HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-12-16 MinutesA. a
MINUTES OF A CITY BOARD RETREAT
A City Board Retreat was held on Saturday, January 16, 1988 at 9:00 a.m. in
Room 326 of the City Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas. 11.
PRESENT: Mayor Johnson; Directors Martin, Kelley, Marinoni, Hess and
Bumpass; City Manager Pennington, City Clerk McWethy,.
Department Directors Coates and Linebaugh, members of the
press and audience
ABSENT: Director Lancaster
The retreat began at 9:00 a.m. with five Directors present. Director
Marinoni arrived at about 10:25 a.m. Director Lancaster was unable to
attend because he was in the hospital.
ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS
City Manager Pennington said at the last Board retreat the Directors 18.1
expressed a desire to postpone January appointments to citizen committees in
order to have an opportunity to discuss the entire issue. Pennington asked
the Board what their philosophy was regarding the various citizen
committees. He noted some of the groups had regulatory authority and others
were only advisory bodies. He said philosophy should be set by the
governing body and carried down to the various committees to implement in
accordance with the wishes of the Board. He said „ in his opinion, theBBoard
has not established a basic philosophy in various areas. He said he/didn't
think the Planning Commission, for an example, had a good reading of the
Board's position. He added that, when the Board changes, the philosophy may
change, and it must be made. clear to the various commissions. Pennington
commented that the Planning Commission was extremely important in'terms of
future development of the city.: He emphasized that planning for the future
of Fayetteville has to be a joint effort between the Board and the Planning
Commission. Pennington added that he thought the Board ought to be more
involved in the decision making process for the General Plan.
Mayor Johnson said she believed very strongly the Board has never given the
Planning Commission any direction at all.' She said she would like to see
the Board establish all the policies for "the Planning Commission to
implement.
•
Director Martin agreed, and commented the Planning Commission ought to be a
balanced group of members. "He remarked that persons were appointed who were
proponents of certain positions, such as strongly pro -environment, or
strongly pro -growth, and these commissioners often end up in warfare.
•
•
18.2
18.3
January 16, 1988
19.1 Johnson said she didn't think the Board was doing a very good job of
providing the commission with adequate information. She noted that in the
past there had been members on the commission who were specialists in
certain fields which caused the Board to rely on those citizens for their
knowledge. Martin said he would not favor the idea of appointing
specialists to the commission, and said it was the purpose of the staff to
provide the expertise.
19.2 Pennington said he thought the idea in the creation of citizen commissions
was for the lay person to have some involvement as a citizen of the
community. Pennington said the City had an inherent weakness in its own
organization because there is no built-in plan for tomorrow.
19.3 Director Hess said he thought the structure of the Planning Commission has
always been weak, and he thought this had been overcome in the past because
of a couple of exceptional individuals who served on the commission. He
said he felt strongly that the City needs a professional planner on staff
because there is a lack of communications between the City Board and the
Planning Commission. Hess said he thought the General Plan should include
the desire of the City Board on land use.
19.4
Pennington said the reason for having citizens on advisory boards is to pick
up solid information from all aspects of the community. He said some
communities have slots on their commissions which have to be filled by
certain "types of people". He urged the Board to select people who will not
be "yes" people but will be people with a lay perspective who understand the
philosophy of the Board.
19.5 Director Bumpass said he thought the City did have a plan and did have a lot
of policies which have been established. He remarked that the City lost an
interpreter in a person who was on board in the Planning Office and who
brought an historical perspective to each and every decision. He commented
that the Planning Commission's function is to strictly enforce the plan.
19.6 Johnson said she thought zoning decisions were not the Board's biggest
problem as much as lack of policies. Hess commented that there was no way
to create a document that will cover every single situation. Johnson said
she thought it was the Planning Commission's job to interpret a broad set of
guidelines.
19.7 Bumpass said the Planning Commission is set up to consider developers'
requests for interpretation. He said the General Plan provides an
historical perspective for the future. He said at some point the City Board
must be the responsible party which will vote on its passage.
19.8 Director Martin said the Planning Commission is like a sub -legislative
committee, but the Board has been expecting them to be policemen who enforce
rules and to be judges at the same time.
•
January 16, 1988
Bumpass said, as Jack Meriwether told them, the Board has thrown hot
potatoes' in the laps of the Planning Commission to take the heat off some
political decisions.. He said the weakness has been that the staff did not
want to make a recommendation and was a "perpetual case study in diplomacy".
•
20.1
Hess said he found it very ironic and interesting that, when the Board 20.2
studied.a reorganization of its system, we wound up having three departments
but didn't wind up having anything relating to planning, except for a small
division: Johnson said, when that reorganization was set up, nobody told
her there was an area called "planning".
•
Pennington stressed the point that planning is not just "land use planning"
but has a broader perspective. He told the Board they must integrate a
planning element into the management system. He said this starts at the
top, with the Board and the City Manager. Pennington said a Planning
Commission has to be protective of the community but at the same time has to
be innovative.
Hess said he thought the Planning Commission should enforce the existing
policies. He said a typical example of that was the disagreement over the
Polarbek development. He said that, while the Planning Commission adhered
to the existing rules which had already been established, the Board
discovered they didn't like some of those rules and changed them.
Johnson asked Pennington how. he felt about the Board's existing policies.
She asked if the problem was the policies or letting the Planning Commission
know that. ,the Board is the policy -maker.' Pennington said he thought there
was a policy void but, on the other hand, he thought the Planning Commission
would like a clear cut statement from the Board dealing with policy. He
said it was important for the Board to decide whether it wants the Planning
Commission to be a regulatory body;. an advisory body, or a combination of
both.
•
20.3
20.4
20.5
Hess said he would want reports from the Planning Commission regarding 20.6
advice or suggestions they .may have'. but, due to an incorrect process, he
thought they were taking it upon themselves to infringe upon the legislative
process.
Martin said the matter of how to get the message to the Board may be the 20.7
Planning -Commission's frustration. He said in:the past there has been no
vehiclethrough the staff to pass on Planning Commission recommendations to
the.Board, and so the Planning Commission's only way was through a vote.
Martin asked if there was any.reason why the City Attorney, the Public Works
Director and the chief subordinate in the Planning area should not be in
attendance at Planning Commission meetings. Bumpass agreed but said first.
of all there may need to be a policy .to•address the situation of requiring a
large developer to be responsible for a substantial amount. of street;
utility and sidewalk improvements.
20.8
61
January 16, 1988
21.1 Bumpass suggested the City Manager develop for the Board a statement and an
analysis based on the discussion, and allow the Board to participate in the
formation of the new land use plan.
21.2 Johnson, referring to the current work on revising subdivision regulations,
said she senses a problem in that it is impossible for anything to be done
in a relatively short period of time. She said the Board asked the Public
Works Director to review the revisions but never heard back from him. She
said now the revisions are at the Regional Planning Commission being put on
a computer to be part of the General Plan, having never been approved by the
Board. Hess said one way to elimioate confusion is to focus that activity
in one person. He remarked that he didn't see one person who has been given
a directive and has the wherewithal to focus on this item. He asked the
City Manager if he planned to appoint someone for this purpose. Pennington
said he intended to implement a team approach process.
21.3 Johnson said the question of increasing building inspection fees was raised
and the Board asked for more information and the issue hasn't been seen
since. She said that to her that says there is no need for the increases to
be implemented.
21.4
21.5
21.6
21.7
Bumpass said he has had a lack of trust in the staff to interpret the
mission statement, maybe because of lack of direction. Johnson said she
thought the mission statement never got passed down to those who need to
have it. Director Kelley said he thought that was the responsibility of the
staff. [Director Marinoni arrived at this point.] Kelley suggested the
Board let Pennington take the mission statement and implement it, and let
the staff move forward with the planning process.
Johnson said the Board has to have political courage to make some decisions,
that the Board could cause a lot less grief if they use a little more
leadership and a little less management.
Kelley said the Board will not always vote 7-0, that Directors' philosophies
will be reflected in their votes on issues. Johnson said she thought the
Board as a whole has to accept majority decisions.
Martin said he thought the Board was clearer about their role and more
faithful about staying out of management than they were a year ago.
Pennington said the staff needs to know they have the support of the Board.
He said the organization has good people but needs to tap their innate
talents. He said in the past the employees didn't feel it was wise to be
creative or wise to come up with a new idea, and felt it was safer to not do
anything. Pennington added that, because "the ball has slipped a lot",
management is trying some positive and negative things. He said in cases
where the ball was dropped when it should not have dropped, those
individuals are getting the appropriate letters and comments that this will
not be tolerated but, on the other hand, a program is being instituted for
those who do a good job where a simple "thank you" goes in their file.
January 16, 1988
Hess said citizens who .are appointed to commissions do not receive any 22.1
training.. Kelley said the'City Board,is included in that. Hess said he
thought it would be wise if the staff would develop a seminar to give to
those people as an introduction to what they can expect and things they need
to prepare themselves. Kelley said in many cities such training for Board
members is done by a university. Hesstsaid he thought it should be done on
a yearly basis. The Mayor said she and former City Manager Grimes assembled
an introductory packet for distribution to new Board members.
d1
•
Director Bumpass said he,was not sure he understood the relationship of City 22.2
Hospital to city government. Marinoni expressed the same question about the
Library Board. Johnson said the Board's input into the City Hospital Board
is through the appointments it makes to that group. She said in addition to
those appointments, there are other members representing various churches.
She said the City funds the Library and owns their building. She said the
City Hospital receives sales tax funds which she said were specifically
pledged to pay for an addition to their facility. Linebaugh clarified that
the Board, not the voters, pledged those funds Bumpass asked if the
smoking policy will apply to the City Hospital and Library buildings, if the
buildings., are owned by the City. Johnson said;.that is a policy decision,
and noted that the staff recommended the _policy apply to governmental
agencies, of which the Hospital and Library are not.
1'
4
Bumpass asked for an analysis from the staff of the City's relationship to 22.3
City Hospital. Martin suggested an organization chart be drawn up which
shows the Board's relationship to other entities. Hess said he didn't want
the City Board to exert greater control, but to have increased input.
Martin agreed, commenting that the Board wants to exert the control it has,
but it needs to know what control it has.
Dr. Anthony DePalma (the only citizen present other than media) told the 22.4
Board there was a brief history of the hospital in the Library. He
suggested some source material should be kept available in City Hall. He
also suggested the Board meetinformally once a year with groups such as the
City Hospital Board to get acquainted.
It was decided the Board would discuss appointments at their next agenda 22.5
meeting and make appointments to citizen committees at the first Board
meeting in February. Director Marinoni suggested the Board should meet the
applicants before making a decision. He suggested they be invited to an
agenda meeting. Director Martin suggested it might be more convenient for
applicants to invite them to an evening meeting. The Mayor thought the
Board should shorten the list to finalists before inviting applicants.
At the suggestion of the Mayor; it was agreed that the Board would review 22.6
the entire list of applicants at the agenda meeting, and decide then whether
to schedule meetings with applicants during the week between the agenda
meeting and the regular board meeting.
(.r
January 16, 1988
23.1 Pennington advised the Board consider its policy on how many terms can be
served by a committee member.
Recess at 11:00 a.m./Reconvene at 11:15 a.m.
23.2 The Mayor told the Board that because of lack of attendance by some of the
hotel, motel and restaurant members on the Advertising and Promotion
Commission, a letter was sent to them asking them to reconsider their time
commitments and intentions to remain on the Commission. She said one
indicated he may be resigning in the near future, one did resign and the
other has not responded. She said advertising needed to be done for two
positions. The City Clerk was asked to advertise the positions. Bumpass
asked that a direct mailing be done to all hotel, motel and restaurant
owners from whom we collect H/M/R tax.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
23.3 The City Manager introduced for discussion potential growth management
topics such as excavation (cut and fill), erosion and sedimentation control,
as well as vegetation and tree control, environmental controls (code
enforcement of dumping), the Comprehensive plan, future use of City owned
lands, and an annexation policy.
23.4 The Mayor suggested the staff develop all these areas into a "buffet" of
potential choices the Board could discuss individually, and provide the
Board with ordinances from other cities.
23.5 Director Marinoni noted that the City does currently have certain
landscaping requirements it imposes on builders.
23.6 The Mayor said the City's street overlay process is beginning to cause
damage in some parts of Fayetteville. Hess said in some cases, there is
only three or four inches between the street and the top of the curb.
Pennington said any time asphalt is added to a street it increases the
runoff.
23.7 Pennington said he hoped to bring some policies to the Board on extension
and sizing of water lines. He said Fayetteville's minimum sizing of lines
is the smallest of any community he had ever been in. He noted the City had
a large growth area and asked where the Board wanted to go with annexation.
He said there was no plan for future in this area
23.8 Director Bumpass said over the years oversizing has been done upon request
from anyone who wanted to develop. Director Marinoni asked how many water
meters were on these lines which the City paid to oversize. Johnson said
there was no actual policy.
23.9 Pennington told the Board it needs to look at the annexation question,
whether it is five, ten or twenty years from now. Johnson agreed that the
f i
6 1
growth of- the City cannot be denied but questioned whether the City should
amass more land. Martin said theremugt be a basis for annexation, noting
that studies have shown that there is already a lot of undeveloped land
within the City. Hess pointed out that -the more people who request services
will place the City in a position where it may have to say it cannot provide
them, or it will have to face the extra costs.. ,Pennington stressed the fact
that annexation must `be ,rational, because economic, human, service, and
environmental factors must be considered. •
January 16, 1988
Z4
24.1
Director Hess said he would like'to see'an inventory of City -owned lands. 24.2
Recess at 12:10/Reconvene at 12:30
Director Bumpass said there apparently is motivation by the School Board to
lock up the Lake Fayetteville,land for a long time, for the Environmental
Center. He said the Board should make its intent for the use of that area
clear. Bumpass said he would hate to foreclose the use of the park by the
public. Johnson said Judy,McDonald pointed out .that any construction or
encroachment on that land will disturb the balance of nature for several
years.
24.3
Hess said he thought the City had a unique opportunity to set a piece of 24.4
land aside and say it will remain in its natural state. He said leasing it
to the school, in his opinion, would not prevent the publicfrom. camping or
hiking at. the Lake.
Martin pointed out that next year the City may decide there is abetter 24.5
publicuse for that land. He said he was 'not ready to memorialize this
property. Bumpass said there is a gym at Lake Fayetteville which is locked
and cannot be used by the public. City Manager Pennington pointed out that
the problemis that some of the City's facilities really cannot be thrown
open to general public use because their use is already heavily scheduled by
the schools. He told the Board they may want to look at a policy whereby
every five years or so the uses of City property is reviewed.
Johnson said some agreement needed to be established to give the school 24.6
system security that for a period of time they will have the ability to use
that land for the Environmental Center. She pointed out there was no policy
on who is in charge of maintenance of the facility - whether this is the
responsibility of the Fayetteville schools, the Springdale schools, or the
City of Fayetteville.
Martin agreed there should be rules but said if the City turns the area over
to the school system they should make the rules and regulations, not the
City, and he said that then takes it out of the public domain. He asked
what was wrong with the arrangement as it is now.
24.7
Pennington said the question before the Board, from Jim Lindsey, is whether 24.8
or not the Board will consider allowing development of part of the area.
'b
January 16, 1988
25.1 Martin suggested the Board respond with "no, but thank you for the generous
offer."
25.2 The City Manager pointed out there is a City resolution which authorizes the
use of the area for an Environmental Center. Martin suggested the Board's
policy be that it is standing by its old resolution.
25.3 It was agreed that consideration of a lease with the School Board would not
be brought up at the next agenda meeting, and the City Manager was
instructed to say "no" to Lindsey.
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
25.4 Director Hess commented that every time the Board has ever discussed the
issue of solid waste, it seems to be at odds. He said he would like to
receive some feedback to some basic questions such as whether it is agreed
there is a problem with the management of solid waste, and what would be the
best way to solve that problem. Hess said he would like to develop a
consensus on those questions.
25.5 Johnson said there is about four pounds per person of garbage generated per
day, and the problem is what to do with it. She said although a landfill
exists as a viable alternative, the Sunray landfill has a life expectancy of
two more years. She said the Northwest Arkansas Waste Management landfill
has a five-year life, given today's conditions. Bumpass expressed confusion
with these statistics, noting that Springdale had just signed a ten-year
contract with Sunray. Johnson said she did not think Springdale's approach
was a responsible way to deal with waste being generated.
25.6 Kelley asked if the City had talked to either of the landfill companies
about their intentions for keeping their businesses going.
25.7 Johnson said the City is using Northwest's landfill now, which is located on
the White River. She pointed out the City is responsible for whatever it
puts in that landfill. She told the Board that landfill was cited by the
DPC&E two months ago for leachate in their wells.
25.8 Hess asked if incineration was more environmentally acceptable than
landfilling and are there more environmentally acceptable methods which can
be used to help solve the problem.
25.9 Bumpass said one landfill is on Clear Creek and the Illinois River, and the
other is on the White River. He said the plan with the incinerator is to
dispose of the ash in one of those landfills. Johnson said she didn't think
the Authority had ever made that decision. Bumpass suggested that a
governmentally controlled landfill is needed. He said landfilling could
take care of the problem for a long time. Johnson said she thought there
were other alternatives for disposing of the ash. •
s: r
January 16, 1988
Martin said he thought it:was critical that the Board figure a way out of
the political mess it has gotten itself` -into, where the Directors are all at
such odds. He said if the Board of Directors and the other two authority
members locked themselves in a room and pledged they wouldn't come,out until
they were unanimous, the bigger?question is"what would the public think. He
said the debate has to be raised to.a public level, with or without a vote,
so a majority of the public can say "we have a problem or we don't have a
problem" and "this is the best solution". He said he guessed that the vast
majority of the public doesn't have a high level of confidence in the City
Board.
' 1
Hess agreed but said the media has to be used to disseminate information and 26.2
their support is .needed. ' He -said it is going to be difficult to impart a
lot of the information because very few people? will be able to understand
the technology and the figures.
26
26.1
Martin said a half dozen of trusted people in the community could be
empaneled to lead a public debate which would be balanced and could precede
a referendum. He said if the project will not stand on its merits it should
not be built. He said his primary objection is economics. He said
environmental changes have been made which, by all the evidence, indicate
the plant will be safe. He said, in his opinion, if the public doesn't
believe in the plant, it shouldn't be forced down the public's throat.
Johnson said what the public reads in the Northwest Arkansas Times and in
the Springdale News are two entirely different viewpoints. She said those
two newspapers were "tainted". She asked how a panel could be empowered to
present an unbiased opinion when the media is presenting biased material.
Martin said he did not think the media was biased, but thought they took a
"snapshot" of what went on at a meeting.. He said the forum (the Authority)
in which the debate has been conducted has become so distorted, that what's
being reported is nothing more than a distortion. Johnson said last week's
reporting in the Times of two citizen committee meetings, where .no reporter
was present, was not an unbiased report. Martin said the forum in which the
debate is being conducted is one in which people expect "the extremes"' to be!
represented. He said most of the community are in between the two extremes.
Bumpass said the only way to have any confidence level is to let people vote
on the issue and to trust them to make the right decision. He said the
public feels alienated because they don't feel as though they are
participating.
Hess said if the Boardagrees to put it to a vote, "so be it". He said it
was a mistake to restrict our thinking to the "here and now", but the Board
should try and anticipate what the future will bring. Hess said, in his
.estimation, there is no way to have a solid waste management plan without
incineration, recycling, composting and landfilling. He said all the
Literature he has read has always put landfilling as a less viable
alternative than incineration, from an environmental standpoint.
26.3
26.4
26.5
26.6
26.7
27
January 16, 1988
27.1 Bumpass pointed out that the Authority selected a mass burn incinerator
because it did not believe the public wanted to separate or recycle their
garbage.
27.2 Johnson said this group did not make all those decisions, just as it never
decided on a total solid waste management plan. She said she didn't believe
in imposing mandatory recycling on the community.
27.3 Bumpass brought up the situation of a widow living alone who is a non-
consumer living on a pension check. He said she would be charged 20% of her
entire income for water, sewer and sanitation services, compared to a family
like his own. He asked why it was fair to charge that widow $15-$18 a month
to pick up her garbage versus his family's garbage. Johnson said the City
has never dealt with that issue.
27.4 Bumpass said the public doesn't trust the Board to make those kinds of
decisions. Johnson said that was because the Board had done a poor job of
educating the public and communicating to them. She said "we screwed up
from day one."
27.5 Martin said it was predictable that there would be opposition as soon as a
site was chosen. Marinoni said if, at the last minute, there is a blitz of
public information to inform the public about what they are voting on, the
public is going to question why this was not done last year.
27.6 Hess said his opinion on a vote was that, although he is glad to hear from
the public, he thinks it is an easy way for the Board to get into a position
of being in a "no lose" situation, which is if the incinerator is accepted,
the Board can say "see, I told you so", and if the incinerator is rejected,
the Board can say years later "see, I told you so, we should have done it
then."
27.7 Martin said, if the incinerator is rejected in a public vote, the Board
can't sit back but must get back to the drawing board immediately to solve
the problem. Hess asked if the Board would then decide incineration is
still needed, or will decide in favor or recycling, or a combination of
both.
27.8 Bumpass said he thought the Board had clouded the process by which it makes
decisions, that the public sees this project as a "taxation without
representation" situation because there was no vote to finance it.
27.9 Hess said he said he might be in favor of several public meeting in a large
auditorium with the Board volunteering to answer questions about philosophy
rather than answering technical questions.
27.10 Marinoni asked what an election would cost and who would pay for it. The
City Manager said the City would bear the cost. It was estimated it might
cost about $1500.
January 16, 1988
28
Marinoni suggested the City get concrete facts on landfill conditions. 28.1
Bumpass told the Board the money on this project is going out at the rate of
about $800,000-$1 million.per.month, and we are $8 million into the project.
He said hethought a decision should be made to not spend another dime until
a vote is taken.
Martin said he thought the debate should not be to present the Directors but
should be to present experts in the field with a structured debate of the
alternatives, to be televised and publicized. He said this should be
addressed not to the people who have been attending the Authority meetings
'but to the general public. Martin said he thought a public debate and a
vote would be a springboard to results.
•
Johnson asked whose responsibility this was. She said she asked for a
public information campaign months ago and it was never done. She asked if
this task should be given to Louis Watts or to City staff. Hess said he was
not sure Louis Watts was ever given a specific definition of his job. He
saidhe'thought it might have to be handled by City staff.
Pennington said February 5 was the deadline for adopting an ordinance and
getting on the ballot. He said one of the problems is that the City Board
has become- the focus of the whole thing, and before it can go on to other
issues, this one has to be dealt with. He said he was concerned over the
split which has developed in the community, commenting that it was not good
for the city, not good for the Board, and not good for the Directors as
individuals.
Marinoni said he didn't think all the meetings in the world were going to
convert the opposition, although it might help inform the public. He said
he thought the only solution was to bring it to a vote.
Johnson said until the Board can get back to a close group, every decision
it makes will be clouded by this issue.
Johnson said she would not be able to attend the Wednesday agenda meeting
and asked if it could be moved to another day. Johnson said she would like
tointroduce at that time the question of an election. Following
discussion, it was decided to schedule the meeting for 4:00 on Friday,
January 22.
Pennington told the Board the budget would be delivered to them by January
20 and he asked that a special Board meeting be scheduled to review it. He
said the budget must be voted on by February 1. That meeting was scheduled
for Saturday, January 30 at 9:00 a.m.
Recess at 2:00 p.m./Reconvene at 2:20 p.m..
•
28.2
28.3
28.4
28.5
28.6
28.7
28.8
28.9
January 16, 1988
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
29.1 Pennington said he would be recommending an economic development program as
part of the 1988 budget. He said one source for funding that program may be
from the housing bond windfall.
29.2 Martin asked how the City's program would relate to that of the Chamber of
Commerce. Pennington said it would be a combination effort where the
business community and the Chamber will be working together, with the City
taking the lead. Martin said he was concerned about the dangers of
duplication, and said he hoped the City Manager's proposal would show what
the Chamber is or is not doing now.
29.3 Kelley asked if there will be a quantitative result to the program
Pennington said the first few years may be more qualitative than
quantitative.
29.4 Hess said he thought the town should be aggressively marketed and thought
the addition of a new person on staff for this purpose will be a key element
to the program
29.5 Kelley said, if the program will require any of the windfall funds, he
thought discussion should be put on hold until the Manager presents his
report with the budget. Pennington said he would be asking for about
$145,000 of the windfall for the economic development program for one year.
$500,000 HOUSING BONDS WINDFALL
29.6 Hess and Marinoni said they had received an enormous amount of mail in favor
of the "You Can" project. Hess said $375,000 is needed to fund this project
for five years.
29.7 Martin said when the windfall was first discussed it was agreed that no
decision would be made until the five-year plan process was completed. He
said the idea was that process would identify areas of most critical need.
29.8 Kelley said the Board had a public hearing on January 28, 1987 to take
requests for use of the windfall. He said there was a list of people who
made requests and he asked the City Manager if he had reviewed it. Kelley
said in addition to that, Director Bumpass sent out a formal presentation in
February.
29.9 Johnson expressed a preference that the staff waive their review of those
requests until after the five-year planning process is completed.
29.10 Hess said he thought it was also agreed the windfall would not be used for
any project that would normally be financed in the General Fund.
MEDIA -RELATIONS
January 16, 1988
Pennington said he would be glad to give any Board member a copy of a book
entitled "Effective Communication: Getting the Message Across" which he said
was written for cities and addresses media relations.
Hess asked if there was someone in charge of dispensing information to the
media. Pennington said the city did not have a "P. R. person". He said he
was working on making sure the media gets the proper information. He
remarked that, during the snow storm, there was some information out which
was totally incorrect, because the individual who gave out the information
had no idea what was going on somewhere else in the organization. He said
he would be trying to coordinate that type of information.
Hess asked, on the Arts _Center project, if you wanted architectural
information or information on current decisions and finances, where would
you go to get such information. Pennington said basic information would be
obtained from Bill Mitchell, Executive Director for the project. Hess asked
if therewould be people in charge of information for projects in the
future. Pennington said that will be part of a new program
Pennington said he has been in a situation in the past where totally
erroneous information went out and was printed as a City's position. He
said he instituted a program where all communication and information had to
come from knowledgeable sources only. He said the media in that community
did not like the program and insisted a "gag rule" was in effect.
Marc Francoeur, reporter for the Springdale News, asked Pennington if he
would be trying to set up such a procedure in Fayetteville. Pennington said
he would. Francoeur said he thought the media might have problems with
that. Pennington said media talking to low level employees who have no idea
why a decision was made or implemented cannot get accurate information about
policies. He said the media has to go to the supervisory level. As an
example, he said in the case of an accident, the media should get its
information from the rescue crew, not from the bystanders; on the other
hand, he said it was acceptable for the media to question any level of
employees on what they think of the new smoking policy.
Francoeur asked Pennington how he would have the city employees distinguish
the difference between types of questions which are asked. Pennington said.
the policy wouldn't relate to employees' individual rights. Francoeur asked
if employees could comment on any city business, e.g., could a trash hauler
comment on what he thinks of his truck. Pennington agreed, as long as the
trash hauler is not questioned about what he thinks of the trash routing,
for example.
•
Bumpass said when the sewer plant flooded, the Mayor was asked by the media
how the situation was going.. He said he didn't think it was fair for the
Mayor to have to comment on how something has broken down, commenting that
•
30
30.1
30.2
30.3
30.4
30.5
30.6
30.7
31
January 16, 1988
31.1 the appropriate people to question would have been the operators of the
plant.
31.2 Francoeur commented that there were many aspects to centralizing the
dispersion of information which would have to be addressed, and said whether
or not there will be objection will depend on how well the issue gets
addressed. He said, in running the police beat, if something major happens
during the night, a reporter can't get information at 7:30 in the morning
because it has to be cleared through Marty Coates, and then the television
media picks it up at noon and beats the reporter. Coates said he has had a
new procedure worked out for months now which runs smoothly and the media
has not complained. He said he allows an officer in charge of the scene to
release preliminary information, but an official press release has to be
okayed by him. Francoeur said he knew of an instance where an officer was
verbally reprimanded for following the procedure just described.
31.3 Martin said as far as he was concerned the media had the right to ask
anything they want, but the City had the right to restrict the flow of
information, and if a certain class of worker isn't able to give a cogent
response to a question, they ought to be able to say "I'm sorry, I can't
comment on that, check with my supervisor." Martin said employees will have
to be trained as to what they are and are not able to respond to.
31.4 Francoeur asked where the liability was in a reporter asking a trash truck
driver why the sewer plant flooded and attributing the response to a trash
truck driver. Francoeur said information can be centralized and accurate
but if it is not provided in a timely manner for all the news media, the
media will be at a disadvantage and will be getting whatever information
they can wherever they can.
31.5 Pennington said the news media in large communities do not have the
prerogative that the news media gets in Fayetteville, but instead get
information whenever the public information officer gives it out. Martin
said if we operate in a way that allows one type of media to get information
but deprives another type of media of the opportunity, then something needs
to be done. Pennington said Fayetteville was a good media market compared
to a number of communities where employees will not tell reporters anything
because they are subject to being fired.
31.6 The Mayor asked what the city's responsibility was, under the freedom of
information law. Francoeur said all public records are open to inspection.
Bumpass said you must respond to a request in writing for information within
a certain time period.
31.7 Johnson said the reason she asked to put this topic on the agenda was
because of an article in the paper regarding her memo calling for an
election where it was reported she had not provided the reporter with a copy
of her memo. She said she felt it was grossly unfair to her and other Board
members, in the decision making process, to read things in the paper before
having received them. She said she told the City Clerk to release a copy of