Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-10-21 MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 21, 1975 The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met in a regular session on October 21, 1975 at 7:30 p.m. in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building. PRESENT: City Manager Donald L. Grimes; Administrative Assistant David McWethy; City Attorney Jim McCord; City Clerk Darlene Westbrook; and Directors Marion Orton, Ernest Lancaster, John Todd, Paul LS; Noland, Al Hughes, Russell Purdy, and Morris Collier CQ Ct ABSENT: None L) OTHERS PRESENT: Members of the audience and representatives of the news On media. CALL TO ORDER AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES The meeting was called to order by Mayor Orton. Following a brief moment of respectful silence, the Mayor asked if there be any amendments to the minutes of the October 7, 1975 meeting. Director Todd requested amending the second sentence of paragraph 15.2 to cause it to read: "...and not encourage them to be staggered." He also requested that a negative vote incorrectly recorded as cast by him and appearing in paragraph 22.5 be corrected to accurately reflect Iris "Aye" vote. He also requested that paragraph 16.2 be amended to clarify that the additional expenditure for the North Street/Garland Avenue project was necessary because of redesign and extension by the Highway Department to improve traffic flow and safety. Mayor Orton requested an amendment to the third sentence of paragraph 14.7 to cause it to read- "...representing the American Association of University Women..."; and that paragraph 15.1 be amended to reflect that: "Mrs. Peg Anderson felt..." No other amendments being necessary, the minutes were approved as amended. ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY - Kaylor Investment Co., petitioners (R75-19) The proposed ordinance would rezone a 2.36 acre tract of land located at the intersection of Crossover Road and Joyce Street from A-1 Agricultural to C-1 Neighborhood Commercial. The City Attorney read the ordinance the first time after which Director Collier, seconded by Director Hughes, moved that rules be sus- pended and the ordinance placed on second reading. The motion carried unanimously and the ordinance was read the second time. Director Hughes, seconded by Director Purdy, moved that rules be further suspended and the ordinance placed on third and final reading. In roll call vote of the Board the motion carried unanimously and the ordinance was read the third time. 25 r 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 25.5 26.1 During discussion, Director Lancaster stated that he had been con- tacted by a citizen who was concerned that the rezoning would allow the location of a liquor store, and Mayor Orton reported that she had received correspondence from another citizen stating his request that the property be rezoned R-0 instead of C-1. 26.2 Speaking in behalf of the petitioner's request was Mr. James Vizzier who explained that the R-0 classification had not been requested because the petitioners had thought that the R-0 classification would restrict the number of doctors practicing in a proposed clinic to four. He also cited the Highway 265 Land Use Plan recently adopted by the Board which stipulates that major intersections would be reserved for commercial activity. He said the petitioners would like for the property to remain C-1 until they can determine a future use for the remainder of the 80 acre tract. In order to serve the property, Mr. Vizzier stated that the developers would have to install approximately one-half mile of sewer line and that development of the entire parcel was highly probable. 26.3 Comments from the audience included those of Mrs. Phyllis Street, 3933 Crossover Road, who expressed her wish that the property be zoned R-0 as she felt it would be a much more desireable use for the area. Mr. Dave Quin, of the same address, cited what he believed to be the hazardous traffic conditions along the 265 corridor and believed the commercialization of the intersection would multiply those dangers. 26.4 Following further slight discussion and comment, the Mayor asked if the ordinance should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": Orton The ordinance was declared passed. ORDINANCE NO. 2151 APPEARS ON PAGE 8 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY - Mr. Ed Storm, petitioner (R75-20) 26.5 The proposed ordinance would rezone a .96 acre tract of land located at 2846 West Sixth Street from A-1 Agricultural to C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial. 26.6 The City Attorney read the ordinance the first time after which Director Collier, seconded by Director Todd, moved that rules be suspended and the ordinance placed on second reading. In roll call vote of the Board the motion carried unanimously and the ordinance was read the second time. Director Collier, seconded by Director Hughes, moved that rules be further suspended and the ordinance placed on third and final reading. The motion carried unanimously in roll call vote of the Board and the ordinance was read the third and final time. 26.7 There being no discussion, the Mayor asked if the ordinance should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The Mayor declared the ordinance passed. ORDINANCE NO. 2152 APPEARS ON PAGE 9 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V 26 ORDINANCE APPROVING LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT - Kaylor Investment Co. The proposed ordinance would approve the large scale development plan of Kaylor Investment Company for an orthopaedic -neurological clinic to be located at the intersection of Crossover Road and Joyce Street and would accept and confirm the dedication of street right-of-way and/or utility easements. The City Attorney advised that the ordinance would approve the plan conditioned upon the extension by the developer of water and sewer lines to the property and that the clinic not use a septic tank for waste disposal. The City Attorney read the ordinance the first time after which Director Collier, seconded by Director Lancaster, moved that rules be suspended and the ordinance read the second time. The motion carried unanimously in roll call vote of the Board and the ordinance was read the second time. Director Hughes, seconded by Director Purdy, moved that rules be further suspended and the ordinance placed on third reading. In roll call vote of the Board the motion carried unanimously and the ordi- nance was read the third and final time. There being no discussion, the Mayor asked if the ordinance should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The Mayor declared the ordinance passed. ORDINANCE NO. 2153 APPEARS ON PAGE 10 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - Zion Road/Highway 71 The ordinance would establish Sewer Improvement District Number 75-1 for a tract of land in the Zion Road/Highway 71 North area. The City Attorney advised the Board that he had obtained an abstracter's certificate certifying that the signed petition represented a majority in assessed value. He also reportedthe ordinance,upon their consent, named three property owners as commissioners of the district -- James E. Lindsey, Joe Fred Starr, and J. B. Hays -- but that the Directors were free to appoint someone else. The Board indicated their approval of the three commissioners. The City Attorney read the ordinance the first time after which Director Collier, seconded by Director Hughes, moved to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. The motion carried unanimously in roll call vote of the Board and the ordinance was read the second time. Director Collier, seconded by Director Todd, moved to further suspend rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading. In roll call vote of the Board the motion carried unanimously and the ordinance was read the third and final time. There being no discussion, the Mayor asked if the ordinance should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The Mayor declared the ordinance passed. ORDINANCE NO. 2154 APPEARS ON PAGE 11-12 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V 27 27.1 27.2 27.3 27.4 27.5 27.6 28 8 ORDINANCE AMENDING SIGN ORDINANCE 28.1 Left on second reading at the October 7, 1975 meeting, the ordinance would amend the sign ordinance by allowing free-standing signs in Industrial and Commercial zoning districts to be 75 square feet in area plus one addi- tional square foot in size for every one foot of setback from street right-of-way above 40 feet to a maximum of 300 square feet. It would also allow wall signs in all districts, except R and R -O, to be 150 square feet, or 35% of the area of the wall, whichever is greater. The City Attorney read the ordinance the second time. 28.2 Present in the audience was Mr. Art Hobson, 280 Olive Street, who to- gether with Mrs. Sylvia Swartz and Mr. Frank Sharp had initiated a peti- tion drive and had obtained 2,200 signatures on petitions stating: "We the undersigned patrons of Fayetteville shopping areas oppose any weaken- ing of Fayetteville's present sign ordinance to allow larger signs." The petitions were presented to the Mayor who acknowleged their receipt. Mr. Hobson felt that, in view of the large amount of opposition, the Board should not amend the sign ordinance. 28.3 Director Purdy, "in a spirit of concialiation and compromise", moved that Sections 1 and 2 of the proposed ordinance be deleted and that Section 3(2)(b) be amended to read: "...or 20% of the area of the wall..." The motion was seconded by Director Collier. 28.4 During comments from the audience, Mrs. Sylvia Swartz stated that she was amazed at the number of people expressing their dismay that Fayetteville would allow larger free-standing signs and that some felt the size limita- tions put the businesses on a more equitable basis. She felt the Board should be aware that the citizens were "quite aroused" and that there was no question that they desired fewer and smaller signs. Mr. Fred Baker commented that he thought the people would like a more conservative ordi- nance and felt that the 20% provision as suggested by Director Purdy was excessive. Mr. J. B. Hays commented that he felt the current 75 square foot limitation was adequate. 28.5 Building Inspection Superintendent Harold Lieberenz spoke briefly and informed the Board of certain administrative problems related to the sign ordinance. One in particular was the restrictive nature of the 75 square foot limitation and its effect upon signs located along controlled access highways when setback was measured from street right-of-way instead of pavement edge. Mayor Orton informed Mr. Lieberenz that she intended to appoint a Board committee to study some of the administrative problems connected with the ordinance and requested that he inform that committee of any of the problems in administering the ordinance. 28.6 Discussion completed, Mayor Orton asked if the amendment proposed by Director Purdy should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The motion was declared passed. 28.7 Director Hughes, seconded by Director Collier, moved to suspend rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading. The motion carried unanimously in roll call vote of the Board and the ordinance was read the third and final time. There being no further discussion, the Mayor asked if the ordinance should pass as amended. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The ordinance was declared passed as amended. ORDINANCE NO. 2155 APPEARS ON PAGE 13 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V 28 Ut Cg bilt 4 CC Director Hughes moved that the Mayor appoint a committee of the Board to study the sign ordinance to propose possible minor and administrative amendments. The motion was seconded by Director Todd. Mrs. Swartz felt that, in view of the citizen response concerning the sign ordinance, it was not wise to limit membership of the commitee to Board members. Director Hughes disagreed, commenting, "Everytime you get others involved, you can't get anything accomplished. The committee will be open to the public. Any Board committee is open to the public and press and I would like to see the rules designed so that other...people speak only when spoken to." Mayor Orton then asked if the motion to establish the committee should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The motion was declared passed and Mayor Orton appointed Directors Lancaster, Hughes, and Noland to the committee to be chaired by Director Lancaster. Mayor Orton stated that the committee would expect input from all Board members as well as interested citizens. REHEARING OF SIGN APPEAL - Consumer's Market The appeal for a variance in sign area was orginally at its September 16, 1975 meeting at which time the Board Mr. David Glass was present in the audience to represent and stated that the preceding action of the Board "took problem" and that the rehearing would not be necessary. Board did not consider this agenda item. heard by the Board denied the appeal. Consumer's Market care of (Consumer's) Therefore, the ORDINANCE PROHIBITING SALE OF FIREWORKS The City Attorney read the ordinance the first time after which Director Purdy, seconded by Director Noland, moved that rules be suspended and the ordinance read the second time. The motion carried unanimously in roll call vote of the Board and the ordinance was read the second time. Director Hughes, seconded by Director Purdy, moved that rules be further suspended and the ordinance placed on third and final reading. The motion carried unanimously and the ordinance was read the third and final time. During discussion, Director Todd expressed reservation that the ordi- nance would not be enforceable. Director Purdy said he knew the ordinance would not be enforceable but that it would give parents leverage in denying their children fireworks. Director Todd noted that the ordinance would permit the use of fireworks throughout the year upon approval of applica- tion made to the Fire Chief. Other members of the Board did not seem to think it important to limit the time of year that fireworks could be used. After further discussion, the Mayor asked if the ordinance should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Noland "Nays": Todd The ordinance was declared passed. ORDINANCE NO. 2156 APPEARS ON PAGE 14 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V 29 29 29.1 29.2 29.3 29.4 29.5 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT - Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning 30.1 The proposed resolution would authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission for technical and supportive services for completion of the 1976 Community Development Block Grant Application. 30.2 After the City Attorney read the resolution, the City Manager explained that the CD staff planned to prepare the application but that the agree- ment would permit consultation with the Planning Commission if so needed. There being no questions or discussion, the Mayor asked if the resolution should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The resolution was declared passed. RESOLUTION NO. 88-75 APPEARS ON PAGE 13 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V 30.3 Director Hughes requested that, at an early date and before renewal of the CD program, the Board meet in executive session to discuss personnel matters relating to the Communtiy Development program. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING QUITCLAIM DEED - Fletcher Street 30.4 The resolution, read by the City Attorney, would authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Quitclaim Deed for the transfer of a portion of street right-of-way near the south end of Fletcher Street to Mrs. Ora Lee Edwards. In correspondence addressed to the City Manager, Mr. Ed Connell, Land Acquisition Agent, informed that: "In our recent negotiations for right-of-way and property for Fletcher Street extension, we told Mrs. Edwards we would try to obtain from Mrs. Beulah Cook a small portion of land at the southwest corner of Lot #4 of City Addition. This property was iso- lated from the rest of the property owned by Mrs. Cook but it could be of value to Mrs. Edwards. 30.5 We were successful in obtaining the land from Mrs. Cook but the deed was made to the City of Fayetteville. It will be necessary for the City to convey it to Mrs. Edwards and her children...by Quitclaim Deed." 30.6 Director Hughes, seconded by Director Collier, moved adoption of the resolution. The Mayor asked if the resolution should pass. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The resolution was declared passed. RESOLUTION NO. 89-75 APPEARS ON PAGE 14 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V ORDINANCE AMENDING CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE ORDINANCE NO. 1808 - Warner Cable 30.7 The City Attorney explained that the ordinance was an attempt to amend Ordinance 1808 to bring it in compliance with Federal Communications Commission rules and regulations. 30 1 tf: CC Director Collier, in an attempt to facilitate proceedings, moved that the City request the FCC to inform the City what it must do to comply with the rules and regulations. City Attorney McCord believed that the regula- tions were sufficiently set out in the informational materials included with the agenda and stated that he had no hesitancy about the ordinance as far as those sections that do not pertain to policy decision regarding contract negotiations. The City Manager stated that cities are having to write ordinances around FCC regulations when it is not clear whether or not the FCC will regulate cable television. Director Purdy was con- cerned that the ordinance was being written by Warner Cable and felt it should be written by the City. The City Attorney assured the Board that the drafted ordinance was the result of joint efforts of himself and Lynn Wade, legal counsel for Warner Cable. Director Collier's motion died for lack of second. Mr. Wade was then granted the floor and proceeded to explain the ordi- nance section by section. In regard to Section 5 which stipulates that the amended franchise will have an initial term of 15 years, Mr. Wade stated that the term was necessary in order for the company to amortize its investment in the rebuild of the system. He said that additional 10 -year terms were not automatic but negotiable with the City. "We have already asked for the right to return here at the end of the rebuild to ask for a rate increase. As a practical matter, that is going to reopen the franchise. Mr. Grimes had indicated that he may or may not want additional clauses, he doesn't know for sure, but he wants the right to do it. And factually, procedurally, realistically; when we come back with the rate request, the leverage you have is 'Alright you want a rate increase. Here is what we want.'" Mr. Wade stated that the amended franchise would take effect at the time the FCC grants a final certificate of compliance. Director Todd noted the three percent franchise fee, the maximum allowed, and questioned what recourse the City would have should the FCC change its rules. Mr. Wade reiterated his previous statement by commenting, "The leverage you have is 'Fine, but before we give any kind of a rate adjustment, we want...a five percent franchise tax (if permitted)'. We have acknow- leged repeatedly to Mr. Grimes, and I am now doing so publicly, that we recognize that as a bargaining factor this is certainly something we would anticipate from time -to -time would happen." Mr. Wade, in reply to a question posed by Director Todd, stated that the clause of Section 5 pertaining to additional terms did not commit the City to a specific 10 -year term, just that the company has the right to negotiate for an additional term. Director Todd stated that the last sentence of Section 4 concerned him in that it pointed the city "unfairly to say that the rates will only go up" when in fact, Todd felt, they might go down due to decreased capital depreciation, etc. He felt the'section should be clarified to specify some of the data Warner Cable would need to support a rate increase request. Following further questions and discussion, the City Attorney read the ordinance the first time after which Director Hughes, seconded by Director Todd, moved to suspend rulesand"place the ordinance on second reading. The motion carried in roll call vote of the Board, with Director Lancaster abstaining from voting, and the ordinance was read the second time. Director Hughes, seconded by Director Todd, moved that rules be further suspended and the ordinance placed on third and final reading. 31 31.1 31.2 31.3 31.4 31.5 The motion carried in roll call vote of the Board, with Director Lancaster abstaining from voting, and the ordinance was read the third and final time. 32.1 Director Todd then moved to amend the first sentence of Section 2 to read: "Board approval may be withheld only if the transferee is not qualified to continue to carry out the terms of the franchise as amended or has not provided satisfactory service that was under its control to its past or present customers." The motion was seconded by Director Purdy and in roll call vote of the Board the recorded vote was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Todd, Noland "Nays": None Abstain: Lancaster The motion was declared passed. 32.2 Director Todd moved that Section 4 be amended by inserting the follow- ing: "Any application for a rate increase must be accompanied by verifiable accounting and statistical information, to the extent that such informa- tion is available, that accurately shows gross revenue, operating expenses, overhead, depreciation, asset investments, allocations to and from re- lated operations, and pro forma financial statements which reflect the requested 'rate increase. The company shall cooperate with the City in obtaining and verifying the necessary information for evaluation of the requested rate increase. This information shall include all detailed fixed asset records that are available, applicable to the Fayetteville system, that can be viewed at the company's offices in Fayetteville." The motion was seconded by Director Hughes. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Todd, Noland "Nays": None Abstain: Lancaster The motion was declared passed. 32.3 There being no further discussion, the Mayor asked if the ordinance should pass as amended. The recorded vote of the Board was. "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Todd, Noland "Nays": None Abstain: Lancaster The ordinance was declared passed as amended. ORDINANCE NO. 2157 APPEARS ON PAGE 15-18 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V PURCHASING ITEMS AND AWARD OF BIDS 32.4 Bid 300: Dump Truck/W & S Department Purchasing Director Sturman Mackey recommended award of the bid in the amount of $17,054.84 to Lewis Ford for one 48,000 GVW dump truck to be used by the Water and Sewer Department to transport sludge from the sewer treat- ment plant. Director Purdy, seconded by Director Hughes, moved that the bid be awarded as recommended. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The bid was declared awarded as recommended. 32.5 Bid 303: Fuel Storage Tanks The Purchasing Director recommended award of the bid for two 12,000 gallon underground fuel storage tanks to General Steel Tank Company of Birmingham, Alabama in the amount of $2,588 each. Mr. Mackey stated that 32 the tanks would provide storage for reserve fuel in case of fuel shortages and would allow the City to take advantage of lower "truck tank load" prices. Following slight discussion, Director Hughes, seconded by Director Todd, moved the bid be awarded as recommended. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The bid was declared awarded as recommended. OTHER BUSINESS SPECIAL CENSUS The City Manager recommended that the Board authorize a special census to be taken which would, if it indicated a population increase for Fayette- ville, P P Y ville, result in increased state turnback and revenue sharing funds. Director Hughes suggested that the census be conducted before December on 15, 1975 to allow a count before university students left for semester break. Director Todd stated that he would be inclined to defer the census until September, 1976 because university enrollment might be down by 1,000 students in January. Director Noland, seconded by Director Hughes, moved that a special census be authorized to be conducted providing the census could be sub- stantially completed before December 15, 1975; if not, that the census be delayed until September 1, 1976. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The motion was declared passed. 33 33.1 33.2 RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS - Special Census The City Attorney read a resolution appropriating General Fund Surplus 33.3 Funds in an amount necessary to pay for the special census. During discussion, the City Manager estimated that the cost of the census 33.4 might be $15,000 if block and tract information were obtained. He mentioned the possibility of charging part of the cost to Community Development be- cause of block and tract information that would be beneficial to the pro- gram. Mr. Chuck Hoffman, CD Administrator, stated that the CD program would utilize information taken from data on hand and said they would have "to stretch a point to say that CD funds are necessary to help defray the cost of the census." Following further discussion and comment, Director Hughes, seconded by 33.5 Director Purdy, moved that the resolution be adopted. The roll call vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The resolution was declared adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 90-75 APPEARS ON PAGE 15 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEM The City Manager reported that several members of the Pollution Control 33.6 Committee had traveled to Oklahoma to investigate Bio -Lite sewage disposal 33 systems in operation and had been impressed with the system. In view of septic tank problems in the area and the relatively low cost of a small unit (approximately $1,350), the City Manager requested authorization to purchase and have installed a unit either at the Lake Fayetteville pavillion or a city rent -house. He indicated that he preferred to have the unit installed in a home so that it could be tested under household use. Funds for purchasing the unit would come from the Water and Sewer fund. Director Hughes, seconded by Director Purdy, moved that the City Manager be authorized to purchase the unit and make arrangements for its installation. The recorded vote of theBoard was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The motion was declared passed. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CHANGE ORDER - Water Storage Tank 34.1 The City Manager informed the Board that the resolution would authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a change order for the construction of a four million gallon water storage tank in the amount of $383,892.05. Construction of the tank had been recommended by the Board Water and Sewer Committee with funds to finance the construction coming from an Urgent Needs Funds grant. 34.2 The City Attorney read the resolution after which Director Purdy, seconded by Director Collier moved that the resolution be adopted. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The resolution was declared adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 91-75 APPERAS ON PAGE 16 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V RESOLUTION SUPPORTING APPEAL FOR NURSING FACILITY EXPANSION - City Hospital 34.3 The City Attorney read a resolution supporting the appeal of Fayette- ville City Hospital and Geriatric Center for approval of a 72 -bed medicare and medicaid approved skilled nursing facility expansion. 34.4 Director Collier, seconded by Director Noland, moved adoption of the resolution. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, Todd, Noland "Nays": None The resolution was declared adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 92-75 APPEARS ON PAGE 17 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V RESOLUTION REQUESTING FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE 34.5 The City Attorney read a resolution requesting Arkansas Congressmen and Senators to act on the City's behalf to obtain special United States Government financial assistance conditional upon the granting of federal financial assistance to the City of New York. The resolution cited the City's anticipated deficit of $500,000 for the 1976 fiscal year as being parallel to the existing financial plight of New York. 34 1 1 Director Todd, seconded by Director Lancaster, resolution. The recorded vote of the Board was: "Ayes": Hughes, Orton, Purdy, Collier, Lancaster, "Nays": None The resolution was declared adopted. moved adoption of the Todd, Noland RESOLUTION NO. 93-75 APPEARS ON PAGE 18 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK V PRIVATE CLUB LICENSE TRANSFER - Gaslite Club Mr. and Mrs Dale Killian were present in the audience to protest the granting of a license transfer request of the Gaslite Club to 2217 North College. Mr. Killian presented the Board with petitions signed by area property owners expressing opposition to the location of the club at that address. Mr. Killian stated that the proposed location was near a school and residential properties and felt the club would have a deteriorat- ing effect upon neighborhood children's lives. He also cited the hazardous entrance and exit at the location and the fact that a school bus stop was nearby. The City Attorney explained that the state has pre-empted most areas of authority in the granting of and transfer of liquor, private club, and beer licenses. He advised Mr. Killian that protests of the license trans- fer should be filed with the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission. No action was taken by the Board. In view of recent beer permit applications by some local grocery stores, Director Noland requested that the current ordinance governing location of liquor stores be studied for possible amendment to prohibit sales in any retail establishment other than a retail liquor store. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Director Hughes, seconded by Director Lancaster, moved that the meeting be adjourned. The motion met with approval of the Board and the Mayor adjourned the meeting. ATTEST: APPROVED: 7z2on ion ROron Ma �l 35 3 35.1 35.2 35.3 35.4 35.5