Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-05-21 Minutes66 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS May 21, 1974 The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met in a regular session on Tuesday, May 21, 1974, in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building at 7:30 P.M. Present. City Manager Donald L. Grimes; Administrative Aide David McWethy; City Attorney Jim McCord; Darlene Westbrook, acting as City Clerk; and Directors Orton, Noland, Murray, Carlson, Stanton, Purdy, and Utley. Directors Absent: None Others Present: Representatives of the news media, Concerned Citizens of Highway 62 West and members of the audience. Mayor Purdy called the meeting to order and after a moment of respectful silence the Mayor asked if there were any changes to be made to the minutes of the May 7, 1974 meeting. Copies of the last minutes had been previously submitted to the Board members. Director Orton requested an insertion in the City Manager's explanation of Bid Number 240 for Liquid Oxygen and Vaporizers. The word "force" was requested inserted in the phrase "...to eliminate odors along some sewer mains" to cause it to read "...to eliminate odors along some sewer force mains." Director Noland requested the minutes to reflect the reasons necessitat- ing_waivers of bid requirements on Bid,Numbers 239 and 246 --those reasons being the shortages of items and possible price increases. After the City Attorney assured Director Noland that these reasons appeared in the Ordinance waiving the requirements, Director Noland withdrew his request. There being no further additions or changes to the minutes they were de- clared approved as corrected. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE GENERAL LAND USE PLAN The City Attorney read the Ordinance to amend the General Land Use Plan for property along Highway 62 West from Highway 71 to the Farmington City Limits, by repealing the parallel service roads requirement of Ordinance Number 1940. Following the first reading Director Orton motioned to suspend the rules to allow for the second reading. Director Murray seconded the motion which passed unanimously. The second reading being completed, Director Murray motioned to further suspend the rules for the third and final reading. The motion was seconded by Director Noland and was passed upon a roll call vote. The City Attorney read the Ordinance for the third and final time after which Mayor Purdy asked for discussion from the Board. Director Utley had been absent from the previous meeting and the discussion regarding the Ordinance and asked if the proposed Ordinance would remove the parallel access road requirement only as far as the Land Use Plan was concerned. The Board answered affirmatively. 66 1 There being no further discussion, Mayor Purdy called for a roll call vote on the Ordinance. There being seven "Ayes" and no""Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. The Concerned Citizens of Highway 62 then expressed their thanks and appreciation to the Board for its cooperation in this matter. ORDINANCE NO.aoog Appears on Page of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1661 The Ordinance was read by City Attorney McCord for the first time. Director Murray motioned to suspend the rules to allow for the second reading. The motion was seconded by Director Orton and was passed upon roll call vote. Following the second reading a motion to again suspend the rules for the third and final reading was made by Director Stanton and seconded by Director Noland. The third and final reading being completed, the Mayor called for discussion. There being none from the Board or audience a vote was taken. The vote was six "Ayes" with one "Abstain" vote cast by Director Utley. Mayor Purdy declardd the Ordinance passed. ORDINANCE NO.a6/0 Appears on Page/Ziaf Ordinance and Resolution Book IV ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS City Attorney McCord recommended the Board amend Section 4 of Resolution 58-71 to permit issuance of additional revenue bonds secured by a pledge of airport revenues. This action was needed to enable Mcllroy Bank to issue a release to the City. Mcllroy Bank currently holds previously issued airport revenue bonds. The City Attorney suggested the Resolution be read three times as though it were an Ordinance The Board agreed and the Resolution was read for the first time. Director Utley made a motion to allow for the second reading of the Resolution; Director Stanton seconded the motion. The motion passed in a roll call vote. After the second reading, Director Murray moved to allow for the third and final reading. The motion, which was seconded by Director Utley, was passed with the Board's unanimous vote. Following the third and final reading of the Resolution, Mayor Purdy invited discussion from the Board. During a brief discussion period Director Carlson made her opposition known stating that she did not believe the course of action the City was embarking on was a fully legal one. Following the discussion and comment period Mayor Purdy asked if the Resolution should pass. After a vote of 6 "Ayes" and one "Nay" cast by Director Carlson, Mayor Purdy declared the Resolution passed. RESOLUTION NO.si-1PAppears on Page3g-1of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV The City Attorney then read the Ordinance allowing the issuance of revenue bonds in the amount of $50,000 for the construction of a hangar facility at Drake Field. Director Stanton made the motion to suspend the rules for the second reading and Director Utley seconded the motion. The motion was passed by the Board in a roll call vote. After the second reading a motion to further suspend the rules for the third and final reading was made by Director Noland. The motion was seconded by Director Orton and was passed unanimously. After the third and final reading the Mayor asked for discussion. 67 67 68 As a matter of record, Director Utley questioned the City Attorney if it was the City Attorney's opinion that the Ordinance was in compliance with the Arkansas Constitution and Statutes currently in existance. In answering, City Attorney McCord stated that the undertaking of this project does not constitute a lending of the City's credit. He informed the Board of his contact with the firm of Smith, Williams, Friday, Eldridge, and Clark; a legal firm located in Little Rock specializing in bonds and their issue. The firm was in agreement as to the legality of the bond issue and they expected to render a favorable opinion on the bond issue. City Attorney McCord said he believed the Ordinance to be legal. Director Carlson was still in disagreement citing Legislative Act Number 135 passed in 1929. She agreed as to the legality of going into debt to support an airport but it required a certain procedure as set out in the State Constitution --that being by the vote of the people. Director Carlson cited a later amendment to the Constitution providing more debt incurring power but only at the vote of the people. The bonds previously issued were done sa under Legislative Act Number 9 and by the vote of the people. Director Carlson stated she would like to see the city govern- ment act wherever and whenever possible under the laws and Constitution as it was her opinion this has not always been the case. In regard to the current loan in effect, Director Carlson said it had been her understanding the current loan was autho'rized to be $1450000; however, it had come to her attention it had risen to $210,000 and currently stands at $183,000. She wanted to know what further indebted- ness authorization there was permitting the City to increase the original debt figure of $145,000. Director Carlson added that the debt was initially called "promissory notes" but lately had been referred to as "bonds". She stated the City's action (issuing revenue bonds) was not seeking security from the proposed lessee of the building. She questioned what recourse there might be if the building was not leased and how the City could be expected to meet the bond obligation. She continued by inform- ing the Board that airport revenues at times had not been as much as $1,000 and information from the City Controller indicated the net revenue at the end of 1973 had been $303. These amounts, she concluded, would not be sufficient to pay an installment on an old debt nor anything else. Director Carlson further added she could not participate in passage of the Ordinance as she did not believe it to be a financially sound action nor did she believe such cases had ever held up in court under test of legality. City Attorney McCord then informed Director Carlson that the revenue from the lease with Scheduled Skyways was considered sufficient security by Mcllroy Bank. Again he stated the indications from Smith, Williams, Friday, Eldridge, and Clark were that the bond issue was a valid one and would receive a favorable opinion from them. Otherwise, he continued, McIlroy Bank would never buy the bonds. As to the current loan obliga- tion in effect, the City Attorney told Director Carlson he had no knowledge of an increase in the debt amount of $145,000 and the instrument for the obligation refers to it as a revenue loan obligation. Director Carlson's reply to the City Attorney's statements was that she was still concerned about the debt and whether or not the City could meet the indebtedness if for some reason the revenue to help pay the bonds did not materialize. It was her contention the debt would be enforceable upon the City in case of the lessee's default. City Attorney McCord said he had researched the matter and explained the revenue bond was a special obligation and constitutional provisions applicable to General Obligation Bonds do not apply to revenue bonds. It was his opinion 68 1 1 1 that the.City's.tax base could not be held liable in case of default. Mayor Purdy asked for a vote on the Ordinance and the roll call vote was six "Ayes" and one "Nay" cast by Director Carlson. Mayor Purdy declared the Ordinance passed. . p�._,ai ORDINANCE No.sco9 Appears on Page of -Ordinance an_dLR'esolution Book' IV City Attorney McCord then. readYlarResojution:.authorising:.t1he Mayor and City Clerk to execute a subordination agreement with MCIlroy Bank. Director Stan€ohNgiiatiined to\ra'dtptsthhe aesalutiafi /anditaitettrad ton secondednthe motion. The vote was six "Ayes" and one "Nay" cast by Director Carlson. RE'SDIIU'CI©N NOAndYal*eassSla'AIIDIaIg'eR4160o'f :Ordinance and Resolution Book IV ORDINANCE REQUIRING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS As a matter of review the City Attorney briefly summarized the Ordinance for the Board. The Ordinance would require the installation of sprinkler: systems in buildings of four or more stories in height or more than fifty (50) feet tall. Mayor Purdy asked if the Ordinance would apply to buildings constructed with the intent to allow for future additions to the height. The City Attorney said the Ordinance did not specifically state that fact but it could be amended to include such buildings and their future addi- tions and additions in height to existing buildings. Mayor Purdy said he had been approached by City hospital authorities in regard to the Ordinance and their concern was whether or not the Ordinance would apply to their institution since they were already required to meet rigid regulations for fire protection. Mayor Purdy said this added regulation would add terrific costs to a hospital building that already had to meet strict requirements. The concern of the hospital officials, Mayor Purdy explained, was the blanket effect of the Ordinance which would put severe financial burdens on the hospitals unnecessarily. Director Carlson was offthe opinion the sprinkler systems would reduce other costs required for fire -proofing and would obviate other precau- tions having to be taken. City Attorney McCord informed the Board of a variance procedure set forth in the Ordinance. Fire Chief Charles McWhorter then commented that even though the hospitals are required to meet rigid requirements he did not feel they should be exempt unless they fall under special rules. His concern was for the fire fighters as well as the occupants. MayotePti±xIy hated he would like to consult with the hospital authorities for their views. Tom Burke, Attorney for the Washington Regional Medical Center was present in the audience and said he would like for that hospital to be considered in this question.before the City attempted to impose a City Ordinance upon a County institution. Director Carlson called for some urgency in the matter in order to avoid a possible disaster. In the best interests of the citizens, Director Carlson felt the hospitals should include every possible fire protection possible. She then asked for the Fire Chief's opinion about the possibility ofrsnttuding buildings of three stories in the Ordinance. Mr. McWhorter stated there was no particular problem with buildings of three stories and the use of a 50 foot ladder now on order would help fire fighting efforts at buildings of that height. Director Stanton made a motion to table the Ordinance to allow time for consultation with hospital authorities or until the authorities could attend the next meeting. Director Carlson seconded the motion which was passed by the Board in a roll call vote. 69 69 70 ORDINANCE TO REZONE PROPERTY Petitioner Frank Ashby had requested rezoning a 1,13 acre tract located at 2262 South School Avenue from R-1 Low Density Residential to C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial. The City Attorney read the proposed Ordinance for the first time. The motion to suspend the rules for the second reading was made by Director Murray and seconded by Director Orton. The motion passed and the second reading was completed. Director Murray again motioned to suspend the rules to allow for the third and final reading. Director Orton seconded the motion and the motion was passed. Following the third reading, Mayor Purdy called for the Board's discussion. After a brief question and answer period, Mayor Purdy called for the Board's vote. The recorded vote was unanimous and the Ordinance was de- clared passed by the Mayor. ORDINANCE NO.90II Appears on Pagel$ of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV ORDINANCE APPROVING LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN This Ordinance would approve the Large Scale Development Plan of Dr. J.B. Hays for property at 2844 North College. The City Attorney read the proposed Ordinance for the first time after which Director Noland made a motion to suspend the rules to allow for the second reading. The motion was seconded by Director Murray and was passed by the Board. After the second reading, Director Murray motioned to further suspend the rules for the third and final reading. The motion was passed and the third reading completed. There being no discussion, Mayor Purdy asked if the Ordinance should pass There being a vote of Seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. ORDINANCE NO.404.2 Appears on Pagela5 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STREET DEPARTMENT TO PERFORM NECESSARY ENGINEERING STUDIES FOR EVA AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT The City Manager reported to the Board that thSsengineefingts$udges are the first step for a proposed street improvement district. After esti- mates have been made it could be determined whether or not the project would be feasible. He informed the Board that the studies would be made by the Street Department. The City Attorney read the Resolution and there being no discussion, Director Orton made a motion to adopt the Resolution. Director Noland seconded the motion which was passed by a unanimous vote of the Board. RESOLUTION NO.30-1yAppears on Page 3i of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV RECOMMENDATION FROM THE BOARD'S STREET COMMITTEE City Manager Grimes requested deferral of the question until interested parties could be in attendance on June 4. Director Noland made the motion to table the matter until the June 4, 1974 meeting; Director Carlson seconded the motion which the Board passed unanimously. 70 • 1 r 1 RECOMMENDATION FROM POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE Doctor Meyer of the Pollution Control Committee told the Board of the progress of the study concerning re -cycling newspapers. The data is being collected.and will be submitted with the cost study and possible solutions and recommendations at a future date. One recommendation would be the possible use of the metal storage building near the incinerator for storage purposes. Doctor Meyer hoped to have the plan for discussion at the next meeting of the Board and the cost analysis completed by July or August. Manager Grimes reported that the time had elapsed for informing Mr. Weems, bidder for the rent of the building, whether or not the City would need the building. Should the Pollution Control Committee not need the building, Manager Grimes said the City could re -advertise for bids for its rental. A motion was made by Director Carlson to take no action on the matter. Director Orton seconded the motion which was passed unanimously in a roll call vote. RESOLUTION PERMITTING QUITCLAIM DEED Mr. Robert A. Huff had requested the Quitclaim Deed for a small parcel of land adjacent to Edgehill Drive. The City Attorney read a Resolution permitting the City to grant the Quitclaim Deed to Mr. Huff after which Mayor Purdy called for discussion. Mrs. Donald Watts, 1307 Mission, said she would like a driveway to property owned by herself and her husband. The driveway, which would entdr onto Edgehill, would involve the parcel of land. Mr. Huff showed the 1968 deed to the Board and said at the time he•pur- chased the land that Mr. Clay Yoe told him the parcel had not been dedicated to the City but was a part of a proposed road to be agreed upon by both owners. Manager Grimes told the Board that the original plat showed the parcel as being a part of the dedicated street right-of-way. Mr. Tom Pearson, Jr., who was in the audience, said there appeared to be some ambiguity in the copy of the plat. He said the plat approved by the City Council and Planning Commission in 1952 reflects the strip of land running East and West from Edgehill to Mission as being part of the street dedication. In his opinion the City had assumed the dedicated portion went to the fence line when actually the dedicated portion would normally have been 40 feet of the road right-of-way and would not have included the parcel in question+ A prime concern of the Edgehill property owners was the opening of E4gehill Drive to Mission Street and the addi- tional traffic entering Edgehill Drive. Mr. Pearson then submitted a petition to the Board signed by property owners on Edgehill and expressed the hope that the City would act properly in clarifying the descrepency and grant a quitclaim deed to Mr. Huff as requested. It was also his opinion that Mr. Yoe,iringg_anting: a warranty deed, never intended the parcel to be part of the dedicated street right-of-way. Russell Howard of 1143 Lakeridge, said he was'one of the first property owners on Edgehill having purchased his lot from Mr. Yoe. Mr. Howard said the plat was set up to give the property owners protection through the use of buffer zones. He felt the property owners were due some consideration as taxpayers and their right to protection as to what they understood they were purchasing when they bought their lots. • 71 4 72 City Manager Grimes told the Board that the reserve strips Mr. Howard referred to were no longer permitted. He also explained that Mr. G Mrs. Watts would have to deal with the private property owners in regard to an access to their property. Director Utley commented that there was no question in his mind as to the original intent (that the parcel would not be part of dedicated street right-of-way) of the parties when the deed and plat was executed regardless of what the plat might show. Director Orton made a motion to adopt the Resolution. Director Murray seconded the motionland the motion was passed by the Board. RESOLUTION NO.3341Appears on Page HI of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV RESOLUTION TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT Manager Grimes made a recommendation to the Board to table the Resolu- tion until the June 18 meeting as there were some proposed changes being made to the by laws. Director Orton made the motion to so table the Resolution and the motion was seconded by Director Noland. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. PURCHASING ITEMS AND AWARD OF BIDS Bid #238A -2380D: Sanitation and Street Department Vehicles Bid 238A for two 20 cubic yard packer units was recommended to be awarded to Choctaw Sales in the amount of $11,412.40. Bid 238AA for two 24,000 GVW truck chassis was recommended to be awarded to Lewis Ford Sales for $13,803.96 Bid 238B for two 24,000 GVW truck chassis was recommended to be awarded to Lewis Ford Sales in the amount of $115834000. Bid 238BB for two 10 cubic yard packer units was recommended to be awarded to Truck Equipment Company for $13,680.00 Bid 238C for one Street Department truck was recommended to be awarded to Lewis Ford Sales in the amount of $13,136.71. Bid 238D was not to be awarded but it was recommended to award alternate Bid number 238D(a) for one 56,000 GVW truck chassis to Arkansas White Equipment Company for $21,150.00. Bid 238DD for one 34 cubic yard packer body with 10,000 pound front end loader was recommended to be awarded to Solid Waste Management Equipment Company for $20,848.00. Administrative Assistant David McWethy informed the Board that $78,624.00 of the $92,768.36 total for Sanitation Department items is budgeted in the 1974 Revenue Sharing Accounts 7426 and 7427. The remaining balance of $14,144.36 was recommended to be allocated from the 1973 Revenue Sharing Contingency Account 7335 in the amount of $6,346.11 and $7,798.25 be charged to the 1972 Revenue Sharing Contingency Account 7224. $8,500.00 of the $13,136.71 amount for the Street Department truck was budgeted in the 1974 Revenue Sharing Account 7437. The balance of $4,646.71 was recommended to be allocated to the 1972 Revenue Sharing Contingency Account 7224. Manager Grimes reported to the Board of plans to run double shifts with the 56,000 GVW truck and 34 cubic yard packer unit. The increased opera- tion of the unit would permit maximum use from such an expensive item. The unit is to be used primarily for commercial pick-ups and would not operate all night. 72 1 Mayor Purdy expressed his amazement at the high prices of the items but could see no other alternative to paying the prices since the equipment was needed. Director.Utley made a motion to award the bids as recommended and Director Murray seconded the motion. The roll call vote was unanimous and the bids were awarded as recommended. Bid Number 247: Fire Truck and Pumper The bid was recommended to be awarded to Lewis Ford Sales for one 27,500 GVW chassis in the amount of $12,321.00 and to the Boardman Company for one 1,000 GPM pumper in the amount of $35,600.00. An amount of $35,000 was budgeted in the 1974 Revenue Sharing Account 7401. The remaining $12,321.00 was recommended to be allocated from the 1972 Revenue Sharing Contingency Account 7224. Fire Chief McWhorter said the price was -guaranteed and there was no penalty clause included. MayorPurdy asked Chief McW)orter to report on the status of the snorkel purchased by the City. Chief McWhorter said it was to have been delivered in April of this year but Ford Motor Company had not delivered the chassis to the pumper company for installafion of the snorkel. Chief McWhorter reported that the pumper company is ready to install the snorkel as soon as the chassis arrives from the assembly line. Director Noland made a motion to accept the recommendation for the award of the bid and Director Orton seconded the motion. In a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. Bid Number 248: Water $ Sewer Repair e1ainps and Couplings A recommendation was made to award bid items 1-6 to Rohan Company; item! 7 to Harry Cooper Supply; items 8-11 to Rohan Company. Item 12 was rejected because the bids did not meet spedifications. Director Carlson made the motion to accept the bids and award as recommended. Director Or Orton seconded the motion which passed unanimously in a roll call vote by the Board. Bid Number 249: Sanitation Department Uniform Rental The bid was recommended to be awarded to Fayetteville Linen Supply in the amountpff$2.70 per week • per employee. The price included the uniforms 'and the laundry cost. DirectorlStanton made the motion to award the bid as recommended and Director Utley seconded the motion. In a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. Bid Number 250: Clay Pipe Items 1-55 were recommended to be awarded to Waterworks Supply Company; items 56-60 were deleted because of no bids; item 61 was recommended to be awarded to Can -Tex Industries; item 62 was deleted because of no bids; items 63-66 were recommended awarded to Can -Tex Industries; and items 67-75 were recommended to be awarded to Waterworks Supply Company. City Attorney McCord read an Ordinance to waive formal bidding procedures to allow for further quotations should the bidders chose to enforce the escalation clauses. Upon motion from Director Orton and a second from Director Murray to suspend the rules for the second reading the Board voted unanimously to allow for the Sbtoddrtedding. Director Murray then 73 73 74 motioned to further suspend the rules to allow for the third and final reading. Director Orton seconded the motion which was passed by the Board. Following the third reading, Mayor Purdy asked for discussion and there being none asked if the Ordinance should pass. The vote was seven "Ayes" and no "Nays". The Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. ORDINANCE NO.a0r3 Appears on Page /Z of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV The Board hada Lanett)/ discussion about the possibility of the City buying Truss pipe. Many advantages of the Truss pipe were cited including ease of installation, durability, and minimal breakage. The Board asked the City Manager to investigate the possibilities for purchasing the Truss pipe. Director Utley then made a motion to award the bids as recommended with the understanding that the bid award did not constitute a contract so as to give the City flexibility in purchasing Truss pipe if so desired. Director Orton seconded the motion which passed with a unanimous vote from the Board. Bid 251: One Police Vehicle The bid was recommended to be awarded to Hatfield Pontiac, the only bidder, in the amount of $3,789.00. Ninety percent of the cost is to be funded with an Arkansas Crime Commission grant. Director Noland made a motion to award the bid as recommended and Director Orton k seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously in a roll call vote. Bid Number 252: One Police Mobile Radio The recommendation was to award the bid to Motorola of Little Rock in the amount of $1,981.77. A grant from the Arkansas Crime Commission would bear 90% of the cost of the radio. After a short question and answer period, Director Orton made the motion to award the bid as recommended. Director Murray seconded the motion which passed unani- mously in a roll call vote. Bid Number 253: Two Police Walkie Talkies The recommendation was to award the bid to Motorola of Little Rock in the amount of $1,954.90 as the low bidder, Jim's Radio and TV of Springdale took exceptions to the specifications. Again, a grant from the Arkansas Crime Commission would bear 90% of the cost. Director Orton made the motion to award the bid as recommended and Director Murray seconded the motion. The motion passed in a roll call vote. Bid Number 254: 3/4" Copper Pipe The bid was recommended to be awarded to Bowles and Edens in the amount of $1.04 per linear foot to be effective until May 22, 1974. Director Noland made the motion to award the bid as recommended. Director Murray seconded the motion which passed unanimously during a roll call vote. Bid Number 255: One Police Radio Alarm System The bid was recommended to be awarded to Jim's Radio and TV contingent upon agreement from the Arkansas Crime Commission who is to bear 90% of the cost. The amount of the bid is $1,344.15. Director Orton motioned to award the bid as recommended and Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion was passed by the Board. 74 Drake Field Hangar The bid was recommended to be awarded to Kunco Incorporated of Fort Smith in the amount of $49,800.00. The City Attorney recommended award of the bid be conditional upon the sale of the bonds. Aide McWethy reported that the bid price was good for 30 days from May 21, 1974 and the City Attorney said the bonds should have received an opinion within that time. Director Noland made a motion to accept the bid upon the condition of the sale of the bonds Director Orton seconded the motion and the motion was passed by the Board in a roll call vote. Lake Fayetteville Spillway Repairs The bid was recommended to be awarded to Jerry Sweetser in the amount of $41,340.00. Director Stanton made a motion to accept the bid and Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. CORRESPONDENCE AND OTHER BUSINESS Director Orton asked for the Board's opinion of the possibility of acquiring the Old Post Office Building located on the square for use as a City Administration Building. She cited the May 22 meeting of interested citizens to save the building and called for an indication from the Board about its interest in acquiring the building if it could be purchased for a moderate price. Mayor Purdy said the purchase price set by HUD was $234,000 and that the City could not pay that price. If the price could be reduced to a favorable one, Mayor Eurdy indicated his favor in securing the building. Director Stanton felt the Board could not take a definite position until the Board knew what was involved to renovate the building for the City's use. Director Utley was in agreement with Director Stanton's statement. Director Noland also felt there was a special need to explore all the possibilities for saving the building if a moderate price could be agreed upon. Director Stanton stated the purchase price should be based on the cost of remodeling the building and all costs of acquiring and remodeling should be made known to the public before such a project was ever under- taken. At such time all costs and recommendations could be presented, Director Stanton then felt the Board could express an opinion. Director Murray favored keeping the building instead of installing f.1 - fountains ,'fountains as was now planned. Director Carlson termed the building unique and said it had potential for use as a City Hall even though a new City Hall might be constructed in the future. Director Noland_ questioned Mr. Cy Sutherland, an architect, as to the building's condition and if it would take a great deal of work to renovate it. Mr. Sutherland answered that it could be useful as it is now and is capable of being converted for another use. Mr. Sutherland stated the possiblity of converting it over a period of time instead of doing the work all at once. Director Utley reminded the Board and audience that not everyone was in favor of retaining the Old Post Office Building and at one point in time the original plans to renovate the square included the removal of the building. Director Carlson clarified that the property was owned by the Housing Authority, a "creature" of the State of Arkansas, and that it was being 75 75 76 in behalf of the City. In view of her clarification she felt the possibilities of acquiring the building might come under new considera- tion. Director Carlson was of the opinion that the Housing Authority's actions were controlled by the laws of the State of Arkansas and perhaps they could be of some assistance in retaining the building. The Board decided to make no formal indication on what action the City might take to save the Old Post Office. RESOLUTION APPOINTING CITY CLERK City Attorney McCord read a Resolution appointing Darlene Westbrook as City Clerk. There being no discussion, Director Orton moved the Resolu- tion be adopted and Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon a roll call vote the Resolution was passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO.94-441Appears on Page 4a of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE DEVELOPER CONTRACT City Manager Grimes requested the Board to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a developer contract for a subdivision owned by Leonard Kendall and wife located outside the City Limits. The contract_ would guarantee the installation of improvements as required of developers. The City Attorney read the Resolution. Director Carlson felt this responsibility be handled by the County authorities and the City should not undertake to be an agency of the County. Manager Grimes recommended the City take this action until the County Planning Commission could get organized. He felt it was the City's obligation to see that such subdivisions met requirements until the County could take the responsibility at which time the City would gradually forego its planning jurisdiction. Director Carlson said the City did not have the legal authority to approve subdivisions outside the City limits and maintained the responsibility belonged to the County government. She felt this particular contract should be passed on tothe County Planning Commission as a "beginner lesson" in these matters. Director Utley asked if the City was obligated to make inspections of the development. The City Attorney informed him he had to have certain tests and approval of septic tanks. Manager Grimes said subdivisions outside the City limits do not need building permits but they do have to make certain improvements. City Attorney McCord informed the Board of his familiarity with planning Statutes and that the City has jurisdiction over developments within a five mile limit of the City's boundaries. Before he could make a definite statement on the legality of the contract, Mr. McCord stated he would like to research the matter more extensively. Director Noland made a motion to table the Resolution until the next meet- ing. Director Stanton seconded the motion and upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE RIGHT-OF-WAY The right -of --way is needed for the extension of Fletcher south to Huntsville Road. The City Attorney read the resolution authorizing the City Manager to purchase right-of-way for street and utility purposes from Clifton and Vera Wade in the amount of $3,000.00. The money would be allocated from the 1973 Revenue Sharing Right -of -Way account. Director Noland made a motion to adopt the Resolution. Director Utley 76 seconded the motion which the Board passed unanimously in vote. RESOLUTION NO. 35'1*Appears on Page 43 of Ordinance and Resolution Book IV ADJOURNMENT a roll call There being the meeting. unanimously. ATTEST: no further business, Director Stanton made a motion to adjourn Director Murray seconded the motion which the Board passed Mayor Purdy declared the meeting adjourned. Darlene Westbrook, City Clerk APPROVED: 77 ARtiANSAS STATUTORY PERFORAIANCE AND PAYMENT BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, Kunco, Inc., Fort Smith, Arkansas COMMERCIAL UNION COMPANIES as Principal, hereinafter called Contractor or Principal, and Commercial Union Insurance Company Boston, Massachusetts , a Massachusetts corporation, authorized to do business in the State of Arkansas, as Surety, hereinafter called Surety, are held and firmly bound unto City Of Fayetteville, Fayetteville, Arkansas as Obligee, hereinafter called Owner, in the amount of FORTY NINE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND NO/100 — - - Dollars ($49,800.00 1, for the payment whereof Contractor and Surety bind themselves, their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. Contractor has by written agreement dated July 10, 1974 entered into a contract with Owner for co nstruction of Hanger Building, Drake Field, Fayetteville, Arkansas. which contract is by reference made a part hereof, and is hereinafter referred to as the Contract. The condition of this obligation is such that if the Principal shall faithfully perform the Contract on his part and shall fully indemnify and save harmless the Owner from all cost and damage which he may suffer by reason of failure so to do and shall fully reimburse and repay the Owner all outlay and expense which the Owner may incur in making good any such default, and, further, that if the Principal shall pay all persons who have contracts directly with the Principal for labor or materials, failing which such persons shall have a direct right of action against the Principal and Surety under this obligation, subject to the Owner's priority, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. No suit, action or proceeding shall be brought on this bond outside the State of Arkansas. No suit, action or proceeding shall be brought on this bond except by the Owner after six months from the date final payment is made on the Contract, nor shall any suit, action or proceeding be brought by the Owner after two years from the date on which the final payment under the Contract falls due. Any alterations which may be made in the terms of the Contract, or in the work to be done under it, or the giving by the Owner of any extension of time for the performance of the Contract, or any other forbearance on the part of either the Owner or the Principal to the other shall not in any way release the Principal and the Surety or,Sureties, or either or any of them, their heirs, personal representatives, successors or assigns from their liability hereunder, notice to the Surety or Sureties of any such alteration, extension or forbearance being hereby waived. In no event shall the aggregate liability of the Surety exceed the sum set out herein. Executed on this lOth day of July tg 74. Kco, I—nc�.- -y'—Principal By� oomercial Union Insurance Comca_ny Surely gy1P—C: 1°faait— — Attorncy in fact G 60523 10.69 ?'O;VER OF ATTORNEY® KNO�y ALL MEN BY THESii PRESENTS, that the COMMERCIAL UN',) INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation duly orgalyzed and existing under the laws of dw Conun"l—alth of Massachusetts, and having its principal office in the City of Boston, Mass., hath made, constituted and appointed, and does by tht:se peese:,ts make and constitute and appoint PAUL R. JOHNSON, WALTER L. MOOR14AN and PAT FERRARI, all of Fort Smith, Arkansas and each of them its true and lawful Attorney -in -Pact, to make, execute, seal and deliver for and on its behalf as surety any and all bonds or undertakings and the execution of such bonds or undert..kings in pursuance of these presents, shall be binding upon said Company as fully and amply, to all intents and purposes, as if such bonds were xigntd by the President, scaled smith the corporate sea! of the Company, and duly attested by its Secretary, hereby ratifying, and confirmg inall the arts of said Attorney -in -Fact rursuant to the power herrin given. This Power of Attorney is rnade and i �ccutrd pur.u:, t to a d I nntnoriry .,[ the Imbuing r01-116i:-n, adr,plr,i t , I!- G•.,,"d IDir u- ,.,f the CODf- MERCIAI. UNION !NSI;RANCE :,'•AVIAN , at .. meeting duly called :cod heir:..:, tie .,erne, -•.month dap of !lily, 19;2: Resulted, 'flat the Prr•s,dent, or any Vice-Presidcrt, or any Assistant %'lee Pnl,uh-ut, may execute. for and in behalf of the company any and all bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity, and all other writings obligatory in the nature thereof, the same to be attested when necessnry and the seal of file company ;trued thncin by the Secretary, or any Assistant Secre- tary; and !!'At ": Pr,id,••t, yr :.tit V,-e P; ,.J! t, or .\,a";ant Vie- Fr, id,-,,, we a}an Am—ev-in-Fact to ex,"I,: on behalf of ti:e I nuj,.u,y any and ;III such in,trarutnt, and to aRx tb,• , al nl tl„• .ontpa ny ho-mho; and tbat the President, at- Vi..--Prcsulrn, -,r soy V:•••�I•rr. A, I. ,o at .I,,y tu„ ,,. „ ;\:I nu•y-i rr Fact and n•. vuke all power and authority given to mn: s.tch Atiorucy in -Pact. i1 �" Resolved: That Mini nets. i n-Fact may he given full power and aulhori!�. rr n, b,r a d in the ram^ aloof en bchaif of uu• rortq.an) ., d eo I -Id,, n t o•ntracts , ! ina,•nmi.,, .sod ,li •.,!u ohlie:u"r in the nit; nature iherrof, and any such foil nnnrut executed bY' any sorb Anurney-iu-P.0 t ,het! :��" a Li nrl i!�q hynm the •�mnp:lily as if signed by tes he President and ceah-d anes d atttvd by tilt, So,, rt•tary, .u,t1, further. :\u,n tie,'+-in1 to I art ben fly a ,thorizcd to vrtfy any affidavit rrquirrJ i,, ', • a(tat d t",rd to Fond. rt, ,,cuir:,Her., c ,ntrar to of ih.d, r.utY.:Hui a!I ,rttare sit ithnrs nldigatr,ry in the nature thereof and art atsu auth,n in•d :uul eu, p. „s reeu, certify I,, a rnpy' of :u,v �,1 th, Lv-lam., of the rnm pony as well as any le,olutiun of the Direct-, i,.ls+q. I. ;, „i,b II:,. rx,•rution f 1,� !d , n•roph,is:raise. :;tr: of indrnmio', :old all other writinl:s obligatory in Ihr n:w,re t',rt rcol. .tn,f t , certify nq,i,'• :,f III, Po„er _t At;. it I ;u"I I:, th,• of any of the officer, of the om,pany I r of Atdant•ys-in-Karl. This power of attorney is signal and sealed by facsimile under the authrmity of III, follot,iug Re50II1tIU❑ at!npted by the Directors of the COMMERCIAL. ANION INSURANCE: COMPANY at a mating duly called and held on the twenty-setenth day of July, 1972: "Resoh'ed: What the signartlrr •.f the Presid,•nl, or any Vice -President, or any A,,kt tit %'ire President, and the si.gna- turte of the, Secretary or any As,;ktu,: Secretary anri the Company Seal ma, I :dlixed hp facsimile b, any pt Herr of attorney or to any certificate relating dut•r•u, appointing Attorneys -in -Pact file purpn,rs oI, of e1, ing and aany ing any fond, dertaking, reeugnizancr or other tc either obligation in the nattue then•of. and any such signature and seal where so list-(], being hereby adopted by the company as the original signature of such o(Bccr and the original seal of tilt, company, to be valid and binding upn:'tbr cotnl,any „fth oft. same force anri r•frrct uu though m:,,o;wv ,fr red.,, IN WITNESS WIIF,RL•'OF, Ihr Ch-y?!A!r.KC1A1. UNION INS(iRANCF ANY, h:u cal.., sr presents III Lr signed by its Vir,-President and its corputat(! .sal to hr hrrm- affixed, Icy its Secretary this 8th y of 'March 19 73. COMMERCIAL, t"',ION ;NS11!RANCE COMPANY Attest: l�ti,{,,G:.�°. By Secretary / Vice -President COMMONWEALTH OF M:ASS.1CIIl1SE"I'I I, COUNTY OF SUFF•OIX S.S. On this 8th day of Mnrch 19 73, I+r(orc vu• prrs:,nalb. taunJobn t• (;. 'I"homps„n, \'i,r-I'n•sidrnt, and William I). &)gar, Secretary (if the CMIMERCIAL l!NION INSURANCE COMPANY t,, m,• I all, known o� I- the indkiduals and offi- cers described in and who executed the preceding instrument, and Ill.., dw dw estr„tion of (it, ,:our. and Lying by me duly sworn, severally' and each for himself (h•posa•th and' that they are the ,:hid olfi,er, ,d th,• Company mmv,aid, and that the seal affixed to the preceding instrument i, the cnrpurrte seal of said Company and that th.• ,aid tohporaW .cal :uul Ihrir .signatures as such officers were duly affixed and subscribed to Ihr said instrument by the authority and duecuon of the said Company. r Y t (L,bt•n I.. Martelli -- Notar" Public. 'T— � •``ie� ,µy ``ci. Ofy (',.rnniuinn r.YPir s Jun.; : , 1975) CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned, Assistant Secretary of the COMMERCIAL, UNION INSURANCE (;OMPANY, a Afas,achostus Corporation, do hereby certify that the foregoing power of attorney is in full fit, t, and has nr,t been revoked; .uul buthrrnuu'c, that The Resolutions of the Board of Dirff:ctors set forth to th, powe—f ;nu,ru•y are no,v in ford-. Signed and staled at the City of Boston. Dated this day. of !9 i`CM Try ' t !�M � ntnnnn ---_—�-��-__— Ati11.Yl:ltll St'CfClary f- CITY CL614'Jef PROP07"L P !ace Date = r — Proposal of U; JC J %tile_ a corporation-, organized and existing under the laws of the State of 4-x—,, and qualified to do business in the State of Arkans-:sl r / a Par•tnership-`•cons istin� of /✓ A Urr Individual': trading as lv!/J. TO TH": CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: The bidder, in compliance with your invitation to bid for the construction of a metal utility building, having examined the Plans and Specifications with related documents,and the site of the proposed work, and being familiar with all the conditions surrounding the work, including the availability of r__erials and l�Lor, hereby prposes to furnish all labor, materials, and supplies required, and to construct the project in accordance with the Contract Documents at the lump sum price stated below. This price shall cover all exp•_nses incurred in performing the work re- quired under the Contract Documents, of which is Proposal is a part. Bidder hereby agrees to commence work under this contract on a date to be specified in a written "Notice to Proceed" of the Engineer. Bidder hereby acknowledges receipt of the following addenda: ITEM LUMP SUM PFICE Metal n ` . CopleBei ldi g, m words— Bidder understands that the Owner reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to +:. iye any inforraj: ties in the bidding. The bidder ag reos th, t h i:i :i shy i i b f i : r: . nd rn:,y rro be bidar withdrawn for ashy of 31 calendar _„ys from the time set for or receiving, bids. _ Upon receipt of written notice of the acceptance of this bid bidder will execute the formal contract attached a;ithin Ih dais and deliver a Surety Bond or ?onds as required by Darn raph 8 of he General Condi tions. The bid sccuri ty ntachod in the sum of ($ ) i s to beccma the property of the Owner i n the ever t the contract and 'bond are not executed within the time set forth, as liquidated damages for the delay and additional expense to the Owner caused thereby. Respectfully submitted; . !. Musiness address & zip code SEAL (if bidder is a corporation) Drake Field Hangar f_E The bid was recommended to be awarded to Kunco Incorporated of Fort Smith in the amount of $49,800.00. t, p The City Attorney recommended award of tihe bid be conditional upon the sale of the bonds. Aide Alcl4ethy reported that the bid price was good for 30 days from May 21, 1974 and the City Attorney said the bonds should have received an opinion within that time.t"� Director Noland made a motion to accept the bid upon the condition of the sale of the bonds. Director Orton seconded the motion and the motion was passed by the Board in a roll call �' t vote. e Fayetteville Spillway Repairs re V Th bid was recommended to be awarded to Jerry Si;eetser in the amouuIt of $41,� 00, llirector Stanton made a motion to accept the bid and Director Noland sFedthe motion. Upon a roll call vote the motion unanimoupassed CORRESPONDENCE\ AND OTHER BUSINESS Director Orton ked for the Board's opinion of the possibility of acquiring tlhe Old ost Office Building located on the square for use as a City Administrati 1 Building. She cited the May 22 meeting of interested ; citizens to save the uilding and called for an indication from the Board about its interest in r' quiring the building if it could be purchased a moderate price. ased for Mayor Purdy said the purch se price set by HUD was $234,000 and that the City could not a that Mayor favorable one, PurdyliS�atedhhisrfavoroindsecuringced thetbuilding. Director Stanton felt the Board could not take V: a definite position until the Board knew what was involved to renovate the building for the City,s use. Director Utley was in agreement with Director Stanton's statement. Director Noland also felt there was a\special need to explore t all the possibilities for saving the building if a moderate price could be agreed upon. Director Stanton stated the purchase price should be based on the cost of remodeling the building and all costs of acquiring and remodeling should be made known to the public before such\a project was = ever under- taken. At such time all costs and recommendations could be presented, Director Stanton then felt `r ` the Board could express\an opinion. Director Murray favored keeping the building instead\of installing fountains as was now planned.` ' Director Carlson termed the building unique and said it \had potential for use as a City Hall even though a new City Hall might be constructed in the future. j' Director Noland questioned Mr. Cy Sutherland, an architect, as\to the building's condition and if it would take a great deal of work to renovate it. Mr. Sutherland answered that it could be useful as it is now and is. capable of being converted for another use. Mr. Sutherland land stated the possiblity of converting it over a period of time inste doing the work all at once. r i Director Utley reminded the Board and audience that not everyone was iri favor of retaining the Old Post Offic the e Building and at one point in time original plans to renovate the square included building. the removal of tine Director Carlson clarified not the property was owned by the Housing Authority,"creature" a r creature of the State of Arkansas, and that it was being 75 .r � roryt,ra.n,Vn"4 A M awn rt Yr!+Y"^"r i} 777