HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-02-04 Minutes112
MINUTES OF A BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
A meeting of the Board of Directors was held on Monday, February 2, 1981,
at 7:30 p.m. in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
PRESENT: Directors Osborne, Sharp, Todd, Henry, Bumpass, Lancaster,. Noland;
City Manager Grimes, City Attorney McCord, Assistant City Manager McWethy,
City Clerk Koettel, members of the news media, and other members of the
audience.
ABSENT: None
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Todd called for a moment of respectful silence and the meeting was
then called to order.
EMPLOYEE AWARDS
112.1 Mayor Todd presented certificates and checks of $100 each to the five
persons chosen as "Employee of the Month" for January 1981. The five who
received awards are named below:
112.2 Mr. Delbert Bolinger is a Construction & Maintenance Foreman with the
Street Department. Mr. Bolinger has worked for the City for seventeen and
one half years. Mr. Bolinger's award was given to his superintendent for
forwarding since he was unable to attend due to illness.
112.3 Mr. James Brumley is a Construction & Maintenance Foreman with the
Water & Sewer Department. Mayor Todd read a few comments made by Mr.
Brumley's supervisor, Don Bunn. "James goes out of his way to train new
people in the operation of their equipment. He is in charge when the
supervisor is absent, and takes calls nights and weekends." Mr. Brumley
has worked for the City for eight years.
112.4 Mr. James Johnson is a light equipment operator with the Street
Department. He has worked for the City for seven years and ten months.
Mayor Todd read comments made by Clayton Powell, Street Superintendent.
"James has applied himself and has learned to operate a lot of light and heavy
equipment used in street construction and maintenance. He is very conscientious
and applies himself fully on every project assigned. He operates equipment
with a pride of ownership attitude which results in maximum machine productivity.
He is an asset to every crew and project to which he is assigned.
112.5 Ms. Judy Huffaker is an Accountant I in the Finance Department. She has
worked for the City for three and one half years. Scott Linebaugh, Finance
Director, had made these comments about Judy. "She has been heavily involved
in changing our accounting system, which has required a lot of retraining
the staff and Judy has come out as a backbone during these improvements.
She has gone beyond the call of duty to help us improve and in the performance
of her job, and is therefore recommended as Employee of the Month.
112.6 Mayor Todd stated that Finance Director Linebaugh had pointed out that
during the Christmas holidays, when two employees were needed to help after
regular hours, Judy was one of the first to volunteer and sacrifice a portion
of her holiday time with her family.
112.7 Ms. Ina McElroy is a Clerk III of the Finance Department. She has worked
for the City for a period of two years and two months. Ina first started with
the City as a PBX operator and has advanced to her present position. Finance
Director Linebaugh had made the following comments about Ina. "Ina has worked
extremely hard to work up to her present position which requires much
responsibility. The entire office was put through a great deal of stress
and asked to work overtime during the recent conversion to the computer.
1
1
Ina excelled beyond the call of duty in helping us work the bugs out of our 113
system. She made herself readily available when needed, and during the conversion
displayed exceptional work, and is therefore recommended as Employee of the Month.
III LEAKAGE TEST/LEWIS BROTHERS BUILDING
Mayor Todd stated that a request had been made by the owners of the Lewis 113.1
Brothers building to determine the source of water leakage into the building.
He explained that the owners of the building believe that water leakage into
their basement comes from a rose -garden planter in front of the building.
Mr. Paul Lewis was present to address the Board. He requested that city
personnel thoroughly flood the planter for a period of twelve hours, or until 113.2
water comes through the foundation of the building, whichever occurs first.
He also requested that a representative of Lewis Brothers be present.
Assistant City Manager McWethy told the Board that one test had already
0 been made using dyed water. He stated there was no colored water that came up 113.3
6) into the basement during the test.
CD Director Osborne asked how much it would cost to do what Mr. Lewis was
requesting. 113.4
7 McWethy replied that basically the only cost would be the personnel cost. 113.5
Cr He did state he felt like each party should have a representative present during
Q the test.
Mayor Todd asked how the twelve hour period was decided upon. He asked why 113.6
eight hours would not be sufficient since this would be a full work day for City
personnel involved.
Director Lancaster asked who built the planter, and City Manager Grimes 113.7
responded that they were built by the downtown urban renewal project and do
belong to the City.
illAfter further discussion, Director Osborne, seconded by Sharp, moved
that the leakage test be performed using dye, for a 'period'of eight hours.
Mr. Lewis told the Board that the ground was so dry that he did not know
if the eight hours would be long enough.
McWethy stated that he would rather have the test done for twelve hours
so that it would be satisfactory to everyone and a final conclusion could be
reached.
Director Osborne, seconded by Sharp, amended his motion to state a period 113.11
of twelve hours. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
113.8
113.9
113.10
BUDGET REVIEW
Director Osborne, Finance Committee Chairman, reported on the 1981 General
Fund, Public Works Fund, and Airport Budgets. He reported that the General
Fund has a surplus of $300,000.
Director Osborne stated that he would like to advise the citizens of
Fayetteville that the City of Fayetteville is going to have to cut capital
projects and reduce the services offered by the City if additional sources of
revenue were not enacted. He asked the people to pass a 1% sales tax if the
legislature will allow.
Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved that the budgets be approved
for 1981.
Mayor Todd, in response to a question asked by a member of the audience,
explained that these budgets did not include Water & Sewer, Sanitation,
Community Development, or Revenue Sharing. He stated that the Sanitation
and Water & Sewer Departments are funded by user fees. The Community
Development and Revenue Sharing programs are federal grant programs.
One member of the audience asked if the budget included money to continue
the Ozark Transit bus system for six months. Mayor Todd replied that this was
included in the budget.
113.12
113.13
113.14
113.15
113.16
114
114.2
114.3
114.4
114.5
114.6
114.7
City Attorney McCord requested that a separate resolution be passed
approving a contract with Ozark Transit for a six month period.
Mayor Todd explained that the deficits in this year's budgets were
covered by surplus money from the past.
Finance Director Linebaugh also pointed out that the money being overspent
is coming from prior years' gain. He said it should not be misinterpreted
that the City is spending more than what it has. He did state that in the
future something would have to be done to obtain more income for the City.
Director Lancaster asked what kind of contract was being considered
with Ozark Transit. He stated that he could not understand how the City
could spend $11,000 for this when it has just barely balanced the budget.
He said he did not understand how the City could create another agency that
would call for more money. He said he could look at this more objectively
if he believed that it would only be for six months, but that it would extend
beyond that length of time. He also stated that the City Attorney had at one
point said this was not legal.
City Attorney McCord clarified that the opinion he had given was that the
City could not outright appropriate public funds to this organization. However,
he stated the City does have the authority to provide public transit through
city employees and city equipment. He said that by the same token the City
could contract with another agency to provide a governmental service
which the City is authorized to provide. Therefore, he said that in his
opinion, if the City chose to contract with Ozark Transit to provide a
public service that contract would be valid, and the City could make an
appropriation for services rendered under that contract.
McCord explained that the proposal received from Ozark Transit was for
a six month contract from February 11 through August 11 for Ozark Transit
to operate a public transportation system in accordance with the existing
schedule, subject to agreed upon modifications. Ozark Transit would agree
to attempt to develop a financing plan to develop services of local matching
funds from other sources, so that upon expiration of this six month contract
it would not be necessary for Ozark Transit to come back to the City Board
requesting an extension of the contract.
There being no further discussion, Mayor Todd called for a vote on
the motion made to approve the budgets. Upon roll call the motion passed
by a vote of 6-1, with Director Lancaster voting in the minority because of the
funds appropriated to Ozark Transit.
RESOLUTION N0. 12-81 APPEARS ON PAGE 12-) OF ORDINANCE A RESOLUTION BOOK )( I
114.8 McCord outlined the proposal submitted by Ozark Transit:
1. Ozark Transit will operate public transportation in Fayetteville
according to the hours and route schedules made effective on 12-8-80, unless
the schedule is modified in accordance with a decision by the City's Public
Transit Committee.
114.9 2. The City of Fayetteville will provide $11,170 as a
portion of local
matching funds for the service under Section 18 of the Urban Mass Transit Act.
114.10 3. Ozark Transit will provide additional matching funds necessary to meet
the local share requirements
114.11 4. At the end of the six month period Ozark Transit will provide a report
to the transit committee and Board of Directors summarizing expenditures,
revenues, and service statistics, including ridership.
114.12 5. Ozark Transit will cooperate with the City and other interested parties
to develop:
114.13 (a) a service plan which will coordinate Ozark Transit services with
other transportation services operating in the city, and
(b) a financing plan to develop services of local matching funds for
the following for other services: private contributions, local
government sources, eligible in-kind s s urc faresand funds
generated from incidential sources by Ozark transi.
1
1
•
6. Ozark Transit will with the assistance from the Public Transit
Committee develop a plan for achieving cost savings in the operation of the
transit service.
Director Henry, seconded by Sharp, moved that the execution of the
contract be approved.
Director Sharp stated that he was willing to take the risk on the idea
that mass transit can be built up in Fayetteville. He said this was actually
a reallocation of money, and that perhaps 200' of street would not be paved
because of this appropriation.
Upon roll call the motion passed by a vote of 6-1, with Director Lancaster
voting in the minority. RESOLUTION NO. 17-81
Director Osborne stated that the Finance Department was recommending
O a freeze on hiring in the Public Works Department. He stated that the reason
was because of the significant amount of surplus that was having to be used
for operations and capital projects. He stated the recommendation was that the
only way a vacancy in the Public Works Department could be filled was by
Board approval.
Director Osborne, seconded by Lancaster, moved that a freeze be placed
on hiring in the Public Works Department for a period of six months, and that
any hiring would have to be approved by the Board.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Mayor Todd stated that the street Committee had met with the Street
Superintendent and set priorities on streets.
City Manager Grimes stated that the Street Committee had recommended that
the City proceed with the project as budgeted, but that they would like a
closer look taken at Deane Street and Ashwood.
Director Sharp explained that there was about 1400 feet of Ashwood
that was an area of low and moderate income and could be eligible for CD
funds. Also, the street committee felt like Deane Street from Garland to
Porter might also qualify for CD funds.
City Manager Grimes stated that the Street Committee's recommendation
was to do what was necessary this year, but try to keep it at a minimum with
the hope that the major work could be done with CD funds. He stated that
the priorities could change after the winter and another look would be taken
in the Spring-
Mayor Todd explained that these were included in the budget which had
been approved.
1
115
PARKS DEDICATION
Mayor Todd explained that the City Attorney had prepared two alternative
ordinances amending the recently enacted "Greenspace Ordinance."
The amendments being considered dealt with Planned Unit Developments,
which already must have land provided for "open space."
Section 1 of Proposal A read as follows:
(6) If the developer of a Planned Unit Development dedicates required open
space for use as a public park, the Planning Commission may give a credit
reducing the dedication of land or contribution in lieu thereof required by
paragraphs (1) and (2) above, provided the Planning Commission determines,
after consultation with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, that (1)
the physical characteristics of the site, and its surroundings, make the
site suitable for park purposes, and (2) the proposed site is consistent
with the City's General Plan for Parks.
Section 1 of Proposal B read as follows:
(6) If the developer of a Planned Unit Development designates open space
for park areas and provides recreational facilities in said areas and if the
subdivider guarantees that said land or contribution in lieu thereof required
115.1
115.2
115.3
115.4
115.5
115.6
115.7
115.8
115.9
115.10
115.12
115.13
115.14
115.15
115.16
113
116.1
116.2
116.3
116.4
116.5
116.6
116.7
116.8
116.9
116.10
116.12
116.13
116.14
116.15
116.16
by paragraphs (1) and (2) above, provided the Planning Commission determines,
after consultation with the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board, that (1) the
physical characteristics of the site, and its surroundings, make the site
suitable for park purposes, and (2) the proposed site is consistent with
the City's General Plan for Parks.
In answer to a question from the audience, McCord replied that the
ordinance does not provide interest on the refund.
City Attorney McCord explained to the developers that the proposed
amendment was actually for their benefit. He said that if a developer does
not know what the density will be, and the contribution is based on permitted
density, a refund can be made if application is made within five years, if the
actual density is less than the density the contributions were based upon.
Mr. Jim Lindsey told the Board that the consideration of allowing any
private property in a PUD to be public would cause a great deal of problems.
Mr. Frank Farrish asked that if part of the 30% of land in a PUD required
for open space was dedicated to the City, would that land not be under the
homeowners association. Mayor Todd stated that under proposal A the land
would be dedicated to the City as public property and would not be maintained
under a homeowners association.
Mr. Farrish asked if the designated park area under proposal B would be
public or private property and was informed that it would be private and
would remain under the homeowners association for maintenance.
Mr. Farrish asked the Board if these amendments could also apply to
subdivisions as well as PUDs.
City Attorney McCord answered that they could if the Board elected to make
them apply to both.
Dr. Hays asked that if 30% was set aside for open space and designated
for park space, would a developer still be required to make a contribution
for parks or would the 30% open space serve this purpose.
McCord explained that the amendment would authorize the Planning Commission
to give the developer credit so that nothing additional would have to be done
other than reserve the 30% area for recreational activities and provide
recreational facilities. No more land or cash contribution would be required.
Mayor Todd pointed out that it would not be automatic, but would be
discretionary with the Planning Commission.
One member of the audience expressed disapproval of proposal B because
he stated it would allow private developers to create their own parks not
accessible to the public. He stated this would essentially create a private
system of parks with all the new parks being private parks and the old
parks continuing to be public. He asked why the Board would want to pass a
park ordinance to create parks for the future of the City and then turn them
over to private individuals.
Director Bumpass pointed out that a new homeowner would pay property
taxes and that part of that money would go into the General Fund and a
percentage of that would be used for existing parks.
Mr. Lindsey pointed out that the proposed amendment does not allow a
developer to do anything he cannot presently do, but that the issue is whether
or not the developer receives credit for the things he does.
Mr. Farrish addressed the Board and asked them not to limit this to only
Puds, but have it apply to subdivisions also. He asked what would be done if
the homeowners association did not maintain the park.
He was advised that if the parks were not maintained, they would revert
to public use and would be maintained by the City.
Director Noland asked Director Henry what she thought about the possibility
of having this apply to subdivisions also.
1
1
117
Director Henry stated that she would not have any objections to the 117.1
amendment applying to subdivisions, but that the subdivision would have to have
III a property homeowners' association.
City Attorney stated that he would recommend that it apply to PUDs and to 117.2
subdivisions.
After further discussion, City Attorney McCord read the second alternative 117.3
ordinance (proposal B) which had been amended by stating that the recreational
facilities would in fact be constructed within one year from final plat
approval, and that the Planning Commission, after consultation with the Parks
Advisory Board, would approve the nature of the recreational facilities that were
to be constructed to insure that they actually would serve the residents of the
subdivision, and require that a bill of assurance be given that if the
recreational facilities were not maintained that they would revert to the City
O as public property.
CD Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved that the rules be suspended 117.4
CD and the ordinance placed on second reading. Upon roll call the motion passed
unanimously, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time.
7 Director Noland, seconded by Osborne, moved that the rules be further 117.5
Q suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Upon
Q roll call the motion passed unanimously and the City Attorney read the
ordinance for the third time.
Upon roll call the ordinance passed unanimously. 117.6
ORDINANCE NO. 2698 APPEARS ON PAGE.26 ! OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )C .
SEWER WAIVER.
Mayor Todd introduced a request for a waiver from the requirements of 117.7
Ordinance 2095 that structures using city water that are within 200' of a
sewer line must hook on to the sewer.
Matthew Horan was present to represent Mr. and Mrs. Baker who were 117.8
requesting the variance. Mr. Horan told the Board that the Baker's requested
the variance because they are planning to build a new house within a couple
of years and feel the expense of tying on to the sewer for such a short time
would not be worth the expense, especially since their septic tank works
properly. Also, he stated that the grade available is somewhat less than the
recommended grade of 1/4 inch per foot. Mr. Horan stated that the firm of
Estes-Rausch Engineering had been to the Baker home to determine the elevation
change between the outlet invert of the Baker's existing septic system and
the lowest invert location of an existing manhole directly in front of their
house. He said measurements were taken three times and a variation in
measurements of less than .01 foot was obtained.
City Engineer Don Bunn recommended that the variance not be granted as he 117.9
does not believe that there are existing grounds for granting a variance based
on accessibility of the sewer.
Mr. Horan also told the Board that the Bakers were concerned that they 117.10
would have sewage coming into their house if they hooked on to the sewer. He
said the City could not guarantee the Bakers that they would not have sewage
back up into their home.
Mr. Horan also advised the Board that the Bakers were not creating a large 117.11
load on the sewer. He said they do not have a washing machine nor dishwasher.
Only two persons live in the house and they work during the day. He stated
that the Bakers would be glad to make a contract with the City stating that
they were not going to sell the house, and if they did it would be condition
of the deed that the house would have to hooked on to the sewer.
City Manager Grimes stated that he had discussed this matter with the 117.12
City Engineer and that it was their recommendation not to grant the variance.
He said many persons had been required to hook on to the sewer line and he
felt the City should be consistent.
lis
118.1 City Attorney McCord commented that it was a factual issue before the
Board as to whether or not the homeowner can connect to the City sewer without
incurring a substantial risk of sewage backup.
118.2 Director Lancaster stated that this matter had been considered before, and
the City Engineer had been instructed to check again and be sure the house
could be hooked up on the sewer line. Lancaster stated the City Engineer was
still recommending that the house be connected to the sewer system and that
a variance not be granted.
118.3 Director Osborne stated that the Board would be asking the Bakers to spend
approximately $1,000 on something that the City does not know for certain will
work
118.4 City Manager Grimes stated that it had been checked three times by the
City Engineer and he still recommended that the variance not be granted.
Also, Grimes stated that anytime a home is connected to a public sewer line
there is a possibility that it will back up into the house. He said that
everybody in town has the chance of that happening, and that he did not think
it was fair to require some to hook on and not others.
118.5 Director Lancaster, seconded by Noland, moved that the variance be
denied. Upon roll call the motion failed by a vote of 2-5, with Noland
and Lancaster voting in the minority.
118.6 After further discussion, Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved
that the variance be approved conditional upon the property owner executing
a bill of assurance, which would be a covenant running with the land, to
provide that the property would be connected to public sewer upon sale of the
property, a change in occupancy, expiration of five years from today's date,
or evidence from the County Health authorities that the septic tank is not
properly functioning, whichever occurs first.
118.7 City Manager Grimes stated he wanted the Board to be certain they
understood that hundreds of people have been forced to connect to the
sewer whose septic tanks were working properly.
118.8 Upon roll call the motion to grant the variance upon the above conditions
passed by a vote of 5-2, with Directors Lancaster and Noland voting in the
minority.
INDUSTRIAL PARK SALE
118.9 City Manager Grimes requested the approval of the sale of 2.33 acres
in Fayetteville Industrial Park to SWEPCO for $5,000 per acre. He told the
Board that the power company does not propose any construction on the site
for a couple of years and that they were not asking for streets to be built.
118.10 Mayor Todd pointed out that this sale was recommended by the Industrial
Park Committee.
118.11 Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the sale be approved.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 13-81 APPEARS ON PAGE MOF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X1 .
TAXI FRANCHISE REQUEST
118.12 Mayor Todd introduced a request by Willis Dean Quinton for a permit
to operate a taxicab company.
118.13 Mr. Quinton told the Board that he felt like Fayetteville and Springdale
both needed cab service. He explained that he would start with about three
cars and if business called for more cars he would obtain them.
118.14 Mayor Todd asked Mr. Quinton if he had driven for a cab company before
and he replied that he had driven for several different companies.
118.15 Director Henry asked Mr. Quinton if he owned cars now, and he replied
that he has two cars at the present time but that Jerry Tippin would put one
car on the line if the franchise was obtained. Mr. Quinton stated he has
a 71 Torino and a 73 Ford.
1
1
City Manager Grimes requested that the item be tabled for a couple
of weeks. He explained that other possibilities were being explored and that
he would like some time to get more details together.
Director Lancaster, seconded by Bumpass, moved that the item be tabled as
suggested by City Manager Grimes. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously
Director Lancaster advised Mr. Quinton that he should request a copy of
the ordinance on taxicabs from the City Clerk and read it. Also, he asked
for more specific information from Mr. Quinton as to his financial status
and a written notice from his insurance carrier stating the vehicles which
were covered.
119 119.1
119.2
119.3
PARKING LOTS
Mayor Todd introduced a resolution authorizing the execution of an Agreement
for Engineering Services with McClelland Consulting Engineers regarding
O improvements to be made to city parking lots at the northwest corner of Meadow
Street and East Avenue, and northeast of the Continuing Education Center. City
6) Manager Grimes stated that a screening committee had been appointed to screen
Q) the engineering proposals which had been presented. He informed the Board the
committee had consisted of the traffic superintendent, street superintendent,
a and the City Engineer. The recommendation of this committee was to employ
Q McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. to perform the worktln the CEC parking
lot.
Director Lancaster, seconded by Henry, moved that the resolution be
approved authorizing an agreement for engineering services with McClelland
Consulting Engineers.
After further discussion pertaining to how much engineering work would
be required, and whether or not the City wanted to engineer the project for
a possible multi-level parking lot or for only two levels, it was suggested
that the item be tabled and that other figures be obtained for the engineering
of only two levels.
Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the item be tabled until
more exact figures for only two levels were obtained.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
ELECTRIC CODE
City Attorney McCord read an ordinance adopting by reference the 1981
version of the National Electric Code, but deleting the section that
requires ground -fault interruptors to be installed in garages.
Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the rules be suspended
and the ordinance placed on second reading. The motion passed unanimously upon
roll call, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time.
Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the rules be further
suspended and the ordinance placed on third and final reading. The motion
passed unanimously upon roll call, and the City Attorney read the ordinance
for the third time.
Mr. Tom Tucker, Plumbing & Electrical Inspector, addressed the Board.
He explained that the reason he was recommending deletion of the section
requiring ground -fault interruptors in garages was that if someone had a freezer
in the garage and the ground -fault failed, the contents of the freezer could
spoil before detection. He stated that he felt the public should be protected,
but that both sides should be considered.
Upon roll call the ordinance passed unanimously.
ORDINANCE NO. 2699 APPEARS ON PAGE .2.70 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X .
TOWNHOUSES & CONDOS
City Attorney McCord stated that the ordinance amending the City's
regulations regarding the minimum lot width, area, and other requirements for
townhouses and condominiums had previously been read the three required times
119.4
119.5
119.6
119.7
119.8
119.9
119.10
119.12
119.13
119.14
120
120.1
120.2
120.3
120.4
120.5
and was referred back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission
recommends the ordinance.
Director Henry, seconded by Sharp, moved that the ordinance be brought off
the table. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously with Director Bumpass
absent upon roll call.
Mr. Jeff Slaton, a member of the audience, addressed the Board and told
them that basically he agreed with what the ordinance was trying to do, but
not with the way it went about it. He asked the Board to consider some
alternatives. One would exempt all vacant lots in existing platted and accepted
subdivisions which have adjacent to them a single story structure. Another
alternative would be to exempt any existing platted and accepted subdivisions
in which 15% of the population furnish petitions requesting exemption with the
Planning Administrator within 60 days of the passage of the ordinance.
After further discussion, Director Sharp asked Mr. Slaton if he had had
the opportunity to discuss these alternatives with the Planning Commission and
was advised by Mr. Slaton that he had been back to the Planning Commission.
Director Sharp pointed out that the Planning Commission had referred
the ordinance back to the Board as it was originally, with no amendments.
Upon roll call the ordinance passed unanimously as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
ORDINANCE NO. 2700 APPEARS ON PAGE Lit OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X .
CD ADJUSTMENTS
120.6 Mayor Todd stated
was recommending that
approximately 3.22%.
the $622,000 proposed.
120.7 Director Henry, s
Mr. Mason be approved
"Fair Housing." Upon
that Rick Mason, Director of Community Development,
the dollar amount of each line item be reduced by
The 1981 CDBG amount will be $602,000 instead of
econded by Noland, moved that the recommendation from
and that there be a separate line item of $2,000 for
roll call the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 14-81 APPEARS ON PAGE t23 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X .
NOMINATIONS
120.8 Director Henry, seconded by Lancaster, moved that Melanie Stockdale be
appointed to the Energy Advisory Commission to a term expiring January 1, 1983.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
120.9 Director Henry stated thet the nominating committee was recommending that the
Planning Commission be expanded to include one more position for a total of
ten. She pointed out that only three times during the past year were all nine
members present at the same time.
120.10 Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved that the Planning Commission
be expanded to ten members. Upon roll call the motion failed by a vote of
3-4, with Directors Henry, Sharp, and Osborne voting "yes" and Directors
Todd, Bumpass, Lancaster, and Noland voting "no."
120.11 Director Lancaster moved that both recommendations of the nominating
committee for the Planning Commission be presented to the Board and that the
Board members vote by calling the name of the person they wished to fill the
available position.
120.12 The nominations were Pauline Baker and David Williams.
Upon roll call the vote was five for Williams and two for Baker with
Directors Osborne and Henry voting for Baker and Directors Sharp, Todd, Bumpass,
Lancaster, and Noland voting for Williams.
120.13 Director Henry, seconded by Lancaster, moved that Ed Schweitzer be
appointed to the Bicycle Task Force. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
121
HOOT'S CHICKEN DRIVE-IN/SIGN VARIANCE
Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the item be brought off 121.1
the table. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Director Bumpass, seconded by Osborne, moved that the variance be granted 121.2
until August 1, 1983, or at the time the business changes ownership.
Upon roll call the motion passed by a vote of 4-3, with Directors Sharp, 121.3
Todd, and Lancaster voting "no" and Directors Osborne, Bumpass, Henry, and
Noland voting "yes."
CITY HALL RENOVATION
Director Sharp requested approval of the City Board for City Attorney 121.4
McCord to negotiate with the attorney for the Masonic Lodge on purchasing their
right to the third floor of City Hall.
O Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved that approval be granted. 121.5
01 Upon roll all the motion passed unanimously.
01 RESOLUTION NO. 15-81 APPEARS ON PAGE I 1 6OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X 1
Q SELF-INSURANCE PLAN
a Director Osborne stated that last year the City paid out $9,000 in 121.6
premiums for the $1,000 life insurance plan on city employees. The claims
were only a total of $1,000. He stated that the Finance Committee had decided
that the City could save money by self-insuring. Director Osborne stated that
Bob Hall, the City's insurance consultant, had recommended this be done.
Director Osborne, seconded by Todd, moved that the City self -insure 121.7
this program. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
1
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that budget adjustments for
Water & Sewer and Sanitation Funds be approved. These adjustments were for
the period of the last audit,
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. Ilo-BI APPEARS ON PAGE 1 `7OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK 2C L .
121.8
121.9
CHANGE MEETING DATE IN MARCH
Director Osborne, seconded by Bumpass, moved that the March 17 Board meeting121.10
be changed to March 24.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. 121.11
MINUTES
Director Osborne asked that paragraph 111.3 of the minutes dated 2-2-81 121.12
be corrected to state that 'the motion was made by Director Lancaster instead of
Director Osborne.
Mayor Todd requested that paragraph 105.5 of the minutes dated 2-2-81 be 121.13
corrected to read, "if a developer had a preliminary plat approved before the
passage of this ordinance, the ordinance would not apply,..."
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 12:10 p.m.
121.14