2.86% 2004 $36,000 Total Increase $7,000 24% # of Senior/Disabled Households = 3,013 % Senior Households of Total Residential Accounts = 18.61 % Attachment 3 Property Tax Comparisons on Properties of Equal Appraised Value Explanation The attached spreadsheet shows a comparison between actual property taxes paid bv residents that are over 65 with a comparison of a resident under 65 pavinq taxes on the same pieces of property. The calculations take into account homestead exemptions as well as over 65 exemptions . for those that offer them. Below is a breakdown of exemptions: Homestead Over 65 NRH 15% $36,000 County $50,000 Hospital $50,000 College $50,000 BISD $15,000 $10,000 Property Tax Comparison Assumptions * Year 1 is assuming it is the first year of a freeze being in place Assumes 5% per year growth in property values Assumes all entities, except Tarrant County and the Hospital District, provide a senior freeze (Therefore it can be seen that taxes will increase for seniors in this example for County and Hospital District taxes) * * Property Tax Comparison Analysis A non-senior citizen would Q-ªY anywhere from $5.474 to $13.229 more over the five year period than a citizen that currentlv resides at these homes and receives the benefits of senior freeze. PROPERTY TAX COMPARISON ·1,.:.'.·.'.1~.,...~I~~!~Ø....,.....'.. -..' ..J..?...,~.,_...;. ,.... iI,.····én.~:~t1í!i_.i~t.." .. "I .,:,,, ,12~t!!~ill....!""_,,.,,~ _,,, 'h'___l. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Under 65 Over 65 Difference Year 4 Total $1,540.67 $522.11 $1,018.56 B.¡'V~I. :~.'iBr_., ';"~~-tR~' 1f4. :8~~~'m._ ,,:I~I"'..L.1; .db. w~~}f~'-_~~ødIL Year 5 $1,455.75 $506.42 $949.34 $1,629.83 $1,723.45 $1,821.75 $538.58 $555.88 $574.04 $1,091.25 $1,167.57 $1,247.71 $8,171.45 $2,697.04 $5,474.42 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Under 65 $1,640.'88 $1,735.06 $1,833.93 P $2,046.77 $7,256.64 Over 65 $441.64 $459.04 $477.31 $496.50 $516.64 $2,391.14 Difference $1,199.24 $1,276.01 $1,356.62 #VALUEI $1,530.13 $4,865.50 I"'_'_a....· III·~".-_~'·'$n ¡; :" )i .:. ,':-:":: ,:;:" , : -~ '::~:~.it:.i~~ ", .,;;""":t:, u:: '"~,,,: ,':;; ',,'~,",.: ,'; ,:#~ ~lIIr~'__:::'@'" , J®~:;:;:,¡¡¡j:~.'~' _^/,_ ,:g, ~', ¡itill, ,~: , ,;,'" ,--: Under 65 Over 65 Difference Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total $2,256.64 $1,057.17 $1,199.46 $2,381.60 $1,080.26 $1,301.34 '...-.'."""'...'._..' .·....·'F="·."'_'. ···..."'.·.··1.·_. .'.. . .., ~..I!'À"v ;"1'" 7', ,.- . .. .": ,,1f&«4n0<·' ",:0~:~ :'c'::'d _' ':' y~" ',," , A Under 65 Over 65 Difference Year 1 Year 2 $2,512.80 $2,650.57 $2,795.23 $12,596.84 $1,104.51 $1,129.96 $1,156.69 $5,528.59 $1,408.30 $1,520.61 $1,638.54 $7,068.25 Year 3 Year 4 Total $3,072.15 $1,256.95 $1,815.20 $3,237.88 $1,287.57 $1,950.31 ',...-...'.'.'.'..... .'.'."'..''''''''II1II'..'',.1'..''', 00_.".·.·' ·.,"~.'@..'..~_il...'.,· ..,,' ..,Iiiíi I,m '···,1. ;..'1 '. . .. I' ,'·1·' .', ,. ., ,: . .: '~:::i:,,","iØ;¡¡:m;'i : , ", '!i<':!,:' ,,'.: ,it:<8@<::f,~ Under 65 Over 65 Difference Year 1 Year 2 Year 5 $3,411.90 $3,594.62 $3,786.48 $17,103.03 $1,319.73 $1,353.49 $1,388.94 $6,606.67 $2,092.18 $2,241.14 $2,397.54 $10,496.36 Year 3 Year 4 Total $4,129.49 $1,858.30 $2,271.19 $4,348.09 $1,898.69 $2,449.40 ."..~.'.... IIII".-øm· .-_... _".. . , .', '-"".' ,~, .'< ',:,' ., ,_x· --'_ -. t _, . :~.-, ~iIi.~ :..,' -, _ ,: ' ',' ~: «¡ ;)<, ,¡,··,;,i.·.·..··S'd···..··,..··" . . ".~ :¡¡:;¡;?, \;' J':,;;,,, PJill wW~~,:,*,~, _ ~{ y'< i l't. .' , . _ ,"';:~ Under 65 Over 65 Difference Year 1 Year 2 Year 5 $4,577.62 $4,818.63 $5,071.69 $22,945.53 $1,941.10 $1,985.63 $2,032.39 $9,716.11 $2,636.52 $2,833.00 $3,039.30 $13,229.42 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total $5,028.06 $3,073.31 $1,954.75 .~_' ..,.... ...... ".....wmmJ_·""·· . .... ., II·· ;.,nfrÂ'\'· ... 'IifiMi' .~....' \ .. >... .,.: .·1 i"" ):.), "::,?i!!.!t-R#', "',' -' . '*:--- -- ",", . W'J: Under 65 Over 65 Difference $4,777.07 $3,026.93 $1,750.14 Year 1 Year 2 $5,291.59 $5,568.29 $5,858.83 $26,523.84 $3,122.00 $3,173.13 $3,226.81 $15,622.18 $2,169.58 $2,395.16 $2,632.02 $10,901.66 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total $4,870.18 $2,960.27 $1,909.91 $5,125.81 $3,007.50 $2,118.31 $5,394.23 $5,676.07 $5,972.00 $27,038.28 $3,057.10 $3,109.17 $3,163.85 $15,297.89 $2,337.13 $2,566.90 $2,808.15 $11,740.39 Attachment 4 City of North Richland Hills Senior/Disabled Property Tax Revenue and Direct Public Services To Seniors/Disabled Senior/Disabled Property Tax Revenue Total Senior/Disabled Property Values Total Senior/Disabled and Homestead Exemptions Net Taxable Value Total Senior/Disabled Property Tax Revenue 2004/05 Estimates 1 $ 340,849,869 ( 156,293,286) $ 184,556,583 $ 1,051,973 Direct Senior/Disabled Service Northeast Transportation Services Senior Center Expenditures Fire/EMS Operations (Senior Related) Total Estimated Costs $ 29,900 152,605 1,370,534 2 $ 1,553,039 .$ (501,066) SeniorlDisabled Property Tax Revenue Less Exp. Note: This schedule is to only compare the property tax revenues received from over 65 and disabled persons and to show direct services provided to seniors and disabled. Over 65 citizens also receive other public services such as street maintenance, police, and others as well. This is to show "how far the property taxes go to support these direct services." Other taxes/charges are paid by seniors and disabled, such as sales taxes, but again this is a property tax comparison onlv_ 1 Based on Preliminary 2005 Tax Rolls and Budget 2 EMS (ambulance) services are also offset by charges, and seniors on Medicare and without supplemental insurance coverage generally pay 20% of the actual cost of service. This is typically around $70 per transport. Approximately 30% of the EMS services in NRH are for persons over 65 years of age. - '.' - ----'^~"-'-",-"-_.._'~........_--~~--~---~,-,--- Attachment 5 STATS OF AREA TAXING JURISDICTIONS SENIOR/DISABLED TAX FREEZE Snr/Disabled Freeze Adopted? County Tarrant County Hospital District TCCC District No No Yes City Azle No Bedford Yes Benbrook Yes Blue Mound Colleyville Yes Crowley Yes Dalworthington Gardens No Edgecliff Village No Everman No Forest Hill No Grapevine No Keller No Kennedale Lakeside Lake Worth No Mansfield Yes North Richland Hills No pantego No Richland Hills No Saginaw No South lake Yes Westover Hills No Arlington No Euless Yes Fort Worth No Haltom City No Hurst Yes River Oaks No White Settlement No Watauga * No Westworth Village No Haslet Yes Briar Pelican Bay No Westlake Yes Grand Prairie Yes Sansom Park Newark No Flower Mound No Note: Of the 42 taxing entities in the Tarrant County area, 12 or 28.6% have approved the senior/disabled person tax freeze. and 25 or 59.5% have not. * Election called for September 11 , 2004 :þ ~ ¡ ~~ \¡~ ~§ \~ ~ ""I- ~ (j) CD ::J -- o ~ o -- en Q) 0- CD c. --i Q) x -n ..., CD CD N CD . -n ..., CD CD N CD (') 0) ::J ::J o r-+ e- CD ..., CD ""C CD 0) - CD Cl. o ::J (') CD 0) Cl. o '"'C r-+ CD Cl. . . C/)- r-+ -0) o r-+ en CD -- r ::J Q) CC ~ ::r o (') 3 ~ m CD ~ ::J Q) r-+ - - - '< 0 ""C r-+ ..., ::::T o CD r-+ ..., CD CD Q. >< en CD en 3 CD ""C ::J r-+ -- -- o 0 ..., ::J en en ::J Cl. CD ""C CD ::J Cl. CD ::J r-+ ~ ..., o 3 . -n ..., Zæ ;ON ICD -- Q) en r-+ r-+ en ..., Q) Q) 3 ~ CD CD' ""C ..., CD Q) ..., Q: (') CD CD r-+ ::J 0 r-+ 0) Cl. cc -- CD ~ CD ..., CD ::J r-+ ::r o 3 CD -- ::J . o < CD :< -- CD ~ s: Q) en'< ""Ce- o CD c: en""C CD Q) __ en en en CJ1CD CJ1Cl. o Õ ..., o en _c: Cl.< CD -- ..., < -- ::J cc en ""C o c: en CD . . :::¡.; o -c . I -- o :J en ." o ., -I Q) >< ." ., CD CD N CD OJ I\.) I\.) I\.) I\.) I\.) I\.) -n Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- en en 0 0 0 0 0 0 C") CD ex> ----J 0) CJ1 ..þ.. W Q) ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... - + 0 0 0 0 0 0 -< CJ1 CD ex> ----J 0) CJ1 ..þ.. CD -< Q) ;0 ., --I 0 ,-+ Q) - {;ß {;ß {;ß {;ß {;ß {;ß {;ß () w 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 .... 0) CJ1 ..þ.. ..þ.. I\.) 0 ex> en I\.) 0 0 CJ1 0 0 CJ1 ,-+ .... .... .... .... .... .... ,-+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- a ,-+ '< () o :::J r-+ -- :::J c: CD -f:I7 W (j) - o o o en CD :::J -- o ~ o -- en Q) C- - CD c.. m >< CD 3 ""0 r-+ -- o ::::J o ""0 r-+ -- o :::J ....J.. OJ I\J I\J I\J I\J I\J I\J " Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- en en 0 0 0 0 0 0 (") CD ex> ~ (j) 01 .þ.. W Q) ---...... ---...... ---...... ---...... ---...... ---...... - + 0 0 0 0 0 0 -< 01 CD ex> ~ (j) 01 .þ.. CD -< Q) ...., ;0 --I 0 r-+ Q) - -f:fl -f:fl -f:fl -(;fi -f:fl -f:fl -f:fl () .þ.. CD ex> ~ ~ (j) (j) 0 ... CD CD CD 0 I\J 0 (j) en 0 0 01 01 0 01 r-+ 0 ... ... ... ... ... ... r-+ 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- a r-+ '< ~» G)a. .., 0 Q)-c :J ,...... 9;., Q) .., """'CD ::rCD CD N ~CD ()ö c: ..þ.. .., CD Qo :J ,...... m >< CD 3 -c ,...... -- o :J o -c ,...... -- o :J I'V OJ I\J I\J I\J I\J I\J I\J -n Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- en en 0 0 0 0 0 0 C1 CD ex> ~ (j) CJ1 ~ W Q) ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- - + 0 0 0 0 0 0 -< CJ1 (O ex> ~ (j) CJ1 ~ CD -< Q) ;U , -I 0 ,...... Q) - -f:fi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ () ~ W I\J ~ ex> 0 (j) 0 ... ~ ~ ~ CJ1 0 CJ1 en 0 0 CJ1 ... CJ1 ,...... 0 0 ... ... ... ... ,...... CJ1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 ,...... '< » 0 c.. -C 0 r-+ -- -C 0 r-t- ::J 11 W ..., CD CD N CD .... 0 .þ. Qo ::u CD -C CD tu - m >< CD 3 -c r-t- -- 0 ::J .... 0 ~ OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ TI Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- en en 0 0 0 0 0 0 () CD (X) ~ 0) 01 ~ W Q) ............ ............ ............ ............ ........... ........... - + 0 0 0 0 0 0 -< 01 (C (X) ~ 0) 01 ~ CD -< Q) ::0 .., -I 0 r"+ Q) - -f:fl -f:fl -f:fl -f:fl -f:fl -f:fl -f:fl () ~ ...Jrt. (C (X) ~ 0) 0) 0 ... ... ~ ...Jrt. ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 en 0 01 01 0 01 r"+ ...Jrt. W ... ... ... ... ... r"+ 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- a 0 r"+ '< » c.. o -c r-+ 11 ..., CD CD N CD ~ o ..þ.. Qo () o ::s r-+ -- ::s c: CD -f:I7 W Q) ^ m >< CD 3 -0 r-+ o -C r-+ -- o ::s ..þ.. OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -n Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- en en 0 0 0 0 0 0 (") CD 00 "'"'-I 0) (J1 .þ.. w Q) ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. - + 0 0 0 0 0 0 -< (J1 <.0 00 "'"'-I 0) (J1 .þ.. CD -< Q) -. ;0 -I 0 ,....... Q) - -(;ß -(;ß -Efl -Efl -Efl -(;ß -Efl () .þ.. 00 "'"'-I "'"'-I 0) 0) 0) 0 ... w 00 .þ.. <.0 ~ 0 ~ en 0 0 0 (J1 0 (J1 ,....... "'"'-I ... ... ... ... ... ... ,....... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- a ,....... '< z 0 0 ""0 r-+ " -- 0 ...., CD ::J CD ()1 N CD ............ » ::J ::J c:: Q) - m >< CD 3 -0 r-+ -- 0 ::J - ::J (') ...., CD Q) en CD Z 11 11 11 en 0 ...., ...., ...., ~ CD CD CD Q) 11 CD CD CD ~ ...., N N N c: CD CD CD CD en CD ... ... ... 0 0 N 0 0 0 CD ..þ... ..þ... ..þ... c: '"C 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ^ ::u ::u -- :J 0 (") CD CD CD :J m CD '"C '"C en '"C CD CD >< -f:ß Q) Q) CD - - 3 w .... ... (j) 0 0 '"C ^ ..þ... CJ1 ~ -f:ß -f:ß -f:ß -f:ß -f:ß 11 (j) ~ 0 CD ~ ..þ... ... (j) co -< 0 I\J ~ CD CD co 0 I\J .... .... ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 CJ1 0 0 I -f:ß -f:ß -f:ß -f:ß -f:ß I\J CJ1 ~ ..þ... (j) .... ... ~ .... ~ ~ I\J (j) 11 (j) 0 co ..þ... w -< .... ... ..þ... 0 0 CJ1 0 I\J I\J ... .... 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ..þ... 0 0 0 0 CJ1 I o c: 3 c: - Q) ,.-.+ -- < CD - :J a ., CD 3 CD :J ,.-.+ Q) - o o en ,.-.+ o --t, o ""C ,.-.+ -- o :J en . ::T . '< . . . . C/) » 0 (J) CD - - () - ......., 3 3 c: - 3 CD Q) c: 3 - -- 0 CD :J ~3 -c ~ -c en-c Q) ~ - 3 -- CD -c en 0 C1 CD r-+ ~ e- - :J 3 Q) -- c: CD r-+ 0 en r-+ a.3 0 CD ., :J Q) ......., CD :J '< en :J cc CD ......., >< r-+ -c a. CD :J ~ CD Q) r-+ r-+ CD 3 r-+ ~ CD -- 0 a. ......., 0 -- ~ N -c :J < en CD CD r-+ -- Q) CD -- a. 0 0 CD e- N 3 :J ......., - CD CD Q) ......., ~ ~ ~ CD a. -- -- CD CD :J :J - -c CD -- -c - CD I\J '< ~ N ......., ~ 0 CD CD 0 -- õ' r-+ 0 :J en CD ..þ.. ......., CD 3 ~ C1 c: :J ... 0 (J) r-+ r-+ r-+ CD :J c: en ~ CD a. 0 ~ CD :J CD I\J C1 ......., -- -- 3 0 ~ '< C1 0 ~ 0 -c CD CD en en 3 :J r-+ Q) Q) - r-+ '< Qo C1 ~ en - en 0 r-+ -- 0 en 0 :J -- -- - en :J :J 0 Q) cc :J :J e- r-+ CD cc - ::T CD >< ~ a. CD r-+ c: -- ~ :J AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 AREA 4 AREA 5 AREA 6 AREA 7 AREA 8 AREA 9 Y ARD-OF-THE-MONTH June, 2004 J. D. Cornelius. 3800 Park Oaks Ct. Bobby & Ann Kennedy. 4609 Deville Dr. Terry & Betty Walker. 6612 Hillside Court Ron & Helen Ferauson. 5612 Boaota Catherine Roberts. 6017 Aualon Brett & Dena Reicek. 6905 Briardale Dr. Charles & Patsy Mellard. 6805 North Oaks Dr. Lauahlin Family. 7845 Hidden Oaks Dr. Thomas M. Wells. Jr.. 7905 Shady Oaks Texas SmartScape Winner Danny & Carolyn Daniel. 6704 Oliver Dr. Business Landscape Winner Alexander's Landscape & Irriaation. Inc. 7709 Davis Blvd. MINUTES OF THE PRE-COUNCIL AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD IN THE CITY HALL, 7301 NORTHEAST LOOP 820 - JUNE 14,2004 PRE-COUNCIL SESSION The City Council of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas met in Pre-Council session on the 14th day of June 2004 at 5:45 p.m. in the Pre-Council Room prior to the 7:00 regular Council meeting. Present: Oscar Trevino David Whitson John Lewis Jo Cox Frank Metts, Jr. JoAnn Johnson Nancy Bielik Timothy J. Welch Staff Members: Larry J. Cunningham Richard Torres Ogden Bo Bass Karen Bostic Paulette Hartman Patricia Hutson Alicia Richardson George Staples John Pitstick Larry Koonce Mike Curtis Clay Caruthers Tom Shockley Jim Browne Vicki Loftice Dave Green Call to Order Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilwoman Councilwoman Councilman City Manager Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager Managing Director Administrative/Fiscal Services Assistant to City Manager City Secretary Assistant City Secretary City Attorney Director of Development Finance Director Public Works Director Budget Manager Police Chief Parks & Recreation Director Assistant Parks & Recreation Director Zoning Administrator Mayor Trevino called the Pre-Council meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. 1. Discuss items from ReQular June 14,2004 City Council Meetinq None. City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 2 2. IR 2004-061 Status Report on the Damaqe of Recent Storm Assistant City Manager Richard Torres provided council with an update on services, equipment and property either damaged or interrupted during the recent storm. 3. IR 2004-058 Review Theme for Libertv Park Assistant Parks Director Vickie Loftice informed council Liberty Park is located at Holiday Lane and Industrial Boulevard. Staff is recommending San Antonio artist Donna Dobberfuhl to design and construct the monument. Ms. Loftice advised initial plans for the park include a brick wall carving of soldiers that will incorporate the theme of liberty and to further complement the space and the monument, a "Liberty Walk" is planned within the trail that will meander throughout the park. Ms. Loftice advised the Park and Recreation Board have recommended the monument include a minimum of 9 soldiers. Council consensus was to move forward with artist Donna Dobberfuhl. 4. IR 2004-063 Discuss(1) Reauest of Councilwoman Bielik reaardinq Senior/Disabled Tax Freeze and (2) Provide Clarification of Direction to City Manaqer Reqarding Senior/Disabled Tax Freeze Matter Mayor Trevino advised council this item has two items for council consideration. The first being Councilwoman Bielik's appeal to have City Manager Larry Cunningham list the senior/disabled tax freeze on the agenda for council consideration. Mayor Trevino advised Councilwoman Bielik requested Mr. Cunningham put an item on the council agenda regarding the senior/disabled tax freeze, and prior to Mr. Cunningham's response, Councilwoman Bielik forwarded a letter to Mr. Cunningham and the Mayor to appeal Mr. Cunningham's decision to the council to place the item on agenda. Mayor Trevino advised Councilwoman Bielik it was council's intention to have the senior/disabled tax freeze listed on the last council meeting in June. Mayor Trevino acknowledged this action was taken by the previous council, but he had included council-elect Jo Cox and Nancy Bielik in the consensus at the May 24, 2004 pre-council meeting when information was provided to council regarding the senior tax freeze. Although council-elect Cox and Bielik were unable to comment or discuss item because they had not been sworn in as elected officials Mayor Trevino made certain to acknowledge them and receive their approval of what was decided by the sitting council. Mayor Trevino asked council if they still wish to continue with instructions given to staff to bring back to council at the last council meeting in June. It was the consensus of council to move forward with direction previously given to staff. Mayor Trevino advised the second part of the item dealt with direction for the City Manager. Mayor Trevino informed council the City Manager was seeking direction from council as to whether he should continue with the timeline given to him previously City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 3 regarding the senior tax freeze or if council had any changes to their previous direction. Mayor Trevino advised the City Manager and Staff have been previously directed by Council to answer to the council as a body. Council has agreed that information requested by one council member is to always be distributed to the entire council and the entire council is to be informed of and agree to requests from individual council members that will involve significant resources. Council concurred with the previous direction that had been given to the City Manager and consensus was for City Manager to follow previous direction given to him regarding the senior tax freeze, which is to bring information back to council at the June 29 City Council meeting. 5. Executive Session Mayor Trevino announced at 6:19 p.m. the council would adjourn to Executive Session to discuss the following: a) Personnel Matters Authorized by Government Code §551.074- 1) Appointment of Municipal Court Judge and Alternate Judges and Establish a Salary for Such Term 2) Appointment of City Attorney and Contract b) Consultation with City Attorney on Pending Litigation as Authorized by Government Code §551.071 - Jacobson v. City of NRH 6. Adjournment Mayor Trevino announced at 7:03 p.m. that the Council would adjourn to the regular Council meeting. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Trevino called the meeting to order June 14, 2004 at 7:09 p.m. City Council Minutes June 14,2004 Page 4 ROLL CALL Present: Oscar Trevino David Whitson John Lewis Jo Cox Frank Metts, Jr. JoAnn Johnson Nancy Bielik Timothy J. Welch Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilwoman Councilwoman Councilman Staff: Larry J. Cunningham Bo Bass Patricia Hutson Alicia Richardson George Staples City Manager Assistant City Manager City Secretary Assistant City Secretary Attorney 2. INVOCATION Councilwoman Johnson gave the invocation. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilwoman Johnson led the pledge of allegiance. 4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None. 5. CITIZENS PRESENTATION Mr. Maury Siskel, 4516 Cummings Drive, spoke on the City's purchase of the Food Lion City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 5 property and if the Library and Recreation Center would be relocated to the property. Mr. Siskel stated he felt that the widening of Loop 820 would have little impact on the current location of the Library and Recreation Center and the parking for these facilities. Mr. Siskel also spoke to claims by Arcadia Reality that they have received unopposed approvals of concessions from Council, but there has not been an identification of the concessions. Mr. Siskel stated that he has heard that arrangements have been made to relocate the present city hall to a new facility in Home Town. Mr. Siskel asked Council to publicly address the reasons for purchasing the Food Lion property, future plans for the Library and Recreation Center, disclosure of all concessions made by the City to Arcadia Reality, intentions for the present City Hall, the current bonded indebtedness of City Hall and when that debt is scheduled to be paid, if any promises or concessions regarding City Hall have been made, the identification of any concessions, and if arrangements have been made to relocate present city hall to new facility in Home Town. Mayor Trevino asked the City Manager to send a letter to Mr. Siskel addressing each of his comments. Mayor Trevino asked the City Manager to specifically explain how the assumptions regarding the purchase of the Food Lion property were wrong, and to clarify the number of public meetings held and the numerous press releases and news articles on the subject matters mentioned by Mr. Siskel. Mayor Trevino advised the assumption of City Hall moving did not come from the City and also asked that a letter be posted on the web site and on also post letter on Citicable prior to the presentation of meeting to address the falsehoods and questions being asked. Mr. Marlin Miller, 5109 Susan Lee Lane, stated that he was tired of the adverse publicity in the City and felt that the citizens needed to attend the meetings and to check things out for themselves. 6. REMOVAL OF ITEM(S) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA None. 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED A. MINUTES OF THE MAY 24, 2004 COUNCIL MEETING B. PS 2004-17 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM BOBBY JOE DOWDY TO APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1 DOWDY ADDITION LOCATED AT 6525 HARMONSON ROAD (1.18 ACRES) C. GN 2004-049 RESCHEDULE JUNE 28 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO JUNE 29 City Council Minutes June 14,2004 Page 6 D. PW 2004-012 AWARD OF BID TO HUMPHREY AND MORTON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,103,438.20 FOR THE HOLIDAY WEST CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (HOLIDAY LANE TO MEADOW OAK DRIVE) AND THE RIVIERA CHANNEL EROSION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND REVISE THE 2003/2004 CIP BUDGET E. PW 2004-013 APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER #2 TO THE WALKER BRANCH CHANNELlCALLOWA Y BRANCH CHANNEL, PHASE III IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WITH CRAIG OLDEN, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $23,900 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF MEADOWVIEW CHANNEL PROTECTION PROJECT AND REVISE THE 2003/2004 CIP BUDGET F. PW 2004-014 AWARD OF BID TO SHARROCK ELECTRIC CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $64,836.66 FOR THE MID CITIES BOULEVARD AND SIMMONS DRIVE TRAFFIC SIGNALIZATION G. PU 2004-028 AUTHORIZE INTERLOCAL PURCHASING AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF FOREST HILL - RESOLUTION NO. 2004-039 H. GN 2004-013 APPROVE EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY (ALONG 270 FOOT SECTION OF WESTERNMOST PROPERTY LINE OF CROSS TIMBERS PARK) FOR GAS SUPPLY TO TXU GAS COMPANY - RESOLUTION NO. 2004-014 COUNCILMAN METTS MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MAYOR PRO TEM WHITSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 6-1; Mayor Pro Tem Whitson, Councilwomen Cox and Johnson, Councilmen Lewis, Metts and Welch voting for and Councilwoman Bielik voting against. 8. PS 2004-12 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM COY QUINE TO APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 1R & 2R, BLOCK 1 NORTH EDGLEY ADDITION, SECOND FlUNG BEING ARE-PLAT OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1 NORTH EDGLEY ADDITION, SECOND FlUNG LOCATED AT 7511 GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY (2.7 ACRES) APPROVED Mr. Coy Quine, applicant, was available to answer questions from council. Zoning Administrator Dave Green advised property is currently platted as one lot with two existing buildings and the purpose of the re-plat is to divide the existing lot into two lots, per the mortgage lenders request. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard City Council Minutes June 14,2004 Page 7 this request and recommend approval. Staff is recommending that a note be attached to plat stating that future ROW dedication on both lots will be required. COUNCILMAN WELCH MOVED TO APPROVE PS 2004-12 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND WITH STAFF'S NOTE. COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. Mayor Trevino advised council they would move to item 18 (1). 18 (1) GN 2004-045 (1) APPOINTMENT OF MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE AND ALTERNATE JUDGES AND ESTABLISH A SALARY FOR SUCH TERM - ORDINANCE NO. 2788 APPROVED City Manager Larry J. Cunningham advised council Ordinance No. 2788 appoints Judge Oujesky, the alternate judges and sets the minimum salary for the judge as required by State Law. The salary cannot, as required by law, be reduced for his term of office, although it may be increased. COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE No. 2788 AND TO APPOINT RAY OUJESKY WITH A BASE PAY OF $55,944. COUNCILMAN METTS SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. 9. PZ 2004-07 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM RAND CARLSON FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM "1-2" MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO "HC" HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED AT 5750 RUFE SNOW DRIVE (2.26 ACRES) ORDINANCE NO. 2784 APPROVED Mayor Trevino opened the public hearing. Mr. Rand Carlson, applicant, was available to answer questions from council. Mr. Green advised applicant is wishing to have a beauty salon at location, but the use is not permitted in the current zoning of 1-2 (Medium Industrial District). Applicant is proposing to change zoning to HC (Heavy Commercial District). The downsizing of the zoning will match the zoning of the existing office/retail/service uses. Mr. Green advised the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of request. City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 8 Mayor Trevino asked if there was anyone wishing to comment on this request. There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Trevino closed the public hearing. COUNCILMAN METTS MOVED TO APPROVE PZ 2004-07 AND ORDINANCE No. 2784. MAYOR PRO TEM WHITSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. 10. PZ 2004-09 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM INTEGER DEVELOPMENT FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM "C2" COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO "R-2" RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT LOCATED IN THE 8000 BLOCK OF STARNES ROAD (4.11 ACRES) ORDINANCE NO. 2785 APPROVED Mayor Trevino opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Charles Dibrell, 2109 Franklin Drive, Arlington, advised they intend to develop tract as a small single family subdivision. The original request was to change the existing C- 2 (Commercial District) to R-3 (Residential). The applicant revised his request to R-2 (Residential) at the May 20 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Dibrell indicated Integer's desire to construct the mandatory screening wall to deter and provide buffering to the 1-2 (Medium Industrial) and C-2 (Commercial) district located to the west. Mr. Dibrell also stated Integer proposes to reduce the floodplain. Mr. Green summarized item for council advising applicant has accepted responsibility for the screening and landscape buffer. As a rule, it would be the responsibility of the adjacent mini-warehouse/storage to construct screening and landscape buffering. The Comprehensive Plan shows commercial uses for this site. However, the request reflects a recent trend toward downsizing of commercial and industrial uses to residential development. The site is surrounded on the north, east, and south by"R-2" residential zoning and uses and proposed zoning change is complementary to the surrounding residential areas. Mr. Green advised the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval. Mayor Trevino asked for anyone wishing to comment on this request. Mr. Omar Alderman, 7928 Lucian Drive, spoke against the request. There being no one else wishing to speak Mayor Trevino closed the public hearing. City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 9 COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON MOVED TO APPROVE PZ 2004-09 AND ORDINANCE No 2785. COUNCILMAN LEWIS SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 6-1; Councilmen Lewis, Metts, Welch, Mayor Pro Tem Whitson, Councilwomen Johnson and Bielik voting for and Councilwoman Cox voting against. 11. LRB 2004-01 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM JONES & CARTER, INC. ON BEHALF OF BRINKER INTERNATIONAL FOR A LANDSCAPE VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 2473 FOR A PROPOSED CHILI'S RESTAURANT AT 8485 DAVIS BOULEVARD (.014 ACRES) APPROVED Mayor Trevino opened the public hearing. Mr. Green advised council applicant is requesting a variance from the 15-foot landscape buffer. The applicant is proposing a 10-foot landscape buffer along Davis Boulevard and Shady Grove Road. In lieu of the variance, applicant is proposing to increase the number of trees and shrubs. Mr. Green reminded council the Planning and Zoning Commission did not hear this case because variances are heard by the council. Staff recommends approval of LRB 2004-01. Mr. Jason Elms, applicant, was available to answer questions from council. Mayor Trevino asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the request. Ms. Teresa Hampton, 8601 Steeple Ridge, advised council she spoke on behalf of the Steepleridge Subdivision. Ms. Hampton advised residents in her subdivision were concerned with Chili's line of sight from their homes. Ms. Ginny Parsons, 7701 Turner Drive, did not have any comments on the case, but brought to staff and council's attention a clerical error on the caption for this item. (Note: correct lot size is 1.45 acres) There being no one else wishing to speak Mayor Trevino closed the public hearing. COUNCILMAN LEWIS MOVED TO APPROVE LRB 2004-01. COUNCILMAN WELCH SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 10 12. PZ 2004-11 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY JONES & CARTER, INC. ON BEHALF OF BRINKER INTERNATIONAL FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED CHILI'S RESTAURANT AT 8485 DAVIS BOULEVARD (.014 ACRES) APPROVED Mr. Jason Elms, applicant, was available to answer council questions. Mr. Green advised all new non-residential uses with 200 feet of residentially zoned areas or areas shown to be residential on the Comprehensive Plan must have a site plan approved by both Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval and staff recommends approval with the addition of wheel stops to be placed on all parking spaces along the western edge of the site adjacent to the public access easement. MAYOR PRO TEM WHITSON MOVED TO APPROVE PZ 2004-11 WITH THE ADDITION OF WHEEL STOPS TO BE PLACED ON ALL PARKING SPACES ALONG THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE SITE ADJACENT TO THE PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT. COUNCILMAN METTS SECONDED MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. 13. LRB 2004-02 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM ERNEST HEDGCOTH ON BEHALF OF HUGGINS HONDA FOR A LANDSCAPE VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 2473 AT 7551 LOOP 820 DENIED Mayor Trevino opened the public hearing. Mr. Ron Huggins, applicant, advised he was requesting a variance from a previously approved landscape plan. Mr. Huggins contends the parking lot is for display purposes and not parking and that the addition of shrubbery would block the view of the vehicles. Mr. Green advised council they approved site plan PZ 2002-19 on August 20, 2002 for the second phase of Huggins Honda. The approved site plan indicated that the applicant would provide the required number of street trees (12) and screening shrubs (169) to meet the minimum landscape requirements of the ordinance. The applicant is requesting a variance from providing the 169 shrubs on 3' centers along the Nancy Lane and portions of the Loop 820 frontage in lieu of providing 12 shrubs along the Nancy Lane and no shrubs along the Loop 820 frontage. Mr. Green called council's attention to Five Star Ford, whom in 2002 submitted a proposed expansion to their dealership and a used car display lot along Loop 820 frontage. The approved plan for Five Star Ford expansion provided the required number of screening shrubs along this City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 11 frontage and the site has now been landscaped accordingly. Staff recommends that the proposed variance be denied and the existing approved landscape plan be upheld. Mayor Trevino asked for anyone wishing to comment on case to come forward. There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Trevino closed the public hearing. COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON MOVED TO DENY LRB 2004-02. COUNCILMAN LEWIS SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to deny carried 7-0. 14. GN 2004-044 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS/CABLE FRANCHISE RENEWAL CONTINUED Mayor Trevino opened the public hearing. Assistant to City Manager Paulette Hartman advised council the purpose of the item is to open a public hearing to receive comments regarding Charter Communications pertaining to customer service, billing practices, and other cable service concerns as part of the cable franchise renewal process. The franchise does not expire until January 2007; however it is standard practice to begin the franchise renewal process 30 to 36 months before expiration. The first stage of the franchise renewal process involves public proceedings to review the cable operators past performance and identify future cable related needs. This involves receiving public comments from cable customers regarding the cable operators past performance. Staff is proposing to receive public comments in a variety of ways. Staff is asking City Council to open a public hearing to receive public comment; the public hearing will be continued for the remainder of the first stage. Staff anticipates this will take at least six months to complete and is recommending the following dates to receive public comments: June 14,2004 First meeting in August 2004 (August 9, 2004) First meeting in October 2004 (October 11, 2004) First meeting in December 2004 (December 13, 2004) Ms. Hartman advised council the City will also receive comments via the City website and citizens are welcome to submit letters to the City Manager's Office, attention Paulette Hartman. Mayor Trevino asked if there was anyone wishing to comment on this request. There was no one wishing to speak. City Council Minutes June 14,2004 Page 12 Mayor Trevino asked Ms. Hartman if staff could also include information regarding the franchise and public comment on Citicable. Ms. Hartman advised council staff would also include Citicable as a method to notify citizens. COUNCILMAN WELCH MOVED TO CONTINUE ITEM TO FUTURE COUNCIL MEETINGS. COUNCILMAN METTS SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. 15. GN 2004-046 REQUEST ACTION REGARDING THE CITY'S CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE NE JOB ACCESS PROGRAM APPROVED Economic Development Director John Pitstick advised the city was participating in a transportation program, Northeast Job Access Program, with North Central Texas Council of Governments to provide transportation to major employers in North Richland Hills. Mr. Pitstick advised North Richland Hills was the only City to initiate the service out of six Northeast cities. Mr. Pitstick informed council staff is recommending that North Richland Hills notify the North Central Texas Council of Governments immediately to cease service for the NE Job Access Shuttle in North Richland Hills. The City is required to give sixty days notice prior to halting the shuttle service. COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON MOVED TO APPROVE GN 2004-046, RECOMMENDING NORTH RICHLAND HILLS NOTIFY THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS IMMEDIATELY TO CEASE SERVICE FOR THE NE JOB ACCESS SHUTTLE IN NORTH RICH LAND HILLS EFFECTIVE AUGUST 15, 2004. COUNCILMAN LEWIS SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. 16. GN 2004-047 CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS TO SOUTH GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE APPROVED Mayor Trevino advised North Richland Hills and Richland Hills set up a Joint Ad Hoc Committee to consider the renaming of Grapevine Highway. Councilmen Metts, Turnage and Councilwoman Johnson represented North Richland Hills. A newly established Oversight Committee will replace the Ad Hoc Committee and the committee will be responsible for broader duties; including recommendation of funding efforts to City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 13 individual Councils for the South Grapevine Highway corridor strategies. Mayor Trevino informed council he would like to reappoint Councilman Metts and Councilwoman Johnson to the Oversight Committee. MAYOR PRO TEM WHITSON MOVED TO REAPPOINT COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON AND COUNCILMAN METTS TO THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. COUNCILMAN WELCH SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 7-0. 17. GN 2004-048 AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR THE PROPOSED LOOP 820 CORRIDOR STUDY - RESOLUTION NO. 2004-029 APPROVED Assistant City Manager Richard Torres advised a staff committee of six members recently formed to review proposals by various consultants interested in preparing the planning study for the City. The study to be prepared is in anticipation of and in advance of the proposed widening/expansion of Loop 820 through the City of North Richland Hills. The proposed project will have a major impact on the landscape and land uses along the corridor. Staff received six (6) proposals from the following firms: HOK Engineering, Kimley-Horn and Associates, HNTB Engineering, Freese & Nichols Engineering, SEC Planning Consultants and Halff Associates. The committee, after a thorough review, invited the three (3) highest scoring consultants to make formal presentations. Staff is recommending Kimley-Horn and Associates for the proposed Loop 820 Corridor Study. The following is a summary of the scope of services proposed in the professional services agreement: · Stakeholder and policy maker workshops - two (2) meetings with the public (property owners, business owners, and developers) and two (2) meetings with each of Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. · Team Meetings - a maximum of five (5) face to face meetings with staff and five (5) conference calls to receive direction for the project and to discuss project status · Background Analysis - conduct inventory and land use analysis of the defined project area to include various mapping technologies · Land Use Plan - a comprehensive plan including all design and image concepts to include mapping City Council Minutes June 14,2004 Page 14 · Traffic and Access Management Plan - provide strategies for maximizing future freeway access points, plans to minimize curb cuts through shared access plans, plans to maximize visibility of businesses along the corridor, traffic design recommendations, and investigations of multi-modal transportation activities · Mass Transit Investigation - a study of the feasibility of locating commuter rail stations in the corridor and provide a strategy to link rails to businesses and neighborhoods · Draft Report/Final Report - report to be complete within nine (9) months of authorization. Mr. Torres advised council Mr. Kurt Schulte, Project Manager of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., would be available for questions. Mr. Schulte presented council with a power point presentation giving an overview of their proposed plan and timeline. COUNCILMAN METTS MOVED TO APPROVE GN 2004-048, RESOLUTION No. 2004-029. MAYOR PRO TEM WHITSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion to approve carried 6-1 with Councilmen Lewis, Metts, Welch, Councilwomen Cox, Johnson and Mayor Pro Tem Whitson voting for and Councilwoman Bielik voting against. 18. ACTION ON ANY ITEM DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION LISTED ON PRE- COUNCIL AGENDA GN 2004-045 (1) APPOINTMENT OF MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE AND ALTERNATE JUDGES AND ESTABLISH A SALARY FOR SUCH TERM- ORDINANCE NO. 2788 - APPROVED Item discussed earlier in the agenda. PU 2004-029 (2) APPROVAL OF CITY ATTORNEY APPOINTMENT AND CONTRACT - RESOLUTION NO. 2004-038 - APPROVED Mayor Trevino advised council he is recommending the reappointment of George Staples with T.O.A.S.E as City Attorney for a term of two years. COUNCILMAN METTS MOVED TO APPROVE MAYOR TREVINO'S NOMINATION OF GEORGE STAPLES. COUNCILWOMAN JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. City Council Minutes June 14,2004 Page 15 Motion to approve carried 5-2; with Councilmen Lewis, Metts, Welch, Councilwoman Johnson and Mayor Pro Tem Whitson voting for and Councilwomen Cox and Bielik voting against. 19. INFORMATION AND REPORTS IR 2004-055 2004 TXU GAMES OF TEXAS Park and Recreation Director Jim Browne presented council with a public service announcement. IR 2004-059 AUDIBLE CROSSWALK SYSTEM LOCATED AT MID-CITIES AT HOME DEPOT/BIRDVILLE STADIUM Public Works Director Mike Curtis advised council staff received a request from Birdville Independent School District to install an audible pedestrian indicator system for the traffic signal located at the entrance of Birdville Stadium and Home Depot on Mid-Cities Boulevard. The pedestrian indicator system would help visually impaired students who attend Birdville Independent School District. The cost of the Navigator APS system is $1,000 and the Public Works Department plans to install one more on the new traffic signal light at Glenview Drive and Dawn Drive. Mr. Curtis advised council in the future Public Works will make the system available on all new traffic signal light installations. Mr. Curtis also provided council with a video demonstrating the Navigator APS system. IR 2004-062 GRAND RE-OPENING OF RUFE SNOW DRIVE BETWEEN LOOP 820 AND MID CITIES Mr. Pitstick advised council staff is preparing for a ribbon cutting on July 15th for the re- opening of Rufe Snow Drive between Loop 820 and Mid Cities Boulevard. Staff is also proposing to allow all businesses to take advantage of existing grand opening signs for a 30-day period following the re-opening. All businesses within 200 feet of Rufe Snow between Loop 820 and Mid Cities Boulevard will be allowed to have a one time 30 day period for displaying grand re-opening signs. ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilman Metts made the following announcements. The City Council meeting scheduled for Monday, June 28th at 7:00 PM has been changed to Tuesday, June 29th at 7:00 PM. Come join the crowd for NRH20 Dive-in movies! The Dive-in movies begin this Friday June 18th with "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". The movie will start at dusk. For more information call 817-427-6500 or go to www.nrh20.com . City Council Minutes June 14,2004 Page 16 Join the Summer Reading Club at NRH Public Library and Color Your World Read! Registration ends Saturday July 17th. Reading time ends Saturday July 24th. For more information call 817-427-6800 or go to www.librarv.nrhtx.com. June 19 Critter Connection North Hills Mall 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Kudos Korner Kim Killion and Karen Richards, Dispatch, Police Department - On May 19th the City of Keller experienced an outage in phone service that made it impossible for many Keller citizens to contact Keller 911 for emergency calls. The NRH PD dispatch center took over calls that would have normally gone to Keller PD. Kim Killion and Karen Richards were the dispatchers on duty during this outage, and a call was received to express thanks to Ms. Killion, Ms. Richards and the NRH PD for taking on the additional load to make sure Keller citizens had access to 911. Northeast Transportation Services (NETS) - On May 28th the Northeast Transportation Services, or NETS, received the Regional Cooperation Award from the North Central Texas Council of Governments. NETS is a partnership between 8 cities in Northeast Tarrant County including North Richland Hills, Grapevine, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, Keller, Haltom City, and Colleyville. NETS provides on demand transportation services to elderly and disabled residents within these 8 cities. Kudos to the City Managers of each of these eight cities who serve as the NETS Board and City staff that assists with this program. 20. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Trevino adjourned the meeting at 9:36 p.m. Oscar Trevino - Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson - City Secretary r ' '" CITY OF NORTH RICH LAND HILLS Department: Police Department Council Meeting Date: June 29, 2004 Subject: 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant and Setting Public Hearing Agenda Number: GN 2004-050 - Resolution No. 2004-040 The City is about to enter the process of applying for the 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG). The City's allocation for 2004 is $11,112.00, and requires a cash match from the City of approximately $1,112.00. Funds for the City's cash match are available from the Federal and State forfeiture monies. This year, the Texas Attorney General certified Tarrant County as a "disparate jurisdiction," requiring the City of North Richland Hills and the other four municipalities eligible to receive LLEBG funds to negotiate a plan to share their funds with the County. The proposed plan calls for $1,914.00 of the LLEBG funds allocated to the City to be paid to Tarrant County at the time the award is received to support the Tarrant County Mental Health Liaison. The remaining balance of the allocation available for use by the City is estimated to be $9, 198.00. The grant process has several requirements that must be met before the funds may be awarded. First, the City Council must grant its formal approval to apply for the LLEBG grant and name an agent to act for the City in its dealings with the United States Department of Justice. Second, the City Council must appoint an ad hoc LLEBG Advisory Board to make non-binding recommendations pertaining to how the grant funds may be allocated and expended. The grant requires that the board must include a member from each of the following local organizations: the local law enforcement agency, prosecutor's office, court system, school system, and a nonprofit group active in crime prevention or drug-use prevention or treatment. Past appointees from these organizations to prior years' LLEBG advisory boards have indicated that they would be willing to be re-appointed and serve on the 2004 LLEBG Advisory Board. Third, the City Council must schedule and hold a public hearing to allow public comment and input on the recommendations for allocation of the grant funds that will be made by the LLEBG Advisory Board. Fourth, in consideration of the State Attorney General's disparate jurisdiction ruling, the City Council must approve an interlocal agreement with Tarrant County for the sharing of grant funds and authorize the City Manager to sign and enact the agreement. The attached resolution will authorize application for the grant, appoint an agent to act for the City relative to the grant, appoint an LLEBG advisory board, schedule a public hearing on the grant, approve the interlocal agreement with Tarrant County for the sharing of funds, and authorize the City Manager to sign and enact the interlocal agreement. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2004-040. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Budget Director Page 1 of ....L RESOLUTION NO. 2004-040 WHEREAS, the City of North Richland Hills, Texas possesses legal authority to apply for the 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant, make appointments for the conduct of business relative to the Grant, and approve Interlocal Agreements with other entities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, THAT the filing of the application for the 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant is hereby authorized, and names Captain Sid Johnson of the Police Department to act as the official agent and representative of the City in connection with the Grant application; THAT the following individuals are hereby appointed to the Advisory Board for the 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant: 1. Tom Shockley 2. Alan Wayland 3. Ray Oujesky 4. Mike Fritz 5. Roberta Ballister THAT a Public Hearing on the recommendations made by the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Advisory Board for allocation and expenditure of the grant funds is scheduled to be held July 12, 2004. THAT the Interlocal Agreement between the City and Tarrant County to pay $1,914.00 of the City's 2004 LLEBG allocated funds to Tarrant County is approved and the City Manager is authorized to sign and enact the Interlocal Agreement for the City. PASSED AND APPROVED this 29th day of June, 2004. APPROVED: Oscar Trevino, Mayor ATTEST: City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Attorney for the City '8' ..." ~. iil ~. ~': :< >: ~t' l/J: . . ... .. .. ... .....:..'*:.......... May 28, 2004 Mary F. Santonastasso Director of State and Local Assistance Bureau of Justice Assistance 810 7th St. NW Washington, D.C. 20531 Dear Ms. Santonastasso: On May 28, 2004, the State Attorney General certified Tarrant County as a "disparate jurisdiction" under the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant program. The Attorney General restricted the funding disparity issue to the Cities of Fort Worth, Arlington, Haltom City, Hurst and North Richland Hills in the certification process. As a result of this certification, the County and the Cities of Fort Worth, Arlington, Haltom City, Hurst and North Richland Hills discussed strategies on a collaborative effort to share the LLEBG funds. Tarrant County Government did not receive an LLEBG allocation but the Cities of Arlington, Fort Worth, Haltom City, Hurst and North Richland Hills are eligible for $505,302. Fort Worth is eligible to receive, $311,079 Arlington, $162,687, Haltom City $10,199, Hurst $10,225, North Richland Hills $11,112 and Tarrant County $00.00. Tarrant County and the Cities of Fort Worth, Arlington, Haltom City, Hurst and North Richland Hills have successfully negotiated an agreement. Therefore, Tarrant County has agreed to waive the classification as a "disparate jurisdiction" for the current funding year negating the certification process based on the following terms: · Fort Worth, Arlington, Haltom City, Hurst and North Richland Hills will submit separate grant applications: Fort Worth - 311,079; Arlington - $162,687; Haltom City - $10,199; Hurst - $10,225; and North Richland Hills, $11,112. · Fort Worth, Arlington, Haltom City, Hurst and North Richland Hills will contribute the cash match associated with the allotment amount independently; · An interlocal agreement will be developed between Tarrant County and the City of Arlington for $ 21,588 of the LLEBG funds (including cash match); · An interlocal agreement will be developed between Tarrant County and the City of Fort Worth for $55,423 of the LLEBG funds (including cash match); · An interlocal agreement will be developed between Tarrant County and the City of Haltom City for $1,756 of the LLEBG funds (including cash match); · An interlocal agreement will be developed between Tarrant County and the City of Hurst for $1,761 of the LLEBG funds (including cash match); and · An interlocal agreement will be developed between Tarrant County and the City of North Richland Hills for $1,914 of the LLEBG funds (including cash match). Tarrant County was not allocated LLEBG funds this year. The negotiated LLEBG funding from the Cities of Fort Worth and Arlington will support the Adult Drug Court program in the amount of $56,195 (cash match included), in addition to the Mental Health Liaison Program in the amount of $20,816 (cash match included). The negotiated LLEBG funding from the Cities of Haltom City, Hurst and North Richland Hills will support the Mental Health Liaison Program in the amount of $5,431 (cash match included). Please refer to the attached program overview for further clarification. Sincerely, Tom Vandergriff, C Tarrant County, Te s City Manager City of North Richland Hills, Texas THE STATE OF TEXAS KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS COUNTY OF TARRANT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CIY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS AND COUNTY OF TARRANT, TEXAS 2004 - LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS This agreement is made and entered into this I ~ day of ~ , 2004, by and betwe~n the COUNTY OF TARRANT, acting herein by and through itS~9 body, the Commissioners Court, hereinafter referred to as COUNTY, and the CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, acting herein by and through its governing body, the City Council, hereinafter referred to as CITY, both of Tarrant County, State of Texas, witnesseth: WHEREAS, this agreement is made under the authority of Sections 791.001 - 791.029, Texas . Government Code; and WHEREAS, each governing body, in performing governmental functions or in paying for the performance of governmental functions hereunder, shall make that performance or those payments from current revenues legally available to that party; and WHEREAS, each governing body finds that the performance of this Agreement is in the common interest of both parties, that the undertaking will benefit the public and the division of costs fairly compensates the performing party for the services or functions under this agreement; and WHEREAS, the CITY agrees to provide Tarrant County $1,914.00 from the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Fund and grant matching funds for the Tarrant County Mental Health Liaison Proaram; and WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY believe it to be in their best interests to reallocate the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant funds; NOW THEREFORE, the COUNTY and CITY agree as follows: Section 1. CITY agrees to pay COUNTY a total of $1,914.00 of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Funds and grant matching funds. Section 2. COUNTY agrees to use $1,914.00 for the Tarrant County Mental Health Liaison Proaram until September 30,2006. Section 3. Page 1 Nothing in the performance of this Agreement shall impose any liability for claims against COUNTY other than claims for which liability may be imposed by the Texas Tort Claims Act. Section 4. Nothing in the performance of this Agreement shall impose any liability for claims against CITY other than claims for which liability may be imposed by the Texas Tort Claims Act. Section 5. Each party to this agreement will be responsible for its own actions in providing services under this agreement and shall not be liable for any civil liability that may arise from the furnishing of those services by the other party. Section 6 The parties to this Agreement do not intend for any third party to obtain a right by virtue of this Agreement Section 7. By entering into this Agreement, the parties do not intend to create any obligations express or implied other than those set out herein; further, this Agreement shall not create any rights in any party not a signatory hereto. . COUNTY OF TARRANT, TEXAS ~Ud~~ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS City Manager City Secretary ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney *By law, the District Attorney's Office may only advise or approve contracts or legal documents on behalf of its clients. It may not advise or approve a contracts or legal document on behalf of other parties. Our view of this document was conducted solely from the legal perspective of our client. Our approval of this document was offered solely for the benefit of our client. Other parties should not rely on this approval and should seek review and approval by their own respective attorney(s). Page 2 .... CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ',--. Department: Finance Department Council Meeting Date: 06/29/2004 Subject: Extension pf Contract with Deloitte & Touche, LLP for Professional Auditing Services and Approve Resolution No. 2004-041 Agenda Number: PU 2004-030 In September 2000, the City contracted with Deloitte & Touche, LLP (D&T) for professional auditing services for a period of three years with two one-year extension options. The initial contract period expired with the issuance of the 2002 Comprehensive Annual. Financial Report. In May 2003, the first one-year extension option was exercised. Over the last four years, staff has been very pleased with the services provided by D&T. The engagement team assigned to the NRH audit has been knowledgeable, courteous, and professional. The customer service level provided by the staff, from the partner to the field auditor, is first-rate. The length of actual on-site auditing procedures has dropped from approximately two months to just four to five weeks. Fiscal year 2003 represented the City's implementation year for GASB Statement No. 34. The assistance provided by D& T during the conversion, audit, and reporting processes was invaluable. Not only did the new model require formatting changes in the financial reports, but also added sections to the financial statements. The implementation of new policies and procedures were required as well. As such, the number of items to be audited, the level at which the items are audited, and the number of statements to be audited increased. Overall, more information was audited at materiality levels much lower than in prior years. Total audit fees for fiscal year 2003 were $89,640. Deloitte & Touche, LLP has quoted a fee not to exceed $92,350 for the financial and '-- single audits for fiscal year 2004. Should the City not require a single audit in 2004, this fee will be reduced by $8,350. The quoted amount represents a 3% increase or $2,710 greater than 2003 audit costs. Recommendation To authorize staff to exercise the contract extension option for Deloitte & Touche, LLP to provide professional auditing services for fiscal year 2004 for a price not to exceed $92,350 and approve ResolutionNo. 2004-041 authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract extension. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget X Other Finance Review Account # 001-9898-526.32-05 & 405-9898-712.32-05 Sufficient Funds Available w Finance Director '- Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-041 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, that: 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the contract extension with Deloitte & Touche, LLP to provide professional auditing services for fiscal year 2004 for a price not to exceed $92,350 as the act and deed of the City. PASSED AND APPROVED this 29th day of June 2004. APPROVED: Oscar Trevino Mayor ATTEST: Patricia Hutson, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Attorney for the City APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Larry Koonce, Director of Finance Deloitte -1 Deloitte & Touche lLP JPMorgan Chase Tower 2200 Ross Aven ue Suite 1600 Dallas, TX 75201-6778 USA Tel: +12148407000 www.deloitte.com June 2, 2004 City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 North Richland Hills, TX 76180 Attention of: Mr. Larry Koonce Dear Mr. Koonce: We are pleased to serve as independent accountants and auditors for the City of North Richland Hills (the "City") for the year ending September 30. 2004. Mr. Terry Kile will be responsible for the services that we perform for the City_ Mr. Kile will, as he considers necessary, call on other individuals with specialized knowledge, either in this office or elsewhere in our tìrm, to assist in the performance of our services. While auditing and reporting on the City's financial statements for the year ending September 30, 2004, is the service that we are to provide under this engagement letter, we would also be pleased to assist the City on issues as they arise throughout the year. Hence. we hope that the City will call Mr. Kile whenever management believes he can be of assistance. This letter sets forth our understanding of the terms and objectives of our engagement, the nature and scope of the services we will provide, and the related fee arrangements_ Audit of Financial Statements and Other Reporting We will audit the financial statements of the City for the year ending September 30,2004. In addition, we will audit the City's compliance with laws and regulations related to federal and state awards; and report on the City's Schedule of Expenditures of Federal and State Awards. Our audits will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (hereinafter referred to as "generally accepted auditing standards"), standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-profit Organizations and the State of Texas "Uniform Grant Management Standards." We will plan and perform our audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by error or fraud, and we will perform tests of the City's compliance with certain provisions oflaws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, because of the characteristics of fraud, particularly those involving concealment and falsified documentation (including forgery), a properly planned and performed Member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu audit may not detect a material misstatement. Therefore, an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards is designed to obtain reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance that, the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit is not designed to detect error or fraud that is immaterial to the financial statements or to detect immaterial instances of noncompliance. As part of our audit, we will consider the City's internal control and assess control risk, as required by generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, for the purpose of establishing a basis for determining the nature, timing, and extent of auditing procedures necessary for expressing an opinion on the financial statements, and not to provide assurance on the City's internal control or to identify reportable conditions. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our auditing procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, creditors, and tinancial institutions. We will make audit inqUlries and request written responses from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. As part of our audit of compliance with the requirements of major federal and state programs, we will obtain an understanding of the City's internal control related to administering major federal and state programs and we will assess risk as required by OMB Circular A-133 for the purpose of establishing the nature, timing, and extent of auditing procedures necessary for expressing an opinion concerning compliance with laws and regulations related to major federal and state award programs. As required by OMB Circular A-133, our audit of compliance will also include tests of transactions related to federal and state award programs for compliance with applicable laws and regulations. However, because of the concept of reasonable assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, fraud or illegal acts may exist and not be detected by us. We will advise you, however, of any matters of that nature that come to our attention, and will include such matters in the reports required for an audit in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to matters that arise during any subsequent periods for which we have not been engaged as auditors or for which we have performed no substantive auditing procedures. The objective of an audit carried out in accordance with the standards described above is (1) the expression of an opinion concerning whether the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows of the City in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (hereinafter referred to as "generally accepted accounting principles"), (2) reporting on the internal control relevant to an audit of the financial statements, (3) reporting on the City's 2 compliance with laws and regulations, which could have a material effect on the financial statements, (4) reporting on whether the schedule of expenditures offederal and state awards is fairly stated iJ1 all material respects when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, (5) the reporting on our determination as to whether the City's internal control provides reasonable assurance of compliance with federal laws and other laws and regulations, (6) the expression of an opinion on whether the City complied with specific terms and conditions of its major federal and state programs. and (7) preparation of a schedule of findings and questioned costs to summarize the results of the audit in accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-l33. The report on our understanding of the City's internal control and the assessment of control risk made as part of the City's financial statement audit will include (1) the scope of our work in obtaining an understanding of the City's internal control and in assessing the control risk and (2) the reportable conditions, including the identification of material weaknesses identitied as a result of our work in understanding and assessing the control risk. In addition, we will render a report on illegal acts, as required, depending on the results of our audit procedures. We will complete and sign one copy of the auditor's information section of the Data Collection Form. City management must prepare all other sections of the forn1 and sign the form prior to its submission to the Federal Bureau of the Census. Our ability to express an opinion and render those reports, and the wording of our opinion and reports, will, of course, be dependent on the facts and circumstances at the date of such reports. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form or have not formed an opinion, we may decline to express an opinion or decline to issue a report as a result of this engagement. If we are unable to complete our audit or if our auditors' reports require modification, the reasons therefor will be discussed with City management and the City Council. We understand that our reports on the City's internal control, as part of the financial statement audit and on compliance with laws and regulations, are intended for the information of the City Council, management, and others within the City and the federal and state granting agencies. Management's Responsibility The financial statements are the responsibility of City management. In this regard, management has the responsibility for, among other things, establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, for properly recording transactions in the accounting records, for adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements, for making appropriate accounting estimates, for safeguarding assets, for the overall accuracy of the financial statements and their conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, and for making all financial records and related information available to us. Management is also responsible for compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants, and for establishing and maintaining effective internal control to ensure such compliance with those requirements applicable to its activities. We will advise you about accounting principles and their application and will assist in the 3 preparation of your financial statements, but the responsibility for the financial statements remains with you. We will make specific inquiries of City management about the representations embodied in the financial statements. As part of our audit procedures, we wiII request that management provide us with a representation letter acknowledging management's responsibility for the preparation of the financial statements and for compliance with laws and regulations applicable to federal and state award programs; and affirming management's belief that the effects of any uncorrected financial statement misstatements aggregated by us during the current audit engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. We wiII also request that management confirm certain representations made to us during our audit. The responses to those inquiries and related written representations of management required by generally accepted auditing standards are part of the evidential matter that we will rely on as auditors in forming our opinion on the City's financial statements. Because of the importance of management's representations. the City agrees to release and indemnify Deloitte & Touche LLP and its personnel from all claims, liabilities. and expenses relating to our services under this engagement letter attributable to any misrepresentation by management If the City intends to publish or othenvise reproduce in any document our report on the City's financial statements, or othenvise make reference to Deloitte & Touche LLP in a document that contains other information in addition to the audited financial statements (e.g., in a periodic filing with a regulator, in a debt or equity offering circular or in a private placement memorandum), the City agrees that prior to making any such use of our report, or reference to Deloitte & Touche LLP, City management will provide us with a draft of the document to read and obtain our approval for the inclusion or incorporation by reference of our report, or the reference to Deloitte & Touche LLP, in such document before the document is printed and distributed. The inclusion or incorporation by reference of our report in any such document would constitute the reissuance of our report. The City also agrees that City management wiII notify us and obtain our approval prior to including our report on an electronic site. Our engagement to perform the services described above does not constitute our agreement to be associated with any such documents published or reproduced by or on behalf of the City. Any request by the City to reissue our report, to consent to its inclusion or incorporation by reference in an offering or other document, or to agree to its inclusion on an electronic site, wiII be considered based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time of such request. The estimated fees outlined herein do not include any services that would need to be performed in connection with any such request to make use of our report, or reference to Deloitte & Touche LLP; fees for such services (and their scope) would be subject to our mutual agreement at such time and would be described in a separate engagement letter. It is also management's responsibility to ensure that the City has not caused D&T's independence to be impaired by hiring a former or current D&T partner, principal, or professional employee in a key position, as defined in the Code of Professional Conduct of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICP A), that would cause a violation of the AICP A Code of Professional Conduct or other applicable independence rules. Any employment opportunities with the City for a former or current D&T partner, principal, or professional employee should be discussed with Mr. Kile before entering into substantive employment 4 conversations with the former or current D&T partner, principal, or professional employee. For the purpose of this paragraph, "D&T' shall mean DeIoitte & Touche LLP and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, its,member firms and the affiliates of Deloitte & Touche LLP, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, and its member firms. Independence Communications In accordance with Independence Standards Board Standard No.1, Independence Discussions with Audit Committees ("Independence Standard No.1"), we will disclose to the City Council, in writing, all relationships between Deloitte & Touche LLP and its related entities and the City and its related entities that in our professional judgment may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence and confirm to the City Council in such letter whether, in our professional judgment, we are independent of the City within the meaning of the securities acts administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). We also will discuss our independence with the City Council in accordance with Independence Standard No.1. Other Communications Arisinq; From the Audit In connection with the planning and the performance of our audit, generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards require that certain matters be communicated to the City Council. We will report directly to the City Council any fraud of which we become aware that involves senior management, and any fraud (whether caused by senior management or other employees) of which we become aware that causes a material misstatement of the financial statements. We wiII report to senior management any fraud perpetrated by lower level employees of which we become aware that does not cause a material misstatement of the financial statements; however, we will not report such matters directly to the City Council, unless otherwise directed by the City Council. We wiII inform the appropriate level of management of the City and determine that the City Council is adequately informed with respect to iIIegal acts that have been detected or have otherwise come to our attention in the course of our audit, unless the i1Iegal act is clearly inconsequential. If, after determining that the City Council has been adequately informed of an illegal act that has been detected or which has otherwise come to our attention in the course of our audit, we conclude that (1) the i11egal act has a material effect on the financial statements; (2) senior management has not taken, and the City Council has not caused senior management to take, timely and appropriate remedial actions with respect to the illegal act; and (3) the tàilure to take appropriate remedial actions is likely to result in a departure from the standard auditors' report or warrant our resignation from the audit engagement, we wiII directly report our conclusions to the City Council and take such actions as are required by state or federal law to report such matters to funding agencies and appropriate legal authorities. We wiII also report directly to City management and the City Council matters coming to our attention during the course of our audit that we believe are reportable conditions. Reportable conditions are significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control that could adversely affect the City's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. 5 In addition we will communicate to the City Council, or determine that the City Council is informed, about certain other matters relating to the conduct of our audit, including, when applicable: I · Our responsibility as auditors under generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards and OMB Circular A-I33 · Significant accounting policies · Management judgments and accounting estimates · Audit adjustments · Other information in documents containing audited financial statements · Disagreements with management · Consultation by management with other accountants on significant matters · Difficulties encountered in performing the audit · Major issues discussed with management prior to our retention as auditors. We may also have other comments for management on matters we have observed and possible ways to improve the efficiency of the City's operations or other recommendations concerning internal control. With respect to these other communications, it is our practice to discuss all comments, if appropriate, with the level of management responsible for the matters, prior to their communication to senior management and/or the City Council. Coordination of the Audit We understand that the City's employees will type all cash or other confirmations that we request and will locate any invoices selected by us for testing. Other assistance to be supplied by lour personnel, including preparation of schedules and analyses of accounts, will be descnbed in a separate communication. Timely completion of your personnel's work will facilitate the conclusion of our audit by the targeted completion dates. We will notify you promptly of any circumstances we encounter that could significantly change the targeted completion dates. We are, of course, available to assist you in other areas that might arise. 6 Access to Working Papers by Regulators In accordanc~ with the requirements of Government Auditing Standards and of the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996, we are required to provide access to our working papers and photocopies thereof to a federal agency or the Comptroller General of the United States upon their request for their regulatory oversight purposes. If such a request is made, we will infonn you prior to providing such access. The working papers for this engagement are the property of Deloitte & Touche LLP and constitute confidential infonnation. Access to the requested working papers will be provided to representatives of the United States General Accounting Ot1ìce or other appropriate government audit staffs under the supervision of Deloitte & Touche LLP audit personnel and at a location designated by our finn. If photocopies are requested, we will mark all infonnation as confidential and maintain control over the duplication of all infonnation. All professional and administrative services relating to such access (including photocopying) will be charged as an additional expense to the engagement. The working papers relating to this audit will be retained by us for a minimum of three years from the date of the reports issued, or such longer period as may be required to satisfy legal and administrative requirements. Professional Fees Our fees for these services will be based on the contract for auditing services entered into on September 11,2000 with the City of North Richland Hills. Under section 2. Terms and Conditions, our fees for audit services including the financial audit and single audit are not to exceed $92,350. Should the City not require a single audit, this fee will be reduced by $8,350. Under section 4, out-of-pocket expenses are included in the finn's all-inclusive dollar cost bid proposal. The estimate of our fees is based on certain assumptions. To the extent that certain circumstances, as listed in Appendix A. arise during the engagement, our fee estimate may be significantly affected and additional fees may be necessary. We will notify you promptly of any circumstances we encounter that could significantly affect our estimate and discuss with you any additional fees, as necessary. Additional services provided beyond the described scope of services will be billed separately. ***** We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of North Richland Hills. If you have any questions, please let us know. If the above tenns are acceptable to the City and the services outlined are in accordance with your understanding, please sign the enclosed copy of this letter in the space provided and return it to us. Yours truly, J)~ I r~ LL.P 7 Accepted and agreed to by the City of North Richland Hills: By: Title: Date: 8 APPENDIX A CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING TIMING AND FEE ESTIMATE YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 The fees quoted for our audit of the financial statements of the City of North Richland Hills are based on certain assumptions. Circumstances may arise during the engagement that may significantly affect the targeted completion dates and our fee estimate. As a result, additional fees may be necessary. Such circumstances include but are not limited to the following: 1. Changes to the timing of the engagement at the City's request. Changes to the timing of the engagement usually require reassignment of personnel used by Deloitte & Touche LLP ("D&T") in the perfonnance of services hereunder. However. because it is often difficult to reassign individuals to other engagements, 0&1 may incur significant unanticipated costs. 2. All audit schedules are not (a) provided by the City on the date requested, (b) completed in a fonnat acceptable to D&T, (c) mathematically correct, or (d) in agreement with the appropriate City's records (e.g., general ledger accounts). D&T will provide the City with a separate listing of required schedules and deadlines. 3. Electronic files in an appropriate fonnat and containing the infonnation requested are not provided by the City on the date requested for our use in perfonning file interrogation. D&T will provide the City with a separate listing of the required files and the dates the files are needed. 4. Weaknesses in the internal control structure. 5. Significant new issues or changes as follows: a. Significant new accounting issues that require an unusual amount of time to resolve. b. Significant changes in accounting policies or practices from those used in pnor years. c. Significant changes or transactions that occur prior to the issuance of our reports. d. Significant changes in the City's accounting personnel, their responsibilities, or their availability. e. Significant changes in auditing requirements set by regulators. 9 6. A trial balance in financial-statement format, which references to supporting detailed working papers (by general ledger account number), is not provided by the City. All entries are not posted to this trial balance prior to our receiving it. Any post-closing entries will be minimal and posted to this trial balance prior to our receiving it. Draft financial statements that agree with the trial balance and are internally referenced to supporting documentation (for footnotes and cash flow statements) are not prepared by the City's personnel. 7. Significant delays in the City's assistance in the engagement or delays by the City in reconciling variances as requested by D&T. All invoices, contracts, and other documents, which we will identify for the City, are not located by the City's personnel or made ready for our easy access. 8. The engagement team, while performing work on the City's premises, is not provided with access to the Internet via the City's existing network or through a TI, DSL, or cable connection for purposes of conducting the engagement. 9. Deterioration in the quality of the City's accounting records during the current-year engagement in comparison with the prior-year engagement. 10. A significant level of proposed audit adjustments are identified during our audit. 11. Changes in audit scope caused by events that are beyond our control. 12. Untimely payment of our invoices as they are rendered. 10 .' CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Planning Department Council Meeting Date: 6/29/04 "-. Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of Proposed Text Agenda Number: GN 2004-051 Revisions to Ordinance No. 1847 Zonina Ordinance Regarding the Amount of Time to Appeal Decisions Rendered by the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Clarifying the Amount of Fines for Conviction of Persons Found in Violation of the Zoning Ordinance and Eliminating the 10 Day Publication Period for Consideration of Text Amendments by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ordinance No. 2787. Summary: The City Attorney has determined that certain sections of the Zoning Ordinance are not consistent with the Texas Local Government Code and proposes the following text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance by the adoption of Ordinance No. 2787: Section No. 1 reduces the amount of time for an individual to appeal a Zoning Board of Adjustment decision to District Court from 30 days to 10 days; Section No. 2 raises the maximum amount of penalty for individuals found in violation of the Zoning Ordinance from $200 to $2,000 per day; Section No.3 reduces the required Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing notification for Zoning Ordinance text amendments from one (1) newspaper publication ten (10) days prior to the Commission's public hearing to no notice required. Note: a "-. newspaper publication 15 days before public hearing consideration of text amendments by the City Council is still required. Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on June 17, 2004, recommended approval of proposed Ordinance No. 2787 by a vote of 5-1 with the following revision; 1) That Section No. 3 eliminating the 10 day newspaper publication before Planning and Zoning Commission public hearings on text amendments be removed from Ordinance 2787 in favor of retaining the current publication requirements. The consensus of the Commission was that text amendments occur seldom enough that Source of Funds: Bonds (GOIRev.) Operating Budget Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Available Finance Director GN 2004- CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS "-. advertising them prior to the Commission's public hearing does not impede the consideration process and that more public notification rather than less was an important public perception. RECOMMENDATION: To approve Ordinance No. 2787. '-. ."-. ORD 2787 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED TEXT REVISIONS TO ORDINANCE NO. 1847 ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING THE FOLLOWING: THE AMOUNT OF TIME TO APPEAL DECISIONS RENDERED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, CLARIFYING THE AMOUNT OF FINES FOR CONVICTION OF PERSONS FOUND IN VIOLATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND; ELIMINATING THE 10 DAY NOTIFICATION REQUIRED FOR CONSIDERATION OF TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. APPROVED Dave Green summarized the case. These are amendments that are originally proposed by the City Attorney, Mr. Staples. Mr. Staples is constantly reviewing many of the City's ordinances and looking where they may be in conflict with State Law. This is what was found in Amendment #1 and Amendment #2. Amendment #1: This amendment revises the amount of time that is written within the Zoning Ordinance for an individual to appeal a Board of Adjustment decision to District Court. The Zoning Board of Adjustment functions within the Zoning Ordinance by granting variances such as height and area requirements. The Zoning Board of Adjustment is the only board within the City that is granted the authority to grant variances or waivers to those requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Once the board makes a decision, that decision doesn't go anywhere within the City. They are not a recommending board such as the Planning & Zoning Commission. Once their decision is made it is final with regards to the City's consideration. They're final determination does not go to the City Council. This is written up specifically this way. However, an individual can appeal a decision of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, but it has to be appealed to the District Court. A lawsuit has to be filed against the City and the Zoning Board of Adjustment in order to appeal their decision. What Mr. Staples found out is that language that is currently in the ordinance states that an individual has 30 days to appeal a decision by the Zoning Board of Adjustment to District Court. The State Law states that an individual only has 10 days. The purpose of Amendment #1 is to change the text of the Zoning Ordinance to read and be consistent with what is State Law and that is 10 days. Amendment #2: The current State Law provides for a maximum of $2,000 a day for individuals that violate the Zoning Ordinance. This would be something that is addressed by Code Enforcement in Neighborhood Services or by the Building Official. If there is a situation where someone is violating the Zoning Ordinance and Staff moves to address the situation, if a citation needs to be written to that individual for the violation if the situation is not remedied, Staff could write a citation for as much as $2,000 a day. That is a maximum. The current ordinance states $200 a day. The purpose of Amendment #2 is to change the text of the Zoning Ordinance to read and be consistent with what is State Law in terms of penalties per day for zoning violations. Amendment #3: This amendment is specific to North Richland Hills. The amendment states that if a change is made to the Zoning Ordinance in a text amendment a notice must be placed in the newspaper 10 days prior to the consideration at a public hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commission. Such as Amendment #1 and #2, Staff advertised the changes in the newspaper 10 days prior to tonight's meeting as prescribed by the current City Ordinance for those that may be concerned or those that may see the change in the newspaper. As it stands, State Law doesn't require an advertisement for a text change prior to the change being considered by the Planning & Zoning Commission. Amendment #3 removes the requirement of the Zoning Ordinance for any text amendment to appear, be discussed, or advertised in the newspaper 10 days prior to a meeting such as this evening. Bill Schopper stated that it is his understanding that the Commission can make it tougher than State Law, but the Commission can not make it more relaxed. Regarding the 10 day amendment, if an individual wants their appeal bad enough, that individual will move quickly anyway. However, Mr. Schopper does have a problem with Amendment #2. This change makes it look like the Commission is increasing the fines. If Staff was to issue a citation based on $200 a day, it would stick, or would it stick? Mr. Green responded that this is a maximum, it is not a specific. Mr. Schopper stated that our language could make $200 and that would be within the maximum $2,000. Mr. Green stated that it doesn't allow the City to go to $2,000. Mr. Schopper stated that it does allow the City to go to $200. Mr. Schopper stated that his problem with this is that, the Commission has all this misunderstanding about the RV issues, is that considered a zoning citation? Mr. Green responded that it depends on what the City does with it. If the RV regulations that the City is working on are placed in the Zoning Ordinance, then yes. If the City doesn't place the RV regulation in the Zoning Ordinance and an ordinance is drafted that maybe covers the parking requirements in the Code of Ordinances that is a different location. Mr. Schopper asked Mr. Green where the RV section was now. Mr. Green responded that currently the ordinance that everyone is talking about, the ordinance that was adopted by City Council in October but has not been enforced yet, is in the Code of Ordinances. Mr. Schopper stated that this doesn't have anything to do with the RV regulations. So when everyone talks about this, it doesn't have anything to do with the RV regulations. Mr. Green stated that only if the Commission specifically puts it in there and it is written that way and the City CoLincil adopts it that way. Mr. Sapp stated that he felt the same way, but there could be some zoning violations that could be detrimental enough that $200 a day would not be enough incentive. Mr. Schopper stated that he agrees. That was the biggest problem that the Zoning Board of Adjustment had was enforcing the ordinances against citizens that were nice enough to come and get permits, but the citizen that blows by the permit stage and erects anyway, there was nothing the Board could do about it. That has been a miserable problem. Mr. Sapp commented on Amendment #1. For the benefit of the citizens watching this and thinking that suddenly the City has decided to be tougher on everyone here. This revision is actually to the benefit of the citizens. If a citizen today were to follow our instructions with 30 days notice, and utilize that 30 days they would go to court and find themselves without standing and would not be able to pursue their appeal. By clarifying this, it does keep them from loosing their right of appeal should that occur. Mr. Green stated that he agrees with Mr. Sapp. There is perhaps a false since of security to an individual that wants to appeal. Mr. Schopper asked Mr. Green if now was the appropriate time to change the fine amendment with all of the moving parts that is going on. Mr. Sapp stated that the only reason for this seems to be to be parallel with State Law. There doesn't seem to be an issue of being unable to enforce the City's Zoning Code. Mr. Schopper stated that if $2,000 is the maximum and the City decides that $200 is the maximum, the City is still within State Law. I believe that is may not be the time to go for this change. Mr. Green stated that part of what Mr. Staples responsibilities are is to make sure that the City is in line with State Law. Mr. Schopper stated that he is trying to make sure that the City is in line and to stop upsetting our citizens. Mr. Green stated that he not sure that there is ever a good time to talk to someone about raising a fine. Mr. Sapp stated that the Commission doesn't have a great deal of input of how frequently the City fines anyone. Mr. Green stated that many times when the City writes an individual who is violating the ordinance and $2,000 a day is mentioned, some action is taken in resolving the violations. Code Enforcement is flooded with citizens calling in asking why certain violations haven't been taken care of. Part of that is possibly a big stick. I don't know how much it influences citizens, but to some degree it has to have some sort of bearing. Mr. Schopper stated that he wants to get away from the big stick. Mr. Sapp stated that 10 days is $2,000. Mr. Schopper stated that the individual won't do it in 10 days either. Mr. Schopper doesn't believe this action is appropriate at this juncture. Mr. Davis asked Mr. Schopper why there is a time issue. It is State Law. The City needs to conform to the State Law. The Commission needs to trust the judicial system to make a fair decision and enforce the City's codes. Mr. Schopper asked Staff how many zoning citations are issued a year? Mr. Green responded that there are not that many. Most citations that end up in court are code violations. That can be zoning, nuisance codes, or health codes. Anything that is in the Code of Ordinance Book is caring a $2,000 a day fine. Mr. Schopper stated that the codes are already there, but not the zoning. What is a zoning code violation? Mr. Green responded that for example, if an individual purchased a piece of property and that individual didn't check the zoning, didn't get any permits, didn't get a Certificate of Occupancy, the individual just showed up one day and started conducting business. Once Staff is notified of that situation, Staff begins checking into it. At this time, Staff is dealing with a case just like this. Mr. Sapp asked Mr. Green that isn't more likely that improper commercial activity occur, isn't that the biggest risk? Mr. Green responded yes. That means a lot. Enforcing the Zoning Ordinance has to mean something. If the City doesn't enforce the Zoning Ordinance, the City will be lost. Once one individual is able to go by, others will follow. Mr. Schopper asked Mr. Green about the current situation going on. Mr. Green responded that Staff is resolving it. Mr. Schopper asked Mr. Green if a cease and desist order was given. Mr. Green responded yes. Mr. Schopper believes that any individual will resolve the situation based on the fine, whether it is $200 or $2,000. I don't agree with the big brother, big stick. Mr. Sapp stated that initially, individuals are written a letter in order to resolve the issue. The citation is a last resort. Mr. Green stated that when a letter is sent out, that language needs to be in writing. Mr. Davis stated that "further non conformance may result in a citation...." is usually within the letter giving a deadline date. Mr. Green added that it is not an on the spot citation. Chairman Bowen stated that this has nothing to do with RV Ordinances. This is a completely separate issue. Mr. Davis stated that he has no problem with Amendments #1 and #2. Mr. Davis stated his concerns about Amendment #3 and doesn't see any reason to have #3. The City has a couple of times a year a text change. Why not put it in the paper in the spirit of openness. Mr. Sapp asked Mr. Green if the Commission needs to view this as one motion or do they need to be dealt with individually. Chairman Bowen stated that if the Commission wants to deal with the ordinance tonight, the Commission can change or delete part of it. Chairman Bowen opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak and Chairman Bowen closed the public hearing. Richard Davis, seconded by James Laubacher, motioned to recommend approval of ORD 2787 but to include that the requirement for the newspaper notification of 10 days still be a requirement for any future zoning ordinance text amendments. The motion was approved with Bill Schopper opposing (5-1). James Laubacher commented after the motion that leaving the newspaper notice in is appropriate especially in today's times. As far as the State Law is concerned, this is to bring it into accordance with State Law. Generally, State Law always takes precedents. ORDINANCE NO. 2787 2 AN ORDINANCE AlVIENDING THE NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 4 COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE BY CONFORMING REQUIRElVIENTS FOR APPEALS FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF 6 ADJUSTMENT; PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS AND NOTICES OF PUBLIC HEARINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING 8 COMMISSION TO STATE LAW; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE 10 DATE. 12 WHEREAS, notices of public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council have been duly posted and published, and public hearings held; 14 and 16 WHEREAS, Section 211.011, TEX Loc. GoV'T CODE, provides that petitions appealing decisions of the Zoning Board of Adjustment to Court must be presented 18 within ten days after the date the decision is filed in the Board's office, and Section 210 of Ordinance 1874, the City's Zoning Ordinance, requires such 20 petitions be presented within 30 days; and 22 WHEREAS, Section 54.001, TEX Lac. GoV'T CODE, and Section 1-7 of the North Richland Hills Code of Ordinances, provide that the maximum penalty for violations of 24 zoning regulations is $2,000 per day, while Section 240 of Ordinance 1874, the City's Zoning Ordinance, provides that the maximum penalty fòr zoning 26 violations is $200 per day; and 28 WHEREAS, Section 211.006, TEX Lac. GoV'T CODE, establishes procedures required for amending zoning regulations which do not include any publication of notices 30 of meetings of the Planning and Zoning Commission, while Section 200(g) of Ordinance 1874 requires such published notice; and 32 WHEREAS, the City Council desires to confonn its conflicting zoning ordinance provisions 34 to state law; NOW, THEREFORE, 36 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS. 38 Section 1: Section 210.Q of Ordinance 1874, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of North Richland Hills, is hereby amended to read as follows: 40 42 "Q. Appeal of Board Action. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Board, a taxpayer, or an officer, department, board or bureau of the City, may obtain judicial Ordinance No. 2787 Page 1 of 3 C:\Documents ~nd Settings\dgreen\Local SeLtings\Temporary :nternet ?iles\OLK=\ZBA ~ppea13 ~78Î.doc review of such decision by presenting to a district or county court at law a verified 2 petition within ten days after the date the decision is filed in the Board's office." Section 2: Section 240 of Ordinance 1874, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of North 4 Richland Hills, is hereby amended to read as follows; 6 "Sec. 240. Penalty Clause. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon final 8 conviction fined in an amount not to exceed $2,000 for each offense. Each day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense." 10 Section 3: 12 14 16 Section 4: 18 20 22 24 26 Section 5: 28 30 Section 6: Section 200.G and Appendix E of Ordinance 1874, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, is hereby amended by deleting the second paragraph of such Section 200.G, and by deleting ITom Appendix E, the notation "Ten Day Newspaper Publication" and "R" under the heading "Zoning Text Changes." It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of this ordinance are severable and, if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by the final judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the city council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such invalid phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. The City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause the publication of the descriptive caption and Section 2 of this ordinance as an alternative method of publication provided by law. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage. 32 AND IT IS SO ORDAINED. 34 PASSED AND APPROVED this 28th day of June, 2004. 36 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 38 40 By: Mayor Ordinance No. 2787 Page 1 of 3 c: \Documents and Settings\àgreen\Local Set:.tings\Temporary :nter:1et E'iles\OLK5\ZBÞ. .;;ppeals .2787.doc 10 12 14 16 ATTEST: 2 4 Patricia Hutson, City Secretary 6 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: 8 George A. Staples, Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Department Head Ordinance No. 2787 Page 1 of 3 ':: \Oocuments a.nd Se'Ltings\dgreen\Local Se'Ctings\Temporary Interner. Fi:es\OLK5\ZBA .:"ppeals =737.doc CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: City Secretary Council Meeting Date: 6/29/04 Subject: Appointments to Council Committees / Boards Agenda Number: GN 2004-052 The Council Rules of Procedure states that the Mayor will appoint members to City Council committees, subiect to the approval of the Council. With the recent Council election, there is a vacancy on the Naming Committee and the CIP Committee. Naming Committee - terms will expire 10/31/04 The Naming Committee consists of three council members. Committee members are Councilman Metts and Mayor Trevino. There is one vacancy on the committee. Mayor Trevino is recommending Councilman Lewis to fill the unexpired term. CIP Committee The CIP Committee consists of three council members and one alternate. Council currently serving on the committee are Councilman Welch (Chair), Councilwoman Johnson, and Mayor (alternate). There is one vacancy on the committee. Mayor Trevino is recommending the appointment of Mayor Pro Tem Whitson to till the vacancy. Action needed by Council- consider Mayor Trevino's recommendation for the Naming Committee, term expiring 10/31/04 and the CIP Committee. There are also several boards and council committees in which the Council nominates and approves appointments. At this time Council needs to nominate and approve appointments for the following committees and boards. Fort Worth Water Committee: Voting Member: Fort Worth Wastewater Committee: Voting Member Voting member position is vacant. Councilman Turnage served on these committees as the City's voting member and Mike Curtis is serving as the alternate. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds Þ\vallaDle Finance Director Page 1 of ....." , " CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Action needed by Council- to appoint a voting member to the Fort Worth Water and Fort Worth Wastewater Committee, term expiring September 3D, 2004. Park and Recreation Facilities Development Corporation Place 1 - Council member Director (incumbent is Mayor Pro Tem Whitson) Place 3 - Council member Director (incumbent is Mayor Trevino) Place 4 - Councilmember Director - Vacant Place 5 - Citizen Member Director - (incumbent is Janie McGuigan) Place 7 - Citizen Member Director - (incumbent is Park Board Member Brad Greene) The terms of office for the Board Members serving in Places 1, 3, and 7 expired on May 1, 2004. Place 4 is vacant and the term expires May 1, 2005. The Corporation's Articles of Incorporation and. Byfaws state that appointments to the Board of Directors are to be made by the City Council and that Places 1, 3, and 4 are designated for Council Member Directors and Places 5 and 7 are designated for Citizen Member Directors. Because of the purpose of this Board, i.t would be desirable to select current members of the Park and Recreation Board to also service on this Development Board. Members serving on the Board whose terms have not yet expired are: Councilman Lewis, Place 2 and Mr. Mark Haynes, Place 6. Action needed by Council- to appoint Council Member Directors to Places 1, 3, and 4 and Citizen Members to Places 5 and 7. Places 1, 3, 5 and 7 terms will expire May 1, 2006 and Place 4 term will expire May 1, 2005. Animal Control Shelter Advisory Committee Place 2 - City Official Vacant term expires 6/30/2004 Place 3 - Employee of Animal Shelter Vacant term expires 6/30/2005 Place 4 - Representative from an Pam Burney term expires 6/30/2004 Animal Welfare Organization .-. Bypracttceihese-·are-two--yeaf terms~f-o~-BecattSe-of the speeifie--typ&-of--u_u appointments needed to these places it is recommended that Council appoint a member of the Council to Place 2, an employee of the Animal Adoption Rescue Center to Place 3 and reappoint Pam Burney as the representative from an Animal Welfare Organization. Ms. Burney is the Senior Director of the National Shelter Outreach Program with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Action needed by Council- to appoint a City Official to Place 2, term expiring 6/30/2006; to appoint an employee of the Animal Adoption and Rescue Center to fill the unexpired term of Place 3, term expiring 6/30/2005 and to appoint a representative from an Anima/ Welfare Organization to Place 4, term expiring 6/30/2006. ¡ CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page_of _ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS -bepartment: City Secretary Council Meeting Date: 6/29/04 Subject: Appointments to Civil Service Commission Agenda Number: GN 2004-053 Several of the Civil Service Commission members' terms expire on June 30. These appointments are mayoral appointments with confirmation by two-thirds vote of the Council. Mayor Trevino is recommending the following individuals for Council confirmation: Place 1 Place 2 Place 4 Ex Officio Sally Bustamante September Daniels Dick Bartek Brent Barrow term expires 6/30/2005 t(3rm expires 6/30/2005 term expires 6/30/2006 term expires 6/30/2005 Recommendation: To take action on the Mayor's appointments. -' Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds AVaJlaDle Finance Director .(;?áI/tlMà ~ Department Head Signature Page 1 of CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: City Secretary Council Meeting Date: 6/29/04 Subject: Appointment of One Board Deleaate to Reinvestment Agenda Number: GN 20G!..()54 Zone Number 1 and Two Board Delegates to Reinvestment Zone Number 2 With the recent City Council election, the City has one vacant seat on the Board of Directors of Reinvestment Zone No. 1 and two vacant seats on the Board of Directors of Reinvestment Zone NO.2. The City Council is being requested to appoint City Council Members to fill these vacancies. The Bylaws of Reinvestment Zone Number 1 state that the nine-member Board is to consist of five members appointed by the Council. Council Members currently serving on this board are Mayor Trevino, Mayor Pro Tem Whitson, Councilman Metts and Councilwoman Johnson. Council needs to appoint one member to this board. The Bylaws of Reinvestment Zone Number 2 state that the nine-member Board is to consist of six members appointed by the City Council. Council Members currently serving on this board are Mayor Trevino, Mayor Pro Tem Whitson, Councilman Metts and Councilwoman Johnson. Council needs to appoint two members to this board. Initially, when the Reinvestment Zones were created, David Medanich (City's Financial Advisory with First Southwest Company) recommended that the City's Board Members include elected officials of the City. Council also agreed to appoint the same Council Members to Reinvestment Zones No. 1 and 2 with the exception of the one extra member on Reinvestment Zone NO.2. Councit members appointed to fill these vacancies will serve until October 2004 at which time all board member terms will expire. Recommendation: To appoint one member of the City Council as North Richland Hills' delegate to Reinvestment Zone Number 1 and two members of the City Council as North Richland Hills' delegate to Reinvestment Zone Number 2. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds AvallaDle Finance Director Ç?ab2t¿;r¡ ~~ Department Head Signature cMo!~ Page 1 of to'· CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ,Department: City Secretary Council Meeting Date: 6/29/04 Subject: Appointments to Boards & Commissions (Place 4 and Alternate / Ex Officio positions) Agenda Number: GN 2004-055 The individuals serving on the Boards and Commissions in Places 2, 4, 6 and Alternate / Ex Officio terms of office will expire June 30. For the boards listed below, Ordinance No. 2304 states that the City Council will act upon Council member nominations. At this time, Councilwoman Johnson is submitting nominations for Place 4 and Mayor Trevino is submitting nominations for the Alternate/ Ex Officio positions for Council consideration. Appointments to Places 2 and 6 will be brought before Council at a future Council meeting. . Keep North Richland Hills Beautiful Commission Place 4 Monique Hester Alternate Sarah Enfinger Board of Adjustment Place 4 term expires 6/30/2006 term expires 6/30/2006 Fonda Kunkel term expires 6/30/2006 Substandard Building Board Place 4 Philip E. Orr, Jr. term expires 6/30/2006 Library Board Place 4 Kay Schmidt term expires 6/30/2006 Park and Recreation Board Place 4 Alternate Marlin Miller Kim Kirby term expires 6/30/2006 term expires 6/30/2006 Planning & Zoning Commission & Capital Improvement Advisory Committee Place 4 Randy Shiflet term expires 6/30/2006 Ex Officio Member Suzy Compton term expires 6/30/2006 Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number SufficientFunds ,ð;vallaDle Finance Director ,,-,. ßda'tVd~ Department Head Signature ~X~~ City Mana er ignature Page 1 of 2 Teen Court Advisory Board Place 4 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Doug Stamps Recommendation: To take action on the above listed Board appointments. I~ CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM term expires 6/30/2006 Page ~ of 2- .. /. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Administration Council Meeting Date: June 29. 2004 Subject: Public Hearina on Senior Tax Freeze Agenda Number: GN 2004-056 Over the past several months, the City Council has had interest expressed to enact a tax freeze for seniors and disabled persons. It was the consensus of Council to wait on any action until the special 'legislative session was convened and decisions made regarding school financing as there had been many proposals made regarding property tax provisions that would impact cities in Texas. Not knowing all of the impacts or issues, the thought was to hold on any action on this matter until such time as the City Council and others in the State had a better sense of what the Legislature would do and what actions they might take that would potentially go to the voters in the form of constitutional amendments for restructuring of taxes in Texas. Since the Legislature is at a stalemate and the special session was concluded with no decision, on May 24 the City Council discussed options for calling an election for a tax freeze for seniors and disabled persons. The City Attorney reviewed with the City Council options which included a citizens' petition that could be submitted to the City with at least 5% of the registered voters, the City calling for a non-binding election, the City Council encouraging the initiation of a petition calling for an election, or the Council approving or disapproving a senior/disabled persons' tax freeze. It was the consensus of the Council for the staff to prepare a report regarding the financial impact of such a tax freeze on the City of North Richland Hills at the second pre-council meeting of June, and then decide whether to call an election or consider other options, such as voting on the matter by the City Council. The financial impact report will be presented at the Pre-Council Meeting for Council's review and discussion. In the past, Council stated that at a future time when they had received the financial impact information and knew the State Legislature's position on school finance and its implications on cities that public comments would be received. The school finance issue is still uncertain, but since the financial impact report is being presented on June 29, it seems appropriate to proceed with public comments on this matter to assist Council in determining the direction to take on this matter. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds AvallaCle Finance Director Department Head Signature ~~ Paoe 1 of k , ~ CITY OF NORTH RICH LAND HILLS Therefore, we have placed an item on the regular agenda to receive public comments on -' the enactment of a senior/disabled persons' tax freeze. The purpose of this item would be to receive comments from those who are interested in making their views known to the City Council on this matter. Following the Public Hearing on this matter, we have placed two items for Council consideration: 1 ) To call for an election 2) To approve an ordinance enacting the senior/disabled persons' tax freeze. Not knowing the desires of Council, we have placed both of these before you for your consideration. Another option would also be to take no action on either of these matters. Recommendation: To conduct Public Hearing to receive comments on the matter of the tax freeze for senior and disabled persons. I CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM· P~ae 1 af CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS .,' \'-..- Department: Administration Council Meeting Date: June 29,2004 Subject: Consider Resolution callina election to submit Senior Tax Freeze - Resolution No. 2004-042 Agenda Number: GN 2004-057 This Resolution is provided for your review that would call for an election to take place on September 11, 2004 to allow voters to vote for or against a tax freeze for persons 65 years or older or who are disabled. At the May 24 Pre-Council Meeting, Councilman Metts requested a discussion of options for calling an election. At that meeting, City Attorney George Staples advised Council that if they wanted to call an election, it would need to be done no later than the 2nd meeting in June, in order to have an election in September. Again, not knowing the preference of Council with regard to the senior tax freeze, this item was placed on the Agenda for an option for consideration. Recommendation: No recommendation is provided. t--- Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds ~vallaDle Finance Director r- Department Head Signature ~~ Page 1 of RESOLUTION NO. 2004-042 2 4 WHEREAS, Article XVI, Section 3, of the North Richland Hills Charter provides that the City Council, by majority vote of its members, may submit to popular vote at any election for adoption or rejection, any proposed ordinance and may call a special election for this purpose; and 6 8 WHEREAS, Article 8, Section I-b(h) of the Texas Constitution pennits the governing body or the voters to freeze the amount of taxes of a disabled person and those over 65 years of age for the rest of their lives; and 10 12 WHEREAS, the City Council desires to allow the citizens of North Richland Hills to vote on this proposition without the necessity of filing the required petition as allowed by its Charter; and 14 16 WHEREAS, there is a pending Attorney General opinion request on whether such an election called by the City Council without a petition will effectively enact such tax freeze, which opinion is not expected until after the deadline for calling an election for the earliest possible date; NOW, THEREFORE, 18 20 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 24 Section 1: THAT a special election is hereby called for September 11, 2004, for the submission of the following issue to the qualified voters of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas: 26 28 Shall the total amount oftaxes paid to the City on the homesteads of persons sixty five (65) years of age or older or who are disabled never be increased as provided by Article 8, Section I-b(h) of the Texas Constitution? 30 32 Vote "Yes" or "No" 34 Section 2: Such special election shall take place on September 11, 2004, between the hours of7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. 36 Section 3: The location of polling places for this joint election are designated pursuant to Section 271.003 of the Texas Election Code, and the Council finds that the following locations can most adequately and conveniently serve the voters in this election, and that these locations will facilitate the orderly conduct of the election: 38 40 Resolution No. 2004-042 Page 1 of 3 W:\NRH\General\Resolutions\Special Election 2004-042.wpd PRECINCT 2 VOTING LOCATION 4 Precinct One (includes County voting precincts 3214,3324,3333,3041,3364, 3366 & 3416) City Hall, 7301 Northeast Loop 820 Precinct Two (includes County voting precincts 3032,3140,3215,3289,3325,3326,3399,3424, 3631,3633,3634,4620&4629) Dan Echols Senior Adult Center 6801 Glenview Drive 6 8 Precinct Three (includes County voting precincts Bursey Road Senior Adult Center 3063,3049,3177,3209,3365,3367,3387, 7301 Bursey Road 3507,3527,3543,3580 & 3584) 10 12 14 Section 4: 16 18 Section 5: 20 24 26 28 Section 6: 30 32 34 Section 7: 36 38 Section 8: 40 Each Presiding Judge shall appoint not less than two, but no more than six qualified clerks to serve and assist in holding said election, provided that ifthe Presiding Judge herein appointed actually serves, the Alternate Presiding Judge shall be one of the clerks. Early voting will be held on weekdays beginning on August 25, 2004 at 8:00 a.m. and will continue through September 7, 2004 at 5 :00 p.m. Such early voting shall take place in the office of the City Secretary in the North Richland Hills City Hall (the Pre-Council Room and City Council Chambers shall be considered an extension of the City Secretary's office for early voting purposes) at 7301 Northeast Loop 820, North Richland Hills, Texas. The City Secretary, or her designee, shall be responsible for conducting early voting, both in person and by mail, and has the authority to contract with Tarrant County for early voting services and other miscellaneous voting services. In accordance with Section 87.004 of the Texas Election Code, the Presiding Judge at City Hall and at least two (2) election clerks shall also serve as the Early Voting Ballot Board to count the ballots received in Early Voting by Personal Appearance and Early Voting by mail. All resident qualified electors of the City shall be permitted to vote at said election and, on the day of the election, such electors shall vote at the polling place designated for the Election Precinct in which they reside. The election shall be conducted pursuant to the election laws of the State of Texas. The City Secretary is directed to procure voting machines, if available, for the election of September 11,2004, and voting machines are hereby adopted as the method of voting at such election. Resolution No. 2004-042 Page 2 of 3 w:\NRH\General\Resolutions\Special Election 2004-042.wpd Section 9: The Presiding Election Judges shall be compensated at the rate of $8.00 per hour and each Alternate Presiding Judge and Election Clerk shall be compensated at the rate of$7.50 per hour. The Presiding Election Judges shall also be paid the additional sum of $25.00 for delivering the returns of the special election. 2 4 6 8 Section 10: Should the measure submitted above pass, the City Council shall, should the Attorney General fail to approve the effectiveness of this method of approving the tax freeze, adopt an ordinance enacting such limitation on such taxes. 10 AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. 12 Passed on the 29th day of June, 2004. 14 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 16 18 By: 20 Oscar Trevino, Mayor ATTEST: 24 Patricia Hutson, City Secretary 26 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: 28 30 George A. Staples, Attorney 32 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 34 36 Department Head 38 Resolution No. 2004-042 Page 3 of 3 W:\NRH\General\Resolutions\Special Election 2004-042.wpd .< ;;. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Administration Council Meeting Date: June 29, 2004 Subject: Consider Ordinance Enactina Senior Tax Freeze- Ordinance No. 2789 Agenda Number: GN 2004-058 As mentioned in the previous items, at the May 24 Pre-Council meeting, options were identified for calling an election for a senior citizen/disabled persons tax freeze. It was then requested to· have a financial impact report made to City Council so that it could make a decision with respect to calling an election or voting on this matter by the City Council. This item is being placed on the agenda to give Council an option to decide if Council would like to take action at this time on an ordinance enacting a senior tax freeze. Councilwoman Bielik had previously requested that this item be placed on the previous Council Agenda, but it was determined to hold' on that item until after the report on the financial impact was presented. Again, not knowing which direction Council might choose to take on this subject, it was determined to place two options before Council, that of calling for an election, or voting on the tax freeze matter. \. i Recommendation: No recommendation is provided. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Account Number Sufficient Funds AvallaOle Department Head Signature Finance Director Paoe 1 of ORDINANCE NO. 2789 2 4 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22 OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, CODE OF ORDINANCES ENACTING A LIMITATION ON THE TAXES OF HOMESTEADS OF PERSONS WHO ARE DISABLED OR SIXTY FIVE OR MORE YEARS OF AGE. 6 8 WHEREAS, Article 8, Section I-b(h) of the Texas Constitution authorizes the governing body of governmental entities to permanently freeze the taxes on the homesteads of persons who are disabled or sixty five (65) years of age or older; NOW, THEREFORE, 10 12 14 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: 16 Section 1: THAT Chapter 22 ofthe Code of Ordinances ofthe City of North Richland Hills is hereby amended by adding a new Section 22-7 which shall read as follows: 18 20 "Section '22-7. ELIMINATION OF INCREASES IN TAXES ON HOMESTEADS OF DISABLED PERSONS AND THOSE AGE 65 OR OLDER. 22 Taxes on a residence owned by a person who receives a residence homestead exemption for such residence and who is either disabled or is sixty five (65) years of age or older may not be increased while it remains the residence homestead of that person or that person's spouse who is disabled or is sixty five (65) years of age and receives a residence homestead exemption on the homestead. Upon the death of a person with such residence homestead exemption, the taxes shall not be increased while it remains the residence homestead of the decedent's surviving spouse ifthe spouse is fifty five (55) years of age or older at the time of the death of the person who was receiving such homestead exemption, subject to any exceptions provided by general law. Taxes may be increased to the extent the value ofthe homestead is increased by improvements other than repairs and improvements required to comply with governmental requirements, and except as may be consistent with the transfer of a tax limitation under a law authorized by Article 8, Section I-b(h), of the Texas Constitution." 26 28 30 32 34 36 AND IT IS SO ORDAINED. 38 PASSED on this 29th day of June, 2004. 40 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 42 By: 44 Oscar Trevino, Mayor Ordinance No. 2789 Page 1 of 2 W:\NRH\General\Ordinances-Completed\Homestead Tax Limit 2789.wpd ATTEST: '2 4 Patricia Hutson, City Secretary 6 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: 8 10 George A. Staples, Attorney 12 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 14 16 Department Head 18 Ordinance No. 2789 Page 2 of 2 W:\NRH\General\ürdinances-Completed\Homestead Tax Limit 2789.wpd Announcements and Information June 29, 2004 Council Member JoAnn Johnson: Announcements All City offices will be closed Monday July 5th in observance of Independence Day. Garbage will be collected as usual. Come join the crowd for NRH20 Dive-in movies! The Dive-in movie for Friday July 2nd is "Charlotte's Web". The movie will start at dusk. For more information call 817-427-6500 or go to www.nrh20.com . Celebrate Independence Day with our neighbors in Bedford! This year NRH is a proud sponsor for the City of Bedford Independence Day Event, and we encourage citizens to attend this free event which is being held at Bedford Boys Ranch on July 3rd. For additional information call 817-952-2222 (ext. 514) or visit www.cLbedford.tx.us/4thFest Information Julv 3rd Critter Connection North Hills Mall 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Kudos Korner Every Council Meeting, we spotlight our employees for the great things they do. Julia Howdeshell, Customer Service Representative, Utility Billing Department - An email was received from a NRH resident commending Howdeshell on an excellent job getting Oncor to replace the street light bulbs on a residential street. The comment was made on the departments monthly survey sent to customers. . . 0 · · 3~m,~~b · C/) "0 CD S· CD 0 (") » CD ~ /'\, _ . ~ Q.) "T1"'" ""0 o W.I~_c:: -~~- < ., O. -' ::J CD - CD CD --+¡ 0 0 0 CD O::T 3 3 ..., ::J ~ == ""0 N ~ CD ~ I m < ~ CD Ñ" C'" ::IN_moO CDCD r"'+CDQ.)o-::J r"" en >< ~ CD 0 I\.) Q.) 0 moo a. Q:::J ::::t:: Q) 0 0= CD-c.v ""0"" (") 0 _CD ~"O I CD3 < ~C/) a.Q.) CD 0_ _" c....::J Q.) ::J Q.) (f)- en ::J CD CD ~ c:~. ~ ...J Q.) 0 · CD ..., a. ~ __CD en ºm Q.) ....J.. en- ... 3 Q) CD CD I\.) S! $l o CD-- Q.) 0 a.0 en ..þ.. --I::J -. Q) ::J >< o < CD <: -- CD :E - -