Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-08-21 MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AUGUST 21, 1973 The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met in regular session on Tuesday, August 21, 1973 in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building at 7:30 P.M. Present: City Manager Donald L. Grimes; Purchasing, Personnel and Budget Officer Sturman Mackey; Administrative Aide David McWethy; City Attorney David Malone; City Clerk Helen Young; and Directors Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. Directors Absent: None. Others Present: Representatives of the news media and members of the audience. Minutes of the regular meeting of August 7, 1973 had been distributed to the Board members prior to the meeting. There being no corrections, additions or deletions to the minutes of the August 7, 1973 meeting, the minutes were approved as mailed. MOTION TO LIMIT DEBATE Mayor Purdy commented that he has been unhappy with the efficiency of the Board recently. Mr. Purdy said that he is ready to take full responsibility for over -long and extraneous discussions and that he is ready to do everything within his power to get the Board operating on a better level of efficiency. Mayor Purdy asked whether other Board members shared his beliefs on this matter and asked for suggestions of how the matter might be handled. Director Murray stated that he concurred with the Mayor's remarks and that he does not believe the lengthy meetings have been an absolute necessity. Director Murray moved that the Board of Directors place a time limit of five minutes for each director on each listed item appearing on any current agenda of all scheduled official meetings now and in the future. Director Murray explained that the rules of procedure can be suspended at any time by a two-thirds vote of the Board members present. Director Murray commented that he believed that limiting discussion as proposed in his motion would promote a concise, precise, and to -the -point presentation of all necessary discussions to the issues involved at the time. Director Utley seconded the motion made by Director Murray. Director Carlson commented that she felt that this would tend to do a dis- service to the citizens. "I don't think any of the directors ever say things that they feel are not necessary or that they really want to say so their fellow directors have that information or idea. I think one of the best ways to move along with our meetings would be to set agendas that are reasonable to get through, and when it gets a certain time quit or call another meeting. I don't think we should shuffle off the public charge we were voted to carry on. I see nothing wrong with calling special meetings," Mrs. Carlson said. Director Stanton stated that he has no objection to limiting debate. "I think all directors get their agenda in adequate time to get their information in order that they can make a decision in a reasonable length of time. It is unfair to the people in the audience who have to sit here through lengthy discussions waiting on one item," Mr. Stanton said. Director Stanton added that it is the duty of the directors to become familiar with the items on the agenda before coming to the meeting, and he does not feel that a long meeting serves anybody well. Mr. Stanton said that he is not in favor of having meetings every week. 278 7 1 Director Orton commented that she felt that the idea of limiting debate was "worth a try". Mrs. Orton added that, "If this doesn't seem to work we can try something else. This isn't binding forever." Director Utley said that he feels that limiting debate would give the Board something to strive for. "I would object strenuously to a weekly meeting," Mr. Utley said. • City Attorney Malone concurred with Mayor Purdy that this rule of procedure would be subject to change at any time on any subject with a two-thirds vote on a motion to limit or extend the time limit established. Mayor Purdy called for a vote on the motion made by Director Murray. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION POLICY City Manager Grimes handed to the Board members a copy of a suggested bridge construction policy which read as follows: "The City may, at the discretion of the Board of Directors, pay the costs in excess of what is required to construct a box culvert with SO square feet of cross sectional area. (Roughly $4,000.00 at current prices). "Minimum specifications, 6" bottom, 8" walls, 12" top, 35 feet long. Drainage area to be determined by City Engineer and storm water run-off computed on basis of 50 -year storm. "Board determinations of city participation shall be based primarily upon general public benefit to be derived from the bridge construction. This policy is intended to be used as a means of improving the move- ment of cross-town type traffic by providing more access routes for the general public --- and not as a means of subsidizing subdivision development. "This policy shall not be retroactive." Mr. Grimes said that he felt that the Board needed to establish some policy for bridge construction because he did not believe subdividers would ever come in voluntarily with bridges in their subdivision plats. "We are going to have to encourage the construction of these bridges or they will not be built," Mr. Grimes said. Director Utley suggested that the proposed policy be amended by inserting an introductory phrase to read as follows: "Where police and fire protection and general traffic circulation would be enhanced..." Director Orton asked if bridge construction could not be encouraged at less expense to the City. Director Utley replied that the degree of City participa- tion in the cost of the construction will depend upon how much the bridge will enhance the police and fire protection and general traffic circulation in the area. Director Carlson commented, "I think you will find that every request that comes in here will be assented to." Mrs. Carlson added that the Planning Commission should require a through street for Azalea Terrace and Brookside East subdivisions since the subdivision ordinance does specify bridges as one of the improvements which can be required of a subdivider. Mrs. Carlson said that a policy which would require the developer to show undue hardship before the requirement for a bridge could be waived would be more reasonable. Director Utley noted that in the instance of Azalea Terrace and Brookside East subdivisions, two separate applications have been submitted and he sees no reason for not approving either of the two subdivisions. "I personally feel it would be to the benefit of the City to have a bridge across there and I don't see any obligation on the part of the subdivider to put in a bridge," Director Utley said. 279 Director Murray moved that the suggested bridge construction policy be adopted as amended in the first paragraph to read as follows: "Where police and fire protection and general traffic circulation would be enhanced, the City may, at the discretion of the Board of Directors, share in the cost of construction of bridges in excess of that which is required to construct a box culvert with 50 square feet of cross sectional area." Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the motion passed. BRIDGE BETWEEN BROOKSIDE EAST AND AZALEA TERRACE SUBDIVISIONS This item was tabled from the August 7, 1973 meeting. birector Stanton commented that since it appears that a bridge would be an advantage to the subdivisions involved that the subdivider should pay a portion of the cost of the bridge. Director Stanton moved that the City participate financially in the construction of the bridge in an amount equal to 50 percent of the cost over and above the cost of the box culvert, the developer paying the cost of the box culvert and 50 percent of the cost of constructing the bridge. Director Orton questioned why the Planning Commission could not be asked to look at the subdivision plats again if the Board has not yet accepted the dedication of the streets and utilities in the subdivisions. City Manager Grimes explained that the reason for the developer's early request was that he wanted to know what his committments would be. Mr. Grimes added that if the City refused to participate in the cost of the bridge construction he felt that the plats for the subdivisions would be withdrawn. After some discussion regarding what percentage of participation would be fair for the City to undertake, Director Noland seconded the motion made by Director Stanton. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the motion passed. CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN AZALEA TERRACE AND BROOKSIDE EAST SUBDIVISIONS City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a contract guaranteeing that the contractor/ developer will build the connecting street between Brookside East and Azalea Terrace subdivisions if the City will construct the connecting bridge. Director Utley requested that the resolution be amended to state that the contractor/developer will build the connecting street between Brookside East and Azalea Terrace subdivisions if the City participates financially in the bridge construction costs under the currently established policy for bridge construction as approved in the previous agenda item. T. C. Carlson, Jr. asked for an estimated cost to the City for the bridge construction. Director Carlson replied that the estimated cost to the City would be SO percent of approximately $24,000, or approximately $12,000. Director Utley moved the resolution as amended be adopted. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 69-73 appears on page 168 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. 280 1 AMEND USE UNIT #6 OF ZONING ORDINANCE #1747 City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance to amend Zoning Ordinance #1747 by including an addition to Use Unit #6. City Attorney Malone explained that the proposed amendment would add "smoking, curing and selling of smoked or cured poultry and livestock" to Use Unit #6 which is included in the following zoning districts: A-1 Agricultural, I-1 Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial, and I-2 General Industrial. Director Stanton moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Noland moved the rules be further suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. Director Orton suggested that Use Unit #6 also include the selling of fruits and vegetables. Director Carlson suggested that Use Unit #6 also include the selling of flowers. City Attorney Malone explained that state statutes provide that products of the farm may be sold in any zoning district. -Mr. Malone added that technically any suggested amendment to the proposed ordinance would have to be sent back to the Planning Commission for their recommendation on the amendment, however, since the suggested change5'are technical changes intended to clarify the proposed amendment he felt that the changes would be acceptable. Director Orton moved that the proposed ordinance be amended to clarify that sorting, picking and selling of fruits, vegetables and flowers are also included in Use Unit #6. Director Utley requested that the amendment proposed by Director Orton specify that the sale of fruits, vegetables and flowers shall be "at retail". Director Orton accepted Director Utley's suggestion into her motion to amend. City Attorney Malone advised that it would not be wise to specify "at retail" since part of Mr. Frank Sharp's business is wholesale and this proposed ordinance is a result of rezoning request submitted by Mr. Sharp in May, 1973. (See minutes of May 15, 1973 meeting.) Director Orton requested that her motion to amend remain as originally stated. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion to amend passed unanimously. - The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance as amended the third and final time, after which the Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass?" Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1928 appears on pages 198 and 199 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. REZONING - J. E. MCCLELLAND Upon request of Mayor Purdy, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to rezone a 0.24 acre tract located at 2028 Birch Avenue from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Petitioner is J. E. McClelland. Mr. McClelland was present at the meeting to answer questions of the Board members and the audience. Director Orton noted that in the staff report it was suggested that a decision be made on whether the area under consideration should be zoned for industrial uses or whether Poplar Street would be the dividing line between the residential and industrial developments. 281 Mayor Purdy commented that in the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. McClelland had said that he would have no objection to rezoning the property to I-1, but that other property owners in the area might object. The Planning Commission voted approval for R-2 zoning for the tract, Mr. Purdy said. Mayor Purdy asked the City Attorney if the Board could rezone the property to I-1 without the Planning Commission's first making that recommendation or without the petitioner's requesting it. City Attorney Malone replied that the Board would have to send the matter back to the Planning Commission with the recommendation that it be reconsidered for rezoning to I-1, or possibly requesting a study of the area north of Poplar Street. Director Orton said that she felt that the Board should go ahead and rezone this property to R-2 and then continue in that direction when other rezoning requests are made for that area in the future. Director Stanton stated that there are several houses in the area and he would hesitate to approve I-1 zoning for this property. There were no objections to the rezoning request voiced from the audience. Director Murray moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Orton moved the rules be further suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on third and final reading Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the third and final time, after which the Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass?" Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1929 appears on page 200 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. CLOSE AND VACATE A PORTION OF LORRAINE DRIVE Mayor Purdy declared the public hearing in session on the matter of a petition submitted by Frank L. Doughty, Jr., Ernest E. Jacks, and Warner Cable of Fayetteville, to close and vacate a portion of Lorraine Drive lying east of Williams Drive in Breezy Heights Addition. Frank L. Doughty, Jr. was present at the meeting to answer questions of the Board members and the audience. Mr. Doughty explained that since the Planning Commission, at which the Planning Commission recommended that the legal question of ownership of the narrow strip along the south side of Lorraine Drive be straightened out, he has acquired a quitclaim deed for the property in question to clear up the matter. Mr. Doughty explained that he wishes to make a private drive on this property to serve two houses Mayor Purdy asked the Board members if they understood that granting this petition would stop any street from going over the hill to the east Mr. Doughty stated that the Street Superintendent said it would not be feasible for a street to go over the hill to the east Director Carlson asked whether the dirt road south of Warner Cable's property is a county road. City Manager Grimes replied that the City does not maintain the roadway because the City is unable to find a record of that being a public roadway. Mayor Purdy declared the public hearing closed. 282 1 1 City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance to close and vacate a portion of Lorraine Drive lying east of Williams Drive in Breezy Heights Addition. City Attorney Malone explained that the City Engineer is requesting a utility easement on this property and that that is provided for in the proposed ordinance. Director Carlson moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. (Director Stanton was absent at the time the vote was taken.) City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Orton moved the rules be further suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Noland.seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously (Director Stanton was absent at the time the vote was taken.) City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the third and final time, after which the Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass?" Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Carlson. "Nays" None. Director Stanton was absent at the time the Vote was taken. There being six "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1930 appears on page 201iof Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PARK SITES City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution approving the Large Scale Development Plan for park sites and the dedication of streets and utility easements for public purposes. This item includes park system improvements for the following: Asbell Park, Jefferson Park, Happy Hollow Park, V.A. (Sycamore) Park, Root Park, Butterfield Trail Park, and Bates Park. Mayor Purdy asked whether the funds for the parks improvements were holding out allright. City Manager Grimes replied that the improvements are to be made with Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and City funds and, "...we don't know if there is enough until we take bids." Director Carlson moved the resolution be adopted. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 70=73 appears on page 169 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTED BY PAUL YOUNG, INC. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a contract guaranteeing that the contractor/developer will install certain improvements (streets) in the Large Scale Development Plan sub- mitted by Paul Young, Inc. for property located on Old Missouri Road north of Butterfield Trail School. Director Utley moved the resolution be adopted. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 71-73 appears on page 170 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. 283 ACCEPT DEDICATION OF STREETS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTED BY PAUL YOUNG, INC. Upon request of Mayor Purdy, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to accept the dedication of streets and utility easements in the Large Scale Development Plan submitted by Paul Young, Inc., for property located on Old Missouri Road north of Butterfield Trail School. Mr. Lloyd G. Hobbs was present at the meeting to answer questions of the Board members and the audience, Director Carlson said that there should be an extension of Rolling Hills Drive. Director Stanton replied that when the area east of Rolling Hills Drive is developed into a subdivision there will be a street through there. The property belongs to the Stubblefields, Mr. Stanton said. Director Stanton moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Noland moved the rules be further suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the third and final time, after which the Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass?" Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1931 appears on page 203 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Mr. Hobbs stated that Paul Young, Inc. had presented a deed and a $7500 surety bond to guarantee the improvements in the Large Scale Development Plan. City Attorney Malone, in answer to Director Stanton's question, said that both a surety bond and a contract were not needed, but that the surety bond had just been submitted today (August 21, 1973) so the item remained on the agenda. SANITATION SERVICE CHARGES Upon request of Mayor Purdy, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to clarify the provisions of Section 10 of the City Code of Ordinances, to indi- cate the commercial sanitation service that is provided within the monthly rate, and to provide for additional charges for extra service. Director Noland moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Orton commented that she feels that the proposed ordinance is con- fusing since one week an extra pickup may be required and another week an extra pickup may not be required and this could complicate the billing. Director Carlson stated her concurrence with Director Orton's comments and suggested that the rate be stated as a monthly rate rather than "per can per pickup" for additional services, the last paragraph of Section 1 of the proposed ordinance to read: "...or in the event that commercial establish- ments require more than two cans per pickup, the rate will be an additional $2.00 per month for said additional services..." Director Carlson also suggested that the first paragraph of Section 1 be changed to read: "The minimum monthly commercial rate shall be $4.30 per month, per can, for two cans, for each commercial establishment..." 284 City Attorney Malone said that the basic service provided to commercial lishments is for one can rather than two as indicated by Mrs. Carlson's proposed amendment. City Manager Grimes explained that most commercial are run every day so the costs to the Sanitation Department are greater, is the reason for the higher rate for commercial pickups. City Attorney Malone stated that a worthwhile amendment to the proposed ordinance would be to change the last paragraph of Section 1 to read as "In the event commercial establishments require sanitation service more twice each week the Sanitation Superintendent quently than can schedule service..." Director Stanton suggested that the City Manager take the proposed ordinance estab- routes which follows: fre- such with the suggested changes back to the staff for their ideas on changes and then bring the proposed ordinance back to the Board date City Attorney Malone explained that the proposed ordinance will come up for third and final reading at the next regular meeting the proposed at a later automatically of the Board. TRANSFERRAL OF CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY - JAY H. WILLIAMS AND JERRY D. SIZEMORE Attached to the agenda was an application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity submitted by Jerry D. Sizemore and Jay H. Williams for the transferral of Yellow Cab Company's certificate. Ron Woodruff, representing the petitioners, and the petitioners were present at the meeting to answer questions of the Board members and the audience. In answer to Mayor Purdy's question, Mr. Woodruff said that for various reasons Mr. Charles Woodward, who had previously applied for transferral of Yellow Cab Company's certificate, was no longer interested in applying for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. In response to inquiries about the financial status of the applicants, Mr. Woodruff explained that the applicants have formed a corporation. The stock- holders intend to take over the existing rolling stock of the Yellow Cab Company and assume the secured liabilities of the Yellow Cab Company. The corporation has assets of $300 in cash; the secured liabilities amount to approximately $14,160; the equipment is valued at approximately $1,000; and the balance is the name and goodwill of the company. Director Noland asked which one of the applicants would be primarily responsible for complaints. The applicants explained that one of them planned to be on duty during the day and the other would be on duty at night. Director Carlson stated that she felt that the financial statement should be in written form so it could be of record and she moved that this matter be tabled until the next regular meeting of the Board. Mr. Woodruff explained that the Yellow Cab Company is operating in a state of "limbo" now. He added that the operation of the company "cannot get much worse" and the Board can revoke the certificate if they are not pleased with the operation of the company under the new management. There was no second to Mrs. Carlson's motion to table the matter. Director Stanton moved that the petition submitted by Jerry D. Sizemore and Jay H. Williams be granted with the condition that the applicants present a corporate financial statement to the Board in writing. Director Orton seconded the motion. There was some discussion about the current method of operation of Yellow Cab Company and some allegations made regarding the company. The applicants stated that they propose to meet the requirements of the ordinance regulating the opera- tion of taxicabs when they take over the operation of the company. 285 Director Utley said that he sees no evidence to indicate that Yellow Cab Company will operate satisfactorily as far as meeting the requirements of the ordinance, therefore, he said that he would vote for a motion to close down the operation of Yellow Cab Company until they comply with the requirements of the ordinance. The applicants again expressed willingness to comply with the ordinance regulating the operation of taxicabs, however, they explained that they cannot afford to do anything until they are granted a certificate. Director Stanton reworded the motion as follows: "I move that we grant the petition submitted by Jerry D. Sizemore and Jay H. Williams upon the condition that the applicants provide the Board with a corporate financial statement and meet all other requirements of the City ordinance, the City Manager being the arbitrator in the matter." Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Utley and Carlson. There being five "Ayes" and two "Nays" the Mayor declared the motion passed. BIDS - OILS AND GREASES Attached to the agenda was Administrative Memorandum No. 266 and bid tabula- tion for Bid No. 214 for oils and greases. The Administrative Memorandum contained the recommendation that all items be awarded to the low bidder, Mitchell Oil Company of Fayetteville. Director Stanton moved the City Manager's recommendation be approved. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. RURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CONTRACT AMENDED City Manager Grimes announced that the Rural Development Authority and the White River Rural Water District have agreed that the eastern boundary of the Rural Development Authority district shall be moved back to the west fork of the White River. Mr. Grimes asked the Board's authorization to amend the Rural Development Authority contract to reflect the change in the boundary line. Director Orton moved that the Rural Development Authority contract be amended to reflect that the eastern boundary line of the district shall be the west fork of the White River. Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. CONTRACT OFFERED TO WHITE RIVER RURAL WATER DISTRICT Mayor Purdy announced that it is the recommendation of the Water and Sewer Committee that the City Manager be authorized to write a letter to the White River Rural Water District stating that the City is ready to enter into a contractual agreement with the District for the City's being the sole supplier of water for the District. Mayor Purdy added that he would suggest_ that if the White River Rural Water District rejects the contract, that the City Manager be authorized to then write to the White River Rural Water District asking them to outline the area within their district that they want Fayetteville to serve as the sole supplier of water. Director Stanton moved that the City Manager be so authorized. Director Carlson commented that a water district is created for the purpose of getting potable water to the people in the district and the water district may have a source of supply that is more pure than what the City of Fayetteville 286 can provide. Mrs. Carlson said that if the City of Fayetteville has a minimum contract with the water district that should suffice for the Cityt purposes. Director Stanton said that the water district will have the option of accepting or rejecting the contract and of outlining the area to be served by Fayetteville water, so the water district is not restrained.by this offer of a contract. Such a contract will protect the City of Fayetteville against being called upon to supply water only during peak periods. Director Stanton added that he would not feel that this would be an invasion of the district's operational prerogatives as Mrs. Carlson had suggested. Director Carlson contended that the contract could set a minimum and a maximum for usage of Fayetteville water by the District and that the contract could also specify that the water district not mix the water so that any other water could enter into the Fayetteville system. Director Noland seconded the motion made by Director Stanton. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the motion passed. BID - HIGHWAY 71 SOUTH WATERMAIN RELOCATION City Manager Grimes handed to the Board members a letter from City Engineer Mattke regarding the Highway 71 South 12 -inch watermain relocation. Only one bid was received for this project, that bid being from Capwell Construction Company, Inc. in the amount of $159,913.23. Mr. Grimes recommended that the bid be awarded to Capwell Construction Company in the amount bid. Director Carlson asked how much it would cost to patch the highway. Mr. Grimes replied that the contractor will patch the highway on a temporary basis. City Manager Grimes also stated that an additional $13,000 allocation would be needed from the Water and Sewer Reserve Fund to cover engineering fees for this project. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution to authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a contract with O.L. Capwell Construction Company, Inc. for the Highway 71 South 12 -inch watermain relocation, and further that $18,000 be allocated from the 1973'-74:Water and Sewer Reserve Fund for engineering fees for the Highway 71 South 12 -inch watermain relocation project. Director Stanton moved the resolutiontbe adopted. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson:arid Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 72-73 appears on page 171 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENT FOR HIGHWAY 71 SOUTH WATERMAIN RELOCATION City Manager Grimes handed to the Board a letter from City Engineer Mattke requesting authorization for condemnation of an easement for the Highway 71 South 12 -inch watermain relocation. The property to be secured is a portion of the W. K. Harris estate, under sales contract to Thomas H. Ward and Dorothy L. Ward, husband and wife, under lease to Mobil Oil Company. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution to authorize the condemnation of easement on the above-described land. Director Noland moved the resolution be adopted. Director Carlson asked what the easement might cost. City Attorney Malone esti- mated that the appraisal would be under $500 for the 100 -foot easement. 287 1 Director Murray seconded the motion to adopt the proposed resolution. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 73-73 appears on page 172 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. APPRECIATION TO CITY ATTORNEY MALONE City Manager Grimes and Mayor Purdy expressed appreciation to City Attorney Malone. City Attorney Malone had previously submitted a letter of resignation. Director Utley read a resolution expressing appreciation to City Attorney Malone and moved the resolution be adopted. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 74-73 appears on page 173 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. City Attorney Malone stated that it had been a great pleasure working with the City Manager and the Board. Mr. Malone said that he would be working with the new City Attorney on unfinished projects and would assist him in any way possible. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CITY LEGAL WORK City Manager Grimes handed to the Board his recommendations for handling the City's legal work. The recommendations were as follows: 1. Continue the City Prosecutor (Assistant City Attorney) on the present basis at $4,800.00 per year to prosecute civil or criminal cases for violation or enforcement of City ordinances before the Municipal Court. 2. Due to the present heavy legal workload in the Water and Sewer Department, retain the firm of Crouch, Blair, Cypert and Waters for a period of approximately two years to handle this legal work at a cost of $200.00 per month plus additional fees for trial work, etc., as outlined in Code Section 2-10. 3. Retain a full -tine City Attorney to perform general legal work as provided in Code Section 2-10 at a salary of $800.00 per month plus $200.00 per month office expenses. (To furnish his own office space and secretary.) The City Manager requested that the Board authorize an additional allocation to Account 4351 from the General Fund in the amount of $4,000.00 to provide sufficient funding for the remainder of this fiscal year. City Manager Grimes explained that hopefully at the end of two years the full- time City Attorney will be able to handle the legal work of the Water and Sewer Department. Mr. Grimes further explained that there is no space available in the City Administration Building for an office for the City Attorney. Mr. Malone said that at any time the City can make arrangements for office space for the City Attorney the City Attorney will be free to move from the offices of Crouch, Blair, Cypert and Waters, and he added that it would probably be to the firm's advantage if office space were found elsewhere for the City Attorney. 288 1 City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution to authorize the allocation of $4,000 to General Fund Account 4351, and further to approve the City Manager's recommendation regarding City legal work. Director Stanton moved the proposed resolution be adopted. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utrley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 75-73 appears on page 174 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. EMPLOY JIM McCORD AS CITY ATTORNEY City Manager Grimes handed to the Board members a copy of resume submitted by Jim McCord for the position of full-time City Attorney. Mr. Grimes recommended that Jim McCord be employed as the City's full-time City Attorney. Mr. Grimes added that he had told Mr. McCord that maybe later in the year Mr. McCord would be allowed to take on some probate work in addition to the City's legal work. Director Noland moved the City Manager's recommendation be approved. Director Carlson requested that the Board members be allowed to see other resumes submitted for the position. City Manager Grimes stated that he did not feel that it would be wise for the Board to get involved in personnel matters such as this. Director Orton seconded the motion to approve the City Manager's recommendation. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" None. Director Carlson abstained from voting. There being six "Ayes", no "Nays" and one abstaining vote,the Mayor declared the motion passed. LEND EQUIPMENT TO NORTHWEST ARKANSAS REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION - MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING City Manager Grimes handed to the Board members a copy of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Fayetteville and the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission for the loan of a surplus water tank and a vehicle to the NWARPC for use in its septic tank/soils study. The Commission proposed to use the equipment for a period of 18 months. Mr. Grimes explained that the NWARPC will provide proper insurance so that the City of Fayetteville will not be liable for the equipment during the time it is on loan to the Commission. Director Carlson moved the Memorandum of 'Understanding be executed. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. REQUEST TO NAME STREET INTO INDUSTRIAL PARK Mayor Purdy requested that the street going into the Industrial Park be named "Armstrong Street" or 'Armstrong Avenue" in honor of Armstrong Company locating in the Industrial Park City Attorney Malone advised that the American Legion has expressed a desire to name the northern portion of that street for a citizen and that that problem should be worked out before the matter is brought before the Board. An ordinance will be required to name the street, Mr. Malone said, and it will take some time to prepare the legal description for the location of the street. SPECIAL BOOTS FOR STREET DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES Director Carlson asked what is being done about getting heavy footwear for the Street Department employees. City Manager Grimes replied that the Street 289 Superintendent has obtained quotations for the cost of the boots. Mr. Grimes added that every department will request special equipment if the Street Department employees are issued special boots so, "...several hundred dollars worth for each department is what we are talking about." ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Director Noland moved the meeting be adjourned. Director Utley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously whereupon Mayor Purdy declared the meeting adjourned at 11:02 P.M. ATTEST: APPROVED: /2Nzc mayor .� 290