HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-12-18 MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DECEMBER 18, 1973
The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met in regular
session on Tuesday, December 18, 1973 in the Directors Room of the City
Administration Building at 7:30 P.M.
Present: Donald L. Grimes, City Manager; Sturman Mackey, Purchasing, Personnel
and Budget Officer; David.McWethy, Administrative Aide; Jim McCord, City
Attorney, Helen Young, City Clerk; 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 December 4, 1973 meeting had been distributed to the Board
members prior to the meeting. There being no corrections, additions, or
deletions, the minutes of the December 4, 1973 meeting were approved as
distributed.
PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE #1966 REGARDING REVENUE BONDS FOR THE RURAL GROWTH
AREA WATER LINE PROJECTS
Mayor Purdy declared the public hearing open for the discussion of the issuance
of $1,330,000 in revenue bonds for the Rural Growth Area water line projects per
Ordinance No. 1966.
Former City Attorney Malone explained that the notice of public hearing was not
published for revenue bond ordinance #1965 so the public hearing date will need
to be set for that ordinance at this meeting. The public hearing, Mr. Malone
said, could possibiy be held at the next regular meeting of the Board. Mr. Malone
also explained that no action is necessary at this meeting after the public
hearing on ordinance #1966 unless the Board wishes - the Board is to hold a
public hearing and take the thoughts of the public under advisement.
T. C. Carlson, Jr., 790 Missouri Way, speaking for a group of opponents to the
issuance of the revenue bonds, said that there are still unanswered questions
regarding this matter and questions that the public feels should have been
asked of them, such as: Tae we ready to mortgage our already too high water
and sewer rates in order to construct at City expense water lines outside the
City limits to serve property owners who do not pay City taxes, while at the
same time property owners inside the City who do pay City taxes are being
forced to pay at their own individual expense for extensions of water and sewer
lines to serve their property?"
"Does the fact that we citizens within the City, already within the jurisdiction
of the City government) relegate us to a lower priority for City services and
expenditures?"
Mr. Carlson continued, "The City has not polled the people in the growth area
to find out whether they are willing to give up their right to construct and
operate their own water system....How can the City justify an ever continuing
issuance of bonds, the interest on which is a drain of nearly twenty percent
off the water and sewer bill each one of us pay...:We ask only that you refer
Ordinances 1965 and 1966 to the public referendum."
William Myers, 764 Stone, commented that he does not .wish to take a formal
position on the issue at this time as there are some questions he would like
answered before he would concur with the Board's passing Ordinance #1966;
however, Mr. Myers concurred with•Mr..Car.lson in requesting that this issue
be made a matter of the vote of the citizens of Fayetteville who will have
their funds tied up and their system revenues mortgaged for this project.
383
A. W. Chism, Foxhunter Road, asked how much money is involved in this matter
and whether the people in Fayetteville would have to pay any extra money on
their water bills as a result of this issuance of bonds.
Former City Attorney Malone explained that the ordinance authorizes the
issuance of $1,330,000 in revenue bonds for the rural growth area water line
project. Mr Malone further stated that after studying this matter, the
Water and Sewer Committee had recommended that the rates of the inside-the-
City users not be affected by the rural growth area project.
Mr. Myers asked if the total rates of the inside-the-City users are not
included in the guarantees given to the bond holders. "If we can't make
the revenue outside the City, will we not have to use the revenue of the
total system?"
Mr. Malone replied that the ordinances do contain a guarantee that the revenues
will be sufficient to maintain the bonds. Mr. Malone added, however, that
the Water and Sewer Committee's recommendation was that the revenues on the
outside-the-City portion would be maintained at a level to maintain the bonds
on the outside-the-City portion. If the revenues from outside-the-City users
are not sufficient as originally set, those rates can be adjusted without
adjusting the rates of inside-the-City customers.
Director Carlson said that Act 131 of 1933 specifies that if a city wants
to go out and make an improvement on a certain area and hold it distinct, it
can keep the records and make the adjustments and that area can be accounted
for separately; however, Ordinances #1965 and 1966 do not follow that proce-
dure. "They are written to be one pool of revenue, one pool of liability."
Chuck Barrett, 118 South College, asked why there has to be a bond issue for
these improvements - "...Why can't there be a special improvement district
in this area?" Mr. Barrett went on to say, "It is my opinion and understanding
that these people could have had water a year ago if the City hadn't stepped
in at the time and said we have the money to do it and now they are asking
the people inside the City to vote a bond of a million three to pay for
something that the money was already ready for...."
Mayor Purdy replied that there is more than one method of providing water
to this area, but after study, the Water and Sewer Committee decided that
it would be in the best interests of the City to do it this way. The Board
of Directors adopted the recommendation of the Water and Sewer Committee.
Faye Ramsey, 215 Meadow, said that she and many of her neighbors feel that
if the Board feels they are doing the right thing about this matter, the
Board would not hesitate to let it go to the vote of the people. "The
central part of the City has been taxed over and over and over and we do
not feel that is really justified to put water out into the suburbs."
Tom Lavender, Sang Avenue, expressed his concern about the indebtedness of
the City and doubt that 200 customers could pay off this bond issue. "I
think you are doing the people in Fayetteville a disservice if you don't
allow them to vote on this."
Stephen Morrill, 600 Willow, asked what are the interests to the City of
Fayetteville in this bond issue.
City Manager Grimes replied by showing an annexation map of the City and
explaining that each time an annexation occurs the City pays for another
water system. If the water system is installed in the rural areas now,
the people out there can be using it now and the City will not have to buy
the system when and if the area is annexed. Mr. Grimes said that he feels
that this is a very good investment for the City.
Director Carlson said that the same provisions could be made for a rural
water system as are being made for a sewer system in Greenland and
Farmington.
384
1
r
Charles Weese, Highway 45, reminded the people that the rural people did not
ask the City to bring the water to the rural area.
Mr. Reed, West Ridgeway, commented that there seem to be many questions that
are unanswered. "You are asking the City citizens to buy a pig in a poke...."
Robert C. Ellis, 1441 Meadowcliff, suggested that it might be well if some
questions could be answered in the newspaper, such as what is the projected
growth rate, what are the areas involved, and w}ikt are the risks involved for
both sides.
Director Noland said that probably the number of customers in the rural area
has been underestimated. Director Noland cited one example of an area which
is estimated to have one customer, yet twelve persons in that neighborhood who want
war contacted him personally.who want water.
Mr. Morrill said that it seems that the Board has the information but they are
afraid to let it out and let the people vote on it.
Director Utley replied to Mr. Morrill's comments, saying that all committee
meetings are announced and are public. Director Utley said that he does not
feel that the City should have to pay to have the information published since
citizens could have attended the meetings and the press could have given these
issues more coverage in the reports of the meetings.
Mr. Ostendorff, Zion Road, asked, "Do you feel it is right for you to take this
thing and run off with it and not give the people a chance to vote on it?"
Oliver Ostmeyer asked, "How can you justify going beyond the City limits when
there are people inside the City that don't have sewer?"
Upon Director Stanton's suggestion, Mayor Purdy explained how the feasibility of
thispproject was determined. Mayor Purdy said that a survey was made of the
projected growth area, the data was given to a neutral engineering firm, the
engineering firm determined what rates would be necessary so the project would
pay its own way, the Water and Sewer Committee approved the rates, and the
Board of Directors adopted the recommendation of the Water and Sewer Committee.
Mr Purdy emphasized that all meetings were public and that the newspapers did
publish the information insofar as they considered it a story and wanted to
present it.
Director Noland said, "I firmly believe that this was a very conservative study
that was made....These rates were based upon the system paying for itself....
This was one of the things the Nater and Sewer Committee insisted upon, that
we would not try to project the system if it would not support itself. This was
our main theme - if we would have to raise the water rates within the City,
we were not for it."
Director Utley called attention to a petition signed by citizens living east of
Fayetteville. The petition expressed appreciation to the Board for the time
and effort expended in this matter and commended the attitude of concern shown
for the entire region. The petition contained 69 signatures. Director Utley
also commented, "...If we combine orifi efforts to insure that sanitation measures
and controlled facilities are put in, then we have an assurance of an adequate
water supply. If we don't take those steps now and we allow various systems to
developewithout control, then the sewers follow and when they follow, unless
they are incorporated water districts that adhere to and abide by the principles
laid down by the proper sanitation authorities, then we as citizens are going
to pay the bill to correct the condition rather than paying the bill now to
provide for that system."
Director Carlson said, "There isn't a thing Director Utley says that isn't
desirable and that isn't available for this City to carry out without financing
the laying down of these lines. Every measure of protection he desires it
available under the laws."
385
Gary Renegar, Green Acres Road, said that since the Board has made studies
of this issue, he would assume that the Board made an intelligent decision
based upon those studies and that he would hope the Board would not reverse
its decision.
Edward W. Turner, Foxhunter Road, said that even though he would not benefit
immediately by the rural water line, he is still for it because the people
out there need water and are spending much money to get potable water for
their homes now. "I could pay a big utility bill and still not come up to
what I spend to get water now."
Charles Weese, Highway 45 East, said that the City residents did not
express themselves a year ago when the rural residents were trying to
establish a rural water district. Mr. Weese added that he is willing to
pay his share to get the water out there. He expressed appreciation to the
Board for studying this issue and making this decision.
Don Maguire, 940 Rush Drive, said that the rural residents were progressing
toward obtaining water and the City of Fayetteville stepped in, so he feels
that the people out there are entitled to the water service. Mr. Maguire
added that Beaver Lake was developed using everybody's tax money - not just
the taxes of the four cities. Therefore, he feels that everybody has a
right to the water from Beaver Lake.
Jack Woody, Oakland Road, commented that the rural residents are walling to
pay rates which are higher than those of City residents in order to get water.
The other people who were served as the City grew paid the same rates as the
other City residents.
Ron Sherwood, Highway 45, said, "I would hope we as citizens could join
together and forget about the physical boundaries you have drawn around
the City, but work in behalf of the whole Northwest Arkansas to protect
our Beaver Lake and to provide greater services for our children in the
future."
Ralph Phelps, who lives beyond the growth area, stated that these discussions
were started many months ago with letters, :'anU^then we went into our
meetings on a regular basis until we reached a decision. I think you
reached your decision weighing the evidence presented to you in a wise
and meaningful way. I do not feel like you tried to hide anything. I
think we should proceed with it. I think the best interests of Fayetteville
and all people concerned will be served by going on with this water line
and getting water to the area."
Walter Losey, 2842 Stanton, said, "I am willing to trust my decision to
these people who have studied this and I have not."
Mr. Chism spoke again to say, "If there is some way to word this as Mrs.
Carlson spoke of another ordinance,...I would be glad for it to be so
designated that whatever eventuality would arise that we would pay our
own way, that we haven't asked for something that we don't have any business
with or that we are not willing to pay for....I know that it is to the
interests of the City of Fayetteville or you wouldn't have made this change
when we had things pretty well underway."
L. M. McGoodwin commented that it seems feasible for the City of Fayetteville
to provide a system in the rural areas because when the system is annexed
it will be compatible with the present system inside the City. The rural
residents will be able to realize immediate reduction on their fire insurance
premiums upon annexation into the City. These reductions in insurance rates
will be far less than the added property taxes when annexation occurs, Mr.
McGoodwin added. Mr. McGoodwin also explained that the reason that no water
has been sold out of Beaver Lake to water districts is because it is cheaper
for the water to be delivered through the four cities, Fayetteville, Springdale,
Rogers, and Bentonville, than for the lines to be run direct from Beaver Lake.
386
1
4i1
Mayor Purdy said, "This is a matter that has already been decided before this
present Board took office. This was a committment....I was on the Board when
this occurred and I voted a committment....I intend to stick with that promise."
Director Stanton concurred with Mayor Purdy that the previous Board did make a
committment. "All the indicators are that the growth is going to come, it has
to be handled, somebody has to take care of the water and I think it is in the
best interest of the community as a whole that Fayetteville do it. I, for one,
have made a committment and I intend to stay with it."
Director Carlson said, "...There are very large questions as to whether or not
the best intelligence has been applied to the solution for your benefit outside
the City as well as inside the City....No one has told you for one time that
they have calculated thoroughly what another way would have cost. You have been
told about the need for control. I am highly in favor of this - the formation
of the growth area.tcr.No one is opposing the giving of water by this City to the
residents outside, but it would seem to me to be highly important that the
people out there know, in figures they canuactutatedliypaompare, how much it
would cost if you had your own system. And bear in mind that if you had your
own system you would have a control in the future subject to the contractual
arrangements with the City of Fayetteville....What good does it do for anyone
to be inside the City of Fayetteville if Fayetteville's revenues and attentions
can't be paid to them?...I frankly think that this method is a bad disadvantage
to both the people inside the City limits and outside."
Ben Johnson, Cato Springs Road, questioned the use of asbestos pipe since some
research indicates that perhaps the use of asbestos pipe should be discontinued
because of a public health problem.
Director Orton responded that she has checked on this matter and was told by
Dr. Meyer, an expert who is testifying at the trial in Deluth, Minnesota, that
he feels that asbestos pipe is safe to use. Director Orton added that Dr. Meyer
is on the City Pollution Control Cottittee and he will bring any new information
on this matter to the attention of the City.
Director Carlson moved that thesBoard enact its resolution to place these two
ordinances to a public referendum.
Director Utley said that he.does not believe that the individual citizens want
to come down here and research for two years the background of this issue in
order that they have an intelligent basis on which to formulate an opinion.
Director Orton said, "In this case I feel the people in general trust the Board
to make this decision so I feel we should stick by the decision that we have
made."
Director Noland said the two consideration; he is voting upon are that he is
certain the users of the growth area system will pay for the system, and that
the City will not have to buy the system at sometime in the future.
Director Carlson called attention to a 1977 deadline for decreasing the BOD
content of what we turn out from our sewer treatment plant. "What are we going
to do when that emergency bears down upon us and we have not taken the planning
steps for it?t
Director Murray responded that we are making some progress in the control of
the BOD content; but as far as bringing it down to .006, that is almost impossible.
The motion made by. Director Carlson died for lack of a second.
T. C. Carlson said that in view of the Board's refusal to place this issue to the
public vote, the citizens plan to petition for their constitutional guarantee of
a right to vote. Mr. Carlson requested permission to set up a table,for the
purpose of obtaining signatures on the petition at the Central Fire Station.
City Manager Grimes said he has no objections to the request. The Directors
voiced no opposition to grahting the request.
387
Mayor Purdy acknowledged the letter containing signatures of residents east
of Fayetteville.
Director Murray reminded the Board that in the 1973-74 Water and Sewer
Budget there was a $25,000 allocation for pollution control. "In this
bond issue there is also $175,000 allocated to pollution control. These
funds can probably be a three to one match."
Director Carlson said those funds have little or nothing to do with the
BOD content.
There being no further discussion, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
SETTING DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE #1965.
Former City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance setting the public
hearing on Ordinance #1965 for the next regular meeting of the Board of
Directors to be held on January 2, 1974.
Director Stanton moved the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed
on second reading. Director Orton 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 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. 1968 appears on pages 48 and 49 of Ordinance and Resolution
Book IV.
REPORT. FROM MUNICIPAL PARKING AUTHORITY; RESOLUTION REGARDING OFF-STREET
PARKING FACILITIES
Garland Melton presented the report from the Municipal Parking Authority.
A copy of the report was attached to the agenda of the Directors. "In
essence our proposal is two pronged: that the parking Authority will
assume control of the lots with the debts, leases, etc. remaining in the
custody of the City of Fayetteville since we are an arm of the City;
that the revenues from lots noted in the memo will be used to purchase
Lot #7 and retire the remaining debt on Lot #1; then the property owners
within the area will form an assessment district and construct a parking
deck over the entire half block on Lot #7. This will give us approximately
284 spaces on that initial parking deck if it is only two stories. We
can't tell you that we are infallible. We can assure you that not one
penny of the City's money will go into subsidizing this. This will be
paid for by assessments on the property owners and parking meter revenues
so no money from the City's General Fund will be obligated to it. We
request that you adopt the resolution that you have in hand," Dr. Melton
said.
Director Carlson said, "...I do not feel the City needs this expenditure
when so many of its parking spaces are now empty and there is no credibility
forecast for much change in that condition."
388
IJ*..'..
Dr. Melton said that there are tentative plans for at least one high-rise office
building in the downtown area. "These will generate several hundred -,
people occupying the space in them. The impact of these people coming into the
central business district along with the removal of 77 spaces from the square
area, the Parking Authority believes that the impact will be such to where
this initial parking deck needs to be constructed. Until the assessment
district is formed and until the ground is broken for the high-rise buildings,
the Parking Authority will not spend money to build the deck until the need
is there."
In answer to questions asked by the Directors, Dr. Melton said that the
improvement cost on all ten lots is $75,461. The outstanding debt on all of
the lots as far as the improvements and a little balance owed on Lot #1 is less
than $27,000. "The proposal before you tonight is (1) that jurisdiction over
the operation of all downtown lots be placed with the Parking Authority as
provided by Ordinance #1866; (2) that Lot #7 be purchased; (3) that the mini -
mall and grocery store adjacent to Lot #7 be purchased from the Fayetteville
Housing Authority in order to expand Lot #7; and (4) that the balance on the
purchase price of Lot #7 be paid off....If this were to take place you would
have to add, in addition to the $115,000 we are proposing, $95,000 for Lot #9,
$30,000 for Lot #10, and a small balance on the remainder of the improvement
depth."
Director Carlson indicated that she feels that it is discriminatory for the
City to provide parking facilities for the downtown merchants when they do
not provide parking facilities for the other shopping centers in Fayetteville.
Dr. Melton explained that it is impossible for downtown merchants to provide
their own parking since they are blocked in by other property owners becauseFthe
area is so highly developed:
City Attorney McCord read a proposed resolution regarding off-street parking
facilities which provides for the planning, designing, and acquisition of
property for, and the maintenance and operation of, off-street parking facilities;
providing for the issuance of revenue bonds, and prescribing other matters
relating to'off-street parking facilities.
Director Stanton moved the proposed resolution be adopted.- Director Murray
seconded the motion.
City Attorney McCord said, in answer to Director Utley's question, that this
proposed resolution is a resolution of principle and not of detail Dr.
Melton explained •that the City Board will have to adopt an ordinance authorizing
the issuance of revenue bonds as proposed by the Parking Authority and the City
Board will have to approve the formation of the assessment district for the
parking facilities improvements.
Director Catlson asked what will be done about Lot #7 in the meantime. Dr.
Melton explained that the'agreement regarding Lot #7 is being continued on a
monthly basis. The families involved in Lot #7 have been informed that the
City does intend to purchase the -lot.
Upon roll call on the motion to adopt the proposed resolution, the following
vote was recorded.
"Ayes" Orton, Purdy,
"Nays" Carlson.
There being six "Ayes"
*Resolution No. 107-73
Book IV.
Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton.
and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted.
appears on pages 1 and 2 of Ordinance and Resolution
389
REZONING - OZARK FLOOR COMPANY, INC.
Upon request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to
rezone a 0.2 acre tract located on the south side of Baxter Lane just east
of College Avenue from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to R-0,
Residential Office District. Petitioner is Ozark Floor Company, Inc.
Director Murray moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance
be placed on second reading. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon
roll call vote the motion passed unanimously.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance the second time.
Director Murray 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.
The City Attorney 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
adopted.
*Ordinance No. 1969 appears on page 50 of Ordinance and Resolution
Book IV.
REZONING - DALE HOLLAND
Upon request of Mayor Purdy, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance
to rezone a 2.8 acre tract located between Tanglewood and Oak Avenue at
the east end of Lafayette Street from R-1, Low Density Residential District,
and I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial District, to R-2, Medium
Density Residential District. Petitioner is Dale Holland, agent for
Mrs. R. P. Kennard, Robert H. Seay, Mrs. Eugenia Seay, and Helen R.
Sandford.
Director Murray moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance
be placed on second reading. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon
roll call vote the motion passed unanimously.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance the second time.
Director Murray 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.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance the third and final time.
Director Carlson commented that to rezone this property to R-2 she finds
incompatible with the best interests of the City in preserving its tax
base and the value of the properties all around it. Director Carlson added,
"Due to the action of the City in opening up duplexes throughout town,cdrtaian
R-1 family dwellings have been lowered on the tax assessment base - those
near the duplexes. This is a loss to the City....I would oppose rezoning
this to R-2 when I think it could be more than satisfactorily developed
with conditional duplexes."
Mr. Chamberlain who owns property to the north of the property in question,
expressed opposition to this proposed rezoning. "It will be a hardship and
I will be forced to sell my place. I can't get as much for it as I will
have to pay for another home."
Mr. Poindexter, a resident of 449 Assembly Drive, also expressed opposition
to this proposed rezoning because, "...I can't see having 200 people in my
backyard."
390
1
Director Carlson read a letter from Mrs. Murphy who lives in the area. Mrs.
Murphy also opposes the proposed rezoning.
Hugh Kincaid, representing the petitioner, explained that the development of
Tanglewood Townhouses is proposed for this property and Mr. Holland proposes
to sell these townhouses. Mr. Kincaid said that he disagrees that this property
can be just as easily developed for single family dwellings. Because of the
terrain of the property and costs of developing, it will be necessary to go to
a more intense density. "This medium density is designed to provide an inter-
mediate step between the R-1 and another zone." Mr. Kincaid also argued that
this development will improve the tax base because it will result in the immediate
removal of a blighted single family dwelling that is on the property now. The
project, Mr. Kincaid said, will be oriented westward in order to protect the
single family dwellings to the east
Director Noland commented that we should support efforts to provide housing
within walking distance of the central business district and stimulate housing
in this area to ease transportation problems.
There being no further discussion, Mayor Purdy asked the question, "Shall the
Ordinance pass?" 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 Ordinance passed.
*Ordinance No. 1970 appears on pages 51 and 52 of Ordinance and Resolution
Book IV.
REZONING - JOHNIE BASSETT
Upon request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to rezone
property (a 6.60 acre tract) located on Harold Street east of Highway 71B and
west of Sheryl Avenue from R-1, Low Density Residential•District, and R-2,
Medium Density Residential District, to R-0; Residential Office District.
Petitioner is Johnie Bassett, agent for Mayflower Investment Company.
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 McCord read the proposed ordinance the second time.
Director Murray 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.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance the third and final time.
Director Utley asked what the provisions for streets are in this area at the
present time:
Hal Trumbo, _representing the petitioner; said that there will be a new street
and at this time the proposal is to run the street from Harold Street around
toward Trinity Temple and then turn west and out on Rolling Hills Drive.
City Manager Grimes said that the matter of the location of streets can be
discussed when the large scale development plan is presented.
Director Orton referred to the Planning Commission statement that the developer
be advised that the Planning Commission would look with disfavor on anything
but a low rise office building.
Hal Trumbo replied, "The intent of it is for professional offices period."
Director Orton continued, saying that she could see some value in, at some
time, removing R-3 from the R-0 permitted use and perhaps make it conditional.
"We might want to encourage the Planning Commission to consider this."
There being no further discussion, Mayor Purdy asked the question, "Shall the
Ordinance pass?" Upon roll call, the following vote was recorded:
391
"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. 1971 appears on pages 53 and 54 of Ordinance and Resolution
Book IV.
CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENTS - CLOVER CREEK SUBDIVISION
City Attorney McCord read a proposed resolution to authorize the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute a contract guaranteeing that the contractor/developer
will install certain improvements in the Clover Creek Subdivision, if and
as approved by -the Board of Directors.
Director Murray moved the resolution be adopted. Director Utley 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. 108-73 appears on page 3 of Ordinance and Resolution
Book IV.
FINAL PLAT - CLOVER CREEK SUBDIVISION
Upon request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance
approving the final plat of Clover Creek Subdivision, a re -plat of a part
of Meadowlark Addition, and accepting and confirming the dedication of
street right-of-way and/or utility easements contained therein.
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.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance the second time.
Director Murray moved the rules be further suspended and the proposed
ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Orton seconded
the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously.
The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the third and final time.
Mayor Purdy asked if the condition placed upon this by the Planning Commission -
that the developer extend the cul-de-sac streets (upon approval of the Planning
Office) to increase the buildable area in Lots 22, 23, 24, 25, and 37, 38, 39,
and 40 - is included in the ordinance as read.
City Attorney McCord said that he did not interpret that as being a condition
and in his opinion it does not need to be included in the ordinance.
Director Carlson noted that there is no indication that Clover Drive or
Laverne Avenue can become through streets in the future when the property
to the south is developed.
Ervan Wimberley, engineer for Clover Creek Subdivision, said that the property
to the south isL.owned by Shakespeare.
City Manager Grimes explained that the Planning Commission has been studying
this area and they have reached a concensus that the property to the south
should be industrial to the Bypass.
Upon the City Attorney's recommendation, Director Noland moved that the proposed
ordinance be amended to condition the approval of the final plat upon the
execution of the easement for a sewer line which is outside the plat.
Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed
unanimously.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance as amended.
392
1
I
•
Mayor Purdy then 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. 1972 appears on page 55 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV.
CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENTS - ROSEWOOD ESTATES SUBDIVISION
City Attorney McCord read a proposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and the
City Clerk to execute a contract guaranteeing that the contractor/developer
will install certain improvements in the Rosewood Estates Subdivision, if and
as approved by the Board of Directors.
Director Utley moved the proposed resolution be adopted. Director Noland
seconded the motion.
Upon roll call vote 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. 109-73 appears on page 4 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV.
FINAL PRAT - ROSEWOOD ESTATES SUBDIVISION
Upon request of Mayor Purdy, City Attorney McCord read a proposed ordinance
approving the final plat of Rosewood Estates Subdivision, and accepting and
confirming the dedication of street right-of-way and/or utility easements
contained therein.
Director Murray moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance be
placed on second reading. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll
call the motion passed unanimously.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance the second time.
Director Murray moved the rules be further suspended and the proposed ordinance
be placed on third and final reading. Director Noland seconded the mo£ion.
Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously.
The},City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the third and final tame.
Director Noland asked if the water pump station installation is covered in
the ordinance as read.
Dave Rose, the developer, explained that a separate lot has been dedicated
for this purpose. •The:lot dedicated for the pump station was undersized for
a residence, but the Planning Commission approved it specifically for a pump
station.
There being no farther discussion, Mayor Purdy 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. 1973 appears on page 56 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV.
CONTRACT FOR WATER LINE OVERSIZING AND CONSTRUCTION COST REIMBURSEMENT IN
CONNECTION WITH A PROPOSED WATER STORAGE TANK
City Attorney McCord read approposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and
the City Clerk to execute a contract providing for water line "oversizing"
and construction cost reimbursement in connection with a proposed water storage
tank. The proposed contract is between the City of Fayetteville and David Rose.
David Rose has agreed tbeprovide the City a pump station site, easements, and
will construct the water lines throughout his subdivision at a cost of $10,000.
Pn a letter dated December 3, 1973, City Engineer Mattke recommended that the
offer made by Mr: Rose be accepted.
393
Director Murray moved the proposed 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. 110-73 appears on page 5 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV.
CONTRACTS WITH GREENLAND AND FARMINGTON FOR THE USE OF SEWAGE TREATMENT
FACILITIES
City Attorney McCord read a proposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and
the City Clerk to execute a contract between the City of Fayetteville and
the cities of Greenland and Farmington for the use of sewage treatment
facilities. A copy of the proposed contract was attached to the agenda
of the Directors.
Former City Attorney Malone was present at the meeting to answer questions
of the Board members regarding this matter.
Director Stanton moved the proposed resolution be adopted. Director Noland
seconded the motion.
Director Carlson noted that on page 29 of the proposed contract in Section 2
that there are two sentences which appear to be the same. Mr. Malone said
that the two sentences were intended to make the point clear.
Director Carlson referred to page 30, Section 4, and asked if it would not
be well for the City of Fayetteville to indicate that the City of Greenland
and the City of Farmington should agree to purchase sewer service exclusively
from the City of Fayetteville. Former City Attorney Malone said that he
sees nothing wrong with adding the word "exclusively" in the phrase, if
the Cities of Farmington and Greenland have no objections.
City Manager Grimes explained that EPA will not allow any other plant to
develop within this watershed area.
City Engineer Mattke commented that he would not think the City of
Fayetteville would care if someone else provided sewer service to the
two cities
Director Carlson noted that the contract does not reveal anything about
what will be the post construction connection fee and she asked what that
will be. Mr. Malone said that the fee will be based upon the cost of service
and they understand that the cost of service will be more for outside the
City than it is for inside the City of Fayetteville limits.
Director Carlson commented that the item in the contract which requires the
City of Fayetteville to furnish the parties of the second part with copies
of the rules and regulations and amendments thereto seems like a lot of
paper work. Mr. Malone explained that the rules and regulations will be
furnished one time and amendments will be furnished as they are adopted.
Director Carlson called attention to page 35 of the proposed contract and
suggested that it would be better to provide that if the City of Fayetteville
ever wants to buy the sewer lines that they should be able to purchase them
for the amount of the then book value rather than at one-half of the then
appraised value as the contract is written.
Mr. Malone explained that this part of the contract was a compvomise since
Greenland is allowing the City of Fayetteville to construct the lines across
their property in order to get to some property of the City of Fayetteville,
yet in the event Greenland annexes the property, the City of Fayetteville
did not feel like they could give Greenland the lines they had constructed.
The figure of one-half of the then appraised value was agreed upon by both
parties.
394
1
1
Mr. Malone pointed out that the proposed resolution authorizes the execution
of two separate, but identical, contracts - one with Greenland and one with
Farmington.
In reply to comments made by Director Noland, City Engineer Mattke said that
if sewer service were provided to West Fork and Elkins, as well as Greenland
and Farmington, and all four cities doubled in size, the sewage collected
would still be only one-half percent of Fayetteville's total system capacity.
Mayor Purdy called for a vote on 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 "A9es" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted.
*Resolution No. 111-73 appears on page 6 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV.
CONTRACT FOR-HUD/EPA WATER LINE THROUGH HYLAND PARK SUBDIVISION
City Attorney McCord read a proposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and
the City Clerk to execute a.contract between the developer of Hyland Park
Subdivision and the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas whereby the developer of
Hyland Park Subdivision agrees to install a 12 -inch water line across Hyland
Park entryway for $2.00 per foot plus $20.00 per yard for rock excavation with
the City to pay the difference in the cost of 8 -inch and 12 -inch pipe.
City Manager Grimes said that this is a mutually beneficial arrangement.
Director Stanton moved the proposed resolution be adopted. Director•Murray
seconded the notion. 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. 112-73 appears on page 7 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV.
PROPOSAL TO USE A PORTION OF CITY PARKING LOT FOR A FARMER'S MARKET-
Paul Lewis and others had requested a hearing regarding a proposal to use a
portion of City Parking Lot #1 (west of the square) for a "Farmer's Market".
Mr. Lewis requested that this item be tabled until a later meeting of the
Board.
Director Orton moved that this item be tabled until the next regular meeting
of the Board. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the
motion passed unanimously.
1974 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
Director Carlson movecUthat Items 17 and 18, approving the 1974 General Fund
Budget and approving the modified pay.plan and job classification plan contained
in the 1974 General Fund Budget, be tabled until a special meeting of the Board
called for that purpose. Director Orton seconded the motion.
Director.Carlsen amended the motion by suggesting that a special meeting be
held on Thursday, Hbecember 20, 1973. There was no second to the amended motion.
In answer'to.Director.Utley's question, City Manager Grimes said that because
of the forms which need to be done, the pay plan at least should be approved
before the first of the year.
Some of the Directors expressed reluctance to call a special meeting of the
Board, preferring to continue through the agenda at this meeting. A
City Manager Grimes suggested that the Board authorize the City Manager to
spend up to ten -percent of the proposed budget so operations could continue
the first few days of the year until the next regular meeting of the Board.
395
Director Carlson moved that Item 17, approving the 1974 General Fund
Budget, be considered at a special meeting of the Board. There was no
second to the motion. •
Director Carlson moved that Item 17 be tabled until the next regular
meeting of the Board and that the City Manager be authorized to spend
up to ten percent of the 1974 General Fund Budget before the next regular
meeting of the Board and that Item 18, approving the modified pay plan,
be considered at this meeting. Director Orton seconded the motion.
Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously.
PAY AND JOB CLASSIFICATION PUN
City Attorney McCord read a proposed resolution to approve the modified pay
and job classification plan contained in the 1974 General Fund Budget.
Director Stanton noted that there is no provision in this plan for increasing
the salary of the City Manager by five percent with the same terms and
conditions as other employees of the City. Director Stanton moved that the
proposed pay plan be amended to include a five percent cost of living
increase for the City Manager, and on his anniversary date, a five percent
merit increase for the City Manager.
Director Carlson commented that a five percent increase for the higher
income brackets gives a much larger sum of money when the very basic
costs of living increase almost the same for everybody. "I think a five
percent increase from top to bottom is disproportionate to the needs...."
Director Carlson moved that five percent pay increase be granted to all
salaries that are now from $0 to $6,500; from $6,500 to $8,000 there be
a four percent raise; from $8,000 to $10,000 there be a three percent
raise; from $10,000 to $12,000 there be a two percent raise; from $12,000
to $16,000 there be a one percent raise; and above $16,000 that there be
no cost of living raise.
Director Stanton said that he feels that the cost of living increases are
proportionately the same for all incomes, therefore, he indicated that he
feels the cost of living pay increases should be across the board.
Director Stanton withdrew his motion from the floor.
Director Orton, commenting on the motion made by Director Carlson, said
that she can see some merit in some sort of graduation for the cost of
living increases.
City Manager Grimes said that such a graduation would throw the pay plan
out of line and over a period of time could cause a lower ranking employee
to be earning approximately the same pay as a higher ranking employee.
Director Carlson said that she has no thought of this sort of thing
continuing year after year.
Director. Utley said that he thinks a cost of living increase shodld be
across the board.
Director Carlson's motion died for lack of a second.
Director Stanton moved that the proposed 1974 pay plan be approved and that
the proposed pay plan include a five percent cost of living increase for
the City Manager, and on his anniversary date, that a five percent merit
increase be granted to the City Manager. Director Murray seconded the
motion.
Director Carlson said that she wished to reserve approval of the list of
unclassified employees until later.
Mayor Purdy, addressing his comments to the City Manager and to Department
Heads, said that as far as his vote is• concerned, that the merit iaise
shall not be automatic.
In answer to Director Carlson's question, Sturman Mackey said that the
steps in the pay scale are merit steps and are not automatic.
396
1
1
1
Upon roll call on Director Stanton's motion, 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, as
amended, adopted.
*Resolution No. 113 appears on page 8 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV.
Director Carlson suggested that the following changes be made in the proposed
1974 pay plan: (1) that the Planning Administrator's salary be re -set to
an amount approximating $9,000; (2) that the Shop Superintendent's salary be
re -set to an amount approximating $10,000; (3) that the list of unclassified
employees include the City Clerk at a salary approximating $9,000; and (4) that
the City Attorney's salary be re -set at an amount approximating $900 per month.
Mayor Purdy said that he would be reluctant to "tear this document apart", but
would rather these recommendations be referred to the City Manager for his
consideration and recommendation back to the Board.
City Manager Grimes commented that he does not disagree with any of the
suggestions made by Director Carlson and that he possibly will be coming back
to the Board with recommendations for additional increases in the slots
mentioned by Director Carlson.
Director Utley reminded the Board that personnel matters can be discusseddin
executive session and suggested that if the Board is going to discuss salaries
of variousemployees that it be done in executive session.
Director Carlson said that her comments as.to salaries have only to do with the
positions and their responsibilities, and that the comments have nothing to do
with individuals presently filling those positions.
INCREASE MONTHLY SANITATION RATES
City Manager Grimes explained that if the present type of sanitation service
is to be continued, the sanitation rates must be increased. If the rates are
to remain the same, the service will have to be changed to perhaps curb -side
collection or fewer collections per week.
Director Noland expressed pride in the type of sanitation service available in
Fayetteville, but he added that he wonders if this type service is the most
efficient from the standpoint of the use of the trucks and facilities.
Mayor Purdy agreed that Fayetteville's service is most certainly nbt the most
efficient;l.but he complimented the service provided to Fayetteville residents.
Mayor Purdy continued to say that he believes the people in Fayetteville would
rather maintain thesame level of service and have the rates increased.
Director Utley asked if, in the terms of fuel consumption, we have a choice
of the type ofisanitation service being provided since the "deluxe" service
is not the most efficient.
City Manager Grimes replied that if the City receives the same allocation as
it had last year, the present level of service can be maintained in the
Sanitation Department.
Director_Carlson said that she feels that the people.in Fayetteville would be
willing to place their cans on the curb in light of the energy crisis.
Director Orton said that she would rather go.to only one pick-up a week than
to have to place the dans on the curb.
Director Carlson said that in the residential areas, once a week pick-up would
be adequate and she felt that most residents would be willing to go along with
such an arrangement.
William Myers, from the audience, commented that he thought residents of
Fayetteville would prefer to have the sanitation service continued as is and
pay increased rates for the service.
397
Director Carlson stated that this proposed rate increase would reap great
hardship on many of the citizens who live solely on Social Security.
Director Noland said that many of those elderly citizens, however, would
not be able to carry their garbage cans to the curb either.
Mrs. Johnson, from the audience, said that she would be in favor of
increasing the rates and maintaining the present level of service.
Upon request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to
increase the monthly sanitation rates from $2.20 per month to $3.00 per
month for residential customers, and from $.90 per cubic yard to $1.00
per cubic yard for commercial and residential customers using Lo -Dal
type containers.
Director Murray moved the rules be suspended and the proposed ordinance
be placed on second reading. 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 motion passed.
City Attorney McCord read the proposed ordinance the second time.
Director Murray moved the rules be further suspended and the proposed
ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Orton seconded
the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously.
City Attorney McCord 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 Stanton.
"Nays" Carlson.
There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed.
*Ordinance No. 1974 appears on pages 57 and 58 of Ordinance and Resolution
Book IV.
REPORT FROM BOARD NOMINATING COMMITTEE
Director Stanton presented the recommendations of the Board Nominating
Committee as follows:
For the Planning Commission for a six-year term, appointment of Ernest
Lancaster to replace Roy Clinton;
For the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, reappointment of Romey
Thomason, Ben Winborn, and Jerry Marshall; appointment of George Holland
to replace Norman Koehring.
For the Library Board, appointment of Woodsan W. Bassett, Jr. and Mrs.
Jack Wood.
For the Pollution Control Committee, reappointment of W. E. Sohl and Ruth
Rich; appointment of James Kimzey to replace L. R. Heiple.
Director Stanton said that other appointments will be made at the January 2
meeting of the Board.
Director Orton explained that the Nominating Committee is trying to get
persons from different areas of town to serve on the Planning Commission.
Director Noland moved that the Nominating Committee recommendations be
accepted. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the
motion passed unanimously.
Director Carlson moved that Larry Tompkins be accepted as a member of the
Planning Commission without further delay. The motion died for lack of a
second.
398
1
1
SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ON HIGHWAY 71 NORTH
City Manager;Grimes asked the Board to authorize the City's financial participation
in the inSta:Ilation of flashing beacons at the intersection of Highway 71 North
with Zion Road and Shepard Lane. Mr. Grimes said that the•ambunt of participation
will be approximately $3,500 and this amount is contained in the 1974 Revenue
Sharing Budget.
Director Utley moved that the City Manager be authorized to expend $3,500 from
1974 Revenue Sharing traffic control account for the purpose of installing
flashing beacons. at the intersection of Highway 71 North with Zion Road and
Shepard Lan@ g1%Di ector-Carjhsoit.-•seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the
motion passed unanimously.
PETITION THAT PARKING METERS ACCEPT PENNIES
After discussion regarding the petition signed by merchants and patrons of the
downtown area requesting that parking meters which will accept pennies be
installed in downtown Fayetteville, Director Stanton moved that the City
Manager be authorized to work with the Parking Authority, in coordinating this
request with the total parking projects. DirectorJMurray`secondedt}i� motion.
Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously.
REPORT ON WARD REAPPORTIONMENT CASE
Former City Attorney Malone reported that the order given by the court regarding
the ward reapportionment case was that the ward reapportionment recommended by
the City is valid for municipal purposes but invalid for other than municipal
elections.
The County Election Commission has established precinct lines in the City. The
County Clerk will begin to rearrange the voter registration cards to conform to
the precincts established by the County Election Commission.
Mr. Malone said that the City has been asked to pay the necessary costs to the
County Clerk. However, Mr. Malone said, there is no cost in what the City has
done. "In my opinion, I don't think the City can be compelled'to pay any
portion of the cost."
Mayor Purdy commented that maybe legally we don't have any obligation, "...but
we sure stirred up this mess." When we discussed this thing previously, Mr.
Purdy continued, we agreed to help in the transfer of the cards.
Director Utley moved that the City Board take cognizance of the information
former City Attorney Malone has presented to the Board. Director Carlson seconded
the motion. Upon roll call, the following.vote was recorded:
"Ayes" Orton; Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton.
"Nays" Purdy.
There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the motion passed.
Director Utley asked if Ordinance #1922 did establish new ward boundaries for
the City of Fayetteville. Former City Attorney Malone answered that it did.
Director Utley asked that the matter of calling an election for the purpose of
electing by ward representation be placed on the agenda of the next regular
meeting of the Board.
BID #224 - BRASS GOODS
Attached to the agenda was bid tabulation for Bid #224 for brass goods and the
recommendation that the bids be awarded to the low bidder meeting specifications
for each item.
Director Carlson moved the recommendation contained in the letter from City
Engineer Mattke be accepted. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll
call vote the motion passed unanimously.
399
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Director Stanton moved the meeting be
adjourned to January 2, 1974. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon
roll call vote the motion passed unanimously, whereupon the Mayor declared
the meeting adjourned.
APPROVED:
fe4a
M;tyor ,
ta3
ATTEST:
400