HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-11-15 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
A regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board was held on
Tuesday, November 15, 1988 in the Directors' Room of the City
Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street.
PRESENT: Mayor Johnson; Directors
Bumpass, Lancaster and
Pennington, City Attorney
staff, members of the press
Kelley, Marinoni, Hess,
Martin; City Manager
McCord, members of the
and audience.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by the Mayor, with seven Directors 359.
present. The Mayor lead the Pledge of Allegiance and asked for a
moment of respectful silence.
MONTHLY REPORT
City Manager Jim Pennington presented a report to the public and
Board for the month of November. [This report in detail is on
file in the City Clerk's Office.]
Pennington reported that the City's financial situation continues
basically as it has for the last two years. He stated the City is
still experiencing a situation where expenses exceed annual
revenues and is still utilizing reserves as indicated in the
budget. He noted that the City is at roughly 68% of the annual
budget for revenues as of the end of last month, but expenses are
at the 49% level.
Reporting on the public safety program, Pennington said the crime
prevention office has formed five new neighborhood watch programs.
He reported that since the E-911 program was implemented in
September, 237 emergency calls were received through the
Fayetteville segment of the system. He also noted that there were
279 non -emergency calls and 23 prank calls through E-911 during
the month of October. Pennington stated that the federal grant
for the drug program has been received and the program is
underway. He said the Selective Traffic Enforcement Program
(STEP) which is in effect primarily on College Avenue, is meeting
its goal for the year. He also noted the educational process of
the Fire Prevention Program has proven to be very effective.
•
On the subject of the neighborhood watch, Director Bumpass asked
Pennington to explain to the citizens how they might get involved
in this campaign. Pennington stated that any interested citizen
should call the Fayetteville Police Department and ask for the
crime prevention officer or the police chief.
359.
359.
359.
_359.!
November 15, 1988
360.1 Pennington reported that the Gulley Park pond reconstruction is
complete. He stated that, during Fall Clean -Up this year, there
were 402 tons of refuse collected and encouraged everyone to pay
attention to the solid waste disposal problem in Northwest
Arkansas.
360.2 Pennington stated he would like to give special credit to the
budget staff and special projects officer for their extensive work
in completing the budget by November 30th. He also noted that the
internal auditor/grants administrator made mandatory the placement
of a security system on the IBM System 36.
360.3 Reporting on major projects, Pennington said the first annual
audit on the Arts Center is complete and should be received within
the next two weeks. He stated that the City, working with the
Arts Counsel, is having the asbestos removed from the buildings to
be demolished on the Arts Center property.
360.4 Pennington said the Board needs to establish a new date for the
public hearing on the Warner Cable franchise ordinance.
360.5 In reference to the wastewater treatment plant, Pennington stated
that the equipment is still being tested and so far all tests have
passed.
360.6 Pennington reported that the third party consultant R. W. Beck has
reviewed proposals submitted by M -K Ferguson for the disengagement
of that segment of the Northwest Arkansas Resource Recovery
Authority (NARRA) solid waste project. Beck, he noted, will
prepare a written recommendation to the Authority which will be
made available to the City Board. Pennington said an official
proposal should be available for presentation to the Board by
December 6th.
360.7 Director Bumpass asked if there was an indication of the amount of
financial liability proposed by M -K Ferguson. Pennington answered
that the City's attorneys Nixon -Hargrave and consultant R.W. Beck
are analyzing three different proposals by M -K Ferguson. He
stated M -K is assuming no financial liability in the project.
360.8 Director Marinoni questioned when an increase in sanitation rates
to pay for disengaging the solid waste project could be expected.
Pennington recommended that the Board hold off on this decision
until the final costs have been revealed. He noted that the
neither the City nor the NARRA has the final say in this project.
He said the trustees, Union National Bank of Little Rock, and
Federal Guaranty Insurance Corporation (FGIC) have the final say
in the project, although they will probably take the Board's and
the Authority's recommendations. He further noted that the staff
is presently checking into alternative ways to finance the
disengagement process.
Mayor Johnson noted that a draft
being prepared by Al Raby of The
late December.
November 15, 1988
copy of the proposed General Plan 361.
Plan Group should be available by
Vicky Kelly addressed the Board asking for an update of the time
schedule on implementing educational programs, block leader
training programs, construction of a drop-off collection center
and a composting area for the recycling program. Public Works
Director Batie stated there has been public response to block
leader training which is being reviewed by the sanitation
department. He noted that bids which will be coming to the Board
are: (1) the blue boxes for the pilot program has been bid and
there is a low bidder, (2) the igloos (glass drop-offs) for the
supermarket drop-off was bid approximately November 10th, and (3)
vehicles for transmitting recyclable materials. He further noted
there are four or five sites already lined up at supermarkets for
the placement of igloos. Kelly further questioned who would be
charged with development and direction of the recycling program.
Batie stated that the position of "recycling coordinator" would be
established under next year's budget. He stated that Lance
Heater, an assistant who was hired in the City Manager's budget,
will be working with the recycling effort. He said that he and
Heater would be implementing the educational program and the block
leader program.
Kelly noted that she did not feel the public was being given
enough input into the recycling program.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor introduced the consent agenda, consisting of the
following items:
APPROVE:
A. Minutes of the November 1, 1988 Board meeting;
B. Award of Bid $880, for ground control and aerial 361.
photography; and a request for a budget adjustment;
Recommendation: Award to the lowest' bidder
meeting specifications, Aerial Data Services.
Bid: $97,824 Budget: $80,000
A budget adjustment in the amount of $18,000 is
recommended to be taken from funds which were
slated for a water loss study and air sampling.
The study came in under budget and the air sampling
was done at no cost to the city.
361.
361.
361.
361.
November 15, 1988
362.1 C. Budget adjustments from September 30, 1988
quarterly financial statement;
362.2 Director Martin, seconded by Marinoni, moved approval of the
consent agenda. Upon roll call, the motion passed 6-0-1 with
Director Hess abstaining because he was not present at the agenda
meeting when it was discussed.
CD BUDGET
362.3 Mayor Johnson opened the first public hearing for the 1989
Community Development Block Grant Budget. She noted that the
primary criteria for eligibility of CD block grant funds are that
it benefit low and moderate income families. She stated the
approximate amount of funds available for 1989 is $514,202.
362.4 Kathy Pratt, Administrative Secretary for EOA Housing, addressed
the Board requesting that the EOA Weatherization Program be
supported with CD funds in the amount of $5,000. She noted that
EOA completes 17-20 homes each year within the city limits and
could complete more if more funding is made available.
362.5 Andrea Cromwell, Director of Youth Bridge, requested the Board's
consideration in awarding CD funds for construction of a new
emergency shelter in the amount of $65,000. She noted that the
present shelter, located at 720 Stone Street, is for boys and
girls from seventh grade thru the age of 17 who are homeless or
run -a -ways. She stated they have plans to have ground breaking
for this project in the Spring of 1989.
362.6 Director Marinoni asked Cromwell whether the present emergency
shelter is inadequate. She answered it is inadequate as it is an
old house which is in a deteriorating state of repair, there are
space limitations, and it is poorly situated.
362.7 Director Lancaster questioned what was the average length of stay
for someone utilizing the emergency shelter. Cromwell stated her
latest figures indicated an average stay of 9 days but a person
could stay up to 30 days.
362.8 Director Marinoni asked the staff why, according to the
calculations in the agenda, does it take $100,000 to spend
$500,000. Pennington answered that the administrative costs cover
the salary of a CD Coordinator which, he noted, used to be paid by
the City but is now charged directly to the CD program. Planning
Management Director John Merrell explained that the code
enforcement program would involve enforcement of about a dozen
City codes which have not been enforced in previous years in low
to moderate income areas. Marinoni asked if there was a
differentiation between the tasks this code enforcer would perform
and the tasks currently being performed by City Inspector Richard
Wilson. Merrell stated the staff proposes to fill the presently
November 15, 1988
.vacant position in the community development division and part of 363.
this person's responsibility will be in the area of code
enforcement. He further noted that in this aspect of the job, the
code enforcer would basically be an assistant to the city
inspector. Pennington pointed out that this"CD program is based
on the Housing and Community Development Act of 1972.
Merrell stated that HUD has requested that the City's 363.
recommendation on the proposed CD budget be submitted to them no
later than December 1st. Pennington recommended that an
unofficial document be submitted to HUD to give them an indication
of what can be expected, then the Board can take official action
at its December 6th meeting. The Board concurred with this
recommendation.
Mayor Johnson closed the public hearing. 363.
ANNEXATION
The Mayor introduced an annexation petition by Randall and Ruby 363.
Garrison for 47.86 acres located north of Wedington Drive and west
of Rupple Road.
In answer to a question from Johnson, City Attorney McCord
informed the Board that the annexation has been approved by the
County Court and stated that if the Board wishes to accept staff
recommendation to confirm the annexation, it can be achieved by
resolution.
Bumpass questioned why staff recommends confirmation of the
annexation. Merrell stated a thorough inspection of the utility
situation on this property has been performed and staff sees no
major problems in extending water and sewer lines onto the
property as water and sewer is available at the property.
Bumpass, seconded by Martin, moved staff recommendation to confirm
the annexation by resolution be approved. Upon roll call the
motion passed 7-0.
RESOLUTION NO. 84-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
.REZONING PETITION.R 88-19
. The Mayor introduced an ordinance rezoning approximately .81 acre
as requested in a rezoning petition submitted by Jim Hatfield for
, property located on the west side of Lee Avenue to be rezoned C-2
"Thoroughfare Commercial". Johnson noted that the ordinance was
read three times at the November 1st meeting and amendedby. the
Board to an R-0 "Residential Office" rezoning.
Bumpass stated that, due to an illness in the family, Mr. Hatfield
requested this petition be tabled for two weeks.
363..
363.i
363.'
363.£
363.c.
November 15, 1988
364.1 Bumpass, seconded by Martin, moved that the ordinance be tabled
for two weeks. Upon roll call, the motion passed 7-0.
UNSIGHTLY PROPERTY
364.2 The Mayor introduced an ordinance ordering the abatement of
unsightly conditions and the razing and removal of an unsafe
structure at 515 Lytton Avenue.
364.3 City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. The
Board left this item on the first reading.
UNSIGHTLY PROPERTY
364.4 The Mayor introduced an ordinance ordering the abatement of
unsightly conditions and the razing and removal of an unsafe
structure located on the west side of South School Avenue north of
the Bypass.
364.5 City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. The
Board left this item on the first reading.
NO -SMOKING ORDINANCE
364.6 The Mayor introduced the original no -smoking ordinance which was
presented to the Board in September, 1987, and a second ordinance
which was revised by the City Manager.
364.7 Dr. Richard Back, clinical psychologist, 1706 Joyce Street,
addressed the Board as president of the Northwest Arkansas Chapter
of Arkansans for Non -Smokers' Rights speaking in favor of the
original ordinance (8.01-8.02). He urged passage of the ordinance
which "would provide for the increased comfort and safety of 70%
of your constituents." He noted that his organization had
presented the Board a petition containing 400 signatures in favor
of passage of the ordinance.
364.8 Director Martin questioned, if 70% of the public are non-smokers,
why do they not go directly to the restaurateurs with their
request for a smoke-free eating environment. Dr. Back said that,
from personal experience in speaking with restaurant owners, the
main reaction has been one of stonewalling, although some have
been receptive and changed their policies in the last year.
Director Kelley asked what these restaurant owners had changed
their policies to. Dr. Back stated these restaurants now have
non-smoking areas.
November 15, 1988
Director Marinoni questioned whether air conditioners had any 365.
effect in taking the smoke from the smoking areas and putting it
in the non-smoking areas as well. Dr. Back stated research
indicates that a special ventilation system would be needed in the
smoking area to keep the smoke from merely being moved through the
air conditioning system from one place to another. Dr. Back noted
that he felt they were offering a compromise in asking for
physical barriers between smoking and non-smoking areas rather
than asking the restaurant owners to go to the expense of
installing a special ventilation system.
Director Bumpass asked how many restaurants Dr. Back had contacted 365.
in reference to providing non-smoking areas. Dr. Back said
"informally" he had contacted approximately 10 in the past year
and only 'two of those had made any change in providing for a non-
smoking area. He further noted a general survey performed by the
National Organization for Non -Smokers' Rights which indicated
• that, in areas where non-smoking ordinances or government laws
were not put into effect, there was no significant increase in the
percentage of restaurants providing non-smoking areas.
Director Martin inquired whether a "partial barrier" would be 365.
acceptable between smoking and non-smoking areas. Dr. Back
answered that "a curtain. . .or a wall half -way to the ceiling"
would not be an adequate physical barrier.
Director Kelley questioned whether, under ordinance 8.01-8.02, 365.
small restaurants which have only one room and seat over 20 people
and do not wish to segregate a separate room are left with only
the alternative of having a totally non-smoking establishment.
Dr. Back concurred and noted there will be no construction costs
to restaurants who establish a non-smoking policy. He further
stated he felt it would not affect their business any more than it
did the movie theaters when they enacted a non-smoking policy.
Wayne Dyer, owner of the Hushpuppy Restaurant, addressed the Board 365.
speaking against the non-smoking ordinance. He stated that he has
a non-smoking area in his restaurant "most of the time" but that
sometimes it is "between difficult and impossible" to provide this
service due to a rotation system he uses for parties, etc. He
said he feels a "voluntary policy is much better than a mandated
policy." He further stated that this ordinance has one purpose
which is for a "mandatory non-smoking area" whether with a
physical barrier or without. He noted there would be a financial
burden as well as creating enforcement problems in complying with
either of these ordinances. He asked that he be allowedrto set
the policies in his restaurant and urged the Board to reject the
ordinance.
Director Martin asked whether passage of the ordinance would 365.
remove the enforcement responsibility from the restaurant owner.
November 15, 1988
366.1 Mr. Dyer answered it would remove "part" of the enforcement
responsibility.
366.2 Mr. Dyer stated that where customer preference is concerned, he
gets approximately the same amount of requests for seating in the
smoking area as for requests for seating in the non-smoking area.
366.3 Director Lancaster asked if banning smoking completely in all
restaurants city-wide would eliminate the restaurant owners'
enforcement problems. Mr. Dyer answered affirmatively.
366.4 Dr. Earl Riddick, 57 Colt Square, addressed the Board in favor of
the non-smoking ordinance "from a health standpoint". He noted
that smoking causes 30% of the cancer suffered in the United
States. He noted the Surgeon General's 1986 report which reflects
that the risk of lung cancer is increased by "passive" or "side -
stream" smoke. He stated that smoking "is no longer a matter of
personal choice and individual freedom" due to its impact on the
health of non-smokers. He further stated "the societal issue here
is freedom from exposure" to tobacco smoke.
366.5 Coy Kaylor, Coy's Place restaurant, 2908 N College, addressed the
Board in opposition to the ordinance and noted that "taverns" have
been excluded from the ordinance. He also pointed out that the
lobby of his restaurant is a tobacco shop which is exempted in the
ordinances and asked how that situation would be handled. He
stated that his understanding of the ordinance was if someone
violates the ordinance by smoking in a non-smoking area of his
restaurant, he as the owner, would be fined.
366.6 Dr. Bob Burlingame, a local psychiatrist, read a letter from the
Washington County Medical Society's Executive Committee in support
of the proposed non-smoking ordinance. The letter indicated that
the "American Medical Association as well as the Arkansas State
Medical Society are both on record opposing smoke in public places
where non-smokers cannot be protected." He noted that the "area
hospitals" have established a policy of setting time schedules for
smoking in hospitals. He further noted that this policy should be
enacted by 1989.
366.7 Wilbur Watson, a citizen, addressed the Board speaking in support
of the ordinance.
366.8 Dave Bassett, B & B Barbecue, spoke in opposition to the
ordinance.
366.9 In answer to a question from Director Lancaster, City Attorney
McCord explained that, if a person is caught violating the
ordinance, the violator is held responsible, not the restaurant
owner. Pennington pointed out that a police officer would have to
witness the violator "in the act" before he could issue a
citation.
to post the
enforce the
tn4!
McCord further stated it is the
no -smoking signs as provided by.
ordinance.
November 15, 1988
owner's responsibility
the ordinance, not to
367.
Hess questioned the difference between ordinance 8.01-8.02 and 367.
ordinance 8.32-8.33. McCord stated he was concerned the original
definition of "smoking" in ordinance 8.01-8.02 was "over broad" so
he narrowed it to include the typical smoking materials, i.e.
cigars, cigarettes and pipes. He stated that the second change
was to incorporate language which would require the separate non-
smoking area reduce ambient smoke to the extent possible from non-
smoking patrons, to utilize existing barriers and ventilation
systems to the greatest extent possible to minimize smoke in
adjacent non-smoking areas, but not to require construction of new
physical barriers and ventilation systems. He noted the second
change was "in accordance with case law" which indicates that "an
anti-smoking ordinance must serve to reduce smoking levels to non-
smoking areas." He stated if the ordinance does not serve that
purpose, it will be "struck down". In answer to a question from
Hess, McCord said a non-smoking area placed in the center of a
smoking area or a partial physical barrier would not serve the
_..purpose of the ordinance.
McCord pointed out to the
presented tonight are for
amended, adopted, or rejected
Board that both ordinances being 367.
discussion purposes only and may be
as the Board sees fit..
Director Kelley questioned whether a restaurant owner has the
ability to designate his whole establishment as a smoking area.
McCord -answered, if there is a seating capacity of less than 20
patrons, yes. If the seating capacity is over 20, McCord stated,
there must be designated smoking and non-smoking areas under both
ordinances. Marinoni clarified that a restaurant could declare
itself entirely "smokeless", but they could not declare itself a
"smoking" restaurant. McCord concurred.
Hess stated. he felt that the changes in section 2(a) of ordinance
8.32 (changed from an "enclosed area" to a "designated area")
substantially "watered down" the entire ordinance.
Director Martin questioned whether it is clear that this ordinance
can be enforced in the other areas mentioned such as grocery
stores, etc. Pennington answered affirmatively noting that in
many states, smoking in grocery stores, drug stores, etc. is
against the fire code.
-Director Bumpass noted that City Manager Pennington has enacted a
policy of no -smoking in public buildings. He went on to suggest
possible alternatives to passing a no -smoking ordinance including
(1) passage of a resolution encouraging voluntary use of
segregated smoking and non-smoking areas, (2) an award program
367.
367..
367.1
367.'
November 15, 1988
368.1 could be initiated to recognize such voluntary efforts or (3) tax
money could be allocated for a non-smoking advertising campaign.
He stated he felt one of these programs might be more appropriate
than making it "illegal" to smoke in restaurants.
368.2 Jim Reeve, Razorback Pizza, addressed the Board in opposition to
the ordinance.
368.3 Director Kelley stated that, at this point, he is leaning more
toward the original ordinance (8.01-8.02) but felt he needed more
input from the public as well as time to do more research on his
own.
368.4 McCord questioned whether the Board wanted either ordinance read
for the first time tonight.
368.5 Director Hess suggested that if either ordinance is passed, a
"phase-in period" might be considered during which time the
affected parties could get feed -back concerning the size the
smoking and non-smoking areas should be, etc.
368.6 After further discussion, the Board agreed to discuss this issue
further at the November 30th Board Agenda Session and then place
it on the agenda for discussion at the December 6th Board Meeting.
EPA FINE
368.7 The Mayor introduced a request for approval to pay a $10,000 fine
levied by the Environmental Protection Agency for the City's
failure to report a May, 1988 bypass of untreated wastewater from
the collection system into Mud Creek.
368.8 Director Kelley, seconded by Martin, moved payment of the EPA
fine. Upon roll call, the motion passed 7-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
HEARING RESET
368.9 Mayor Johnson stated there is a conflict with the November 21st
date set for the public hearing on the cable television franchise.
The public hearing was rescheduled for November 28, 1988 at 7:30
p.m. at the Center for Continuing Education. City Attorney McCord
noted that the Ad-hoc Cable Television Franchise Committee would
be there to answer any questions.
J
ARTS CENTER PROPERTY
November 15, 1988
.City Attorney McCord advised the Board he had received a
,settlement offer from the Banks who are the property owners at the
southwest corner of the arts center site. He reminded the Board
that the City's independent appraisal of the property was for
$218,000; and the landowners' independent appraisal was for
$300,000. He said the Banks had originally offered to settle for
$290,000, which the Board rejected; and have now counter -offered
. to settle for $280,000. He said the Board had previously
authorized settlement at 10% above the City's appraisal.
369.
Marinoni, seconded by Lancaster, moved to deny the counter-offer 369.
of $280,000. Upon roll call, the motion passed 6-0-1 with Bumpass
abstaining.
UNSIGHTLY PROPERTY
Cyrus Young, addressed the Board concerning an ordinance passed 369.
"13 years ago" requiring Tom Pearson to clean up his property at
the southwest corner of Dickson Street and West Street. He noted
that this ordinance was brought to the Board's attention a "couple
of months ago." Pennington stated that this issue had been turned
over to the Planning Management department which is in charge of
inspections. He also said shortly after this issue was brought
up, his office received a letter from the landscape architect who
had been hired to do part of the design work for the new'arts
center. The architect, he. stated, indicated that this property at
the present time, is being proposed as a park and questioned
whether the trees should be removed. He noted that the architect
requestedthat the trees and underbrush not be removed until their
plans are complete. Young asked why the .improvement district
(Dickson Street Central Business Improvement District No. 1) said
they were going to use this property. Pennington answered that
the improvement district was set up to provide parking in the area
because the arts center was being built. He further stated -his
understanding was that the Pearson property was to be acquired for
the purposes of a park to accent the arts center. He noted his
understanding was based on the letter he received from the
landscape architect.
Director Martin asked if some improvement could be made "right 369.
early" consistent with leaving it a park.
`Bill Stiles, speaking from the audience, stated there is a hole on 369.
the property which is dangerous and asked if City staff had
inspected it. Pennington answered that staff had inspected the
• property. He further noted that the demolition of the building
was performed by the City several years ago and that a hole was
left where the foundation was removed. In answer to a question
from Young, Pennington stated his understanding was that Pierson
had paid the City for the demolition of the building.
November 15, 1988
370.1 Director Marinoni asked if there was a possibility of temporarily
fencing the hole. Pennington stated that was a possibility.
Pennington noted this area is one of the "major" drainage problem
areas in the Dickson Street section.
HERBICIDE ISSUE
370.2 Sean Redmond addressed the Board concerning the agenda which was
published Monday, October 31st. He said the agenda did not
contain enough information. He further stated he felt information
had been withheld from the public concerning an issue which was
presented to the Board by "Dr. King" at the last Board meeting
before the general election. He further stated that although the
Board of Directors and the general public did not know this
presentation was going to be made "obviously City employees knew."
He noted that since this is a political issue the public should
have been advised in the agenda that this presentation was to be
made. Public Works Director Batie stated he did not know Dr. King
would be present for that meeting before the meeting started.
370.3 Redmond also noted he had received in the mail a "promotional ad
to vote against the ban" of herbicide use by the City. He said it
was mailed out by the Association Against Herbicide Hysteria and
has the City postage meter printed on it along with his City water
department account number. Asst. City Manager Linebaugh said the
address label was from the Water and Sewer Department address
billing which is available for purchase by anyone at anytime and
noted that there are numerous firms in town which purchase it
every month. He further noted this address list is covered by the
Freedom of Information Act and the City is required to make it
available to anyone requesting it.
370.4 Redmond stated that for the past four years the City "has been in
stage one of a three stage (herbicide) program." Pennington
stated "this is the first year" for a "herbicidal spraying
program".
370.5 A gentleman addressed the Board concerning an advertisement
promoting a sales tax which was sponsored by the "Fayetteville
City Administration". He questioned who sponsored this ad and if
there was any City money used for it. Pennington answered that he
was the "City Administration" involved in the ad and also stated
that "not one penny of City money was put into the campaign".
Pennington further stated he "volunteered" his time to the
campaign.
370.6 Al Vick spoke requesting the Board and Batie to call a meeting to
organize a "Department of Public Works Advisory Committee" which
would be fair and equitable in working on the herbicide program.
November 15, 1988
Vicky Kelley addressed the Board stating she had been
"misrepresented" in the pamphlet distributed by the City and Dr.
King concerning herbicide use. Director Martin stated the City
did not pay for the distribution of the pamphlet. Kelley stated
she wanted to "go on record for retracting an accusation of
payment to distribute the pamphlet" by the City.
HILLCREST TOWERS PETITION
371.
Sarafino Guido, 1 North School Ave., Hillcrest Towers, addressed 371.
the .Board requesting police patrol in the parking lots at
Hillcrest Towers due to vandalism. He stated he represented fifty
citizens who signed a petitibn requesting the police patrol and
'requested the Board's approval of the petition. Director Martin
stated the Board did approve of the petition and said he felt. the
Police Department is sensitive to theproblem at Hillcrest Towers
and .stated the Board totally supports as much surveillance and
patrol of the parking lot as the police can afford to give.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. 371.:
1