HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-09-16 Minutes13 2
itegu!ar
Meeting.
The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, met in regular session on Monday, September
16, 1968,
in the Directors Room in the City Administration Building at 7:30 P. M. CDST.
Present: City Manager Gerald G. Fox, City Clerk George J. Davis, City Attorney Hugh Kincaid, and Board
Members: Sylvia Swartz, Joe McFerran, Garland Melton, Jr., Arnold Christie, and Dale Dunn.
T.
J. Keith
Absent: Director Mayor Don Trumbo and Director James T. Kerlin,
News
Rep. of
N.W.Ark.
In the absence of Mayor Don Trumbo, Assistant Mayor Sylvia Swartz acted as Mayor.
Times
also
present.
The minutes of the regular meeting on .Tuesday, September 3, 1968, a copy of which had previ6usly been
mailed to each of the Directors, were approved as written..
Acting Mawr Sylvia Swartz reported this was the date, time and place set for a public hearing to hear
Public
hearing
all persons who wish to be heard on the question of whether a certain proposed Referendum Petition to
on proposed
vote on Ordinance No. 1603, passed and approved May 20, 1968, was signed by the requisite number of petitioners,
Referendum
and that a notice of the public hearing setting forth the date, time, place and purpose of said hearing
Petition.
had been published in the Northwest Arkansas Times, a daily newspaper published in Washington County,
Arkansas, and having a general circulation in the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, more than five days
prior to the time set for the public hearing.
hererencum The proposed petition was filed in the Office of the City Clerk on June 20, 1968, and after checking the
Petition signatures on the petition, he certified to the Board of Directors that the 455 signatures appearing on
deemed the face of the petition were not sufficient in number to constitute a prima facie referendum petition,
insufficient and that of the 455 signatures only 399 could be certified as valid signatures for the purposes of said
for an petition.
Election.{ N6
The Certificate of the City Clerk was spread on the minutes of the regular of the Board of Directors on
August 19, 1968, at page 308, Volume H, City Council Procedure, along with an Opinion from the Attorney
General regarding the proposed Referendum Petition,
Attorneys Peter G. Estes and Lewis D. Jones appeared before the Board of Directors in behalf of the
petitioners and reported that on August 30, 1968, they had submitted an addition to the petition with
more signatures, and while said additional signatures were not accepted by the City Clerk or the Board
of Directors, said attorneys requested that said signatures be made a part of the records of this pro-
ceeding as being offered by sponsors of the proposed Referendum Petition. (A copy of same is appended
to these minutes).
A long discussion was held by Attorneys Estes and Jones in behalf of the petitioners, Attorney Tom Burke
in behalf of Birchbrook, Inc., and the City Attorney. Director Melton moved that the number of signatur
on the proposed petition of June 20, 1968, for a referendum vote on Ordinance No. 1603, be deemed insuff
for a Referendum Election.
The motion was seconded by Director Christie and upon roll call the following vote was recorded, "Aye"
Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, and Dunn. "Nay" None.
There being Five "Ayes" and No "Nays", the Acting Mayor declared the motion passed.
The City Manager presented Administrative Memo #120 which was spread on the minutes and reads as follows:
No.120 (September 10, 1968 LIABILITY OF CITIES FOR TORTS Administrative Memo#120
On July 4, 1968, the Supreme Court decision in Parrish v. Pitts and the City of Little Rock became final.
In this decision, the following was ruled:
(1); Rule of law granting cities immunity from tort liability while acting in governmental capacity is
overruled.
(2). The rule of non -immunity for tort liability shall apply to actions occurring after this decision
becomes final.
(3)• Rule of non -immunity for tort liability imDosed only for imperfect, negligent or unskillful executi
(4). No tort will lie for acts involving judgement and discretion which are judicial and legislative
(or quasi) in nature.
(5). Non -immunity for tort liability not considered for other governmental units or political subdivisio
What this decision meant was that cities had lost their traditional immunity for tort liability. Also th,
by this being done by judicial action, few if any guidelines are present to assist in carrying out this n
rule of law, i.e., limits of liability, notice of claim time limit, funds to he used for claims, creation
of claims commission, status of city employees in claim procedure, etc., are all left unanswered.
The City of Fayetteville has for a number of years carried various forms of liability insurance even when
the immunity provisions for tort liability were effective, such as:
(1.) Workmens Compensation in legal limits authorized for all full time employees.
(2). Vehicle liability on all city vehicles in amount of $102000/$201000/$5,000.
(3). Owner's, Landlords and Tenants Liability for occurances at:
(a) Administration Building
(b) Police facilities building
(c) Library
in amounts of $5,000/$10,000/$5,000.
(4). Liability at Swimming Pool in amount of $10,000/$20,000.
('3). Liability for Patrol Boats on Lakes Fayetteville and Sequoyah in amounts of $25,000/$502000/$5,000.
(6). Malpractice Liability for Ambulance Service in amounts of $5,000/$15,000 with a $100 deductible pro
(7). Ambulance vehicle liability in amount of $10,000/$209000/$52000.
Annual premiums for the above reference
(1). Workmens Compensation
(2). Fleet Vehicle Liability
(3). Owners, Landlords, etc.
(4). Swimming Pool
(5). Lake Boats
(6). Malpractice
(7). Ambulance Vehicle Liability
liability insurance have been running as follows:
$10,400
4,700
200
500
100
400
500
Total 16,800
Based upon the Parrish v. Pitts and City of Little Rock case, as you can see, many areas of city operatio
are not covered by liability insurance. With this Supreme Court decision, we can either depend upon our
present coverages to carry us in those areas only and not broaden our coverage or broaden our coverage to
a Comprehensive General Liability Plan to cover all our operations except specified exclusions. I have
therefore requested the Fayetteville Insurance Exchange, which carries all of our insurance, and the McKi
Agency, vh ich is not in the Exchange, to recommend Comprehensive General Liability policies and programs
for the City in light of the Parrish v. Pitts case. The Arkansas Municipal League has also been requested
1
313
Memo No. 120 by -,the Arkansas Legislative Council to draw up legislation on this matter to be presented to the next
beneral Assembly session. The line of their recommendations will be to put the matter back, by legislatic
(Continued) � o the original complete immunity for tort liability or, at a minimum, to set certain areas which would
be subject to tort claim and other guidelines.
The best quoted costs for a General Comprehensive Liability policy and vehicle liability policy, which
would exclude only the following:
(1). Airport runway, taxi -strips and aircraft parking and storage.
(2). Construction and hazard of a dam or reservoir.
(3). Consumption or use of water.
(4). Operation and maintenance of hospitals.
(5). Amusement devices and practice or participating in a contest.
was from the Fayetteville Insurance Exchange. For coverage of $10,000/$20,000/$5,000 on the Comprehensive
General Liability and Vehicle Liability Plans the total annual cost would be $12,120. These two policies
(would replace present coverages under items 2, 3, 4, and 5 in above liability coverages which presently
cost the city about $5,500 annually. Net increase in cost would therefore be about $6,620o
increased coverage on motor vehicles liability to $25,000/$50,000/$10,000 and Comprehensive General
bility in amounts of $25,000/$50,000/$5,000 the total quoted annual premium costs would be $13,565.
s increased coverage on vehicles and the new Comprehensive General Liability plan would therefore res'
a net annual increase in cost of $8,000 for liability coverage. Until there is further clarification
this matter, either through legislative act or judicial interpretation, I would recommend that the
rd consider authorizing the Comprehensive General Liability plan with $25/$50/$5 limits and Vehicle
bility coverage in limits of $25/$50/$10 from the Fayetteville Insurance Exchange for a total annual
mium of $13,565. This amount would be charged proportionately to the General, Public Works, Sanitati
Water and Sewer Funds.
Authorized City
I Director Dunn moved that the City Manager be authorized to obtain an increase in vehicle liability insur-
Manager to proceed
once to $25,000/$50,000/$10,000 from the Fayetteville Insurance Exchange for a total annual premium of
with Liability
Insurance, Etc. $5,259 as outlined in Administrative Memo x`120. Further that the City Manager be authorized to proceed
with finalization of a Comprehensive General Liability Policy in the amounts of $25,000/$50,000/$52000
to be obtained from the Fayetteville Insurance Exchange for an estimated premium of $8,306 after review
by the City Attorney.
The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and passed unanimously.
The City Manager presented Administrative Memo #121 regarding Proposed private Ambulance Service which
Memo No. 121 was spread on the minutes and reads as follows:
Private Ambhance September 12, 1968 PROPOSED PRIVATE AMBULANCE SERVICE Administrative Memo
Service About sixty (60) days ago we made initial contact with the J. J. Ambulance Service, Inc. of Batesville
concerning the possibility of this firm taking over the City's Ambulance service. The firm at that time
was franchised for operation in the cities of Newport, Batesville, and Rogers. Since then they have taker
over the service in Conway and Poplar Bluff, Missouri. After the initial contact, a firm proposal was
submitted to the City for the firm to provide ambulance service. After another conversation on September
10 with representatives of the firm, certain modifications were discussed. At this time, I am able to
present to you for your consideration the following proposal. .
(1) J. J. Ambulance Service, Inc. be granted an exclusive five year franchise with option to renew to
provide ambulance service within city.
(2) This service to begin on November 1, 1968.
(3) Franchise can be rescinded for violation of terms of Ordinance 1511 with a ninety (90) day notice
from city.
(4) All terms of Ordinance 1511 will be in effect for the operation.
(5) Ambulance firm will operate three radio equipped ambulances 24 hours per day from a location in
c Fayetteville.
(6) Ambulancerfirm will provide liability insurance on all vehicles.
(7) Firm will purchase city ambulances with sirens, lights, cot and stretchers for the sum of $3,500.
(8) City would retain an option to repurchase equipment at depreciated value within 12 months if service
discontinued.
' (9) Rates to be charged would be as follows:
(a) Non -emergency 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. within city limits $15.00
(b) Non -emergency 5PP.M. to 8 A.M. within city limits 20.00
(c) Additional for emergency pick up 5.00
(d) Outside the City Limits in addition to (a), (b), or (c) 0.50/mile
(e) Required attendant on pick up 2.00/hour
(f) Waiting time in excess of one hour 2.00/hour per attendant
(10) City to be provided with an annual audit of Fayetteville and firm's entire.operations.
(11) No subsidy would be required.
J. J. Operations in Newport, Batesville, and Rogers have been investigated. All contracted parties indi-
cate satisfaction with their operation. Also attached ,you will find a copy of their profit and loss
statement for these three operations in the three cities. Since July 1, they have begun operations in
Poplar Bluff,and Conway.
In the past 23
months of operation, the City has expended $51,500 for
ambulance operations. This include
$6,000 placed
in the Replacement Fund, $1,200 placed
in the Firemen's
Pension Fund, $2,500 expended for
three radios,
and $7,500 for the original cost of the
three ambulances.
The remaining $34,300 was opera-
ting costs of
the service. During the same 23 months
period, $29,300
has been collected from charges.
With no capital
outlay during the first eight months
of 1968, revenues
have equalled $11,400 and expendi-
tures $12,750.
If the City Board wishes to proceed with entering into this franchise agreement, the following steps
would be required:
(1) Repeal of Ordinance 1518 creating ambulance department of the City.
(2) Preparation of franchise agreement embodying all of above terms.
(3) Preparation of resolution to authorize execution of franchise agreement.
' All of these items could be prepared for action on first reading at meeting of September 30, 1968. They
would then be placed on file for fourteen (14) days to be finally acted upon at the October 14 meeting.
Approved private Director Dunn moved to approve the proposed Private Ambulance Service and that the City Manager and City
Ambulance Service Attorney be authorized to prepare the necessary papers for the franchise agreement.
& I The motion was seconded by Director Melton and passed unanimously.
Authorized preparation
of necessary papers.
1,
r
314
No,
26-68
TRACT A
A part of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of Section 19, Town-
ship 16 North, Range 29 West, described as follows: Beginning at a point on East line of public
road, Ten (10) feet East and Seven Hundred Seven and Eight -tenths (707.8) feet North of the
Southwest Corner of said Forty (40) acre tract and running thence North Two Hundred Ten (210)
feet, thence East Two Hundred Ten (210) feet, thence South Two Hundred Ten (210) feet, thence
West Two Hundred Ten (210) feet to the place of beginning and containing One Acre, more or less,
together with all improvements thereon.
TRACT B
Part of the fractional Southwest Quarter (fractional SW 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4)
of Section Nineteen (19) in Township Sixteen (16) North, Range Twenty-nine (29) West, described
as follows, to -wit: Beginning at a point Four Hundred Thirty-seven (437) feet South of the
Northeast Corner of said Forty (40) acre tract, and running thence South Two Hundred Seventy'"
eight (278) feet, thence West Three Hundred Fifteen (315) feet, thence North Two Hundred Seventy -
,eight (278) feet, thence East Three Hundred Fifteen (315) feet, to the point of beginning.
TRACT C
Part of the.East Half (E 1/2) of the Northwest fractional Quarter of Section Nineteen (19) in
Township Sixteen (16) North, Range Twenty -Nine (29) West described as beginning at a point Nine
Hundred Seventeen and Eight -tenths (917.8) feet North and Ten (10) feet East of the Southwest
Corner of said fractional Eighty (80) acre tract, and running thence North One Hundred Twenty-
nine and Two-tenths (129.2) feet; thence East Two Hundred Ten (210) feet; thence South One
Hundred Twenty-nine and Two-tenths (129.2) feet; thence.West Two Hundred Ten (210).feet to the
place of beginning, containing One Half (1/2) acre, more or less, less and except that part
of said property already annexed to the City of Fayetteville by Ordinance No. 1458, passed and
approved on the 7th day of September, 1967.
and, ,
WHEREAS, the County Clerk of Washington County, Arkansas, has forwarded a transcript of said pro-
ceedings to the Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and
WHEREAS, more than thirty days have elapsed since the date of said order and no proceeding has been
instituted in the Circuit Court to prevent said annexation and no notice thereof has been given as
required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
SECTION 1. That the Annexation of the above-described territories to the corporate limits of the
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, be and the same is hereby accepted, and all of said territory is hereby
assigned to and made a part of Ward 3 of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas.
. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage, approval,
and publication.
F1
PASSED AND APPROVED this 16th day of September, 1968,
q
GEORGE J: DAVIS, CITY CLERK
A nnDn=n.
lH rector Christie was excused at this time
The Citya?Manager read a proposed resolution in its entirety entitled, " A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS TO PERMIT WITHDRAWAL OF SECURITIES WHICH IT HOLDS.TO SECURE INVESTMENT
OF 1966 WATER AND SEWER REVENUE BOND FUNDS AND RETURN TO REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF DALLAS".
Director Melton moved that the resolution be adopted.
The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and upon roll call the following vote was recorded ;!Aye's
McFerran, Melton, and Dunn. "Nay" None.
There being four "Ayes" and No "Nays", the Acting Mayor declared the Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION N0. 26-68
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS TO PERMIT `r7ITHDRAWAL OF SECURITIES WHICH IT
HOLDS TO SECURE INVESTMENT OF 1966 WATER AND SE°aiER REVENUE BOND FUNDS AND RETURN TO REPUBLIC NATIONAL
BANK OF DALLAS.
WHEREAS, heretofore, under date of September 20, 1966, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas issued to
The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Depositor, and Republic National Bank of Dallas, Texas, Depository,
its Joint Safekeeping Receipt or receipts covering certain securities; and
d
,
1
7
The City Attorney introduced and, at the request of the Acting Mayor, read a proposed Ordinance in its
nance
entirety for the first time entitled, "AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING TERRITORY ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF FAYETTEVII
.1622
ARKANSAS; ASSIGNING SAID TERRITORY TO WARDS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES."
Director Melton moved that the rule be suspended and that the Ordinance be placed on the second reading.
xation.
The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and passed unanimously.
The Ordinance was then read for the second time.
Director Melton then moved that the rule he further suspended and that the Ordinance be placed on the thi
and final reading.
The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and passed unanimously.
The Ordinance was then read for the third and last time.
The Acting Mayor then declared the Ordinance open for discussion. There being no discussion, the Acting
Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass?"
Upon roll call the following vote was recorded, "Aye" Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, and Dunn.
"Nay" None,.
There being five "Ayes" and No "Nays" the Acting Mayor declared the Ordinance passed.
ORDINANCE NO. 1622
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING TERRITORY ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF FAYETTE'VILLE, ARKANSAS; ASSIGNING SAID TERRITORY
TO WARDS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
WHEREAS, the County Court of Washington County, Arkansas, did on August 5, 1968, make an order anneii
ing the following described territories to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, to -wit:
26-68
TRACT A
A part of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of Section 19, Town-
ship 16 North, Range 29 West, described as follows: Beginning at a point on East line of public
road, Ten (10) feet East and Seven Hundred Seven and Eight -tenths (707.8) feet North of the
Southwest Corner of said Forty (40) acre tract and running thence North Two Hundred Ten (210)
feet, thence East Two Hundred Ten (210) feet, thence South Two Hundred Ten (210) feet, thence
West Two Hundred Ten (210) feet to the place of beginning and containing One Acre, more or less,
together with all improvements thereon.
TRACT B
Part of the fractional Southwest Quarter (fractional SW 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4)
of Section Nineteen (19) in Township Sixteen (16) North, Range Twenty-nine (29) West, described
as follows, to -wit: Beginning at a point Four Hundred Thirty-seven (437) feet South of the
Northeast Corner of said Forty (40) acre tract, and running thence South Two Hundred Seventy'"
eight (278) feet, thence West Three Hundred Fifteen (315) feet, thence North Two Hundred Seventy -
,eight (278) feet, thence East Three Hundred Fifteen (315) feet, to the point of beginning.
TRACT C
Part of the.East Half (E 1/2) of the Northwest fractional Quarter of Section Nineteen (19) in
Township Sixteen (16) North, Range Twenty -Nine (29) West described as beginning at a point Nine
Hundred Seventeen and Eight -tenths (917.8) feet North and Ten (10) feet East of the Southwest
Corner of said fractional Eighty (80) acre tract, and running thence North One Hundred Twenty-
nine and Two-tenths (129.2) feet; thence East Two Hundred Ten (210) feet; thence South One
Hundred Twenty-nine and Two-tenths (129.2) feet; thence.West Two Hundred Ten (210).feet to the
place of beginning, containing One Half (1/2) acre, more or less, less and except that part
of said property already annexed to the City of Fayetteville by Ordinance No. 1458, passed and
approved on the 7th day of September, 1967.
and, ,
WHEREAS, the County Clerk of Washington County, Arkansas, has forwarded a transcript of said pro-
ceedings to the Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and
WHEREAS, more than thirty days have elapsed since the date of said order and no proceeding has been
instituted in the Circuit Court to prevent said annexation and no notice thereof has been given as
required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
SECTION 1. That the Annexation of the above-described territories to the corporate limits of the
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, be and the same is hereby accepted, and all of said territory is hereby
assigned to and made a part of Ward 3 of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas.
. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage, approval,
and publication.
F1
PASSED AND APPROVED this 16th day of September, 1968,
q
GEORGE J: DAVIS, CITY CLERK
A nnDn=n.
lH rector Christie was excused at this time
The Citya?Manager read a proposed resolution in its entirety entitled, " A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS TO PERMIT WITHDRAWAL OF SECURITIES WHICH IT HOLDS.TO SECURE INVESTMENT
OF 1966 WATER AND SEWER REVENUE BOND FUNDS AND RETURN TO REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF DALLAS".
Director Melton moved that the resolution be adopted.
The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and upon roll call the following vote was recorded ;!Aye's
McFerran, Melton, and Dunn. "Nay" None.
There being four "Ayes" and No "Nays", the Acting Mayor declared the Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION N0. 26-68
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS TO PERMIT `r7ITHDRAWAL OF SECURITIES WHICH IT
HOLDS TO SECURE INVESTMENT OF 1966 WATER AND SE°aiER REVENUE BOND FUNDS AND RETURN TO REPUBLIC NATIONAL
BANK OF DALLAS.
WHEREAS, heretofore, under date of September 20, 1966, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas issued to
The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Depositor, and Republic National Bank of Dallas, Texas, Depository,
its Joint Safekeeping Receipt or receipts covering certain securities; and
d
,
1
7
r 315
WNEREAS, both the Depositor and Depository now desire the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas to permit
Resolution No.
a substitution of certain securities, or a withdrawal of securities, which it now holds; as hereinafter
26-68
more fully set forth; and
(Continued)
WHEREAS, the securities, if any, hereinafter mentioned, which the above named parties desire to sub-
stitute in lieu of those heretoforeplaced in safekeeping with the Federal Reserve Bank of.Dallas, meet
with the requirements of law and have been and are hereby approved; and
'
WHEREAS, the securities, if any, hereinafter mentioned, which the above named parties wish to with-
draw, are entitled under the law to be withdrawn;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the City of Favettevilie, Arkansas:
THAT the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas be and it is hereby requested and •authorized to surrender
following securities heretofore placed with it for safekeeping by the above named Darties, to -wit:
Description Par Value
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Waterworks &
Sewer Revenue Bonds (Registered) 4.10% to 6-1-70;
4.50% thereafter.
Due: 6-1-96 405,000
Due: 6-1-97 4252000
Due: 6-1-98 445,000
Due: 6-1-99 465,000
Due: 6-1-2000 M2000
.2,225,000
THAT the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas be and it is hereby authorized to deliver the securities
described herein to be substituted for or withdrawn to Republic National Bank of Dallas; Texas or its
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this the 16th day of September, 1968.
i APPROVED —�i .� �L_t±
ATTEST: .-7S77 YL A SWARTZ, ACTING MAYO
' GEORGE J. DAVIFa CTX CLERK
The City Manager read a proposed resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO
DESIGNATE REGULAR BOARD MEETINGS FOR SEPTEMBER 30 and OCTOBER 14, 1968".
Resolution No. Director McFerran moved that the Resolution be adopted.
27-68 The motion was seconded by Director Melton and upon roll call the following vote was recorded, "Aye"
Swartz, McFerran, Melton, and Dunn. "Nay" None.
There being four "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Acting Mayor declared the Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 27-68
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO DESIGNATE REGULAR BOARD MEETINGS FOR SEPTEMBER 30 and
OCTOBER 14, 1968.
WHEREAS, Ordinance 1488 states that the Regular Meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held on
he first and third Mondays of each month except when such day falls on a holiday;
WHEREAS, the City Manager has indicated that he will attend meetings out of Fayetteville which will
conflict with the regular meeting nights of October 7 and 21, 1968;
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Board of Directors to have the City Manager at these two
ar board meetings,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas:
THAT the date of the two next succeeding regular meetings of the City Board of Directors be changed
' from October 7 and 21, 1968 to September 30 and Octoberfl4, 1968 beginning at 7:30 P.M. in the City
Administration Building.
THAT this Resolution be published one time in a newspaper of general circulation.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this the 16th day of September, 1968.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:qA.�/SYLVF SWARTZ/, ACTING M47
GEORGE OV. D IS, CITY CLERK
Aud4it Report for
1967-68 Director Dunn moved that the 1967-68*Audit Report of the Water and Sewer Department for the fiscal year
Water & Sewer Dept. ending July 31, 1968, as prepared by Mvers, Scarbrough and Baker, Certified Public Accountants, be accept
Accepted & Filed. and filed.
The motion was seconded by Director Melton and passed unanimously.
Agreement with The City Manager read a proposed Agreement between the City and the Sherman Lollar Little League Baseball
Sherman'Lollar which was spread on the minutes and reads as follows:
Little League, Inc., AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into this 16th day of September •1968 by and between the City of Fayette-
ville, Arkansas (called City) and the Sherman Lollar Little League, Inc. (called League).
WHEREAS, the City and League entered into an agreement dated November 3, 1960 whereby the City borro
$12,000. to construct and equip baseball diamonds at Walker Park and the League agreed to pay off the
borrowing at the rate of $1,000. annually; and 11
WHEREAS, the League has been unable to pay the debt service since 1965 and the City Recreation
has need of using the baseball diamond at City Park now under use by League.
NOW, THEREFORE IT IS AGREED:
1. That the City of Fayetteville absolves the Sherman Loliar Little League, Inc. of the terms and
conditions of the agreement dated November 3, 1960.
2. That the remaining debt of the League to the City in the amount of $7,435.46 is hereby also
removed and discharged.
3. In consideration for the absolving of the November 3, 1960 agreement and the removal of the re-
maining debt, the League agrees to relinquish all rights of control, operation and maintenance
over the lighted baseball diamond at City Park to the City Parks and Recreation Department for
its use and operation.
f 316
nt with
League.
Spei
T.J:Keith,
News Reporter
N.WlTimes
alsopresent.
ed
4. Further, the League agrees to develop and construct a fourth baseball diamond at Walker Park
from any future profits it makes from registration fees, concession receipts and any other in-
come derived from the operation of the baseball diamonds at Walker Park. Said diamond upon
completion to become the property of the City.
5. It is to be understood by both parties to this Agreement that all baseball diamond improvements
including field, lights, stands, etc. at City Park and Walker Park are the property of the City
of Fayetteville, but that through this agreement the Sherman Lollar Little League, Inc. has
exclusive right to operate and the duty to maintain at its expense the three (3) diamonds pres-
ently located at Walker Park and to construct, operate and maintain at its expense the fourth
diamond referred to in paragraph 4 above.
6. (a) The League agrees to indemnifv and keep, hold and save harmless the City against any claim:
expense, loss or liability suffered or sustained as the result of the League's use, operation of
maintenance of said baseball diamonds and improvements thereto, or the carelessness, negligence
or improper conduct of the League, its agents, servants, and employees, customers, invitees or
licensees.
(b) In this regard, the League shall provide and keep in effect a policy of general liability
insurance with a good and solvent insurance company authorized to do business in the State of
Arkansas. Said general liability policy shall have limits of not less than $25,000. for injury
and/or death of any one person, $50,000. for injuries and/or death in any one accident, and $5,(
for property damage in any one accident. The League hereby agrees to file a copy of said insure
policy with the City.
It is hereby expressly understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that nothing contain
in sub -paragraph (b) above, shall be construed as a limitation of the League's liability as set forth in
paragraph 6 (a) hereof nor as a limitation upon the rights of the City to be held harmless as provided i
said sub -paragraph.
7. It is hereby agreed and understood by the parties that the League's right to operate and ma_intai
the baseball diamonds referred to herein and the League's obligations arising under paragraph
No. 6 hereto are to have force and effect for a term of ten((10) years, beginning on the 1st da3
of September, 1968, and ending on the 1st day of September, 1978, with the option to renew for
an additional period of five (5) years at the expiration of the original term at such terms and
conditions as are agreed upon by the parties at the time of exercise of the option.
APPROVED on this 16th day of September, 1968,
SHERMAN LOLLP.R LITTLE LEAGUE, INC.
PRESIDENT
SECRETARY
Director Dunn moved to approve the Agreement with the Sherman Lollar Little League, Inc., and that the
Mayor and City Clerk be and they are hereby authorized to execute the Agreement.
The motion was seconded by Director Melton and passed unanimously.
There being
no further business
Director McFerran moved to
adjourn.
The
motion
was seconded by Director
Melton and
passed unanimously,
where upon the Acting Mayor
declared
the
meeting
adjourned.
F7
APPRO D:
S IA SWART , ACTING NL4Y11
The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, met in special session on Wednesday,
September 25, 1968, in the Directors Room in the City Administration Building at 5:00 P. M. CDST,
Present: City Manager Gerald G. Fox, City Clerk George J. Davis, City Attorney Hugh Kincaid, and
Directors: James Kerlin, Sylvia Swartz, 'Joe McFerran, Garland Melton, Jr., Arnold Christie, Mayor Don
Trumbo,-and Dale Dunn,
Absent: None.
The Mayor reported that the purposeeof the meeting was to accept anRegi.orial Intergovernmental Relations
Award from a Representative of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and to adopt a resolution
changing the area to be included in the GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD RENEWAL PLAN, and that all members of the
Board of Directors had been notified by U. S. flail and by telephone.
L. B. Pearcy, Representative of the State Director of Federal Housing Administration, appeared before
i. the Directors and presented a Regional Intergovernmental Relations Award which was accepted on behalf
of the City by Mayor Don Trumbo and City Manager Gerald G. Fox.
Mr. Pearcy was representing the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
The City Manager read a proposed resolution entitled, "A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 27-66, AS
AMENDED BY RESOLUTION N0. 3-67, TO CHANGE THE AREA TO BE INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD RENEWAL PLA.
Director Melton moved that the Resolution be adopted. The motion was seconded by Director Swartz and upon
roll call the following vote was recorded, "Aye" Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, Trumbo, and
"Nay" None.
There being Seven "Ayes" and No "Nays", the Mayor declared the Resolution adopted.
No.' 28-68 I RESOLUTION NO. 28-68
A RESOLUTION AMENTDING RESOLUTION N0, 27-662 AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION N0, 3-67, TO CHANGE THE AREA TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD RENEWAL PLAN.
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 27-66 dated October 17, 1966, the Board of Directors of the City of
Fayetteville, Arkansas, approved the undertaking of a General Neighborhood Renewal Plan and the filing
of an application for federal advance of funds, describing therein the area to be included in the General
Neighborhood Renewal Area, and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 3-67, dated February 6, 1967, the Board of Directors of the City of
Fayetteville, Arkansas, amended Resolution No. 27-66, in part to change the description'of the General
Neighborhood Renewal Area, and
WHEREAS, in order to conform more precisely to current criteria for renewal areas as established by
the Regional Office of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, it is now necessary to further
modify the description of the General Neighborhood Renewal Area.
a
.
r
7