Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-04-01 Minutes94.1 94.2 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE BOARD OF DIRECTORS A regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, April 1, 1986, at 7:30 p.m. in the Directors' Room of City Hall, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Noland; Directors Bumpass, Hess, Johnson, Martin and Orton; Acting City Manager Murphy, Department Directors Burch, Coates and Linebaugh, City Attorney McCord, City Clerk Kennedy, members of the press and audience ABSENT: Director Lancaster ROLL CALL The Mayor called the meeting to order, with six Directors present, and asked for a moment of respectful silence. REPORT TO THE PUBLIC 94.3 Acting City Manager Murphy presented the monthly "Report to the Public and Board". 94.4 Public Safety Department — Safety Program Murphy reported there were two injury incidents in March. Murphy reported the Public Safety Department will initiate a "city accident prevention committee" consisting of the Public Safety Director, the Public Works Director and the Administrative Services Director. This committee, said Murphy, will meet periodically and will have responsibility for giving direction to the city's safety program, will review all accidents involving city employees or city property, will develop procedures to reduce accidents, will promote safety training in all work environments, and will conduct a tour of a different facility each month to observe the "housekeeping" status, identify safety hazards if any, and make recommendations for corrections. Murphy said individual departments will be responsible for developing an accident prevention committee (the "APC") to work in conjunction with the city committee. Murphy said these committees will also have three members, one of which shall be a member of management with the other two members being selected from employees in the department. Murphy said employees April 1, 1986 would serve on a rotating basis for six months. Murphy said the department committee will take an active part in conducting monthly safety meetings at the department level, shall monitor- hazards in the work place and convey safety suggestions from employees to the entire committee, including management. Public Works Department Murphy reported that the Public Works Department is working with the APC in developing a safety program - each department will have its own frequency of meetings, with the minimum meeting the committee's standards. Murphy said all individuals in the Public Works Department will be certified in CPR training this year, an inventory of all vehicles and work areas is being taken for needed first aid items, and locations and conditions of department fire extinguishers. Murphy reported a public information program has been initiated which will pass all information on to the press, both formally and informally. Murphy said a "work problems program" is being initiated to deal with any complaints from the public, which will be routed to the proper departments for needed action, and will be signed and held accountable by each supervisor and then returned to the Public Works Director. In answer to a question from Director Orton, Murphy explained that a citizen with a complaint should contact City Hall, and the Public Works Department or the City Manager's office will funnel the complaint to the proper department. Murphy added that someone will get back to the citizen to make sure they are satisfied that the City has done everything it can to solve the problem Maintenance and Engineering Divisions Murphy reported the Dickson Street radius, and the Mission and North Street projects, are scheduled for August construction, pending right-of-way acquisition. Murphy said materials are on hand for the Mission Street sidewalk and construction is scheduled for this week. Murphy reported the Fourth Street sidewalk is complete; the Dead Horse Mountain Road water service connections will be completed this week; utility relocation for Highways 265 and 45, and Highways 265 and 16, are completed; the fuel farm road project at the Airport is ready for bid; the North and Pollard turn lane right-of-way has been acquired and the project is scheduled for June construction; sewer relocation for Mud Creek bridge has been submitted to the State for approval; Washington Street sidewalk plans and specs are being prepared; the Appleby 95.1 95.2 95.3 95.4 95.5 April 1, 1986 96.1 Road extension plans and specs are being prepared; and the Lake Sequoyah Road overlay project with the County is complete. Murphy reported the County paid $16,600 for materials and the City expended approximately $3,500 in resources and equipment. Murphy said the Duncan Street general maintenance project is complete (a project Murphy noted was initiated by a citizen who called this problem to the attention of the City at a Board meeting). Murphy reported drain pipe has been installed at the Wilson Park ballfield, as part of a renovation project; School Street bids were received and will be considered tonight; and Park Street sidewalk construction is scheduled for May. 96.2 Murphy reported that the cross training program is in its sixth week and the cycle of integrating entire crews has been completed. Murphy explained that within the next two weeks individuals will be transferred in order to learn more technical job skills. 96.3 Director Martin asked for an explanation of the cross training program, and asked for the general reaction, if any, from employees being cross -trained. Murphy explained that, before the reorganization, there were many employees working in public works areas but who worked in a specific department. He said that, when the Public Works Department was created, the plan was to include all those employees in one common labor pool. Murphy explained that a period of time was set aside for adjustment and training for the employees to be able to work in any one of a number of different areas. Murphy said that he has received reports that employees' reactions are "generally positive and getting better all the time as they understand it is not a threatening situation". Murphy said employees have discussed a lot of problems they have had with the cross -training and the cross-referencing of jobs. Murphy said employees are not only accepting the program but are working in it and he thought this was because the staff had been spending a lot of time working with the employees. Murphy said he thought what was most important was that the employees were not resisting the program. Public Safety Projects 96.4 Murphy reported the Director of Public Safety is pursuing disaster planning, and the City will work with Washington County on a county -wide cooperation program. Murphy noted the County conducts two drills per year and will coordinate these with the Fayetteville hospitals. Murphy said there will be fire drills and an independent tornado planning program for City Hall. April 1, 1986 Murphy reported the City has received a new pumper fire unit which is now being placed into service. Employee Positions Murphy reported that, as a result of the reorganization, 28 positions have been deleted and 11 positions have been added. State DPCE Meeting Regarding a request made by the City to delay construction on the Pollution Control Plant's sewer outfall line, Murphy reported that, in a meeting with the State Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, it has been clarified that the City can proceed with construction of the line and begin discharging into the Illinois River. The City Attorney explained that the City never formally requested a delay, but requested an opinion from the E.P.A. as to whether the existing administrative order required con- struction of the outfall line for discharge into the Illinois River Basin. McCord said the E.P.A. responded that the order merely required that the effluent limits in the permit be met, regardless of the point at which the discharge is made. McCord said the City met with the DPCE officials to discuss the alternatives, if any, from meeting the deadline requirements in the administrative order as viewed by the State. McCord .said the State's position was that those deadlines should be met and it would be in no one's best interests to delay compliance. McCord said the City was advised that, under applicable law, if the City had applied for a federal discharge permit at least 180 days prior to the initial discharge, the City would not be in violation of law if the discharge commenced even if the federal permit had not yet been issued. McCord reported he and Murphy indicated to the DPCE officials that the City would proceed with compliance with the administrative order. Director Martin asked if the City would have an investment in a useless outfall line if, at some future time, the split flow permit is disallowed. McCord responded that, in that case, the line could not be utilized. In response to a question from Director Bumpass, McCord stated it was his understanding there were no federal grant funds available for construction of the outfall line. McCord noted that construction of the line is a requirement under the State permit, although a construction contract has not yet been awarded. The deadline, McCord said, is that a 97.1 97.2 97.3 97.4 97.5 97.6 .14 • 08 April 1, 1986 98.1 complete system which will comply with effluent limits prescribed by the State and EPA must be completed by January 1, 1987, and must be operable by March 1, 1987.. 98.2 98.3 98.4 98.5 ANNEXATION The Mayor introduced consideration of -an annexation petition submitted by Gene Warford, for 6 acres located west of Lake Sequoyah Drive. The City Attorney advised that an annexation order from the County Court has been entered, as required by statute, and that the protest period has run. The City Attorney read an ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0, with Director Lancaster absent. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The Mayor asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak in opposition to the ordinance. There being no public opposition expressed, the roll was called and the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3176 APPEARS ON PAGE / OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )(X / V REZONING/ROCK & CHURCH 98.6 The Mayor introduced an ordinance rezoning the north 130 feet of a .73 acre parcel located at 205 Rock Street, the southwest corner of Rock Street and Church Avenue. The Mayor stated the petitioner, Clem Johnson, requested a change from R-0, Residential Office, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. The Mayor reported the Planning Commission recommended approval, by a vote. of 5-4, for the north 130 feet of the property. 98.7 The City Attorney read the ordinance for Bumpass, seconded by Martin, made a motion place the ordinance on its second reading. failed, 4-2, (five affirmative votes being Johnson and Hess voting against the motion. the first time. Director to suspend the rules and Upon roll call, the motion required), with Directors April 1, 1986 Director Johnson stated she thought the parking requirements had not been properly met, as 12 spaces may be required but there does not appear to be room for that amount of parking. A member of the audience, speaking on behalf of the petition, stated he thought the parking on the west side of the building would be adequate. Mayor Noland declared the ordinance to be left on its first reading and asked the petitioner if he would be present at the Board meeting of April 15 to present a plan to the Board regarding the number of parking spaces he will provide. Director Bumpass asked why the petitioner requested thoroughfare commercial zoning rather than a conditional use in a residential -office district. C.D. and Planning Director Carlisle responded that only thoroughfare commercial zoning would allow uses such as an art gallery, book sales and framing. Bumpass asked why a conditional use would not permit those uses. The City Attorney responded that, under the zoning ordinance, a conditional use cannot be granted for any zoning classification that would enable the applicant to conduct all the uses proposed. The City Attorney recommended Carlisle prepare a memorandum outlining conditional uses permitted in the various zoning districts, for the April 15 Board meeting. McCord added that, under Arkansas law, the Board of Adjustment cannot grant a use variance. R -O -W VACATION .39 99.1 99.2 99.3 99.4 99.5 The Mayor introduced a request for an ordinance vacating and abandoning 99.6 a portion of street right-of-way, located at 718 South Locust Avenue. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded. by Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.' The ordinance was read for the third time. Property owner Phil Bronson explained that, when the Ferguson Addition was built in the 1920's, Locust Street, in the area of his property, was constructed approximately 46 feet to the west of where it was platted on City maps. Director Bumpass asked if any city staff had verified this information. Bronson stated that a survey done by Cramer four years ago, and another survey done by Blew, both verify this information. Bumpass expressed concern that there be some procedure used by the City to validate the information being provided by Bronson. 99.7 99.8 1100 April 1, 1986 100.1 In answer to a question from Director Martin, Bronson stated there were no utility easements designated, although the utilities are located in the right-of-way. In answer to a question from the City Attorney, Bronson said he was not requesting a vacation of any portion of the right-of-way where utilities are located. The City Attorney requested Bronson provide a legal description of the portion of the street to be vacated and whether any utilities are located in the area described. McCord added that, if utilities are located in the area described, an ordinance would be necessary to reserve a utility easement. 100.2 Director Orton suggested the entire block be considered and the City Attorney agreed, stating that even though there has not been a formal request from all property owners involved, if in fact there is a problem for about seven blocks, it would seem reasonable to cure the entire problem McCord added, however, that the City could only vacate the right-of-way for that amount of property provided in a legal description. 100.3 The ordinance was left on third reading. EASEMENT VACATION/1740 OVERCREST 100.4 The Mayor introduced a request for an ordinance vacating and abandoning an easement located on property at 1740 Overcrest Street. The Mayor explained the owner, Monroe Harrison, requests the vacation of a 15' easement located on the north side of his property; and that he was deeded an additional 16' easement to the north which he proposes to deed to the City for possible future use by utility companies. The Mayor noted this request came before the Board at the first meeting in March at which time the Board requested there be releases on file from all utility companies involved in the easement The Mayor noted those release have been provided. 100.5 The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Orton, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Johnson voting in the minority. The ordinance was read for the second time Director Bumpass, seconded by Martin, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Johnson voting in the minority. The ordinance was read for the third time. 100.6 Director Johnson stated she thought Warner Amex Cable's letter indicates they have no problem with normal use of the easement. Johnson added that the last paragraph of the letter states "...Should we have to make repairs to the existing facilities, we would have to get to the easement to make necessary repairs." Johnson commented that she didn't understand whether Warner did or did not agree to the vacation of April 1, 1986 the easement. Johnson said it appeared from Warner's letter that their main cable for Winwood I Subdivision is located in the easement. Director Bumpass asked if this would have an impact on any utility easements for a new subdivision located to the north of this property. Carlisle explained there were separate easements directly south of the new subdivision to accommodate the utilities. Director Bumpass asked if the Board would be setting a precedent in vacating an easement containing a utility. The City Attorney advised the Board to table the request and ask the property owner to resolve the situation perhaps by granting an easement only to Warner Amex Cable, so the city might vacate the public easement for all utilities. Director Bumpass, seconded by Orton, made a motion to table the request. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. EASEMENT VACATION/BALL AVENUE The Mayor introduced a request for an ordinance vacating and abandoning a utility easement on property located on Ball Avenue in the Royal Oaks Estates Subdivision. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Jim Lindsey addressed the Board regarding this request. that. a 25 foot easement was located between Lots 3 and Oaks Subdivision in order for there to be access to subdivision to the east, and that the property owner as impractical. Lindsey stated the request for the about in conjunction with a purchase of the lots by He explained 4 of the Royal the East Oaks now sees this vacation came Bill Lazenby. Director Bumpass noted that when the Directors toured the site they observed what appeared to be a foundation being constructed on the lots. Directors Johnson and Hess noted that they observed what appeared to be a telephone transformer and electric lines located between the lots. Lindsey commented that he was not aware of Lazenby having begun construction on the lots, and stated there were no utilities located between the lots. Lindsey added that letters from the utility companies reflect this information. Lindsey informed the Board that a 15 foot utility easement is located, running north and south, on property to the east. Director Hess commented that Lazenby appears to be in violation of setback requirements which existed at the time he began construction. Director Bumpass requested the ordinance be left on first reading until the next meeting, until it can be determined whether what the Directors viewed on their tour was in fact the property in question. 10.1 101.1 101.2 101.3 101.4 101.5 101.6 101.7 101.8 102 April 1, 1986 102.1 Lindsey commented that there are probably hundreds of encroachment situations in Fayetteville and he predicted that, with title insurance requirements becoming a factor, there will be many more requests for easement vacations. 102.2 The City Attorney advised that the zoning ordinance requires setbacks be measured from property lines, not from easement lines; that the prohibition is against building within an easement. McCord asked if the footings observed on the tour appeared to encroach within the easement. Director Hess stated, although it was difficult to determine from the vehicle, it appeared to .be close. McCord commented that the debate appeared to be academic, since the utilities do not object and there is no compliance problem nor no adverse affect on future development. Director_Hess stated that, regardless of whether utilities agree to the vacation, the problem remains that there was. a 25 foot utility easement in existence at the time the builder apparently decided to begin construction on the easement. 102.3 In answer to a question from Director Martin, the City Attorney explained there is an ordinance which prohibits construction within an easement. Martin commented that the risk incurred by the owner is his financial loss. Hess remarked that if the Board goes on record as saying this is an unacceptable situation, the owner might have to incur a loss by having to tear out the construction which has been done -- but that, if the Board does not take such a stand, there is no risk because property owners know they can come before the Board and be granted a vacation. Martin pointed out that the Board has no responsibility for bailing property owners out of such situations. Hess pointed out that the record shows the Board, in the past, has been bailing people out of such situations. 102.4 McCord remarked that, if this request came from a builder with a history of flagrant violations of building within designated easements, he would think the Board's rejection of the request would be entirely appropriate -- but that, if the evidence is that the builder has made a premature decision to build based on information he had that the Board would in all probability vacate the easement, it is another factor to be considered. 102.5 Sandra Carlisle brought the building permit before the Board, noting that the plat submitted shows the builder to be within the setback requirements and not on the easement location. 102.6 Director Martin, seconded by Orton, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion failed, 4-2, with Directors Hess and Bumpass voting against the motion (five affirmative votes being required). 102.7 Lindsey told the Board the intent of the request was to allow the owner to build a four-plex rather than a duplex. The City Attorney, April 1, 1986 • with Carlisle concurring, pointed out that setbacks for a four-plex would be the same as those for a duplex. Director Hess asked if more land area 'was required for a four-plex. Lindsey responded that a certain number of units are allowed based on total amount of land area available. McCord pointed out that, in calculating total land area, the Planning Office does not exclude the land within an easement. McCord stated that the owner may not even need the vacation in order to build the structure, if it is not encroaching within the existing easement. He added that the easement does not appear to be needed if all the utilities agree to the vacation. The ordinance was left on first reading. At a later point in the meeting, Lindsey commented that, if Lazenby had begun construction, he had done so mistakenly and because of a misunderstanding in communications with Lazenby. Lindsey stated he hoped that, in cases where developers make mistakes unintentionally, the Board would give them some relief. Director Hess stated that, in light of the fact that there may have been some miscommunication between Lindsey and Lazenby, he would change his vote so that some action can be taken. Director Johnson, seconded by Hess, made a motion to reconsider action on the request. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Director Bumpass voting in the minority. Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. The motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the third time. Director Bumpass commented that he objected to the Board making an uninformed decision on this matter. The Mayor stated he felt comfortable in making a decision in light of the fact that all utility companies concur in the vacation of the easement. Director Johnson pointed out that the easement was created initially for the purpose of connecting two developments. Director Hess pointed out that the plat submitted by Lazenby for a building permit does not even show the 25 foot easement -- and that the eight foot setback is shown from a property line which includes an easement which had not yet been vacated. Director Bumpass remarked that this points out a deficiency in the City's issuance of building permits Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 5-1, with Bumpass voting in the minority. 103 103.1 103.2 103.3 103.4 103.5 103.6 103.7 103.8 103.9 104 April 1, 1986 ORDINANCE NO. 3177 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK SX/ V EASEMENT VACATION/A.W. REALTY SUBDIVISION 104.1 The Mayor introduced a request for an ordinance vacating and abandoning an easement on property located north of Millsap Road and east of Front Street. 104.2 The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. 104.3 Director Hess stated he had no problems with this request, as there is another utilityeasement for the property. 104.4 Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0-1, with Martin abstaining as an officer of A. W. Realty Company. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0-1, with Martin abstaining. The ordinance was read for the third time. 104.5 It was clarified that a portion of Sain Street was abandoned in connection with the construction of the Joyce Street extension. It was also pointed out to the staff that a street sign is needed for Sain Street. The Mayor asked if anyone present wished to speak in opposition to the ordinance. No public opposition was expressed. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 5-0-1, with Martin abstaining. ORDINANCE NO. 3178 APPEARS ON PAGE .3 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XX!./ 104.6 EASEMENT VACATION/APPLEBY & GREGG 104.7 The Mayor introduced a request for an ordinance vacating and abandoning a water and sewer easement on property located at the southeast corner of Appleby Road and Gregg Street. The Mayor explained that Crafton, Tull, Spann and Yoe requests the vacation of a 25' water and sewer easement upon completion of the relocation of a sewer line at Jim Lindsey's expense. 104.8 The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. April 1, 1986 In answer to a question from Director Johnson, Lindsey explained the plan was to locate the center line of the easement and dedicate the necessary easement, in a new location, as requested by City Engineer Don Bunn. Director Johnson, seconded by Hess, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Bumpa'ss, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the third time. The Mayor asked if anyone present wished to speak in opposition to the ordinance. There being no public opposition expressed, the roll was called and the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3179 APPEARS ON PAGE `/ OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XX ! V STREET COMMISSIONER APPOINTMENT The City Attorney advised that it would be appropriate to table a request by the Chairman of Commissioners of Fayetteville Street Improvement District No. 59 (that the Board determine who should represent the district in order to accomplish a transfer of funds from the district to the City). McCord explained that the statute permits the existing commissioners to continue to serve although they no longer reside in the district, because there has not been a petition of five property owners asking that they be replaced. McCord added that the existing commissioners have not confirmed a recommendation to the Board to fill the vacancy. Director Johnson, seconded by Hess, made a motion to table the request. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. POLICE OFFICERS' LITIGATION The City Attorney reported he had .submitted 'a memorandum to the City Board of Directors regarding the pending class action lawsuit by 27 present and former police officers who allege the City has failed to compensate them for holiday pay and overtime court appearances as required by State law. McCord said the memorandum outlines the statutory requirements, outlines the settlement to which the plaintiffs have agreed, (in response to his inquiry after Judge Gibson's ruling on the City's Motion for Partial Summary Judgement, which granted 10 105.1 105.2 105.3 105.4 105.5 105.6 106 April 1, 1986 106.1 the motion in part and denied the motion in part), outlines reasons why the Board might want to approve the settlement, contains his recom- mendation that the Board approve the settlement, outlines the facts which he believes the evidence will establish regarding compliance, outlines the potential financial exposure of the City with regard to the named plaintiffs, and specifies the number of unnamed plaintiffs within the certified class who have not "opted out". McCord stated the Chief of Police is the one unnamed plaintiff within the certified class who did "opt out", meaning he would not receive any benefit under the settlement and would not be precluded from filing his own litigation should he choose to do so. McCord reported the case is set for jury trial beginning June 4, 1986, and the plaintiffs have agreed to an extension of the discovery deadline to enable the Board to consider the settlement. McCord requested the Board make a decision whether to approve the settlement as outlined, or to instruct him to defend the lawsuit in a jury trial. 106.2 McCord said he has been advised the plaintiffs would agree to the following settlement: (1) The City would pay plaintiffs holiday pay for the years 1983 and 1984 based upon each officer's daily rate of pay for those years and the number of legal holidays in said years. The City would make the same payment to all other members of the class who have not "opted out" and who file a claim for holiday pay. (2) The City of Fayetteville would pay plaintiffs for overtime court appearances for the two years preceding August 9, 1983. The payment would be one and one-half times the officer's hourly rate of pay for the overtime hours worked. Each officer would submit a sworn statement of his overtime hours which would be subject to verification by City employees using records in the Municipal Court and City Prosecutor's office. 106.3 Attorney for the plaintiffs, Ken Mourton, stated it should be made clear that the request for a settlement offer was made by the City. Mourton stated the officers feel it is very important for the officers and for the City to put the dispute to rest. Mourton stated that McCord's memo states that it is clear that the City has not complied with the sergeants and captains pay, on the holiday issue. Mourton stated he thought this clearly puts the City in a punitive damage situation. McCord clarified that his memo indicates that the City did not make a separate calculation for holiday pay when the positions of sergeant, captain and lieutenant were created. McCord stated with regard to the issue of punitive damages, although Judge Gibson ruled the City was not entitled to summary judgment on that issue, it is his considered opinion that under Arkansas law there is not a likelihood plaintiffs will prevail on their claim for punitive damages because April 1, 1986 there is not a statute authorizing that recovery and the general rule of law is the plaintiff cannot recover punitive damages from a municipal corporation in the absence of statutory authority. Director Bumpass noted that under the settlement outlined, the named plaintiffs would be paid an estimated $11,000 in overtime pay, and he asked how this figure had been determined. Mourton stated the plaintiffs proposed this amount in good faith. Mourton stated the settlement proposes the City would provide the personnel to search the records and the plaintiffs will accept those figures if they can be verified. Mourton commented that the estimated figures may be less or more than $11,000. McCord stated the $11,000 figure was based upon the estimated hours provided by the plaintiffs, multiplied by 1 1/2 times the hourly rate of pay. Director Bumpass stated he would not mind settling the overtime issue but the holiday issue was of grave concern to him, in light of the fact that salaries have been raised substantially in the last six years. Bumpass stated he did not think the City should be subjected to punitive damages. Director Johnson stated to set their own amount not reduce the officers' to other city employees. on the issue of overtime that when the law was passed permitting cities of holiday pay, the City of Fayetteville did holiday pay to coincide with the amount given Johnson stated she would be willing to settle pay but not on the issue of holiday pay. Director Martin stated his position initially and now is that it appears the City has no grounds on the overtime issue. Martin stated it appears the courts will have to settle the complex issue of holiday pay. Martin reminded the Board he had made a motion to accept the initial settlement offer, to which there was no second. Martin stated he now sees the City's financial exposure broadening. Martin added that he hated to see the City fighting with its police officers over this much money. Martin stated he thought the matter should be settled before it further escalates. Director Martin, seconded by Orton, made a motion to accept the settlement offer as recommended by the City Attorney. Upon roll call, the motion failed, 3-3, with Directors Martin, Orton and Hess voting in favor of the motion and Directors Johnson, Noland and Bumpass voting against the motion. Mourton stated that he did not want to present a settlement offer, but wanted to go to court and "make the plaintiffs whole". Mourton stated it was the decision of the police officers to proceed with the settlement offer, against his recommendation. Mourton stated he thought he could "establish bad faith and recover punitive damages from the Board". Mourton stated he thought the Directors individually had opened themselves up because of this action. The City Attorney • 10? 107.1 107.2 107.3 107.4 107.5 107.6 107.7 108 April 1, 1986 108.1 stated he respectfully disagreed with Mourton's, conclusions regarding the potential liability of the Directors. 108.2 [Following a recess which took place later in the meeting, Director Bumpass reported that Ken Mourton had indicated to him that he would leave the settlement offer open for two weeks. Bumpass stated he wished to make a motion to reconsider the issue by tabling it for two weeks. In answer to a question from the City Attorney, Bumpass stated he wished for this matter to be placed on the next agenda, and the Mayor asked the City Clerk to do so, at the request of Director Bumpass.] NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT 108.3 Director Johnson, reporting for the Board Nominating Committee, presented the following recommendations for appointments from the committee: Advertising & Promotion Commission For a term ending April 1, 1990: Bill Clodfelter Board of Adjustment For a term ending April 1, 1991: Don Mills Benjamin I. Sacks, M.D. Board of Housing and Construction Appeals For a term ending April 1, 1991: J. Palmer Boggs For a term ending April 1, 1988: E. Dale Cress Civil Service Commission For a term ending April 1, 1992: Sabra Hassel Electrical Licensing Board For a term ending October 1, 1987 Barry Fink Historic District Commission For a term ending April 1, 1989: Margaret J. Hoffman Lawrence G. Santeford Library Board of Trustees For a term ending April 1, 1992: Bobbye Hay For a term ending April 1, 1991: Steve Smith April 1, 1986 Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to approve the recommendation of the Nominating Committee. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. PERSONNEL COMMITTEE REPORT 109 109.1 Director Johnson, Chairman of the Board Personnel Committee, presented 109.2 a report from that committee's meeting of March 31. Johnson reported the committee reviewed the vehicle take-home policy. 109.3 Johnson explained the policy would reduce the number of vehicles taken home by employees from 35 to 17. Johnson stated the committee felt this was a step in the right direction but would like to see the number pared down even further. Johnson said the policy would allow the City Manager and three department directors to take vehicles home as part of their 24-hour employment obligation and compensation, and would mean that on-call vehicles would deal with emergency situations only, with the following divisions to be eligible for one vehicle per program. Water, Sewer, Street, Airport, Animal Control and Customer Services for the Water Division. Johnson said the Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Chief, Fire Investigator, Police Chief, Assistant Police Chief, and two canine units will be entitled to a vehicle. Johnson said there would be other special situations such as a department head or division head being permitted to instruct an employee to take a vehicle home because of bad weather conditions or conditions where response time might be needed. Director Johnson, seconded by Hess, made a motion to approve the vehicle 109.4 take-home policy and implementation of the policy by City staff. Director Orton pointed out the committee recommended an amendment 109.5 to the policy — that all City vehicles would be labeled "City of Fayetteville". Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-2, with Directors Orton and Bumpass voting against the motion. Johnson reported that the City is required to comply with the Fair 109.6 Labor Standards Act by April 15, 1986. Johnson explained that, under a policy which was adopted in the past, police officers could work up to 43 hours in a seven-day work period. Johnson said that an Arkansas statute indicates that 40 hours is required to be the maximum, so that the officers should now be placed on an hourly rate for 40 hours, with any hours beyond that being paid at the rate of time and one-half. Johnson, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to approve that recommendation. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. Johnson reported that job descriptions, as clarified, were reviewed by the committee but that three of them, for the department directors, are not recommended for approval at this time, because of a need for 109.7 110 110.1 110.2 110.3 110.4 April 1, 1986 some synchronization in their wording. Johnson reported that among those recommended for approval include descriptions for new positions of Industrial Wastewater Control Program Manager, a Property and Sign Inspector and an Assistant Airport Manager. Director Johnson, seconded by Martin, made a motion to approve the new positions and clarification of 13 job descriptions as presented to the committee. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0-1, with Director Bumpass abstaining, stating he had not had an opportunity to review the job descriptions. There was a 10 -minute recess. The meeting reconvened at about 10:00 p.m. BID AWARD The Mayor introduced consideration of the award of bid for a vehicle for the Public Safety Director, tabled from the March 18 Board meeting. Director Johnson, seconded by Martin, made a motion to approve the purchase of a 4 -cylinder vehicle from Jim Ray Pontiac. Director Orton noted that the number of vehicles being taken home by employees has been reduced and she asked if one of those vehicles could be used by the Public Safety Director, instead of purchasing a new vehicle. Acting City Manager Murphy responded that the majority of those vehicles available are pickup trucks, and that the cars which are available have been dedicated to various divisions for 100% City -use. Murphy stated the vehicle proposed to be purchased would be equipped with a new radio system. Director Orton asked if the staff could substitute a pickup truck for one of the cars to be be used by the various divisions. Murphy responded by stating the staff did not think those vehicles currently available would fit the need. In answer to a question from Director Orton, Murphy stated not all the vehicles will be outfitted with a radio system. 110.5 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Director Orton voting in the minority. POLICE & FIRE COMMITTEE REPORT 110.6 Director Bumpass, Chairman of the Police and Fire Committee, reported the committee met on March 31. Bumpass explained that, due to FAA's safety requirements, and because there are now 30 passenger planes which operate out of the airportfor about 18 hours per day, there must be a fire station fully dedicated for the airport. Bumpass explained April 1, 1986 that presently the fire station at the airport responds to structural fires, gasoline fires, and Emergency Medical Service requests. Bumpass reported the committee recommends a change in policy to dedicate Fire Station No. 3 at the airport, for airport services only, during the hours of operation from 6:00 a.m. until midnight, or as additional flights may require during the evening. Bumpass explained this would mean that station would respond to non -airport fires between midnight and 6:00 a.m. Director Bumpass stated that, under the City's fire contract with the City of Greenland, it is not necessary for the City of Fayetteville to respond to a fire from Fire Station No. 3. Mayor Noland pointed out that Greenland's insurance rates may be predicated upon the amount of response time. Bumpass reported the committee addressed this issue, and there would only be a matter of a few minutes difference in response time from another fire station. Director Bumpass, seconded by Martin, made a motion that the fire station at the airport be fully dedicated to the airport and not respond to structural fires or accidents off airport premises, during the hours of operation of commercial flights at the airport. In answer to a question from Director Orton, Fire Chief Jackson said the Central Fire Station would respond to Greenland fires, and fires on the south side of Fayetteville, during the hours of operation of the airport. Director Johnson stated she thought this change requires a review of the overall location of City fire stations. Chief Jackson stated he thought Fire Station Nos. 1 and 2 are well -located and should not be considered to be moved for a long time. He noted, however, that the other three stations are poorly located and need to be studied. Director Martin stated he concurred with the committee's recommendation, commenting that he saw no alternative which would be cost-effective for Fire Station No. 3 other than to fully dedicate it to the Airport. Martin added that an FAA certification inspection resulted in a requirement that the City provide 3 -minute response time during certain hours of operation, in order to keep its certification. In answer to a question from. the Mayor, Fire Chief Jackson reported that in the last year 27 fire runs were either airport -related or made to the airport from Fire Station No. 3. Jackson stated that station answered a total of 41 calls last year (12 inside the Greenland city limits). Jackson noted that Fire Station No. -3 is not poorly located as an Airport Fire Station, but is poorly located as a City Fire Station. Jackson stated Station No. 5 on Crossover Road is the most poorly 111 111.2 111.3 111.4 111.5 111.6 111.8 111.9 April 1, 1986 112.1 located station and should be located in the vicinity of Mission Boulevard and Old Wire Road. 112.2 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. WASTEWATER PIPELINE 112.3 The City Attorney recommended the Board not approve a resolution which would authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a construction permit agreement with Burlington Northern Railroad Company, for a new 16 -inch Gregg Avenue Interceptor sewer pipeline at the intersection of Highway 71 and Gregg Avenue. McCord advised the staff be instructed to negotiate execution of the City's standard easement from the Railroad if possible. McCord explained the proposed agreement prepared by the Railroad contains some provisions which, in his opinion, are "over- reaching" and not in the City's best interests, and provide for compen- sation which would be substantially in excess of what the law would require if an eminent domain case were filed. 112.4 Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to table the request in order to negotiate a standard easement with the Railroad Company. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. OTHER BUSINESS SCHOOL STREET CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 112.5 Mayor Noland introduced consideration of a construction contract for the School Street project, noting the project is budgeted for 1986. 112.6 Acting City Manager Murphy reported the low bid of $123,749 was submitted by Jerry D. Sweetser, Inc. and was the only qualified bid. Murphy reported $138,000 is currently budgeted for the project and the staff recommends the award of bid to Jerry D. Sweetser, Inc. • 112.7 In answer to a question from Director Bumpass, Murphy stated the street would receive an overlay similar to that done for Maple Street. Public Works Director Deryl Burch reported the street should be closed for only 7-9 working days, depending upon weather. 112.8 Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to award the bid as recommended. 112.9 In answer to a question from Director Johnson, Murphy responded that drainage work and street preparation has begun, so that the project should be completed in three weeks, with good weather. • April 1, 1986 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The Mayor asked that location and proposed Retreat. PROPOSED BOARD RETREAT Directors respond to Suzanne Kennedy regarding dates of April 26 and 27 for a special Board GREENLAND FIRE CONTRACT Acting City Manager Murphy reported that the Mayor of Greenland has requested a review of Greenland's fire contract with the City of Fayette- ville, in light of any additional costs they may incur as a result of the action being taken to dedicate Fire Station No. 3 to the Airport. Murphy said he advised the Mayor the City of Fayetteville would be glad to discuss the contract. BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Administrative Services Director Linebaugh reviewed the following inter -department budget adjustments which have corresponding offsets to cover the amounts requested: Adjustment of $2,500 for a Personal Computer for the Public Works Director, to be taken from the Capital -Vehicle Equipment Account, and placed in the Fixed Assets Account. Linebaugh explained this purchase will be made instead of a vehicle, as an existing vehicle will be used in lieu of a new vehicle. Linebaugh said the justification is in order to manage the Public Maintenance Work Order system, and to allow the Public Works Director access to needed information. Adjustment of $1,210 to purchase two sturdier lawnmowers, rather than the three originally budgeted. Linebaugh explained the amount would be transferred from the Minor Equipment Account to the Fixed Assets Account. Linebaugh explained that, in this case, the same amount of money will be used to buy two pieces of equipment rather than three. Adjustment of $500 to purchase a smaller seeder and a weedeater in lieu of a larger seeder originally requested. Linebaugh explained the amount would be transferred from Fixed Assets Account to Minor Equipment Account. Director Hess, seconded by Martin, made a motion to approve the budget adjustments. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 113.1 113.2 113.3 113.4 113.5 -LLL FAA TOWER DEDICATION April 1, 1986 114.1 Director Johnson announced that the dedication of the FAA tower would be held on April 25 at 1:30 p.m. ORDINANCE TO CORRECT ERROR IN LEGAL DESCRIPTION 114.2 The City Attorney reported that the Planning Office brought to his attention an error in a legal description of rezoning Ordinance No. 2774, adopted about two years ago. The City Attorney introduced an ordinance which would correct that error. 114.3 The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the third time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3180 APPEARS ON PAGE S OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK nx f 11 BUILDING PERMITS/CONDITIONAL USES 114.4 Director Bumpass reported there was a lot of sentiment on the part of the Board to request there be a restriction placed on building permits based upon a conditional use of property. Bumpass stated he was referring primarily to property located across the street from Root School. Bumpass said most of the Board members feel a permitted conditional use should apply only when there is an existing structure, and that the ordinance currently allows for a conditional use permit to be issued for the construction of a new structure, as opposed to renovation of an existing structure. Bumpass asked if the City Attorney could prepare an ordinance which would include the restriction suggested. McCord stated he could draft an ordinance which could then be considered at a public hearing held by the Planning Commission. McCord pointed out, though, that there may be situations involving a vacant piece of property which an owner wishes to develop as a conditional use. 114.5 Bumpass also suggested there be an expansion of the number of property owners to be notified in the case of a request for a conditional use. McCord advised that that issue is currently being considered by the Planning Commission. 1 April 1, 1986 Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to approve a resolution requesting the Planning.Commission to consider an amendment to the zoning ordinance to restrict the issuance of building permits for new construction based on conditional uses. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0-1, with Martin abstaining, stating the motion sounded like more than just a recommendation to the Planning Commission, and that he had not had enough time for consideration. RESOLUTION NO. 44-86 APPEARS ON PAGE k C OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X V I . MINUTES The Minutes of the March 18 meeting were approved with the following corrections: 85.2 "monitoring station" should read "sewer monitoring station" 88.2 Add after "airport .improvements": "consisting of a fence" 88.4 Add "or they would all be rejected" PLANNING DEPARTMENT Director Hess remarked that there obviously were a lot of inefficiencies in the Planning Department, in terms of building permits being properly issued, and setbacks being determined correctly. Hess asked that this matter be investigated to see if there is an easier method which can be used. Acting City Manager Murphy commented that the staff is working on that area. Director Bumpass commented that there is a lot of talent in the Planning Office and it seemed to him it was not being utilized in an efficient way. Bumpass added that, in the process of reorganization, some things seem to be "slipping through the cracks". ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at about 10:40 p.m. 115.1 115.2 115.3 115.4 115.5