HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-03-02 Minutes1
1 425
MINUTES OF A BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
A meeting of the Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, March 2, 1982,
at 7:00 p.m. in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
PRESENT: Directors Osborne, Sharp, Noland, Burnpass, Henry, and Todd;
City Manager Grimes, City Attorney McCord, Assistant City Manager McWethy,
and City Clerk Rowe; members of the press and audience.
ABSENT: Director Lancaster
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Noland called the meeting to order and asked for a moment of
respectful silence.
Cr REVENUE SHARING BUDGET HEARING
Mayor Noland introduced a public hearing on the proposed 1982 Revenue 425.1
Sharing Budget. The funds will be used for personnel salaries. Mayor Noland
declared the public hearing open and asked if there were any comments from
the audience or members of the Board. There being no comments, Mayor Noland
declared the public hearing closed.
1
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH AWARDS/FEBRUARY 1982
Mayor Noland introduced the three Employees of the Month for the month of 425.2
February. He presented Dianna L. Cobb, Shelby Hardin, and Charles Johnson with
a certificate and a check and noted the comments their supervisors had made.
(Additional information on this item may be found on page "B" of the agenda
of this meeting attached to these minutes.)
PARKING DECK/THIRD LEVEL ON THE FACILITY ADJACENT TO THE CEC
Mayor Noland introduced a recommendation from the City Manager that the 425.3
City proceed with the construction of a third level on the downtown parking
facility adjacent to the Continuing Education Center and the Hilton Hotel.
City Attorney McCord briefly recapped the history behind the parking 425.4
deck project. The parking facility was to be constructed simultaneously with
the CEC building to serve the downtown area. The project was to be secured by
a pledge of the HMR tax and leased revenues paid by the University for the
CEC and from net parking revenue from the parking facility designed to serve
the complex. He stated that the City contracted on June 20, 1978, with a
parking consultant out of Dallas for a parking demand analysis and feasibility
study. On December 1, 1978, a report was submitted from the consultants
recommending construction of a facility containing approximately 300 parking
spaces, but projected revenues from parking alone would not be sufficient to
finance the parking facility, and they recommended a combined bond package to
finance both the CEC and the parking facility. On May 29, 1979, the City Board
authorized an agreement with the consultants and Hailey -Powers Architects for
final plans for the parking facility as recommended. The city's financial
advisor subsequently determined that revenue from all sources would not be
sufficient to fund a bond package large enough to finance simultaneous
construction of both the CEC and the parking facility due to delays caused by
a number of reasons from the original construction date. Construction costs
escalated tremendously, and the bond market deteriorated substantially during
2
426
March 2, 1982
that time. Interest rates on bonds were higher than the
original projection. Because of this, a decision was made to proceed with
the project in phases. The City issued Tourism Revenue Bonds in 1979 to
finance construction of the Continuing Education Center with the proposal
being that if sufficient revenues were available then the construction of
the proposed parking facility would be financed at a later date. Due to
cooperation from the local banks during the past year, the City was able
to issue revenue bonds to finance construction of the first two levels of
the parking facility which would contain approximately 200 spaces. He stated
that there were several complex issues and financial questions, but he would
be glad to answer any legal or financial questions.
426.1 City Manager Grimes stated that the Board had approved the preparation of
plans for three levels and also approved the additional footing necessary to
support the third level; this was an expression of intent by the Board to
build a third level at some time in the future. He felt the City does have
the obligation, when financially possible, to construct the third level.
426.2 Director Sharp stated that he felt the parking facility was basically
to provide parking for downtown businesses, the Hilton Hotel, and the CEC.
He stated that the downtown businesses for years have been paying into a
parking authority to provide parking. He voted to take half of the surplus
from this and build the two-level facility because he felt the City had an
obligation to provide parking. He felt the two levels are adequate at this
time. Director Sharp stated that the City had also pledged to build a
performing arts center with the excess revenue and read from the pledge the
City had made on March 1, 1977. He stated that the City was making some small
steps forward toward this goal. He stated that he would like to transfer the
$180,000 surplus into the performing arts center fund. This money is the
present surplus. He would like to pursue the sales tax rebate. He also
recommended working with the University of Arkansas on looking at a joint
facility between them and the City that would be built and used jointly.
426.3 Director Todd stated that he thought Director Sharp's comments were
good points, and he agreed with all of them except for the transfer of the
$180,000. He stated that this was not a surplus. He stated that the money
should be used for either the debt payment of about $289,000 or for the
advancement from the general fund of around $400,000 toward this project.
He stated that his interpretation was that the performing arts center would
come after these were paid off. He stated that he did not feel the third
level was related to what was considered when a parking complex was initially
considered. He felt the parking responsibility had been met.
426.4 City Attorney McCord stated that he was not advocating any position in
regard to the parking project. He stated that the $180,000 apparent surplus
in the CEC bond construction fund should probably be utilized to meet debt
service requirements that are mandated by the trust indenture. According
to the trust indenture, any surplus in the construction fund was to be used
to repay the General Fund loan. Sometime after October 1, 1984, the City
is going to have to come up with $289,000 to meet the debt service require-
ment. The 1977 resolution does not make any reference to a parking facility.
The discussions at that time contemplated construction of a parking facility
simultaneously with the convention center to be financed bya joint bond
issue. Mr. McCord read from the minutes of May 29, 1979, when the contract
was authorized between the City and the consulting firm and Hailey-Pnwers
where the City agreed to build the convention center and parking garage.
He stated that this Board could do what it deems best at the present time
regarding the facility regardless of any actual or perceived past commitments.
426.5 Mayor Noland asked if there were people in the audience that would
like to comment on the parking deck.
March -2, 1982
3 427
Ms. Linda Welch, a representative of the Northwest Arkansas Cultural 427.1
Council, asked if it was correct that 50% of the surplus was designated to
the construction of a two-level parking garage. She asked when this had
been done.
Mr. McCord stated that this had been done when the bond ordinance for 427.2
first two levels was adopted on October 6, 1981.
Ms. Welch further asked how the HMR tax surplus got involved with the 427.3
bond issue for the parking facility.
Mr. McCord stated that under the trust indenture for the CEC bonds, there 427.4
was a provision stating that any surplus money from the three pledged revenues --
the HMR tax, the University of Arkansas lease payments, and the net parking
revenues off of the two lots --shall be paid over to the City to be used for
O any lawful purpose. Surplus monies are defined to be those funds not needed
to meet debt service requirements on the CEC bonds for the next 12 months, city
0) obligations under the lease agreement which are primarily to pay insurance on
Q) the buildings, and current debt service reserve fund requirements.
Ms. Welch stated that she had come before the Board at an earlier date 427.5
Q when this was discussed and requested that the surplus funds not be used for
Q this purpose, and as she understood at that time, they were not to be. She
wanted to know when and how it was decided that 50% of the surplus was to
be used.
Mr. McCord stated that this decision was made October 6, 1981, when the 427.6
bond ordinance was adopted for the first two levels.
Ms. Welch stated that about two years ago, the City Board passed a 427.7
resolution or reaffirmed an original resolution that surplus funds from the
HMR tax would go to the building of a performing arts center. In other
II/
words, there has been an affirmation twice that the funds would be used for
a performing arts center.
Mayor Noland stated that Mr. McCord's statement going back to the time 427.8
the CEC was first conceived was that all of this would have been part of the
same package. At that time when talking about the use of the HMR taxes, this
was to have been done under one bond issue. This was not done because, as
Mr. McCord indicated, the bond market deteriorated, etc., so the City is
completing the two decks of the parking garage which was part of the entire
original proposition for the CEC plus the necessary parking areas as Director
Sharp indicated for the people patronizing the CEC.
Ms. Welch proposed that the City Board stay with the original idea of 427.9
keeping the funds for a performing arts center. She stated that setting up a
committee was the first step.
Ms. Marion Orton, former Mayor of Fayetteville, addressed the Board. She 427.10
stated that she was concerned about the original commitment in 1977 that was
taken to the voters. The commitments that have come after that should have
been in compliance with what the voters wanted. She stated that when she
campaigned for the sales tax to support these efforts, more people were
interested in the performing arts center than in the CEC. She hopes the Board
will remember the original commitment and not take money away from the building
of the performing arts center.
Mayor Noland stated that based on Mr. McCord's statement, the CEC and 427.11
parking deck were a package when the hotel, motel, and restaurant tax was
being considered.
II/Director Henry asked if Ms. Orton did not consider that there would be 427.12
parking with the Continuing Education Center.
Ms. Orton stated that she did not. She stated that the parking needed 427.13
for the CEC and for people staying at the Mountain Inn and other motels around
was quite different than the parking needed for a privately owned hotel.
428
428.1 4 Director Bumpass stated that it was important to note that there was
an 'ntervening commitment made on 4% of the general sales tax when the
initial statement was made regarding the CEC and parking deck. A portion
of the county sales tax is also designated to go toward the construction of
a performing arts center which is a revenue that was not anticipated when
the intitial commitment was made.
428.2 Director Henry stated that originally the parking deck was considered
as a five -story complex, and then cut down to three. She stated that she
understood that the Board felt at that time that three levels were needed.
She felt the three levels were already planned, and the main issue is whether
to go ahead with the third level at this time or delay the project due to
financial considerations. She felt the whole project was intended but
only delayed originially.
428.3 Mayor Noland asked if any alternative methods of financing had been
explored.
428.4 City Manager Grimes stated that other areas had been looked into, and
nothing had been available.
428.5 Director Todd stated that he remembered the only reason the third level
was considered was because there was interest among the downtown private
concerns to provide a guarantee for a lease arrangement. He stated that he
did not recall the Board considering that the CEC needed three levels.
428.6 Director Osborne stated that he rememberd the Board deciding that three
levels were needed, but only two were affordable at that time. Private
capital was then tried to be located for the third level.
428.7 Director Henry stated that she remembered about the same as Director
Osborne.
428.8 City Attorney McCord stated that he recalled that the two downtown banks,
Mcllroy and First National, asked that bids be received for two and three
levels because they were contemplating financing the third level themselves.
The banks decided not to do that, and the City considered the possibility of
awarding a contract for the first two levels with or without extra strength
footings and substructure so the third level could be added later. The banks
indicated that they would buy the bonds to finance that project.
428.9 Director Osborne asked who had looked into the financial aspects of
constructing a third level.
428.10 City Attorney McCord stated that he had attempted to cover the financing
in his memorandums. He stated that Finance Director Linebaugh agreed with
the revenue projections for the third level that Bill Gould prepared, and
this is assuming the occupancy rate continues as predicted.
428.11 Director Osborne asked if there was any question about whether or not
the third level would be full every day.
428.12 Director Henry stated that she felt the City had almost been maneuvered
into building a third deck when originally it had never been planned.
428.13 Mr. Fred Vorsanger, Vice President of Finance and Administration at
the University of Arkansas, informed the Board of some of the university
activities. He felt this might benefit the Board in making a decision
regarding the third level of the parking deck. From March 1, 1982, through
August of 1982, there are conferences booked that will bring in at least
3,500 people. One of the first questions asked when booking conferences is
about parking facilities. Mr. Vorsanger encouraged the Board to approve the
construction of the third level because of need and because the price would
never be any lower than at present. He further stated that the 1% HMR
tax was passed primarily to build the parking deck and CEC. He stated that
he felt the surplus, if there is one at present, would not build a performing
arts center for many years due to the large cost involved with the center.
March 2, 1982
March 2, 1982
5
429
Mr. McCord stated that both John Lewis and Bill Gould had called him and 429.1
confirmed the banks' willingness to support this project and to buy the
additional bonds if necessary provided the City does make a provision to fund
the additional debt service requirement that arises in October of 1984 that
was overlooked in the regional revenue projections. In regard to the amount
of future revenue from CEC bonds Mr. Vorsanger addressed, in 1990 the surplus
revenue projections total $1,600,000 and in 2004 they are approximately $4,900,000.
A member of the audience stated that he felt parking and commitment were 429.2
the two issues. He gathered from Director Todd's statement that the City had
committed itself to build a performing arts center, but he also gathered that
there was some disagreement on this.
Director Bumpass moved to table the proposal until further consideration 429.3
of other sources of financing. Director Osborne seconded this motion.
Q Mr. Don Loftis, a Center Street merchant, stated that he felt the east 429.4
C) side of town had been discriminated against by a lack of parking. He stated
that the merchants in this area needed additional parking area and urged
the building of a third deck.
Upon roll call the motion to table passed unanimously. 429.5
Mr. Osborne asked that two letters, one from Kennan Jewelry Company 429.6
Q and one from McAllister & Wade Attorneys at Law, be placed on the record in
support of the third parking level. He also stated that John Lewis, Chairman
of the First National Bank, asked Mr. Osborne to extend his apologies for not
being present at the meeting, but he did support the third level.
Mr. Hank Paulea with the Hilton Hotel addressed the Board in favor of the 429.7
third parking level. He stated that the hotel had outlined their parking needs,
and the 300 spaces that are proposed with the three levels falls far short of
II/
their anticipated needs. The lack of parking has already hurt their business
and the CEC's ability to attract seminars and conventions. He stated that the
people that are brought into the state as well as the City will be adding to
the tax revenue for the City.
Director Todd asked how many spaces the Hilton Hotel had built to provide 429.8
for their parking needs. City Attorney McCord replied that he knew of none.•
Director Todd further asked how this had happened,
Mr. McCord stated that there were several approvals granted by the 429.9
Planning Commission and Board of Adjustments in the construction process --the
first of which was approval of off-site parking to meet the parking requirements
for both the CEC and Hilton Hotel. The lot east of the hotel and the lot north
of Mcllroy Bank were both approved. The concept at this point was that a
parking garage would be constructed, and upon completion would exceed the
zoning requirements for both the CEC and Hilton Hotel. There were other
variances approved that authorized valet parking and waiver of minimum stall
size to allow more cars to be parked.
Director Sharp stated that the Hitlon needs were included in the agenda 429.10
with a total amount of 610 parking spaces. He stated that if a new business
opened up, they would be responsible for providing parking spaces.
Director Osborne stated that the Old Post Office Restaurant did not 429.11
provide any parking.
Director Sharp stated that they were an existing business. 429.12
Mr. Charles Wuest addressed the Board.. He stated that if the parking lot 429.13
was needed, he would donate $10 if everyone in the City would, and the lot
could be built.
Mr. McCord stated that he felt he should answer the obvious question of 429.14
why the Hilton does not build the third level themselves. Because of the
tourism revenue bonds the City issued to assist in their financing, under IRS
regulations, the Hilton cannot incur more than $10 million in capital expenditures
430
March 2, 1982
three years prior or after the date of bonds which was March 2, 1982, so the
Hilton cannot incur or commit to incur any additional capital expenditures
until three years from today without losing the tax exempt status on the
interest of these bonds.
ANNEXATION
430.1 Mayor Noland introduced the further consideration of a recommendation from
the Planning Commission that certain areas be considered for annexation into
the City. This had been discussed on at least two occasions in the past year.
(A map is attached from the agenda that designates the areas.) Mayor Noland
stated that the discussion would be conducted on each site independently.
430.2 Site 1. Mayor Noland asked if there was anyone present that wanted to
speak regarding Site 1 (east of 265 and north of Albright Drive).
430.3 City Manager Grimes stated that this was near the growth area boundary
between Springdale and Fayetteville that has been existant for several years.
This area is in the Springdale growth area. He stated that when this original
discussion occurred, the Board asked him to contact the Mayor of Springdale
and ask if there were any problems with the City of Fayetteville annexing the
area. The Springdale Mayor asked that Fayetteville leave the area alone. The
area is currently served from the Springdale water system.
430.4 Director Todd asked if it were surrounded on three sides by City of
Fayetteville property. This was confirmed. Director Todd further asked how
the property north of this location was included in Fayetteville property.
430.5 City Manager Grimes stated that the area north of Site 1 was part of
the Lake Fayetteville property that overlapped Highway 265 and was included
in the Fayetteville property. He stated that it was annexed before this
growth area agreement had been made with Springdale.
430.6 Director Todd stated that Springdale would have to come around the
Fayetteville property to get to this area. He asked how far away was any
Springdale adjacent property. He stated he understood the policy to be
that property could not be annexed unless the annexing city has property
adjacent to the proposed area. Therefore, the adjacent property could only
be reached from going around the east side of the city -owned model airplane
field. He stated that it would probably be several years in the future
before they get to that point.
430.7 Mayor Noland confirmed that the areas north, west, and south of the
proposed site is Fayetteville property and that the property to the north
and west is Lake Fayetteville Park.
430.8 Site 2. Mayor Noland stated that Site 2 consisted of an area west
of 112 Drive-in and a strip of land west of the railroad track and Gregg
Avenue. These are next to the Johnson City limits.
430.9 Director Bumpass asked why the City wanted to annex this property.
430.10 Mayor Noland stated that these were recommendations made by the Planning
Commission.
430.11 Director Todd stated he felt the rationale of the Planning Commission
was that the areas were potential areas for development; therefore, there
should be planning and various controls in these areas as development occurs.
430.12 Site 3. Mayor Noland stated that this was a narrow strip of land
along Highway 112 through the University farm. Mayor Noland asked if Mr.
Vorsanger had any comments on this site.
430.13 Mr. Vorsanger stated that this was the first time he had seen this
potential annexation. He stated that the University would be happy for the
City to take over the property and maintain it.
430.14 City Manager Grimes stated that the primary purpose for annexation was
to be able to provide police protection to the area.
t
Kennan jewelry Company
.25iamonc4 VVaictee, }ewelry, Kepairing
23 EAST CENTER STREET
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72701
March 2, 1982
Fayetteville City Board
Fayetteville,Ark.
Gentlemen:
The parking situation on Center Street has reached a point
where our customers have to double park to come into my
store. There is no turn -over of parking spaces due to the
fact that people who work in this area must park on the
street because there is no other place for them to park.
I hear constant complaints from my customers that they
just don't come down here because it is impossible to find
parking.
If the anticipated growth continues the situation can only
get worse. I think a third level on the parking deck on
Meadow Street would certainly help the problem.
Yours truly,
KENNAN JRY. CO.
W.R. Kennan
1
I
A. D. MCALLISTER. JR.
LYNN F. WADE
McALLISTER & WADE P A
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
20 E. CENTER STREET
P. O. BOX 1000
FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72702
March 2, 1982
Board of Directors
City of Fayetteville
City Hall
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Re: Parking Deck - Third Level
Meadow Street
Dear Board Members:
We would like to note our support of the addition of a third
level on the Meadow Street parking deck if same appears to
be financially justified.
At the present time, it appears that parking in the downtown
Fayetteville area is somewhat limited and in view of the
recent improvements in the downtown area and anticipated
additional improvements, it would appear that there would be
sufficient need for the third level parking.
Your consideration is appreciated.
Very truly yours,
McLISTER & 4%kDE, P. A.
LFW/tac
CLIFTON WADE
II 910-19941
521-1411
AREA CODE 501
1
March 2, 1982
7 431
Site 4. Mayor Noland stated that this site was on Mt. Comfort Road which 431.1
includes a trailer park which is surrounded on three sides by city limits and
another stretch to the west where there are several houses.
There were no comments on this site. 431.2
Site 5. Mayor Noland stated that this was along Highway 16 West north 431.3
and south of Highway 16, and west of Ruple Road.
There were no comments on this site. 431.4
Site 6. Mayor Noland stated that this was in the Willowby area, east of 431.5
City Lake Road and south of Willowby Road, north and east of the airport and
a small parcel south of the terminal building.
Director Todd asked if this was proposed as an area to be annexed in the 431.6
future in phases,
O Mayor Noland stated that this annexation was not immediately essential, 431.7
but there were some industrial park areas being developed.
City Manager Grimes pointed out that the small site of property south of 431.8
the airport between Fayetteville and Greenland city limits was recommended
for immediate annexation.
Site 7. This includes a strip of land on each side of Highway 45. It was 431.9
Q confirmed that the strip of land is about 660 feet on each side of the
highway centerline.
Mr. Charles Wuest stated that they had received information from the 431.10
Attorney General that his opinion would be ready by March 31, 1982, on the
zoning requirements, etc. He stated that as chairman of the group that was
appointed on Highway 45 East, he would recommend that this discussion be
tabled until after reviewing the Attorney General's report and recommendations.
He stated that the committee had become concerned after not hearing from the
' Attorney General's Office, so he had contacted Judge Johnson and requested his
assistance. Information regarding the opinion had then been received.
It was discussed that there were two sites included in Site 7. The area 431.11
around Highway 45 was recommended for immediate annexation, and the other area
was recommended for annexation at some unspecified future time.
A member of the audience stated that the previous annexation discussions 431.12
had stimulated action from the Goshen Fire Department and cooperation with
LEMS. He stated that this area felt somewhat self-sufficient, and did not
feel the urge to be annexed.
Mr. Henson stated that he would not let the City annex his property. 431.13
Mr. Peter Harkins stated that irrespective of what the Attorney General 431.14
decides, the Quorum Court has not accepted anything so far. He stated that
it would be best for the City to convince the Quroum Court that there should
be a planned use plan for the county. He suggested the interested parties
petition the Quorum Court in this regard. He suggested tabling the issue
until after the Quroum Court meets on the 10th of April.
Director Osborne stated that he agreed with Mr. Harkins. He stated that 431.15
some people were concerned about the type of uses for the land. He felt the
purpose of county planning in this area would be to protect the property
interests and investments people have in the area.
Director Bumpass stated that county zoning could be beneficial to the 431.16
residents and property owners of this area.
A member of the audience stated that 600 feet on either side of the highway 431.17
would not eliminate all undesirable businesses, etc., from being published.
She questioned some of the present zoning and asked if the "protection"
provided by the City zoning was really present.
432
8
March 2, 1982
432.1 Mr. Ron Sherwood stated that he was concerned about the people living
in the area. He stated that this area has already developed. He felt the
City needed to have an all inclusive zoning plan completely around the
city limits. He stated that a comprehensive plan would help eliminate
future problems regarding zoning and/or annexation questions. He stated
that there was a psychology associated with home buyers --they either wanted
to be in the city or outside of the city --and this is a strong feeling
among them which determines where they purchase property. He stated that
for people in a suburban area, a standard set of zoning ordinances would
not work.
432.2 Mayor Noland stated that he thought the joint planning question between
city and county was one of the questions presented to the Attorney General
for his opinion.
432.3 Charles Wuest stated that the basic reason for the letter that went to
the Attorney General was to provide a basis for zoning if the Attorney
General stated that the proposed agreement between the city and the county
would be acceptable.
432.4 Director Osborne made a motion to annex Sites 2-6 and have the question
placed on the May 25 ballot.
432.5 City Attorney McCord stated that by law the City could not annex property
that was strictly agricultural and has its highest and best use in agri-
culture. There are some properties within some of the proposed that fit
into this category. To call the election, an ordinance will have to be
passed, and the ordinance should include accurate legal descriptions of all
of the areas proposed for annexation. If Director Osborne's motion passes,
then at the next meeting, he suggested the Board adopt an annexation
ordinance. Mr. McCord further requested that he be provided with accurate
legal descriptions and let the property owners make any contentions they
desire regarding their property so they could be excluded. By adopting
the annexation ordinance at the next meeting, it would give the election
commission adequate time to have the ballot question prepared.
432.6 Director Osborne altered his motion stating the motion was to annex
the property recommended for immediate annexation in Sites 2 through 6 that
qualify under the definition the City Attorney just outlined and for the
City Attorney to be responsible for working with the City Engineer to
determine the proper legal descriptions of those areas. Mayor Noland
seconded this motion.
432.7 Director Todd asked if the Planning Commission had not already looked
into this question and represented it on the site maps by distinguishing
between areas recommended for immediate annexation and those recommended
for future annexation.
432.8 Director Osborne stated that he intended the motion to be such that
the City Attorney could include the areas that qualify and leave out the
ones that do not.
432.9 City Attorney McCord stated that he did not want to be put into the
position of making factual determinations. He stated he felt the Board
should make the factual determinations. If the motion is to annex the portions
of Sites 2-6, less the agricultural areas, that are recommended for immediate
annexation, then there would be no problem associated with this.
432.10 Director Todd stated that logically he felt Site 1 should be included
in Fayetteville city limits rather than Springdale.
432.11 City Manager Grimes stated that concerning this property, when Jim
Lindsay contacted the City of Fayetteville requesting water for the areas,
the City sent him to Springdale because the property was in Springdale's
projected growth area. Everything that has been done up to this point has
1
0
Q)
O)
7
Q
Q
March 2, 1982
3433
honored the boundary that has been drawn between the Fayetteville and Springdale
growth areas. Mr. Lindsay called Mr. Grimes and reminded him of this.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. The primary will be May
25, 1982.
Director Bumpass asked if on Site 1 something in writing from the City
of Springdale could be obtained regarding how and when they plan to do
something with the property.
Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved to table the discussion
on Site 7 until after the Quorum Court has had time to consider the Attorney
General's opinion.
Director Todd asked if there were any deadlines the City should be aware
of when considering this matter.
City Attorney McCord stated that if the City Board passed an annexation
ordinance at the next meeting, this would put the election commission on
notice that there would be a ballot question. If the City decides to add
Site 7 later, it could be added to the ballot because no legal descriptions
are on the ballots.
The motion was amended to move to table discussion on Site 7 until the
second meeting in April. Director Osborne seconded this.
The motion passed unanimously upon roll call.
Director Todd, seconded by Osborne, moved that Site 1 also be considered
at the second meeting in April.
Upon roll call the motion passed 5 to 1, with Director Henry voting in
the minority.
CD BUDGET/1982 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT BUDGET
Mayor Noland introduced the proposed items for further consideration to
be included in the 1982 Community Development Block Grant Budget. He stated
that the Board had ranked the items from the highest to lowest priority. (The
list of ranked items can be found on page "F" of the attached agenda.)
Mr. Rick Mason stated that the Board needed to determine the list of
projects to be funded in the 1982 CD Budget. This list will be published in
the newspaper before the next board meeting to allow for public comment.
Mayor Noland asked if a waiver would have to be granted for the floor -
covering at the Shelter for Domestic Violence. Mr. Mason stated that he
felt there would have to be a waiver, and he felt that it would not be granted.
He stated that the smoke detectors for the LMIF families should be handled in
this same manner.
Mr. Mason outlined the funds that would be available for the 1982-1983
Budget:
$521,000 -
1,578 -
36,785 -
559,363 -
- 68,000 -
- 50,000 -
$441,363 -
1982-83 Grant
urban renewal grant
payback from General Fund
total
less administrative budget
contingency for cost overruns
BALANCE
Mr. Mason stated that he felt the housing rehabilitation item was a top
priority item and requested the total amount requested to be funded. For this
past year there was about $190,000 in the housing rehabilitation program.
Director Todd asked how much of the administrative budget was devoted
to housing rehabilitation. Mr. Mason stated that he did not know the percent.
He has 1 full-time and 1 half-time employee working on this project.
433.1
433.2
433.3
433.4
433.5
433.6
433.7
433.8
433.9
433.10
433.11
433.12
433.12
433.13
433.14
10
March 2, 1982
434
434.1 Director Todd stated that he felt there were several items that would
have a lot more impact than housing rehabilitation and cost less for
administration.
434.2 Mayor Noland stated that the first two items were listed with top
priority ratings. He felt these should be included, and he would like to hear
discussion from the Board considering the rest of the items.
434.3 Director Henry stated that she would like to include the first four
items since they received a 1.0 or a 1.1 factor. She further stated that
she would like to include the Washington Mountain Project.
434.4 Mayor Noland suggested picking up the smaller priced projects --numbers
8, 11, and 12.
434.5 Director Todd asked if it was absolutely necessary to make this
decision tonight.
434.6 Mr. Mason stated that the list decided upon had to be published before
the next meeting.
434.7 Director Henry suggested putting $50,000 to $75,000 in Jefferson Park
South.
434.8 Mr. Mason stated that the funds that the Board allocated at the last
meeting toward the Jefferson Park South project plus an additional amount
which would be less than $75,000 should allow the park to be completed.
434.9 Mr. Bill Waite stated that this was not the opinion of the Parks and
Recreation Board, rather it was Mr. Mason's opinion.
434.10 Director Henry stated that she would like to include general historic
preservation on the list.
434.11 Mayor Noland stated his support for Oakland, Berry, and Eagle Streets.
Mayor Noland asked Mr. Waite how much it would cost to complete one soccer
and one softball field at Jefferson Park South.
434.12 Mr. Waite stated that it would cost $80,000 to level the whole area.
Mayor Noland asked him if the fields could be completed for the $75,000
that was allocated to the project in the previous board meeting. Mr. Waite
reported that he was not sure if it could be completed for this amount.
434.13 Director Bumpass stated that he would like item 18 --the Dickson Street
property --to be considered. He stated that this could end up in producing
some revenue for the City. He asked if the property were purchased and
resold, would there be any restrictions for the use of the money.
434.14 Mr. Mason stated that the funds would have to be re -programmed through
the CD budget process.
434.15 Director Osborne stated that the problem with this would be how long it
might take to sell the land taking into consideration today's economy.
434.16 Director Bumpass asked if the property would have to be sold at the
appraised value.
434.17 Mr. Mason stated that the property would be appraised after the
improvements were made, and it could not be sold for less than that amount.
434.18 Director Bumpass asked if the property could be sold under an installment
contract. Mr. Mason stated that he did not know.
434.19 Director Sharp wanted to know if there was any way to improve the
property without having to buy it. He stated that he felt Director Lancaster
would want to know this.
434.20 Director Osborne stated that there were ordinances on the books to
take care of this type problem.
434.21 There was some general discussion about how much to allocate to the
housing rehabilitation program. Director Todd stated that he did not know
what the minimum amount would be to allocated that would not mean as much or
more overhead costs as actual housing rehabilitation costs.
434.22 Mayor Noland asked if there would be any contingency money left from
the 1981-82 program that could be put back into this program.
March 2, 1982
11 435
Mr. Mason stated that there would be none after the last of the projects 435.1
for this time period were completed.
Mr. Marshall Evans, a member of the Housing Rehabilitation Board, addressed 435.2
the Board and made some general comments regarding the benefits of the housing
rehabilitation program. He stated that this was one area where the City could
benefit its citizens in regard to housing, as the Board was attempting through
the proposed landlord -tenant fire protection ordinance that has been discussed.
He felt parks and streets had received a larger portion of the community
development funds than had housing rehabilitation projects, which he feels
should have a higher priority. He contacted the people in the areas he
represents and took a poll on their priorities of the proposed list for
consideration for the CD funds. The top priority from this group was the solid
waste disposal project.
Mayor Noland asked how many houses had been rehabilitated with this type
funds in Fayetteville. Mr. Mason stated about 85 to 100 houses. Mr. Mason
stated that $150,000 would allow 20 to 22 houses to be repaired, and $100,000
would probably repair between 12 and 15 houses.
Director Henry, seconded by Sharp, moved to allocate $100,000 to housing
rehabilitation. Upon roll call the motion failed by a vote of 3 to 3, with
Directors Osborne, Bumpass, and Todd voting against the motion.
Director Sharp, seconded by Henry, moved to allocate $75,000 to housing
rehabilitation. Director Bumpass asked if there would be an administrative
overhead fee that would make lowering the allocation to this point impractical.
Mr. Mason stated that he could not justify a full-time staff person with
only $75,000 going toward the project.
Director Todd asked if the housing rehabilitation program were scaled
down, could the majority of the administrative work be done by Mr. Mason to
reduce staffing needs.
He stated that theoretically he could, but priority -wise, he would not
know for sure what to do.
Mayor Noland stated that the Board had expressed their priority according
to how they ranked the projects.
Director Todd stated that he did not want any time spent on soliciting
people to join the CD programs.
Upon roll call the motion to allocate $75,000 failed by a vote of 3 to 3,
with Directors Osborne, Bumpass, and Todd voting against the motion.
Mayor Noland proposed allocating $60,000 to the North Oakland drainage
project and $60,000 to the Oakland, Berry, and Eagle Street improvements.
City Manager Grimes stated that $60,000 would not get very far on the
drainage project.
Director Bumpass asked what historic preservation would include.
Mr. Mason stated that it was basically the same as housing rehabilitation
except it was for property that is located on the historic register. He
stated that because of having to conform with federal guidelines, the cost
of each project was rather expensive.
Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved to allocate $100,000 to the
Oakland, Berry, and Eagle Streets project.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Director Sharp moved to allocate the remaining $26,000 to the Haddon
Street project. He asked Mr. Mason if this amount of money would blacktop
the road.
Mr. Mason stated that it probably would.
There was some general discussion about placing the remaining funds into
the Oakland/Berry/Eagle Streets project to insure sufficient funding.
435.3
435.4
435.5
435.6
435.7
435.8
435.9
435.10
435.11
435.12
435.13
435.14
435.15
435.16
435.17
435.18
435.19
435.20
March 2, 1982
12
436.
436.1 Director Henry stated that she felt some funds should be allocated to
housing rehabilitation.
436.2 Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved to allocate the remaining
funds, approximately $26,000, to housing rehabilitation.
436.3 Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC TRANSIT/REPORT FROM PUBLIC TRANSIT COMMITTEE
436.4 Mayor Noland introduced a report from the Public Transit Committee
regarding the continuance of bus service in Fayetteville. (Background
information may be found on pages "F' and "G" of the attached agenda.)
436.5 Mr. Dale Christy addressed the Board and outlined the background
information concerning the possibilities of continuing bus service in
Fayetteville. He stated that it was the recommendation of the Transit
Committee to recommend to the Board the consideration of the feasibility
study of all phases of the public transit system. The Highway Department
would fund 80% of the study, and the Regional Planning Commission would fund
the local 20% share of the estimated $11,000. In conjunction with this, there
have been proposed some minor scheduling ad0ustments that would help insure
continuance of the bus service through the current contract date of June 30.
436.6 Mayor Noland asked how long it would take to conduct the study. Mr.
Christy stated about 3 to 6 months. He confirmed that the study would
include the Fayetteville -Springdale urban areas because of the scope of the
study funds.
436.7 Mayor Noland asked what was needed from the Board at this time. Mr.
Christy stated that he would need a resolution authorizing the City Manager
to ask the Highway Department and Regional Planning Commission to fund the
study. With this funding approval, guidelines for the study would be extended,
then the City could advertise for a private firm to do the study.
436.8 An audience member stated that he would be willing to pay a little
more for each trip if this would insure the continuation of service.
436.9 Mrs. Stephens, of the League of Women Voters, stated that she felt the
Highway Department wanted some indication from the City that they would
apply for Section 5 funding if the feasibility study shows it advantageous.
436.10 Mr. Christy stated that he felt the only commitment needed was that the
City would be willing to look into Section 5 funding if the feasibility
study indicates it advantageous.
436.11 Director Henry, seconded by Sharp, moved to authorize the feasibility study.
436.12 Director Todd asked what would happen after June 30, 1982, if the study
takes longer than this to complete.
436.13 Mr. Christy stated that Section 18 funding could be used during a
transition period if the City is considering Section 5 funding.
436.14 Director Todd asked if there was any indication from the Community
Resource Group that they were interested in continuing service after June 30,
1982.
436.15 Mr. John Squires of the Community Resource Group indicated their
interest in continuing service if feasible. He stated if the study was
undertaken and there was an interest in maintaining some continuity of
service until a decision is made, Ozark Transit would not be able to wait
until June 30 to start renegotiating a contract from June 30 until Section 5
funding becomes available. He stated that this could be a month-to-month
contract so that when and if the transition does take place, this interim
contract could be canceled.
436.16 Director Todd asked if he had given any consideration as to what the
cost would be on a month-to-month continuation basis.
1
1
March 2 1982
13 437
Mr. Squires stated that Ozark Transit would continue their marketing 437.1
program and hopefully there would be an increase in ridership. He stated that
they would try and remain as close to the current contract price as possible.
Upon roll call the motion to request funding from the Regional Planning 437.2
Commission passed unanimously.
ACT 9 BONDS/ARKANSAS WESTERN GAS
Mayor Noland introduced an ordinance authorizing the issuance of $1,000,000 437.3
in "Act 9" Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for Arkansas Western Gas Company.
Mayor Noland opened a public hearing on the issuing of the bonds. He asked 437.4
if there was anyone present wishing to speak against the bonds being issued.
There was no comment against the issuance, so Mayor Noland asked if there was
O anyone present wishing to speak for the issuance.
Mr. James Walker, Arkansas Western Gas, extended his appreciation to the 437.5
Q) City for their cooperation regarding this project.
(3) Mayor Noland declared the public hearing closed. 437.6
City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Director 437.7
Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance
Q be placed on second reading. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously,
and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time.
Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved that the rules be further 437.8
suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and fi.nalireading. Upon roll
call the motion passed unanimously, and the City Attorney read the ordinance
for the third time.
There being no discussion, upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. 437.9
ORDINANCE NO. 2795 APPEARS ON PAGE /13- OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )C.((
SIDEWALK WAIVER/1ST NATIONAL BANK FOR PROPERTY AT OLD WIRE RD. & CENTURY DR.
Mayor Noland introduced a request by First National Bank for a waiver of 437.10
the literal requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, regarding the instal-
lation of sidewalks on property located near the intersection of Old Wire
Road and Century Drive. Mayor Noland stated that Director Sharp would report
from the Street Committee.
Director Sharp stated that the Street Committee did recommend that 437.11
because of the location and small amount of sidewalks that the requirements
for sidewalks be delayed. In other words, this is a temporary delay with a
bill of assurances.
Director Sharp, seconded by Todd, moved to grant the temporary deferral. 437.12
Upon roll call the motion passed by a vote of 5 to 0 to 1, with 437.13
Director Sharp abstaining.
STREET WAIVER/WATSON STREET BETWEEN THOMPSON AND ST. CHARLES
Mayor Noland introduced a request by Ozark Guidance Center for a waiver
of the literal requirements of the Master Street Plan, for property located
on the south side of Watson Street between Thompson and St. Charles.
Director Sharp stated that the Street Committee was recommending a
temporary waiver and a bill of assurance. Mayor Noland seconded this motion.
Director Osborne asked if this would affect the parking in the area in
any way.
Mayor Noland stated that even if the road was widened, the architect
indicated that part of a parked car would still be out in the existing line
of the street.
Upon roll call the motionpassed 5 to 1, with Director Todd voting in
the minority.
437.14
437.15
437.16
437.17
437.18
138
14
March 2, 1982
BUDGET APPROVAL/1982 GENERAL, PUBLIC WORKS, AIRPORT, REVENUE SHARING, AND
CITY SHOP FUNDS BUDGETS
438.1 Mayor Noland introduced the approval of the 1982 Budget for the General,
Public Works, Airport, Revenue Sharing, and City Shop funds budgets.
438.2 Finance Director Scott Linebaugh stated that several minor adjustments
had been made to the budget. The one major item was that approximately
$50,000 was not included in estimated 1981 revenues of sales tax money and
should have been included. Mr. Linebaugh briefly outlined the minor changes
made to the budgets which consisted primarily of account name changes. (A
copy of the Finance Director's memorandum is attached.)
438.3 Director Osborne made a motion to approve the budget which was seconded
by Director Todd.
438.4 Director Todd recommended several changes for the budget. He stated that
there was over $100,000 allocated to sidewalks, and he would like for the
Street Committee to select which projects would be undertaken. Secondly, he
did not have time to look at each of the streets that have been selected for
improvements, but he felt either the City Manager or Assistant City Manager
should make the final approval of these projects. Third, Director Todd
recommended deferring the hiring of additional fire and police personnel
until the public safety officer program could be studied. Director Todd's
final recommendation was for the overtime policy to be reviewed by the Board.
If there is not an overtime policy, then the City Manager should develop one.
He would like to know who decides and on what basis overtime is granted.
438.5 City Manager Grimes stated that the personnel policy included an
overtime policy.
438.6 Director Todd stated that he would also like to know what the policy is
in terms of travel justification and the reimbursement policy. He stated
that he was not suggesting that something was wrong, but that it needed
reviewing.
438.7 Assistant City Manager David McWethy reminded the Board that the City
was waiting on the hiring of the additional fire fighters to send off the
letter to ISO for a "Class 4" re -rating.
438.8 City Attorney McCord stated that he felt there should be a separate
motion on the deferring of hiring the additional personnel.
438.9 Director Todd, seconded by Noland, made a motion to amend the budget
by deferring the hiring of the additional fire and police personnel until
the study of the public safety officer program could be conducted. Upon
roll call the motion passed unanimously.
438.10 There being no further discussion on the budget, upon roll call the
budget was adopted as amended by a unanimous vote.
438.11 Director Osborne stated that the pie chart in the front of the budget
showing the incomes and expenditures was very beneficial and highly
recommended its use.
RESOLUTION NO. 31-82 APPEARS ON PAGE I o OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )(kV
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS/$1,000 LINE ITEMS
438.12 Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the Finance Director
to make budget adjustments of up to $1,000 per line item over the respective
amounts reflected in the 1982 budgets.
438.13 Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved to approve this resolution.
438.14 Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 32-82 APPEARS ON PAGE I70 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK KW
1
i
FAYHTTEVILLE, A3 -KANSAS
P.O. DRAWER F
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
72701 1501)521-7700
MEMORANDUM
TO: Fayetteville City Board of Directors
FROM: Scott C. Linebaugh, Finance Director 5"
SUBJECT: 1982 General Budget Recommended Changes
DATE: March 2, 1982
ro
The following changes have been recommended since reviewal of the budget.
These changes are on the detail schedules which will also change the summariza-
tion schedules.
General Fund:
1. Page 3 - Revenue Detail - Estaimated 1981 Sales Tax Revenue (Acct. #304-0)
estimates a figure of $377,095. This should be $429,959. Budgeted 1982
Sales Tax (Acct. #304-0) shows $948,711. This should show $894,550.
Sales tax funds planned originally for 1981 City Hall Renovation were not
committed officially until 1982 for expenditure. Therefore, they were
added to General Fund in 1981. (Note: See attached Surplus Schedule to
see the flow of sales tax in General Fund and the reason for surplus
funds at the end of 1982.)
2. Page 29 - Finance Department - Acct. #20-048 Travel and Training.
Reads: MFOA Meeting - $2,000
Should read: MFOA Meetings - Regional and National - $2,000
3. Page 51 - Police Department - Acct. 420-036 Personnel Safety Equipment
$6,800 is changed to be combined with Acct. #20-041 Uniform Allowance.
The title of "Uniform Allowance" is changed to "Uniforms and Personal
Equipment."
4. Page 57 - Fire Department - Acct. #20-041 reads "Uniforms Allowance."
This should read "Uniforms and Personal Equipment."
Page 73 - Animal Control. The item titled "Overtime" should read "Overtime
and Part -Time."
Page 78 - Parks and Recreation - Acct. #25-080 Buildings and Grounds
Maintenance should read "Includes $3,000 for maintenance of the
Downtown Garden Park."
•
•
•
Fayetteville City Board of Directors
March 2, 1982
Page 2
Public Works:
1. Page 9 - Public Works - Street - Acct. #20-048
Reads: APWA Meeting - Houston - $1,600
Should read: APWA Meeting - Houston - $800
APWA Meetings - Other - $800
Sales Tax:
1. Page 1 - Sales Tax - Revenue and Expenditures -
Reads: City Hall Renovation - $54,193
Should read: City Hall Renovation - $00
No expenditures of sales tax revenue are shown
did not authorize expenditures for any purpose
in 1982 expend sales tax funds received in 1981
City Hall Renovation, and City Hospital).
2. Pages 5 and 6 will change the same as items (3) and (4) for the
General Fund (above).
Travel and Training.
Estimated 1981.
for 1981 because the Board
until 1982. Many accnunts
(i.e., Parks Pool, CEMS,
Shop:
1. Page 5 - Personnel Schedule - Overtime - A footnote is to be added to read
"57,000 of this overtime is a one-time expenditures for reorganization of
inventory and operations."
If the above changes are adopted by the Board with the budget, we will
be glad to change your affected pages if you will bring your budget by the
Finance Director's Office.
f
1
1
March 2, 1982
15 439
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT/WATER & SEWER FUND BUDGET
Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the approval by the
Board of a budget adjustment in the Water & Sewer Budget, for the period
ending October 31, 1982. Mayor Noland stated that the amount was approximately
$9,000.
Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved to approve the resolution.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION 33-82 APPEARS ON PAGE /7/ OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIV
DATA PROCESSING/CONTRACT WITH J. K. TURNER AND ASSOCIATES - 'oil •''IJL —
Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk 439.4
to execute a contract with J. K. Turner and Associates for the preparation of
a detailed set of specifications for 'fund management" computer software. He
stated that this contract is not to exceed $2,100.
Finance Director Linebaugh stated that this has been recommended by 439.5
Mr. Abe Winters. The vendors then would have to comply with the detailed
specifications when acquiring the software.
Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved to approve the resolution. 439.6
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. 439.7
City Attorney McCord reported on the status of the computer problem 439.8
investigation. He has interviewed all of the necessary people and hopes to
have a written report submitted within 45 days.
Director Todd asked if there were others in the same situation as the 439.9
City of Fayetteville.
City Attorney McCord stated that he had seen newspaper accounts of other 439.10
litigation over computer problems.
RESOLUTION NO. 34-82 APPEARS ON PAGE j 72.. OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X RU
439.1
439.2
439.3
LOAN CONFIRMATION/TO FUND CONSTRUCTION OF THE CEC.
Mayor Noland introduced a resolution documenting the
of $420,000 bearing 10% interest from October 1, 1979, to fund the construction
of the Continuing Education Center.
Director Osborne, seconded by Todd, made a motion to approve this
resolution.
Director Osborne stated that this was documentation that the auditors
needed.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 35-82 APPEARS ON PAGE )75 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X lV
city's previous loans 439.11
RATE STUDY/AMENDMENT TO 1980 WATER RATE STUDY
Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the execution of an
amendment to a 1980 water rate study contract to reflect changes due to
inflation since that time. Mayor Noland stated that this would be for the
waste water rate study. This would enable the same engineering firm, Black
and Veatch, to continue their study.
The delay in completing the study was at the city's request. Finance
Director Linebaugh stated that the City was trying to acquire EPA funding
for the study, but this was unsuccessful.
Mayor Noland stated that this amendment would take the rates up to the
point where the City needs to make a decision about a new sewage treatment
plant. This would not mean that the rate study would have to be completely
redone at the time of a new sewage treatment plant, just brought up to date
to take the new plant into account.
439.12 :
439.13
439.14
439.15
439.16
439.17
440
440.1
440.2
440.3
440.4
440.5
440.6
440.7
440.8
440.9
440.10
440.11
440.12
March 2, 1982
16
Director Todd asked what was the general rate of increase in this
contract rate.
Mr. Linebaugh reported that the increase was a little over 30% for the
two-year period. He stated that he had discussed this with Mr. Brown
because of the large percentage, and Mr. Brown stated that this was their
normal increase for the two-year period.
Mayor Noland stated that this did seem a little high for the period.
Mr. Linebaugh confirmed that this increase would apply only to future work.
Director Osborne stated that it was the principle of the matter that
bothered him. The City did not give its employees this percentage of a raise,
and heknew of no one that received this large an increase.
Mayor Noland stated that this increase was for a two-year period, and
there were some city employees that had received this type of increase.
Director Todd asked what the total price of the study would be.
Mayor Noland stated that the total price would not exceed $32,000
without further authorization.
Director Todd stated that the total increase would be around $7,000.
He asked if the City had been satisfied with the past work of Black & Veatch.
City Manager Grimes stated that he had been happy with their work.
Mr. Linebaugh stated that the maximum increase due to the rate increase
would be $7,600. He stated that since this company was familiar with the
case, it would cost the City more to go to another consultant. Therefore,
he had no recommendation other than to proceed with this even though he did
feel the increase was rather high.
Director Todd, seconded by Sharp, moved to adopt the resolution.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 36-82 APPEARS ON PAGE /7(9 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIV
SOCIAL SECURITY
440.13 Mayor Noland introduced the further consideration of a resolution
notifying the Social Security Administration of the city's intent to drop
out of the Social Security program.
440.14 City Manager Grimes stated that the department heads did have a meeting
with Dr. Hall discussing the pros and cons of submitting the letter of intent
to opt out of Social Security. He stated that Dr. Hall reported there would
be no problems associated with submitting a letter of intent. In fact, he
encouraged the letter before Social Security cuts out this possible option.
The City has nearly three years to decide whether to opt out or not. The
department heads voted unanimously to submit this letter.
440.15 Director Todd moved the resolution.
440.16 Director Sharp asked why Dr. Hall did not include this recommendation
in his letter to Scott Linebaugh.
440.17 Director Henry stated that Dr. Hall's letter was written long before
this discussion. Director Henry talked with Dr. Hall who is presently doing
a study of this type for a couple of other companies. The study has to be
done on an employee -by -employee basis in order to validly determine the
benefits of Social Security and alternate programs.
440.18 Mr. Linebaugh stated that Mr. Bill Gray of the Social Security Administration
recommended giving notice to opt out because the administration is
anticipating eliminating this option.
440.19 Mayor Noland seconded the motion to submit the letter of intent.
440.20 Director Todd stated that he would like there to be an understanding
that there would be a mandatory retirement program for employees.
440.21 Mr. Grimes stated that he had told the department heads he felt that
this was the intention of the Board and that a program would be mandatory.
1
1
1
March 2, 1982
47441
Director Osborne stated that the City could take the same amount of
money that was going to Social Security and invest it and obtain comparable
and hopefully better benefits for the employees. He stated that he was only
interested in the best --possible benefits for the employees.
City Manager Grimes stated that'. the "smorgasbord" concept had been
discussed in the department head meetings to enable each employee to select
the specific benefits to best fit his needs.
Upon roll call the motion passed 5 to 1, with Director Bumpass voting
in the minority.
RESOLUTION NO. 37-82 APPEARS ON PAGE /r72 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIV
PERFORMING ARTS CENTER DISCUSSION
Mayor Noland introduced a request regarding the formation of a Performing
Arts Center Committee. He stated that it was generally determined that a
committee of this needed to be formed to determine the needs of the City.
He stated that he had never seen a written recommendation to the City Board
regarding a performing arts center. He outlined several objectives that the
proposed committee should address and hoped to have this report completed
by October 1.
Director Todd stated that he did not want to bind the City or Board to
anything at the present time regarding this center.
Director Henry suggested making the committee an ad-hoc committee of
the Board.
An audience member stated that from the cultural council point of view,
he suggested putting a notice in the paper informing interested parties about
the meetings of the committee.
The objective in question regarded the possibility of the proposed
committee becoming an advisory group to the City Board if the art center is
established concerning the use policy and other matters relating to the
center.
Director Henry stated that a sub -committee of the Board would basically
hold 'hearings and ask interested parties for their input rather than forming
a separate committee.
Mayor Noland stated his concern about the necessary time required of
the Board members to hold these meetings over the six month period.
Mayor Noland asked if the Board preferred a board committee. Director
Osborne preferred a separate committee because of the time period involved
before the City could actually construct a center. Director Bumpass stated
that he preferred a board committee.
After general discussion about the committee, Mayor Noland appointed
Directors Henry, Sharp, and Bumpass to serve on the committee and decide if
this should be a board function or a separate committee.
A member of the audience addressed the Board and commented that she had
involved in this sort of thing before and was aware of the large amount of
work involved. She stated this should be considered by the Board in deciding
who should be members of the committee.
Mr. Dale Christy stated he felt the City was progressing in the right
direction in regard to the center.
Director Todd stated that the committee might consider a written response.
Mayor Noland stated that the Board would look for a report from this
subcommittee regarding the Performing Arts Center,
441.1
441.2
441.3
441.4
441.5
441.6
441.7
441.8
441.9
441.10
441.11
441.12
441.13
441.14
441.15
441.16
A 7 2
t
18
March 2, 1982
NOMINATIONS
442.1 Mayor Noland introduced the nominations for the Ad -Hoc Closing Hours
Committee, Advertising & Promotion Commission, Board of Adjustments, Board
of Housing & Construction Appeals, Civil Service Commission, Energy Advisory
Commission, Licensing Board for Dance Halls, Historic District Commission,
Industrial Park Committee, Library Board of Trustees, Planning Commission,
and Public Transit Committee that would be presented by Director Henry.
442.2 Director Henry reported the following nominations:
442.3 Ad -Hoc Closing Hours Committee: Carlon Basset, "Butch" Coger, Carl
Collier, Tom DeMont, Joe Fennel, Wally Gieringer, and Danny Villines.
Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved this recommendation.
442.4 Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
442.5 Advertising and Promotion Commission: For the unexpired term previously
held by George Johnson, ending April 1, 1983, Peter Darabaris was nominated.
The nomination for a full term ending April 1, 1986, was Buddy Zisner.
Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved these nominations.
442.6 Director Bumpass stated that he had noticed that Buddy Zisner was
selling his restaurant in the Planning Commission Minutes. He asked if Mr.
Zisner would still be eligible to serve on the committee.
442.7 Mr. McWethy stated that Mr. Zisner had informed him that he was not
selling all of his interest, rather the restaurant was gaining another partner.
442.8 Director Bumpass asked what the requirements were to serve on the
committee.
442.9 Mr. McWethy stated that a person had to be either an owner or manager
of a hotel, motel, or restaurant.
442.10 Director Osborne stated that he had nominated Mr. Dale Athey. He
stated that Mr. Zisner had been a good and loyal attendant at meetings, and
as he understood, Mr. Zisner has had much to offer.
442.11 Upon roll call the nominations were approved unanimously.
442.12 Board of Adjustments: This needs to be readvertised.
442.13 Board of Housing and Construction Appeals: This needs to be readvertised.
442.14 Civil Service Commission: For a full term ending April 1, 1988, Director
Henry made a motion to approve the reappointment of Howard Brill. Director
Sharp seconded this motion.
442.15 Director Henry stated that Mr. Brill had served a part of a term and
had served well.
442.16 Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
442.17 Energy Advisory Commission: For the unexpired term previously held by
Johnny Adkins, ending January 1, 1984, James Jackson was nominated. For
unexpired terms ending January 1, 1983, Mason Somerville, Davis Harsh, and
Ralph Nesson were nominated. Director Henry, seconded by Bumpass, moved to
approve these nominations.
442.18 Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
442.19 Licensing Board for Dance Halls: For the position previously held by the
Rev. Claiborne Bell, David Hausam was nominated. Director Henry, seconded by
Sharp, moved to approve this nomination.
442.20 Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
442.21 Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved to abolish the Licensing
Board for Dance Halls.
442.22 City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Osborne,
seconded by Henry, moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be
placed on second reading. Upon roll call the motion passed 5 to 1, with
Director Bumpass voting in the minority. The City Attorney read the ordinance
for the second time.
442.23 Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved that the rules be further
suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Upon roll
1
March 2, 1982
call the motion passed 5 to 1, with Director Bumpass voting in the
and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the final time.
Upon roll call the ordinance passed by a vote of 5 to 1, with
Bumpass voting in the minority.
ORDINANCE NO. 2797 APPEARS ON PAGE //9 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK Kf/
Historic District Commission: For the position previously held by Ellen 443.3
Shipley, ending April 1, 1985, Ron Foldvary was nominated. Director Henry,
seconded by Sharp, moved to approve this nomination.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Industrial Park Committee: For the positions previously held by Don
Trumbo and Bruce Armstrong ending April 1, 1987, Director Henry moved to
approve the reappointment of Bruce Armstrong and the appointment of Tom Hughes.
Director Sharp seconded this motion.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Library Board of Trustees: For the position previously held by Martha
Brewer ending April 1, 1988, Director Henry moved to approve the nomination
of Margaret Salassi. Director Sharp seconded this motion.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Public Transit Committee: For the positions previously held by Larry
Gage and Dale Christy, Director Henry moved to approve the nominations of
Carolyn DeLille and Joel Freund. Director Todd seconded this motion.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Planning Commission: For the unexpired term of Martin Redfern, ending
January 1, 1984, the submission of Julie Nash or "Butch" Robertson, for a
decision by the Board was introduced by Director Henry.
Upon roll call, Directors Osborne and Bumpass voted for Mr. Robertson.
Directors Sharp, Henry, and Todd voted for Ms. Nash, and Director Noland
voted for Mr. Bowen.
Ms. Julie Nash was appointed to the Planning Commission.
Board of Adjustment: Director Osborne moved to nominate "Butch" Robertson 443.13
to this board. Director Henry seconded this motion.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
19
minority, 443.1
Director 443.2
443.4
443.5
443.6
443.7
443.8
433.9
443.10
443.11
443.12
DOG KICKING ORDINANCE
Mayor Noland introduced an ordinance that would provide it unlawful for
any person to abuse a police dog.
City Attorney McCord asked that this be tabled to the next meeting.
Mayor Noland, seconded by Sharp, moved to table this to the next meeting.
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
FUEL BID
Mayor Noland introduced a request for board ratification of an emergency 443.19
purchase of 6,700 gallons of #2 diesel fuel.
Director Henry, seconded by Todd, moved the ratification. 443.20
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. 443.21
443.14
443.15
443.16
443.17
443.18
TANK BID
Mayor Noland introduced further consideration of Bid #481 for the purchase 443.22
of a 10,000 gallon gasoline storage tank. The low bidder was the Southern Company.
Director Sharp, seconded by Todd, moved to award the bid to the low bidder. 443.23
Upon roll call the motion passed 5 to 1, with Director Osborne voting in 443.24
the minority.
March 2, 1982
20
- POLITICAL SIGNS
444.1 Mayor Noland introduced an ordinance amending the sign ordinance by
deleting the time requirements for political signs,
444.2 City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Director
Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the rules be suspended and the
ordinance be placed on second reading. Upon roll call the motion passed
unanimously, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time.
444.3 Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved to further suspend the
rules and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Upon roll
call the motion passed unanimously, and the City Attorney read the ordinance
for the final time.
444.4 Upon roll call the ordinance passed unanimously.
444.5 It was confirmed that there is still a 72 -hour time limitation after
elections for sign removal.
444.6 Director Osborne stated that there was a state statute regulating the
placing of signs on state property and highway easements.
ORDINANCE NO. 2796 APPEARS ON PAGE //4 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X/I
AIRPORT GRANTS
444.7 Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the submission of an
amendment to a 1981 FAA grant agreement that would enable 20 acres of land
to be purchased at the north end of the airport and construction of an access
road on the east side of the runway. The city's share of the work on a 90-10
basis would be about $26,719.
444.8 City Manager Grimes stated that the FAA had asked for a quick meeting
to approve these so that the forms could be submitted as soon as possible,
so evidently the FAA has some funds.
444.9 Mayor Noland further introduced the resolution authorizing the submission
of an amendment to a 1980 FAA grant agreement that would add to the original
application for an "Airport Noise Control and Land Use Compatibility Study."
This project would cost the City approximately $14,936.
444.10 Director Todd expressed his concern regarding the increase in price
from $54,388 to $149,360.
444.11 City Manager Grimes stated that the City had always known that the
master plan study would cost $54,388. The City was not sure about the noise
study, and the FAA had expressed their concern over the large fee as well.
This fee will be discussed more and further negotiated. Mr. Grimes confirmed
that this total cost included the master plan which cost $54,388, and the
noise study would be the balance of the cost. He confirmed that the City
needed to proceed with the resolution and then negotiate the fee.
444.12 Director Todd asked when the City would get a report.
444.13 City Manager Grimes stated that the small noise study would be received
in about three weeks. The overall master plan and noise study would take
about 9 to 12 months.
444.14 Director Henry requested that a penalty clause be inlcuded in the contract.
444.15 Upon roll call the motion to accept both amendments passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 38-82 APPEARS ON PAGE /76) OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK KfV
RESOLUTION NO 38A-82 APPEARS ON PAGE /pi OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X(V
ANIMAL CONTROL VEHICLE
444.16 Mayor Noland introduced further consideration of bid #479 for an animal
control vehicle. Mayor Noland asked if the price was for a truck with a
stainless steel body.
444.17 Purchasing Officer Mackey stated that the body was fiberglass with
stainless steel fixtures such as doors, hinges, and compartments.
1
1
1
March 2, 1982
21
Director Todd asked if this was a replacement or an addition to the animal 445.1
control department. It was confirmed that this was a replacement vehicle of
the old truck with the body the City had made.
Director Henry, seconded by Noland, moved to accept the bid.
Wally Brt reported that the truck the city presently owns that is like 445.2
the new one is in very good condition, and it was purchased in 1978.
Director Todd asked if the need for this was based on the need for two 445.3
trucks to be run simultaneously. This was confirmed.
Upon roll call the motion passed by a vote of 4 to 1 to 1, with Director 445.4
Bumpass abstaining and Director Todd voting against the motion.
INDUSTRIAL PARK STREETS
City Manager Don Grimes stated that concrete streets had been considered 445.5
for the industrial park work. He stated that in reviewing the files, he
Q) discovered that the city commitment was to have the streets completed by June 15,
�) 1982, not March 4 as he was under the impression. He recommended that the
specifications be prepared by the City and go out for bids for an 8" concrete
Q slab, with curb and gutters, and a comparable asphalt specification bid.
Q
DEBT SERVICE FUNDING/DUE 1984
City Attorney Jim McCord stated that the City should decide how to meet 445.6
the debt service requirements that would be due in 1984. He stated that the
surplus construction funds could be transferred into a sinking fund and draw
interest.
Mayor Noland asked if the money was currently drawing interest. 445.7
City Attorney McCord stated that it was, but it would be invested when it 445.8
paid over to the City and draw interest as well.
Director Todd stated he felt no additional funds should be borrowed from 445.9
the General Fund unless absolutely necessary. One way to avoid this is to
invest the surplus funds and take advantage of receiving interest.
Mr. McCord stated that the trustee could invest the money or Finance 445.10
Director Linebaugh could depending on who would get the best return. He
stated that the Board would have to make a decision about this at some point.
Director Osborne stated that he felt the City would get a better rate of 445.11
return than the trustee, and he preferred the Finance Departnent to invest the
money.
Director Todd made a motion that the surplus funds being transferred 445.12
to the City be used to meet debt service requirements effective after October 1,
1984 and for them to be held and invested by the Finance Department of the City
of Fayetteville. Director Osborne seconded this motion.
Upon roll call the motion passed by a vote of 5 to 1, with Director Sharp 445.13
voting in the minority.
REPORT FROM SOLID WASTE STUDY TRIP
Director Henry gave a report from the trip the board members took to view 445.14
various solid waste facilities. She stated that overall, the meetings and
tours were very positive and beneficial. The plant managers gave them tours
through the plants and provided information regarding the drawbacks and good
points regarding their plants. (The "board members" referred to above are
members of the Northwest Arkansas Solid Waste Authority.)
LEWIS PROPERTY
Director Osborne stated that Bertha Lewis could not vacate her home by 445.15
the 15th of March. She is requesting a time extension until the end of March
which would enable her to utilize spring break week to complete her move.
Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved to grant the extension. 445.16
Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. 445.17
March 2, 1982
22
MINUTES/APPLEBY ROAD BRIDGE DISCUSSION
446.1 Director Osborne stated that there was some confusion regarding the
minutes and what was actually decided regarding the bridge to be built on
Appleby Road. He stated that the citizens and neighbors were going to build
the road, and the City was taking the responsibility for building the bridge.
He stated that according to the minutes, the City made no commitment to build
the bridge. Mr. Bishop does not want to build the road and then have the
City refuse to build a bridge. He stated that Mr. Bishop wanted a commitment
that the City would build a bridge regardless of the price.
446.2 Director Henry stated that she felt the Board did not want to give a
commitment to build a bridge if the road was not improved.
446.3 Director Osborne asked the Board to consider giving a commitment that
if the road is built, then the City would build a bridge.
446.4 City Manager Grimes stated that the bridge replacements were based upon
the City obtaining the bridge replacement funds. Something could happen to
these, and the City would not be able to build the bridge.
446.5 Director Osborne stated that Mr. Bishop was concerned about giving a
commitment to build a road and actually doing it, and the City not giving
any kind of commitment to build a bridge.
446.6 Mayor Noland stated that he did not want to get into the position of
saying that the City would build a bridge and then not have the funds.
446.7 Mr. McWethy stated that Mr. Bishop was operating under the assumption
that he can bring the improvement district proposition to the next board
meeting and construction could be started this summer. He feels that
construction could not be started nearly that soon.
446.8 Director Osborne stated he felt construction could be started that soon.
446.9 Mr. McWethy stated he felt Mr. Bishop was aksing for an obligation that
might run into the term of another Board of Directors. Mr. McWethy stated
that he felt the Board would have more information after the street
improvement district question is presented to them at the next board meeting.
446.10 City Attorney McCord stated that if and when the improvement district
is formed, the City Board at that time could contract with the district to
agree to install the bridge at city cost, If the City Board refuses to do
this at that point in time, the bridge cost becomes a part of the total
project cost and the assessed benefit amount would not equal or exceed the
total project cost. If it does not, the project would fail. He stated that
this matter could be handled procedurally later down the road.
446.11 It was decided to make a decision regarding this after the improvement
district question is presented to the Board.
BICYCLE MAPS
446.12 Director Osborne presented the Board members with copies of the bicycle
maps. He stated that the maps were being placed at the University, courthouse,
various banks, and bicycle shops for distribution. Because of the federal
grant, the maps cannot be sold, rather they have to be given away.
CONCRETE VS. ASPHALT CONTROVERSY
446.13 Director Osborne wanted to know about the study on equalizing the
standards between asphalt and concrete roads.
446.14 City Manager Grimes stated that he had given this information to Clayton
Powell, Street Superintendent, for his reviewal and action.
446.15 Mr. Denny Tune addressed the Board and expressed his concern about not
being able to get a bid in on a concrete road. He asked who would decide
what would be comparable between asphalt and concrete. He would like to
have some input into who would be making the decisions and what they would
be looking for.
1
1
March 2, 1982
23
City Manager Grimes stated that as soon as he received the committee 447.1
reports and all of the related information, then both the asphalt and cement
representatives would be provided with this information.
Mr. Tune stated that both sides had their opinions of what was "equal". 447.2
Someone would have to make a decision about the city's viewpoint of what was
equal. Mr. Tune expressed his concern about not being able to submit a bid
and his feeling that the City had pre -determined to build asphalt roads.
City Manager Grimes stated that the City had decided to build asphalt 447.3
and use city crews.
There was some general discussion about procedures of bidding and what 447.4
would be fair to both the asphalt and concrete people.
It was decided that after all of the relevant information is gathered, 447.5
Q then both sides would have a chance to express their views and some decision
Q) would be made regarding the equality of concrete and asphalt.
SWIMMING POOL
Director Osborne stated that the concensus was that the Swimming Pool 447.6
Committee was going to work toward getting the pool built as soon as possible.
Q
EUROPE TRIP TO STUDY WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS
Director Osborne stated that he had heard that in Zurich there was a
waste -water treatment plant that was highly praised, and he was going to
attempt to find and tour this facility.
MINUTES
Director Sharp stated that he had an addition to the last minutes.
At 415 6 and 415.7, Mr. Bill Waite expressed his concern about funding the
park if CD money was not available, Mr. Sharp stated that the City has a
green space ordinance to fund park development (which was omitted).
With this addition, the minutes were approved as submitted.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 11:40 p.ni.
447.7
447.8
447.9
•
AGENDA
MARCH 2, 1982 PAGE "B"
NOTICE: Because of the anticipated length
of this meeting, and because the public
hearing on the proposed revenue sharing
budget needs to be considered separately
from the regular Board meeting items, this
meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. rather than
the normal time of 7:30.
REVENUE SHARING: A public hearing on the proposed 1982 Revenue Sharing Budget.
The purpose of this public hearing is to provide citizens with an
opportunity to comment on the proposed budget, listed below.
Because of the federal "red tape" in using revenue sharing funds
for any other purpose, all of the amounts listed will be used
exclusively for personnel salaries.
Administration 16,503
City Prosecutor 4,467
City Attorney 4,873
Municipal Court 4,467
Finance --Accounting & Administration 37,361
City Clerk 4,061
Data Processing 12,183
Purchasing 6,091
Traffic & Parking Control 10,964
Police Department 176,533
Fire Department 124,670
Inspection 16,244
Planning 4,060
Parks & Recreation 15,431
Swimming Pool 146
Street Department 254,366
City Shop 71,744
Total 764,164
EMPLOYEE AWARDS: Presentation by the Mayor of awards to the three Employees
of the Month, for February, 1982.
The "Employee of the Month" program was instituted by the City
Board to recognize and reward those employees who have consistently
given superior performance on the job. Monthly winners are
selected by a rotating committee of department heads and a
representative of the City Manager's Office, and receive a certificate
and a check for $150. Monthly winners are also eligible to compete
for an Employee of the Year award. Pictures of last year's winners
are on display outside the Directors' Room door. Employees of
the Month for February, 1982 are:
Dianna L. Cobb
Accounting Clerk
Finance Department
•
•
•
MARCH 2, 1982 PAGE "C"
Shelby Hardin
Equipment Maintenance Mechanic
Water & Sewer Department
Charles Johnson
Patrolman
Police Department
SPARKING DECK: A recommendation from the City Manager that the city proceed
with the construction of a third level on the downtown parking facility adjacent to
the Continuing Education Center and the Hilton Hotel.
According to a memorandum from the City Manager, construction
of this third level would add ninety more parking spaces. The
estimated construction cost of $228,000 would be funded with the
issuance of revenue bonds, and the bonds would be paid off with
"net parking revenues from City -owned off-street parking lots,
exclusive of those parking revenues pledged to the CEC bonds,
plus SO% of surplus monies in the CEC pledged revenue fund."
The entire parking deck "will be open to the general public and
will provide patron and employee parking for the Continuing
Education Center, Hilton Hotel, and downtown businesses."
If the Board approves the City Manager's recommendation, the
following actions will need to be taken:
1. Adoption of a resolution authorizing the Mayor
and the City Clerk to execute a change order
in the city's contract with Brennan -Boyd
Construction Company to authorize the con-
struction of the third parking level; and
2. Adoption of an ordinance authorizing the issuance
of the revenue bonds.
ANNEXATION: Further consideration of a recommendation from the Planning Commi-
ssion that certain areas be considered for annexation into the city.
A map showing the general location of the seven areas is located
on the next page of this agenda; all of the areas except #6 are
shown as ones to be considered for annexation in the near future.
(Detailed maps of the areas are available for public inspection
in the City Clerk's Office.)
The proposal to consider these areas for annexation was first
heard by the Planning Commission on February 9, 1981, where
it passed 5-C-1 with Commissioner Redfern abstaining and
Wilson, Gitelman and Hunnicutt absent.
1
t
Y%
•
•
J.', •
C 1_
`il• 1:•-•• ; - t
r
•t. ,,..^• .1 :.�:' •d• [
.V \ I• - i s;L:'ti, J'•I4 •
i it . .i; l Pia.
1``Si•
\Ys.,
1.7.•
•
N• 1 .i; •
•
13
Fec
A ill
i• 1.4,E
Or
1.
-
•
•
G'
Ita:341 .41
J� .N
Ipi=
11.
Il
•
•ILLI 11..'.
•
I
:::..------1-Th_.;.• .1:4---:-.---
f-'%f. Z'
rI,
L I/ i �r�,,. f L r l.-.. LI
JOlt *CM
r04 41.
ii a
•
v• hi �♦ l l
ct
_ .t: 1 v: -.I.
LI.
4.4.E -
f Com_ t m- (70
xarl• La
OF v
•
i.. • i• .1' v lN.; • oi
Il , 1
J.
z
z
ICC
r,•;
1 N 1
I. •. ...
LI J .i l•
•
Y _ _ . .
NMct'
•i••• . a
i :1
h
.
... .. P • _ .
z
1
•
•
•
• 1 .
AREAS UNDER CONSIDERATION
•
•
MARCH 2, 1982 PAGE "E"
When the matter was presented to the Board on February 16,
1981 it was met with substantial opposition, principally from a
group of forty or so residents of the Highway 45 East area. Due
in part to the amount of time spent on the discussion of this
area none of the other six were discussed in detail at the February
16 meeting.
At the following meeting, March 3, 1981, a proposal was made to
table any further consideration of the annexation question until the
rural residents could meet with the County Quorum Court and the
County Planning Commission to see if a way could be worked out to
secure some minimum amount of land use controls without annexation
by the city. The City Board agreed to table the matter until the
first meeting in September, 1981.
When the Board met on September 1 the Directors were told that at
least seven meetings had been held with county officials between
May -September, 1981, but that nothing had been resolved. After
some discussion a motion was made to table the item "until more
information is available from the committee working between the
County and City, or until a period of six months has expired, which-
ever comes first." The motion passed 5-0-1, with Director Osborne
abstaining and Director Bumpass absent.
r CD BUDGET: Further consideration of items to be included in the 1982 Community
Development Block Grant Budget.
This is the second in a series of three Board meetings at which
the 1982 CD Budget will be discussed.
At the last meeting members of the Community Development
and Housing Committee and the general public presented various
requests and suggestions for the use of some $500,000 in CD
funds. At that time the Directors "weeded out" those requests
that were clearly ineligible for CD funding, or which had so
little City Board support that they would not be further considered.
Since that time the Directors have indicated in a very preliminary
form an order of funding priority, which will be further refined and
finalized at this meeting. A public hearing on the proposed 1982
CD Budget as a whole will be held at the March 16 meeting.
The list of items being considered, in their preliminary order of
funding priority, is given on the next page with "first place" being
expressed as "1.000".
•
1
1
t
•
i
i
MARCH 2, 1982
Fricnte a Item
Sidr.valk installations in LklIF areas
2. S.Je.valk along the south side of walker Park
_. EOA "Hezd Start" facility
"City Hesaital" streets
5. Wasmmatcn Mor.ntain develoomert
"Jefferson Park South" soccer and softball fields
Oaklard,SerrvfEacle street improvemerts
EOA weatnerization funds
9. Hoy -sine rehabilitation
13. North Oakland drainace & sidewalk
11. Floor co.•ering/Shelter for Domestic Violence
12. Purchase of smoke detectors for LMIF families
13. Historic preservation (General)
14. Phillips Drive street improvemerts
15. Denver/Haddon street improvements •
16. On€ Mile Road/Old Farmington Road/Sandra/Velda
17. Willow Street RO r drainage
18. Accuisition of site @ Dickson & West Avenue
19. Lawson Street extension
20. Lytton/Blair/Mashburn street improvements
21. Eleventh Street improvemerts
22. Teleccmmurications Devices for the Deaf
23. Historic preservation (Confederate cemetery)
24. Locust Street improvements
25. ,Maine/Cross/Lewis street improvements
25. Solis waste disposal
27. Farmirgton Branch flood control
25. Fifth Street improvemerts
29. Dinsmore Trail low water bridge
30. Builcino cemclition: Cleburn @ Vandeventer
Price ranca
25.000
40,000
125,000
40.000-50.000
50.000
50,000-1CO,0C2
100.000-300.000
3.500
50,000-153.0^.0
60,000
2,500
4,000
25,000
25,000-45.030
85,000-153.000
200,000-523.000
40.000
100,000-165.000
25,000
135.000
6,000-25.000
1,500
10,000
100.000
50,000-150.000
100,000-203.0.00
150,000
25,000
25,000
10,000-25.300
PAGE "F"
Prclimirary tall.
1.000
1 .000
1.143
1.143
1.429
1.572
1.572
1.572
1.715'
1.715
1.715
1.715
1.553
1.555
1.555
2.000
2.000
2.143
2.143
2.429
2.429
2.429
2.429
2.572
2.572
2.572
2.555
2.553
3.143
3.256
6PUBLIC TRANSIT: A report from the Public Transit Committee regarding the continuance
of bus service in Fayetteville_
For approximately nine months the city has had a contract with
Community Resource Group, Inc. for the provision of bus service
in Fayetteville. Under the terms of this contract the city
agreed to pick up one-half of the local share of the operating
deficit --to a maximum of $1,862 per month. (Under this
contract, the federal government paid one-half of the operating
deficit and Ozark Transit paid the other half of the local share.)
On February 4, John Squires, Executive Director of Community
Resource Group indicated to the city's Public Transit Board that
the "Section 18" federal funding would no longer be available
after June 30. A different "Section 5" program --under which
the city's share would be the entire local portion of the
operating deficit, or $85,000 for the first year, and $60,000
annually thereafter --could be applied for, although this funding
was no sure thing.
Principally because of the steadily decreasing ridership of Ozark
Transit buses, but also because of the large additional local
share for "Section 5" funding and the uncertainty of such funding,
the Public Transit Board declined to recommend that the city get
involved with a "Section 5" funding application process, as
suggested by CRG.
•t
MARCH 2, 1982 PAGE "G"
CRG then asked the Transit Board to agree to an early termination
of bus service in Fayetteville --before the June 30 date on which the
contract would expire.
The Transit Board unanimously voted not to agree to this early
shut -down date, citing the contract between the city and CRG, and
in effect took the position that if Fayetteville was going to lose its
bus service in March, it would have to be because CRG unilaterally
terminated it.
A further meeting of the Transit Board is scheduled for February 25 --
after this agenda is prepared --to consider whether the city should
agree to a reduced level of service, with the same city funding, to
keep the buses running until June 30; and to receive additional
information from Highway Department representatives regarding
"Section 5" funding.
ACT 9 BONDS: An ordinance authorizing the issuance of $1,000,000 in "Act 9"
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for Arkansas Western Gas Company.
Under the terms of this ordinance, the city authorizes the
issuance of $1,000,000 in Act 9 bonds to finance the expansion
and equipping of facilities for Arkansas Western Gas Company.
The company will pay off all of the costs of the bonds (including
both principal and interest, the cost of issuing the bonds and
financing and attorney's fees) through a lease or similar
arrangement, and the City will own the facilities until the bonds
are paid off. Act 9 revenue bonds do not establish any liability
whatsoever on the part of the City --in the unlikely event that
Arkansas Western Gas should go bankrupt or default on the
repayment of the bonds --nor is there any additional tax millage
for the citizens to pay associated with this revenue bond issue.
Listed below are similar Act 9 bond issues that have been approved
in the past:
Baldwin Piano & Organ, 1974; $2,000,000
Hackney Bros. Body Company, 1977; $11200,000
Warren Tool Company, 1978; $3,000,000
Arkansas Best Freight, 1978; $5001000
American Air Filter, 1978; $3,200,000
Norris Industries, 1979; $6,000,000
Fayetteville Plumbing & Heating, 1979; $310,000
Baldwin Piano & Organ, 1980; $2,000,000
American Air Filter, 1981; $6,000,000
Mexican Original Products, 1982; $2,000,000
•
1
a
1
111
1
•
MARCH 2, 1982 PAGE "H"
Y t
SIDEWALK WAIVER: A request by First National' Bank for a waiver of the literal
requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, regarding the installation of sidewalks on
property located near the intersection of Old Wire Road and Century Drive.
Considered by the Board Street Committee on February 23
and recommended for approval, contingent upon the execution
of a Bill of Assurances stating that the sidewalk will be
installed at the property owner's expense when directed to do
so by the city.
9 STREET WAIVER: A request by Ozark Guidance Center for a waiver of the literal
requirements of the Master Street Plan, for property located on the south side of Watson
Street between Thompson and St. Charles.
11
Considered by the Board Street Committee on February 23
and recommended for approval, contingent upon the execution
of a Bill of Assurances stating that the street improvements
will be installed at the property owner's expense when directed
to do so by the city.
BUDGET APPROVAL: Approval of the 1982 General, Public Works, Airport, Revenue
Sharing, and City Shop Funds Budgets.
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS I: A resolution authorizing the Finance Director to make budget
adjustments of up to $1,000 per line item over the respective amounts reflected in the
1982 Budgets.
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 11: Approval by the Board of a budget adjustment in the Water
& Sewer Fund Budget, for the period ending October 31, 1981.
1 DATA PROCESSING: A resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute
a contract with J.K. Turner & Associates for the preparation of a detailed set of speci-
fications for "fund management" computer software.
LOAN CONFIRMATION: A resolution documenting the city's previous loans of $420,000
�;�„--bearing 10% interest from October 1, 1979 to fund construction of the Continuing
Education Center.
•
•
15
MARCH 2, 1982 PAGE "I"
RATE STUDY: A resolution authorizing the execution of an amendment to a 1980
rate study contract, to reflect changes due to inflation since that time.
watj
I6SOCIAL SECURITY: Further consideration of a resolution notifying the Social Security
Administration of the city's intent to drop out of the Social Security program.
17
18
19
PERFORMING ARTS: A request by Mayor Noland for discussion regarding the formation
of a "Performing Arts Center Committee".
NOMINATIONS: A report from the Board Nominating Committee regarding appointments
to the Ad -Hoc Closing Hours Committee, Advertising & Promotion Commission, Board
of Adjustment, Board of Housing & Construction Appeals, Civil Service Commission, Energy
Advisory Commission, Licensing Board for Dance Halls, Historic District Commission,
Industrial Park Committee, Library Board of Trustees, Planning Commission, and Public
Transit Committee.
a
DOG KICKING: An ordinance providing that it shall be unlawful for any person to abuse
a police dog.
2 FUEL BID: Board ratification of an emergency purchase of 6,700 gallons of #2 diesel fuel.
2 TANK BID: Further consideration of Bid #481 for a 10,000 gallon gasoline storage tank.
22
POLITICAL SIGNS: An ordinance amending the Sign Ordinance by deleting the time
requirements for political signs.
Section 17B-6 of the City Code specifies that certain political signs
"shall not be placed more than thirty days prior to the election to
,vhICh it applies, and it shall be removed within seventy-two hours
following the final election that is held;..."
According to a memorandum from the City Attorney, such a time
limitation appears to be "violative of the First Amendment". The
proposed ordinance would therefore eliminate these restrictions.
1
MARCH 2, 1982 PAGE "J"
1 1
IIAIRPORT GRANT I: A resolution authorizing the `submission of an amendment to a
21981 F.A.A. grant agreement.
24
25
A grant has been offered by the Federal Aviation Administration
and accepted by the city for an aircraft parking apron and connecting
taxiway on the east side of the airport. This amendment requests
additional grant funds for the purpose of acquiring approximately
20 acres of land immediately north of the airport property and
construction of an automobile access road from Highway 71 to the
proposed improvements east of the runway.
The total estimated cost of work added by the amendment is
$267,190. The anticipated funding ratio is 90% federal and 10%
local. Therefore, the city's share of the added work is expected to
be approximately $26,719.
AIRPORT GRANT II: A resolution authorizing the submission of an amendment to a
1980 F.A.A. grant agreement.
The original planning grant application included development of a
Master Plan for Drake Field. The grant has not yet been offered
due to lack of federal funds. This amendment adds to the original
application an "Airport Noise Control and Land Use Compatibility
Study".
The total project cost in the original application was $54,388. The
total project cost in the amended application is $149,360. The
anticipated funding ratio is 90% federal and 10% local. Therefore,
the city's share of the total project is expected to be S14,936.
ANIMAL CONTROL: Further consideration of Bid #479 for an animal control vehicle;
•
26 OTHER BUSINESS.
2!7MINUTES: Approval of the minutes of the previous Board meeting.
1 ADJOURNMENT.
•
•