Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1935-01-16 Minutes153 the Council and the Mayor declared the,•Coancil adjourned. r Attest: Approved CitMa, r. Recessed meeting of Fayetteville Citv Council Wednesday January 16,1935. Present Ma w r T S Tribble: Aldermen: Bynum, Carter, McAllister, Peal, Shook and Stanford. Absent: Aldermen J K Gregory and G T Sanders. tla,rcr tribble expressed appreciation of the services of the Civil Service Commisi sion which was followed by a hound -Ta ble discussion by members of Council and Commission as to the interpretation of Act Number 29., 1933, General Assembly of the State of Arkansas. •Aiderman McAllister introduced the following Resolution: 1q R E S 0 L U T I 0 N. l'1HF.HF•.AS, It has been reported to the members of the City Council of the City of Fayetteville that friction has arisen between the Council of the City of Fayette ville and the Civil Service Uommiss ion of the City of Fayettei il.le �r:d, !.%rHT'F+EAS, It is the desireof the City Council of the City of Favetteville to put at rest all such rumors or reports : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TH?'s CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF FayPttevi.11e that said City Council has the utmost desire to cooperate with the said Civil Service Commission heretofore appointed by this body, in the discharge of their duties; it being thesense of this resolution that the City Council recognizes the authority of the Civil Service Commission to do -a.11 acts in connection with the Policeand Fire Departments necessary for the proper administration of said Departments for the bettermentsof the Citizens of the d'ity of Fav et te- ville, unhampered and unrestricted by the 'ity Council of theiOity of Fayetteville . Th''siresolution was seconded by Alderman Shook and upon the question being put resulted in the following vote: Ayes: Alderman Bynvm, Carter, McAlliater, Peal, Shook and Stanford. Absent and not voting: Alderman: Gregory and Sanders. The Mayor declared carried. Published in the Fayette.vlle Daily Democrat, January 17th,19350 Httest:� Approved Clerk V Mayor" Fayetteville City Council met in regular session January 21,1935. resent: f,ayor TS Tribble. Aldermen: Bynum, Carter, Grerzorv, MCAilister, Peal, Sanders, Shod' and Stanford. City "ttorney Rex Perkins, City Engineer E M Ratliff, Chief of Police IRArl:.HandS AbsentuCitvf•Clark Otoe Phillips, City Atty Rex Perkins acting as clerk of the. session. Minutes of the previous meeting were read and after correction making Alderman Gregory and City Clerk Otoe Phillips, the two members absent, were approved. Alderman Sanders moved to have included in Ordinance Tlumber 778 an "emergency _ Clause", which would make Section three of Ordinance Number 778 read "the provis- ions of this Ordinance are declared tF be cumulative to the City Ordinance now in force and repeals only the Ordinances and parts of Ordinances in direct conflict her'eviith, and this ordinance being necessary for the immediate peace, health, safe- ty and welfare of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, an emergency is declared to exist, and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and of ter its pass,ge, approval and publication". This motion was seconded by Alderman Peal; was duly passed by the Council and the Mavor declared carried. The following bills approved by the Auditing Committee, J C Peal, Chairman, were presented: Fayetteville Drug Company 111.00: $23'r30 and 20 cents; Harper Brush Wks $9.00; Ben Porter $?15.00; A F Shumate u18.00; �O uthwe,St Gas & Electric Co., $314.10 •;: Alderman Gregory moved that the bills be allowed as approved and that the Clerk be instructed to draw warrants for the same upon the proper funds. Alderman Bynum seconded this motion which received the unanimous vote of the Council. Alderman McAllister moved that the bill of 11 is Gregg for services rendered be deferred until next meeting. This motion was sedond'ed by Alderman Peal and carried unanimously, 'Alderman Sanders moved that Mayor Tribble appoint a committee of two! to talk with Civil Service Commission and cal attention to things they have not complied with under Act Number 29y 1933 General Assembly of Arkansas. This motion was second- ed by Alderman Gregory. Motion was withdrawn with consent of Second. Bids for painting name of Streets on curbs were opened. Alderman ficAllister moved that letting of Contract be left up tok Street Corrmittee snd Mayor, with power to act. This motion was seconded by Alderman Sanders and received the entire, vote of the Council. A request from Fayetteville Milk Company to cut grade on North vest Street in front of said Milk Company,':s place of business. Alderman Sanders moved that the 154 Z- request be granted, same to be done under supervision of City Engineer F bi Ratliff'. Alderman Carter"second'ed this motion and it carried unanimously. The, matter of interest charges on overdrafts carried by First National Bank on General and Street Fund accounts, charge made on January 11th,1935, was brought to the attention of the Council. Alderman McAllister moved that these charges be turn- ed to the Finance Committee for verifying. This motion(vias seconded by Alderman Car and was duly passed by' the Council. The Mayor declared carried. The matter of Homer (jlirisman's claim agsinst theCity with ,judgment and costs was presented. Alderman Carter moved that the City Clerk be. authorized to pay this execution amounting to $50.00. Alderman McAllister seconded the motion which resulted in the following vote: Ayes: R.Idergien: Bynum, Carter, Gregory, McAllister, Peal, Sanders, Shook and Stanford. Nayes: None. The Mayor declared carried and the City Clerk was instructed to issue this cheer: for ,50.i')0, same being made payable to Harley Gover, Sheriff lof i'lashington County. r. M. Ratliff, as a me'mberof the Board of Improvement of Sewer Improvement District No, 1., called to the attention of the Council hisappointment by them as a member of said Board, his acceptance of same, and his compliance with all requirements in regard to filing Oath lof Office, and of his not beim; called into conference by the Chairman of said Board, of the various reports through the press of the serious condition of the finances of said District of Sewer Improvement Number One, a:pro- posed hill to be presented to the legislature now in session, and followed with a detailed report of the total assessed benefits, benefits which should have been collected over the ner;iodl 1927 to 1933 inclusive, showing delinquencies as rep(r ted by the City Collector'is office under date of December 15,1933. Alderman McAllister moved that the report of: EnMt-Rattliffl. Sewer Commissioner, be received and same be made a part of the minutes of the meeting of the City Council January 21,1935. Alderrre.n Bynum seconded this motion which received the unanimous vote of the Council. *This report follows on page 155 Record D* Annual report of C FlArmistead,Receiver oNorth Leve11eetmproVe.men t District No•1 was read. Alderman MacAllister moved that the, same be received and filed. This motion was seconded 1by Alderman Shook and was duly passed by thr louncil. The Mavor declared carried.The mattter of merging Sevier and t°Jat.er Improvement Districts( a 0111 having been suggested and printed in Fayetteville newspapers recently) was brour.ht to the attention of the Council, and Alderman Grpgory moved that the City Council of the City if Fayee.tteville go on record in the form of a Resolution as being oppased to merge Sewer and Water Improvement Districts, as we consider said hill harmful to the best interests of the, Citizens of Fayette17i11e, A aansas, and that the City Clerk be. authorized to prepare copies of said proposed bill for all members of the State Legislature and that copies of said Resolution be, sent to each Senator, and Representativee iThis motion was seconder? by Alderman McAllister and resulted in the following vote: Ayes Aldermen: Bynum, Carter, Gregory, McAllister, Peal, San- ders, Shook and Stanford. Nayes hone. The Mayor declared carried. li E S 0 L U T I 0 N. BE IT RFSOLVSD by tie City Council of the City if Fayetteville, Arkansas, that, SECTION ONE: 4'uHFREAS, there is a bill that has been introduced in the Arkansas State Legislature to merge the Sewerage and i"later Improvement Dis- tricts•, and i SECTION T'NO: V'IHEPi J.S, the City Co,rncil of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, deem said hill harmful to the best interests of the Citizens of Fayetteville, Arkamsas, THFRFFORE, IF respectfully NUMBER Attest: v Alderman Gree bey ; Alderman MlcAllist There being, no fu adjourn. This mo vote of the Counc. Attest: the City Council of the City of Fayetto-1Ile, Arkansas, k your co-operation in securinrT, the defeat of this Bill r Approved __ Ia7 or. bved;that,the Resolution be adopted. This motion was seconded by r, and received the unanimous vote of the `'ouncil. ther business,Alderman I•scAllister moved that the Council ion was seconded by Alderr�.n Carter, and received th unanimous 1. The Mayor declared the Council adjourned. Approved c7 e � riap r PFA 9 15� Report of E M Ratliff -member of Sewer Board- s L^st June the City Council appointed me a member of the Board of Improvement of sewer Improvement: District Number One. In 1933, you appointed me a member of the Board of Improvement of Water Improvement District. Number One. I accepted these appointments and filed the oath of office as required by law and have stood ready to perform any duties which might be encumbent upon.a member of said Boards. Apparently these Boards of Commissioners have very few duties. During the period of seven months I have been on the Sewer Board and more than a year on the Water Board there has been no formal meeting of the Boards of either of them. Possibly, it would he more correct for me. to say that to the best of my knowledge no meet- ings have been held; certainly I have had no notice of meetings: neither have I been consulted eil-out matters wbich have tleen handled in the name of the Board or Boards. Some business has been. conducted inthe name of the Board. It woul_d,there- fore, appear to me that one of two situations must prevail. Eitbp.r there has been no business of sufficient importance to .justify the calling of a .meeting or there has been definite planning to avoid recognizing me as a member of the respective Boards. It would be difficult .for one to believe that the business did not ,justify e meeting especially in view of the various reports through the press that a calamitous situation exists viith regard to our Sewer Bonds. It is alsoreported that it has been necessary to borrow money to handle Sewer matters, and many other tl^inrs have hanpened where, to say the least,a discussion by all Board members Might hate beer. helpful. Neither meetings nor discussions have been had. It is, therefore, a natural conelusion that my recognition as a member of the Board is being purposely delayed. In view of the existing situation as above mentioned, I feel it my duty to report the matter to you. Also,. Irhhou3d like to state that I, as a Commissioner for the Water Improvement District, and also for the Sewer District do not: ass-ume any responsibility for any Act performed by either Board' since my appointment. To the best of my knowledge, there has been no concerted action by theBoard Paembers during this time. Such a denial of responsibility is, in no way, to be construed as a criticism of the honesty or intention of any Board member who has acted for th Board, but I do deny any personal responsibility for what has been done.Individual opinions might have been different if the Board had met and exchanged views. Often times a full discussion of a subject will completely chm ge the color of the situation. Since Improvement District Board members are creatures of the City Council, I earnestly request your advise as to the proper action to take that I may not be charged with neglecting my duty. An example of the different in view point which might result from co-operation of Board Members, is that I do not view the Sevier situation with the same alarm as has beenexpressed by another member of the Board and I believe that a proper course of action could be planned from the results of a discussion of all the means at hand. The records of the Sewer District indicate that, if the assessments which have been lefied are_ collected, there would he sufficient funds to pay the Bonds and interest and still have a comfortable margin left t,o cover a reasonable delinquent list. According to the report of the City Collector under date of December 15,1933, the total of the assessed benefits in the Original Sewer District is $266,729.89. F:br the years 1927,1928,1929, 1930, 1931 and 1932, the Collector was instructed to collect from each piece of property in the District 3-1/3O of the benefits assessed against it. Three and onethird percent of ,the total assessments for the six ,year period amounts to (53,345.82. The Collector's report of delinquencies shows a total of $5,285.44 for the corresponding six year period. The collectinnS therefore, would be $148,140.39. The Collector was instructed to collect 4% of each benefit assessment for the ,year 1933. Four percent of the total benefits amount to $110,66'9.19. Delinquencies for 1.933 are $4,688.53, making a net collec- tion of $5,9B0.66. The collector was instructed to collect five percent of all assessments for 1934. On a five percent (5f) basis, the total collections should amount to $13,336.49. The Books show a delinquent list amounting to $11,319.77 which would indicate a collection of $2,016.72 taxes. All of the instructions as given to collector, as rFentioned above, were given by the Board before I was a Member, except for 1934. Then, I was not consulted. The total of all the Collections, for the first eight ,years of the life of the bonds issued, as shown above is $56.137.76. Delinquencies for the same period appear to be $•21,263.74. The delinquencies amount to approximately 27% of the total collections authorized by the Board. Ninety percent of these delinquencies have accrued in the last three ,years. According to the Bond Schedule as filed for record, the total Bor_d and Interest payments coming due to and including December 1,1934, amount to $49,520.00. Passing from the past records to thepossihilities for the future, I should like to submit .for ,your consideration the following table shoving the anticipated receipts and expenditures for the Sewer District for the years 1935 to 1948, both inclusive. This period covers the remaining ,years of the life of the Bond' Issue. Forvaed.ed • - ME 156 �-- -- - ---- TOTf�L i SSESSEll BE14TTITS Pmt ANVIUM DISTRICT SURPLUS BLTIFFITS _ OBLIGATIONS 1935 $266,729.89 $13,336.49 09,280.00 $4,056.49 1936'266,729,89 I 131336.49 91040.nn 40296.49 11937 26x,729.89 13,336.49 9,800.0() .3p536 949 11938 266,729.89 13,336.49' 9,5nn.On 3,836.49 11939 2.66,729.89 13,336.49' 10,2nn.On 3 136.49' 11940 266,729.89 130336.49 90840.00 3,496.49 11941 266,729.89 13,336.49 9,480.00 3,856.49 _ I 11942 266,7?9.89 13,336.49 10,120.003,2.16.49 I 11943 266,729.89 13,336.49 9,7(X1.00 3,636.49 11944 266,729.89 13,336.49 9,280.00 4,056.49 I 11945 266,729.89 13,336.49? 80860.00 4,476.49 11946 266,729.89 13,330.49' 9,440.()0 3,896.49 11947 266,729.89 13,336.49 B,940.0n. 4,396.49 11945 266,729.89 13,336.49 8,480.00 4,856.49 $186,710.86 $131,960.00 054,750.86' The total Bond and Inter^.st obligationsfor theDistrict for the entire twenty ,years according to thelRondScheduleon file, is $178,840.00. The anticinated collections for the years 19.3,5 to 1948 both includive amount to $180,710.86. Accordi.rg to the records, the collections for the years 1927 to 1934 both inclusive amount to $56,137'.76, making a grand total of $242,848.62 available for the entire period, or $64,008.62 more than the District obligations.. With such a surplus for the remaining life of the District; a`dP.lihquer.ev list of 28% could be had and still meet the obligations. In compliance with Pair. McIlroy's invitation of criticism of the bill he is sponsoring for the cons olidatSon of the Water and Improvement Districts in Cities and Towns in Arkansas: I should like to ,point out a few of the apparent dangers of the authority given under its provisions: the attempt to duplicate authority already existing and the lack of provision:ito prevent making, already existing, had matters worse.- le The r)rolosed bill is purported to contain provisions- prant.,ing authority which will prevent public default. Isn't the default already in existence; 1Lccording to thel statement accompanying the publication of the proposed hill, one District is already in default to the amount of $6,000.00, and the other in an amount of $1,200100. 2. The nrovisions makirg it possible for the Commissioners to putinto effect a sewer service charge certainly could not make it easier to collect the needed funds. If a sever customer does not nay his benefit assessment, is there any reasonto believe that he vJill be. more willing to pay a service charge which would probably be higher than the assessment. .The answer to this question might be that the remedy is to discontinue service. This woilld be a remedy, but this remedy also has an impractical side. Intelligent American people usually % on learn to to ice advantage of all such situations. A service charge is only a `rose by a: other name. 3. Regardilg the suit filed to enjoin further polution of White River by the discharge of sewage therein, I will say that authority for handling this situation appears to be coveredthbrdughly by Act 132., of the Acts of Arkansas 1933. This Act grants full authority to the City Council to handle emergency improvements of. this nature. Also there is a Special Act by the State Legislature ( the proposed bill is nothing more than a special Act designed for a special purpose )still in force granting the same authority to the Fayetteville Sewer Commissioners to levy a S"eY service charge to cover the cost of extensions and betterments.. Ai,-,additional service charge law would be superf uous�and serve only to further confuse the issue. 4. The gen, ral under-current thread of the bill seems to conveytthe idea that the burden of default would,under the new plan, be carried by the Water Plant. Such a plan might notlbe definitely branded as unfair but if after further obligating the Water Plant the Bond holders should find it necessary to exercise their "Re-course", as has been suggested,they would not hesitate to forclose on the Vater Plant. Any one would like to Kaye a Water Plant, but no one wants a Sewer Plant, Why kill two institutions by combining when they caneach stand alone. 5. "Bill will insure financing". This statement xx apparentlyc•arriea with it the idea that has been suggested by one member of the present sewer Commission, a number of times. Thatisl,that theppresentnun=sold Water Bonds be used to purchase Sewer Bonds, Should this be done by any authority,the results would most likely be fatal to the, Water Plant. The Water Plant is now burdened with debt, by reason of expenditures which are not ordinarily chargeable to a Water Plant, close to the limit. For the Plast year and for two years previous to that more than 60% of the Water Revenue has gone toward debt retirement.. This shows a healthy condition of the hater Plant from the standpoint of operation and necessarily means a wide margin between operation cost and total water receipts. The fact remains that all of the margin must be spent on debt retirementis evident enoL,gh that no additional debt can be am mod. If for any reason, there should develope a s1ight margin, a profit not needed immediately for debt retirement surely the same should be placed in a small sinking fund (we have none now) for a possible emergency. Or, perhaps I 157 better still to use it to reduce the present floating debt. 6. The hill appears too,dangerous in that it affords the opportunity for mis-use of the almost unlimite authority granted the Commission under its provisions. So long as the management is in the hands of the Commissioners who are working for the best interest of the community no harm should come from this authority, but if some time conditions should be reversed, the whole plan could be wracked before a change could be effected.Some of the things to which I refer are as follows: (2) The Commission becomes permanent with unlimited authority. (b) Commission is authorized -to make rules from which there is - no appeal. (c) Transfer of funds at will. (d) Establish and regulate their own service charge. (No right of appeal). (e) May acquireand own property with no limitations. (f) May pay indebtedness of other districts. (Action not subject to approval by City Council or people.) (g) Full authoeity to assume City obligations without limitations. (h) Bill does not state which Commission of the Districts combined will operate the consolidated district. (i) Authorizes Commission to pay any indebtedness without first creating sinking fund for prior claim debts. (j) Leaves benefit assessments unpaid with a probability of causing a cloud o7iland titles. (k) Contains thirty day limitation clause and emergency clause. In conclusion, I should like to say that in my opinion, that no consolidation hill is necessary, ?nr9 that there is only one sane course to pursue in the matter of handling the sewer situation.My plan is for the Board of Commissioners to comply with their pledge, "that they lrvillcause suit to be, filed for the collection of the benefit assessments",which are not paid within the time specified by ordinance. The excuse that the present Improvement District foreclosure law is an obstruction is only a subterfuge. Some people are not paying their Sewer assessments who are paying pavement assessments many more times more burdensome. ViTy 2,Because they are convinced that nog effort is being made to force collection of sewer assessments. I have heard many citizens say to me that they have not paid their Sewer assesnient because rro effort, us being made to collect other assessmetts, and that they can see no ,justice in them paying vah en others are permitted to go free. The neople I refer to are people who are still paying their County, State and other special Improvenent taxes. My suggestion is that everyone who is delinquent in the payment of Sewer Assessment be given until March 1st, 1935 to come to the Collector's office and pay the assessments. And start foreclosure proceedings in March on all property not paid up to date. This plan will work for all people want tc kno-w that they arP all being treated the; same. I, as a member of the Board of Cort^iissioners, am willing to pledge myself to the e.T�ove action or to any other feasible plan for the collection of the assessments which is acceptable to a majority of the Board. Respectfully submitted, F. 11. Ratliff, Member Sewer ImprovFmeht.District No.l Mater Improvement DI -strict No.1 I