Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-12-20 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS A regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, December 20, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. in the Directors' Room of the City Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas'. PRESENT: Mayor Johnson; Directors Lancaster, Martin, Kelley, Marihoni and Bumpass; City Manager Pennington, Assistant City Manager Linebaugh, City Attorney McCord, City Clerk McWethy; members of the press and audience ABSENT: Director Hess REPORT TO PUBLIC The Mayor began the meeting with the pledge of allegiance and asked the City Manager to present the report to the public and Board for the month of November. Pennington reported that, as of the end of November, revenues exceeded expenses. 'He said the City presently has received 79% of annual budgeted revenues. Pennington reported that a "preliminary final i.eport" on the City's proposed Land Use'Plan had been received from the Plan Group, which he said would be available soon for the Board and Planning Commission to review. He said a new zoning ordinance and transportation plan would. also be developed.' Pennington said requests have been made by the Planning Commission relative to proposals on tree protection and landscaping, and the staff has requested an annexation policy and an illustrated guide for developers. Pennington reported a contract aerial photography for the December, January and February. had been signed with Aerial bata Service to do the City's computer mapping project, to be done in trt Pennington reported that the City Police having a drug unit in operation which is policing agencies in the area. 4C 405.1 405.2 405.3 405.4 Department .should be congratulated for 405.5 being coordinated with federal and other • Pennington reported the Appleby Road project is 50% complete. 405.6 Pennington reported that on November 28 a public hearing was' held by the City 405.7 Board on the proposed Warner Cable franchise renewal, and some negotiations have continued since that time. Pennington reported the City would publicly encourage that' the City, the University and the Arts Center Council move as expeditiously as possible to get underway with the demolition of the buildings which the City andLUniversity have already acquired. Penningtonsaid actual construction needed to be underway by late Spring or early Summer. 405.8 )6.1 December 20, 1988 Pennington reported that at the last Board meeting the Board heard a report from R. W. Beck relative to the disengagement from the resource recovery project. He said that on December 13 the Northwest Arkansas Resource Recovery Authority voted to accept the settlement offer from MK Ferguson, contractor for the solid waste facility project. Pennington said, until the incinerator bond issue matter is concluded, the City of Fayetteville cannot issue any new bonds for any of the planned capital improvement projects. He said he hoped the issue could be resolved in a few months. ROLL CALL )6.2 The roll was called, with six Directors being present. CONSENT AGENDA )6.3 The Mayor introduced consideration of items which may be approved by motion, or contracts and leases which can be approved by resolution, and which may be grouped together and approved simultaneously under a "Consent Agenda." )6.4 Director Bumpass asked that Item F (a resolution approving the 1989 Budget and Employee Pay Plan for the City of Fayetteville) be removed from the consent agenda for separate consideration. )6.5 With the exception of Item F, it was moved by Kelley and seconded by Martin to approve the consent agenda. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0, Hess absent. )6.6 The consent agenda items appeared in the agenda as follows: )6.7 A. Minutes of the December 6, 1988 regular Board meeting; )6.8 B. Award of Bid #884, for the purchase of a gas fired high pressure unit for cleaning equipment at the City Shop; RECOMMENDATION: Award to the only bidder, Freeman Equipment & Supply Company of Siloam Springs, Arkansas. BID: $4,874.94 BUDGET: $6,800 )6.9 C. Award of Bid #886, for the assembly of playground equipment at Jefferson School and Walker Park, under the Community Development Block Grant Program; and a request for a budget adjustment; December. 20, 1988 RECOMMENDATION: Award to the lowest of two bidders meeting specifications, Turner General Construction, bidding $8,660. The purchase of playground equipment for Children'sHouse, Jefferson School and Walker Park, plus the bid for assembly exceeds the amount budgeted: Equipmentand assembly: $34,465.11 Budget: 28,000.00 Amount exceeding budget: 6,465.11 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT: Recommended in the amount of $6,466, to be taken from a 1985 Community Development Contingency Account which has a balance of $7,744.23 available. D . Award of. Bid #892, for the purchase and installation of a motor speed control unit for the Public Works Department; RECOMMENDATION: Award to the lowest of two bidders meeting specifications, Evans Electric of Rogers, Arkansas. BID: $4,180 BUDGET: $8,000 E . Award of Bid #893, for award of construction contract for two Community Development street improvement projects for Willow and Spruce Streets; . .: RECOMMENDATION: Award to the lowest of two ^ bidders, APAC-Arkansas, Inc. (McClinton -Anchor Division). BID: $102,152.95 BUDGET: $173,600. • RESOLUTIONS: 4 G . Supporting an addition to Fayetteville City Hospital's existing facility; r 't;'' i'• -ri RESOLUTION NO. 92-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK P 't H . Declaring that Fayetteville does not.:at this time desire to be a member of the Arkansas "One -Call Center": RESOLUTION NO. 93-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK AFI REQUEST FOR INFORMATION 4 The. Mayor asked that the minutes of this meeting reflect a comment which was in the December 6 minutes which indicated that AFI had never received a response to a letter they sent to the City Manager and the Board of Directors.;' Johnson said she mailed a letter to AFI on October 3 indicating that the information they had gU 407.: 407.2 407.3 407.4 407.5 407.6 December 20, 1988 38.1 requested had not been made available to the Board and that all correspondence between the City Manager (agent for the project) and City Staff was available in City offices to AFI any time. 1989 BUDGET 08.2 The Mayor introduced consideration of a resolution approving the 1989 budget and employee pay plan for the City of Fayetteville. 08.3 Director Bumpass commented that he did not have an opportunity to participate in the special budget session where the proposed budget was reviewed by the Board, and so he did not feel he could approve the budget. D8.4 Bumpass said he really opposed the Pay Plan to the extent that a cost -of -living increase is included in it as a "blanket" for all employees. He said the City spent a lot of money, time and effort about five years ago to develop a Pay Plan matrix with steps and grades for each employee, as well as job descriptions for all employees. He said the City had gone to great effort to try and identify how employees are performing in their jobs and he thought the purpose behind that and the matrix was to get to the point where management could award individual employees based upon merit, to give employees an opportunity to move up through the ranks. Bumpass said for the past eight years that he has been on the Board the cost -of -living increases have been anywhere from 4% to 10%, and builds in the effect of "compound interest" to the payroll expense of the City. He said it was tough to realize that expenses exceed revenues, and if we want a lot of capital improvements perhaps the additional sales tax was necessary, but he saw the payroll expense continuing to compound as long as the 5% cost -of -living increase is applied to payroll. Bumpass said he would vote against the Pay Plan for that reason. Bumpass said he thought the job of the Directors was to be good stewards of the taxpayers' money, and sometimes that takes being very skeptical. Bumpass added that several years ago when the Board spent several months reviewing the City Manager's proposed budget, they changed it so much that they interfered with management's ability to do their job but, on the other hand, Bumpass said he questioned whether a $60 million dollar budget could be adequately reviewed in one day. 08.5 Director Martin said the consultant who set up the City's present pay plan specifically recommended we not set up a compensation system based on performance because our supervisors didn't have the skills to administer such a system. Martin said consequently for the past five years the City has used a pay plan matrix which could be termed a "step progression plan" in which the employees move through steps according to their length of service. Martin said if the City didn't implement an adjustment to the matrix as proposed, it would mean that nobody would get an increase. Martin said he thought Bumpass was asking that the City radically revise, in mid -stream, a plan that it has had for five years. Martin said the City did have a bonus pay system in place. He said City employees were paid below what their peers in corresponding cities were paid in the State and the region. He said to cut off a cost -of -living adjustment right December 20, 1988 now would be absolutely unfair and would change the rules in the middle of the 409.1 game. Mayor Johnson pointed out that the current Pay Plan does provide for a cost -of- 409.2 living increase and step raises. Johnson said the Personnel Department had instituted '.a "weighted ranking" system to prepare supervisors for a "pay for performance" system. Martin, seconded by Kelley, moved approval of the 1989 budget and employee pay 409.3 plan. Marinoni said he thought the budget should be able to be addressed by the public 409.4 and it was for that reason that he seconded the motion to remove the budget from the consent agenda. Marinoni asked if there was any public comment on the budget. Director -Elect Michael Green said he thought there were still some problems with 409.5 the budget. He said some things had not been addressed, that several people have called him relative to their concerns about the Parks and Recreation budget for example. He said perhaps the budget was merely a guide to be continually updated but commented that, if it was "fixed in concrete" like the federal budget, he would want to look at it a little more closely, especially in the Parks and Recreation area. Green said, at the budget meeting, several comments and suggestions were made by various Directors. Green said he thought those ought to be either incorporated into the budget or at least addressed before the Board approves the budget. Director -Elect Fred Vorsanger said it took him eight hours to read the 596 page .409.6 budget and commented that it was one of the best planning documents he had ever read, and he thought the staff did a magnificent job. He said in his opinion the budget was very adequate and very good, but no budget is locked in concrete. He said he thought the Board had an opportunity to pass a good working document. He said the salary levels are low and the Board has an opportunity to do something for the City employees. He said there were five to seven different retirement plans for city employees, a situation which he said must be changed. Vorsanger said ,the Board would have an opportunity to do something concrete about the human resources in the City. Vorsanger suggested the budget be passed with the proviso that it can bechanged in the coming year as needs are determined.. s , In answer to a question from Director Kelley, City Manager Pennington said the 409.7 budget could be amended at any time by the Board. Pennington added that in his budget message he addresses the situations referred to by Bumpass and Vorsanger, and there is a'recommendation to closely examine those issues. upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, Bumpass in the minority. RESOLUTION NO. 94-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK -55 4 5 ' 409.8 December 20, 1988 SMOKING REGULATED L0.1 The Mayor introduced consideration of an ordinance to regulate smoking in certain places in Fayetteville; deferred from a November 15, 1988 meeting. L0.2 The Mayor explained that in July of 1987 Arkansans for Nonsmokers' Rights proposed an ordinance to the City Board, the staff reviewed it and compared it with ordinances from other cities, and studied what impact it would have on proprietors of retail eating establishments. 10.3 She said on November 15, 1988 a revised ordinance was proposed by the City Manager and since that time further revisions have been made. She said at the last agenda meeting the citizens' group proposed an addition to the ordinance. 10.4 At the request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read the City Manager's proposed ordinance for the first time. 10.5 Director Martin moved that Section 1, subsection (c) be amended to include the following: "Within two (2) years, all non-smoking areas must be completely separated from the smoking area by a physical barrier." The Mayor noted that this was the addition proposed by Arkansans for Nonsmokers' Rights. There was no second to the motion. 10.6 Director Bumpass moved to amend Section 1, subsection (b)(1) to include taverns and private clubs; subsection (b)(2) to include convenience stores; subsection (b) be amended to add "(10) all public schools; (11) the University of Arkansas, all fraternities and sororities; (12) law offices, courthouses and office buildings; (13) banks, savings and loan associations, investment banking and brokerage houses; and (14) hospitals, physicians offices, physical and mental health centers and related services. The Mayor said that smoking inside of public schools is already prohibited by State law. There was no second to the motion. 10.7 Director Marinoni moved to amend Section 1, subsection (c) to state that restrooms do not qualify as smoking areas. Marinoni said restrooms were small confined areas and adding another purpose to them would double the capacity of people using those facilities, nonsmokers using restrooms would be subjected to smoke, and proprietors may decide to use the restrooms as designated non-smoking areas. The motion was seconded by Martin. McCord advised that the requirement to post signs may address that problem. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, Johnson voting in the minority. 10.8 Director Bumpass moved to include hospitals, physicians offices, physical and mental health clinics and related services in Section 1, subsection (b). Bumpass said Dr. Philip Duncan, on behalf of the Lung Association, had requested the inclusion of hospitals. The motion was seconded by Marinoni. 10.9 Director Kelley said hospitals had indicated a desire to voluntarily do something, that private business owners had contacted him stating they would be willing to "work with the other side, yet they don't want it legislated to them. • December 20, 1988 L Kelley said he would support a resolution to encourage everyone that this is a 411.: potential ordinance for some point in the future, perhaps in six months. Kelley said the Chamber of Commerce was particularly concerned about the economic impact. Kelley said the resolution he would support could be sent to everyone mentioned by Director Bumpass in his motion, that the City strongly encourages everyone to follow the intent of the proposed ordinance for the next six months, at which time the ordinance could be evaluated again. Director Lancaster said he thought both sides could get together, but couldn't support a mandate that within two years all non-smoking areas must be completely separated from smoking areas. McCord advised that the ordinance would stay on its first reading at this meeting, unless there is a motion to suspend the rules, which passes by a 2/3 vote. He advised that, if Director Kelley wished to delay action on the ordinance for six months, and have a resolution adopted, the appropriate procedure would be a motion to table for six months, followed by a motion for approval of a resolution. It was moved by Director Kelley to table the ordinance for six months. There was 'no second to the motion. The,Mayor asked if there was any public comment on Director Bumpass' motion. Dr. Phillip Duncan addressed the Board, stating he was representing the American Lung Association of Arkansas as one of their Board members. Duncan said at the time of the Surgeon General's first report which detailed the risks of cigarette smoking, there were over 50% of adult American smokers. Duncan said at present 28% were smoking and the number is steadily going down, so that the number of American adults who do not smoke is 72%. He said the lung association sponsors and favors any proposals which would restrict smoking in public places. He said the nation's health organizations operate on a "literal shoestring" compared to the $4. billion spent by cigarette companies each year on advertising, most of which is directed towards youth. He said he would strongly support Bumpass' amendment. He said the lung association has supported many proposals nationwide which are showing some success, and cities are coming together to try to address the health hazards. He said the private ,community was way<ahead and many businesses in Fayetteville have already taken steps so smoking is not allowed in .the workplace. He said in the next few months a number of institutions in this area will be restricting smoking. He said in February there would be a major conference in Fayetteville on smoking in the workplace. He said cigarette smoking was irritating, annoying,and unpleasant tp the majority of American adults, but people smoke because they are addicted to nicotine and satisfying a� habit. He said the lung association would support any proposals or resolutions that might protect the rights of non-smokers. yY t Robert Anderson, Fayetteville resident, addressed the Board.•'He said he had 411.7 smoked for 53 years and enjoyed it. He said Arkansas smokers paid $10,596,957 in State and federal taxes on cigarettes as of August of this year., He said he thought places of business ought to be able to run their business the way they 411.; 411.: 411.4 411.5 411.6 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 December 20, 1988 see fit. He said if people can't smoke in hospitals, they will go out of town to to another hospital, and if they can't smoke in local restaurants, they will go other places. He said if people can't smoke in convenience stores, the stores shouldn't be permitted to sell cigarettes. Jerry Jackson addressed the Board, stating he was representing a local restaurant. He said he didn't smoke and hated the smell of it. He asked if the ordinance proposed was based on research from other cities. The City Manager said although the ordinance was based on such research, it is much milder than ordinances from other cities. Jackson said he thought it would be more appropriate if citizens could see some documentation of the research which was gathered. Wayne Dyer, owner of the Hush Puppy Restaurant, addressed the Board. He said he spoke for his restaurant and for some members of the hospitality industry. He read a resolution from the Northwest Chapter of the Arkansas Hospitality Association as follows: WHEREAS: The northwest chapter of the Arkansas Hospitality Association serves as the private sector organization for food service, lodging and travel oriented operators in Washington and Benton counties and, WHEREAS: Individually and collectively, operators within the hospitality industry have millions of dollars invested in land, buildings, equipment and supplies, and WHEREAS: The adoption of an ordinance mandating smoking restrictions in restaurants would be viewed as further government interference in the operator's right to set his or her own policies regarding smoking and non- smoking areas, and WHEREAS: Mandated non-smoking restrictions in the City of Fayetteville could, and in the opinion of the Northwest Chapter of the Arkansas Hospitality Association, surely would, cause a significant number of would be customers to patronize foodservice establishments in nearby cities and towns where no mandated smoking restrictions apply, and 12.8 WHEREAS: There is every indication that in recent years, an increasing number of restaurants have voluntarily offered patrons a choice of smoking or non-smoking sections, and, 12.9 WHEREAS: Voluntarily compliance with smoking and non-smoking policies have become increasingly acceptable to patrons, 12.10 THEN BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Northwest Chapter of the Arkansas Hospitality Association vigorously oppose any ordinance placing mandatory restrictions on the individual operators's right to establish and maintain policies regarding smoking and non-smoking areas in foodservice establishments located in the city of Fayetteville, and • December 20, 1988 Be it further resolved by the Northwest Chapter that while no conclusive 413.: evidence has been provided to demonstrate a real need for mandatory smoking restrictions in foodservice operations located within the City of Fayetteville, representatives of this organization will be available to develop a productive line of communications with those citizens who seek to have a smoke-free area in our city's dining establishments. Signed: Dale R. Dunn President Northwest Chapter Arkansas Hospitality Association Submitted by: 413.; -Wayne Dyer Dyer .said he wanted to bring to the City's attention that the Fayetteville 413.3 Advertising and Promotion Commission, at its last meeting, went on record as being against the ordinance because of its negative impact on the hospitality industry, and urge cooperation instead of legislation. Dyer said his basic point had to do with government intervention in his right to run his business. He said the hospitality industry was very important to the tax base of Fayetteville and collected over $450,000 in HMR taxes in 1987 and in 1988 has collected over $388,000 through the first ten months. He said "you would think that this would lead to cooperation between the. City Board and private enterprise." Dyer said he would like a resolution from the Board instead of an ordinance. Penny Riley addressed the Board, stating she had conducted the original survey of Fayetteville restaurants and has updated it. She said since March of 1986 when the .original survey was conducted, there are five additional restaurants providing smoking and non-smoking areas that didn't before, but two restaurants which formerly provided those areas no longer do so. Riley said voluntary compliance at this rate will take over ten years to get all the restaurants to provide the smoking and non-smoking areas. Riley said 6,914 seats are available in the restaurants included in the survey and only 10% of those are designated as non-smoking while 72% of the population do not smoke. Riley said she really didn't think voluntary compliance would work. Dan Coody addressed the Board, stating he had asked several restaurants why they do not have non-smoking areas and has been told that "we'd like to but we're waiting on the City to pass an ordinance so the customers won't get mad at us." Coody said the.Old Post Office did a survey last summer,' passing out 250 questionnaires with two questions - "Do you smoke cigarettes?",:and "Would you prefer to see a segregated, non-smoking, smoking only, designated area?" Coody said 239 responded that they did want designated areas. He said he asked the management six months ago and they told him they would make one room a non- smoking area. Coody said that hasn't happened. , Coody said voluntary compliance wouldn't work, and it was time to pass an ordinance ,and pass it quickly. Gary Williams addressed the Board, stating he was the co-oWner,:.of.'a hair salon off the Square. He said his business was small and "if I start telling my people that they have to stand on the street with perm rods in their, hair after a 413.4 413.5 413.6 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9 14.10 December 20, 1988 chemical service that has lasted two hours, they're going to go somewhere else." Williams encouraged the Board to remember that the small businessmen bring revenues into the City and the far-reaching effects of the ordinance will be devastating to them. He said a hair salon was not like a restaurant where you can designate a percentage of space. He said it was just not right to tell people what their personal choices can and cannot be. Johnny Wilkinson, owner of the hair salon, "Mr. Toad and Company" and L. C. Swovert, owner of a barbershop, spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Upon roll call, Bumpass' motion to amend the ordinance passed, 6-0. Director Bumpass said he could make an argument for adding other public places to the ordinance but wondered if Director Kelley's suggestion of a resolution would be supported by the Board. Bumpass introduced the following resolution: A RESOLUTION TO ENCOURAGE RESTRICTIONS IN SMOKING TO DESIGNATED AREAS ONLY IN PUBLIC PLACES. WHEREAS, studies by the Surgeon General of the United States, the National Academy of Sciences, and other health organizations have linked passive exposure to tobacco smoke (second-hand smoke) to a variety of negative health conditions in non-smokers; and WHEREAS, said studies, and other reliable studies, have shown that breathing second-hand smoke is a significant health hazard for elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function; and WHEREAS, health hazards induced by breathing second-hand smoke include lung cancer, respiratory infection, decreased exercise tolerance, decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction and bronchospasm; and WHEREAS, non-smokers who suffer allergies, respiratory diseases and other ill effects of breathing second-hand smoke may experience a loss of job productivity and may be forced to take periodic sick leave because of such adverse reactions; and 14.11 WHEREAS, smoking is a potential cause of fires, and cigarette and cigar burns and ash stains on merchandise and fixtures cause losses to business; and 14.12 WHEREAS, the purpose of this resolution is to encourage the public health, safety and welfare by permitting smoking in designated smoking areas in public places. 14.13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS, THAT: • Section 1. • December 20, 1988 (a) Definitions. r., i (1) "Places of public assembly" means any structure maintained for or used by the public to gather together into a group. , (2) "Smoking" means the lighting, holding, or carrying -of, or emitting or exhaling the smoke of, a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind. 415.] 415.2 415.? (b) Smoking is encouraged in designated places only. A person shall be 415.4 encouraged to smoke in the following ;public ,places .in designated smoking areas in a manner which will reduce the exposure of non-smokers to second-hand smoke: (1) Retail eating establishments,•taverns and private clubs with a seating capacity of more than 20 patrons; 415.5 (2) Retail grocery and convenience. stores; - _ 415.6 (3) The enclosed walk -ways in malls or shopping_centers; 415.7 (4) Beauty and barber shops; 415.8 (5) Public transportation terminals; 415.9 (6) Drug stores; 415.1 (7) Laundromats and dry-cleaners; 415.1 (8) Clothing stores or the clothing section of department stores; 415.1 (9) Places of public assembly; 415.1 (10) All public schools; 415.1 (11) The University of Arkansas, all fraternities and sororities; 415.1 (12) Law offices, courthouses and office buildings; 415.1 (13) Banks, savings and loan associations, investment banking and 415.1 brokerage houses; and (14) Hospitals, physician offices, physical and mental health centers 415.11 and related services. (c) In areas where smoking 'is designated, existing physical barriers and 415.1, ventilation systems shall be used to the greatest extent possible to minimize the smoke in adjacent non-smoking areas. December 20, 1988 16.1 (d) Signs to be posted. 16.2 The owner or other person having the authority to manage and control any place enumerated in paragraph (b) above shall post or cause to be posted and prominently displayed, and shall maintain, "No -Smoking Area" and "Designated Smoking Area" signs in conspicuous locations within such areas. Such signs shall be of sufficient size, number, and location to convey the message clearly and legibly and shall also include the international no -smoking symbol. 16.3 The City Attorney advised that, because this is a resolution, it would encourage businesses to take these steps and would not have the force and effect of law as an ordinance would. 1.6.4 Bumpass said he thought the six-month period might be a good idea. He said, if the resolution is passed, in order to get encouragement, the City staff should also send a copy of the resolution to every business from which we collect sales tax and identify other public areas, and spend the money it will take toget the message out, and then do a follow-up to the survey which was presented. 16.5 The resolution was so moved by Bumpass and seconded by Marinoni. 16.6 Johnson said she did not think a beauty shop was a "place of public assembly." Bumpass said a beauty shop and all other businesses listed in the resolution would be "public use units" rather than "places of public assembly" and he didn't object to making that change. He pointed out that the resolution was simply a recommendation and didn't have the full force of law. 16.7 16.8 16.9 Director Martin said it would have been preferable if the private sector could handle this, but evidence seems to indicate there may be a reluctance to move until the City Board moves, so the Board may be more of the problem than the solution. He said it was proposed at the last agenda meeting that the ordinance be read once tonight, left on first reading for two weeks, then read again, during which time the Board could receive comments. Martin said, if it can be worked out voluntarily, that would be great, but he couldn't support "doing nothing." He said he didn't think the resolution was going to work. Lancaster said the reason he was going to vote for the resolution was that he thought within six months, if something hasn't settled, the people involved are going to be back before the Board. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, Martin voting in the minority. RESOLUTION NO. 95-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK 16.10 McCord advised the ordinance was left on first reading and would be placed on the next agenda. December 20, 1988 Bumpass moved to table the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Marinoni. 417.] Director Lancaster suggested the ordinance be tabled for a period of six months. Bumpass and Marinoni expressed no objections to Lancaster's suggestion. Kelley said he would vote against the motion because he had had contact with business owners who said they would take voluntary action. Kelley said he would like to leave the ordinance on first reading until the next Board,meeting because he wanted to see some action taken. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-2,,Directors Martin and Kelley voting in the minority. RECESS The meeting was recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m. REZONING/R88-25 417.2 417.? 417.4 The Mayor introduced an ordinance rezoning 1.51 acres at 2890 Crossover Road, 417.5 requested by James I. Meinecke, from A-1 "Agricultural" to R-0 "Residential Office". The Mayor said the petitioner had agreed to sign a Bill of Assurance restricting the use of the property for the teaching ofidance, gymnastics and related fine arts. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, 417.6 seconded by Martin, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. The motion passed, 6-0. 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, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the third time. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to or in favor of''the 417.7 ordinance. Jim Meinecke, owner of the property, addressed the Board. He said he and his 417.8 wife owned the gymnastics center which they felt was an asset to the community. He said his plans were to add a dance room with a modern, high-tech wooden floor, and this was his reason for requesting the rezoning. In answer to questions, Meinecke said although he had no final plans, he hoped to attach a small addition, of less than 2,000 square feet, to the side of the existing quonset hut -shaped building. He said he would not build another quonset hut. James Rimby, resident of 2870 Crossover, said he lived immediately north and east 417.9 of the dance studio. He asked if the ordinance included the Bill of Assurance. Rimby said his family would not be interested in seeing the rezoning unless the Bill of Assurance is included The City Attorney said the petitioner did offer to execute the Bill of Assurance and it would be executed before the ordinance became effective and would be a covenant running with the land. L8.1 upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3394 XX! V APPEARS ON PAGE REZONING APPEAL/R88-27 5(3� December 20, 1988 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK L8.2 The Mayor said the petitioner had requested his appeal be tabled. L8.3 It was so moved by Bumpass and seconded by Kelley. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. UNSIGHTLY PROPERTY EXTENSION L8.4 The Mayor introduced a request for consideration of a request of an extension of time to work on unsightly property located at 1159 East Farmers Drive. She said that Cindy Daniels was present on behalf of the property owner, her father, Kenneth Hanshew. L8.5 Planning Director Merrell reported the staff was contacted late last week by someone representing Hanshew who said a demolition contractor had been selected and that the house would be down in three to four days. L8.6 Director Martin said he thought.the City should always cooperate with citizens who are attempting to improve or remove unsightly property. Martin, seconded by Marinoni, mored to grant a two-month extension of time to work on the unsightly property. 18.7 Marinoni added that he was contacted by Hanshew just before the meeting who told him he had suffered a heart attack recently and was unable to attend the meeting or proceed with the demolition. Bumpass asked if Hanshew intended to demolish the property within two months. Cindy Daniels said he would do so "as soon as he can." L8.8 upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. SEWER AND WATER EXTENSION L8.9 The Mayor introduced a request from Julian Archer for the City to share in the cost of extending sewer and water lines to property owned by him on Markham Hill. L8.10 Archer said he owned 200 acres with six residences and a total of ten structures located on the property. He said he and his wife are presently building a new house on the property. He said for years taxes have been paid due to the property but very few benefits have been received from being in the city limits, with the exception of trash pickup. 1 December 20, 1988 Archer said five structures on the property must have septic tanks replaced and 419.1 this would cost less than it would to connect to sewer. Archer said he would prefer to have City sewer, but cannot afford to do it on his own. He requested the city share in half the cost of the sewer extension. Archer also requested the city share half the cost with him ofinstalling an 8" 419.2 water main so that a fire hydrant can be located on the property. He said the property is located just below a City water tank but the last time there was a fire on the property it could not be put out and a structure burned to the ground. 2 Archer said his property is almost public property in that residents walk, hike and jog through it. He promised that, if in the next 25 years the property is tied into a development, the City would be reimbursed its cost plus 10%. Archer referred the Board to a drawing which he had provided showing two alternate routes, and estimated costs of $35,000::for Route A sewer extension from the north, or $30,000 for Route B sewer extension from the east, plus an estimated cost of $15,300 for the water extension. •`; Director Martin said normally such extensions are provided by`contractors who develop property and ultimately charge people who benefit from it. Martin said he failed to see any reason why the rest of the citizens in Fayetteville should help pay for the cost of the facilities which will benefit of select number of people. Archer said his property was an anomaly in the' City in that it was still undeveloped. Martin said Archer's situation was not as anomalous as•he thought, in that there are other large areas of undeveloped property in Fayetteville, and the precedent the City would set would be to pay half the cost of such extensions for everybody who wanted this. • Bumpass asked if there was not a City requirement that..there be a fire hydrant, located every few hundred feet in the City. City Manager Pennington said that, since .this land has been in the City for so long, the City didn't feel there was any legal obligation in that regard. He said, .since the property has been in the City, it has received services provided through the General Fund. He said Water and Sewer Funds are separate and funded by fees charged citizensfor water and sewer services. Pennington said the City can give Archer fire,protection, in that it has entered into "back-up" agreements with citizens whereby the City provides a pumper truck and works with outlying area fire departments. 419.3 419.4 419.5 419.6 In answer to a question from Bumpass, Archer said an agreement could be drawn up 419.7 wherein he would promise to reimburse the City as he stated earlier. Claud Prewitt address the Board, asking them about similar cost-sharing 419.8 arrangements with the City for extensions to Sherwood Forest residents and Shadowridge residents. Martin said it was true there were occasions when the City ..bore some costs of improvements but it involved a situation where the existing septic facilities were apublic threat. Prewitt said Archer probably December 20, 1988 20.1 had the same situation with his septic facilities. Archer said six residences would be hooked up to the sewer which presently all have city water. 20.2 Public Works Director Mike Batie said the staff recommended the request not be approved based on normal development practices of a private landowner putting in his own developments that would substantially improve his property. Batie said he felt the City should not be in the private land development business. Bumpass said he didn't see how the Board could vote to approve the request without the staff being sold on it. 20.3 Archer said he thought the fire hydrant was a vital need. Bumpass said the staff should look into that. Pennington said he didn't disagree with that and said we had this exact problem all over the City. He said this was part of a project to be included in the capital improvements program Pennington said the Shadowridge and Lovers Lane projects were heavily developed areas, as opposed to Archer's area which is a potentially developable area. 20.4 Director Martin, seconded by Kelley, moved the request be denied. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 20.5 20.6 EASEMENT VACATION/CUSTER LANE The Mayor introduced a request for an ordinance vacating and abandoning a 20' utility easement located on property on Custer Lane in the Red Arrow Addition. She said the City Engineer recommended approval but requested the City be granted a 10' utility easement on the east side of Lot 15. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Marinoni, seconded by Bumpass, 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 Marinoni, seconded by Bumpass, 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. 20.7 In answer to a question from Marinoni, the owner stated he had agreed to grant the easement to the City. 20.8 upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3395 APPEARS ON PAGE 1)33 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK EASEMENT VACATION/STEARNS STREET 20.9 The Mayor introduced a request for an ordinance vacating and abandoning a portion of a 25' utility easement located on property on Stearns Street in the Brookhollow Subdivision. 1 The City Attorney seconded by Kelley, its second reading read for the second further suspend the Upon roll call, the time. • December 20, 1988 read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, 421.1 made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Kelley, made a motion to rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the third Claud Prewitt addressed the Board on behalf of ERC Properties, Inc., the owner of 421.2 the lot on which the utility easement is located. He said the utility easement is actually a 40' easement along the south side of the lot. He said 15.' is designated for utilities and drainage and an additional' 25' utility easement is north of that. He said through some error in early construction, the existing house encroaches upon the easement a distance of 3 feet. He said engineers Crafton, Tull, Spann and Yoe in Rogers are in the'process of working with utility companies to locate all utilities in place, and intend to later ask for a 3-5' vacation along the north edge of this utility easement, all. across the subdivision. He said the easement was much larger than was needed. Prewitt said letters from utility companies show no problem in the vacation now being requested. • Martin said this was a mistake and there should be some way it can be prevented 421.3 in the future without incurring enormous expense. Prewitt pointed out that..in a new subdivision there are a lot of pins and flags °,which are hard to keep in place. Marinoni remarked that if the request wasdenied the only alternative would be to move the house or cut 3' off the house. - Prewitt said he didn't think' the public or anybody would be damaged since the utility companies have concurred in the request. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3396 APPEARS ON PAGE y3 y OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK XXiv CITIZEN COMMITTEE POLICY t • 421.4 The Mayor introduced discussion of a Planning Commission resolution requesting 421.5 the Board reconsider its policy of not including residents of the Growth Area as potential candidates for various appointed commissions and boards which serve in an advisory capacity to the City Board. - • Martin said when we have commissions that set policy that affect areas outside of 421.6 the city limits, people in those areas should be entitled to representation on those boards. He said it was unfair to impose regulations on people who have no opportunity to be represented. He said he would favor a change, although it may only affect -certain commissions. 22.1 December 20, 1988 Kelley said the City Board had the authority to make appointments to commissions, and he thought the Planning Commission was well served by people who have good input based on the fact that they live in the Growth Area. He said he also supported the change. 22.2 Lancaster said this was not a new issue. He said he thought the Board was considering personalities (referring to Planning Commissioner Butch Robertson). He said he supported Robertson's appointment to the Planning Commission because at the time he lived within the City limits. He said there was a woman who served on the Planning Commission who moved outside the City limits and who, when her term expired, was not re -appointed by the Board for that reason. He said it has been the Board's policy that appointees must live within the City limits. Lancaster said he would vote on the policy, not on the people. 22.3 Marinoni asked what functions any committees have outside the City limits. Planning Commission Chairman Ernest Jacks said the City's planning area is outside the City limits, and the City has jurisdiction over subdivisions (with the exception of roads) within that area. 22.4 City Attorney McCord advised that under Arkansas law, the only extraterritorial legislative authority a municipality has is in land development regulations, which include subdivision but not zoning regulations. He said the City didn't have the authority to enforce its building code or its police regulations beyond the corporate limits. He said he thought the discussion was restricted to the Planning Commission only, since other boards and commissions do not have extraterritorial jurisdiction. 22.5 Kelley asked why the City Board would have a policy that would exclude them from appointing someone who could be beneficial to the Commission. He said he thought the policy should be more inclusive, not exclusive. 22.6 Johnson said residents outside the City limits would be no more qualified to make up regulations than someone from another City. She said she would favor continuing with the present policy. 22.7 Bumpass agreed, stating he saw the City limits as a logical cutoff. 22.8 Jacks said he thought the Planning Commission thought this was a policy decision for the Board but said it did come up in connection with Commissioner Robertson. 22.9 Butch Robertson addressed the Board, stating he would be elated if he were re- appointed, but if not, his feelings would not be hurt. He said he thought it was wrong to eliminate qualified people in the Growth Area. 22.10 Kelley, seconded by Martin, moved to remove the policy to not include residents of the Growth Area as potential candidates for various appointed commissions and boards which serve in an advisory capacity to the City Board of Directors. Upon roll call, the motion failed, 2-4, Directors Martin and Kelley voting for the motion and Directors Lancaster, Marinoni, Bumpass and Johnson voting against the motion. SOLID WASTE PLAN December 20, 1988 The Mayor introduced a request from the Public Works Director for authorization for the City to participate in a Regional Solid Waste Management Plan. The Mayor explained that in January 1988 the Northwest Arkansas Economic Development District, working cooperatively with nine counties, pursued the development of such a plan for an environmentally safe and economically feasible solution to the problems of solid waste in Northwest Arkansas. She said the staff recommends participation by Fayetteville at a cost of 33.38 'cents per capita, or $12,220. 'I 423.1 423.: 423.3 Martin, seconded by Marinoni, moved approval. 423.4 In answer to questions from Directors, Public Works Director Batie said the plan would be for the entire nine -county area, and various programs will be involved. Kelley asked if the staff thought it was feasible for Fayetteville to participate in a nine -county area plan. Pennington pointed out there has not been much success in a one -county plan, and this effort now in operation is being endorse by the State and has the potential funding and the potential of working. Bumpass asked for a total budget figure. Batie said he did not have that figure but believed the participation rate was pretty high.. Director -Elect Vorsanger said he thought the figure was $96,000, with .Fayetteville responsible for over $12,000. He said Fayetteville would be the largest contributor of'any city, and commented that we should exhibit some leadership. Vorsanger asked about the statement of objectives to be accomplished, on of which is the "development of a comprehensive waste disposal facility siting and management plan which will lead to the securing of regional facilities and the maintenance of waste flow control..." Vorsanger asked if that .meant an incinerator.' Batie.said the group will look at all alternatives, including an incinerator. Vickie Kelley addressed the Board, expressing hope that the: City would join other cities and counties across the region in working toward support of'the district, and seeing how Fayetteville might fit in some type of regional solution. Director Martin said he was Fayetteville's representative on the district. He said one of the greatest things it has going for it is,f the participation 'of the top elected officials across the nine -county area. Martin 'said he fully endorsed the staff's recommendation. Martin, seconded by Marinoni, moved approval of the staff recommendation. Bumpass noted that the Plan states "Legislation will'be introduced in the 77th General Assembly to establish a loan and grant program to assist local governments in planning and developing resource recovery programs.*. In the event grant funds are appropriated by the State of Arkansas for the development -of regional solid waste plans, the District 'hereby states its intent to make application for such funding." Johnson said theonly legislation she was aware of was on a recycling study and not a resource recovery fund. .Bumpass said he 423.5 423.6 423.7 423.8 423.9 24.1 24.2 December 20, 1988 feared Fayetteville would pay $12,000 to get into a nine -county study and it would be decided an incinerator should be built in Fayetteville. Upon roll call the motion passed, 5-1, Bumpass voting in the minority. BID WAIVER/SANDBLAST DISPOSAL 24.3 The Mayor introduced an ordinance waiving competitive bidding requirements and award of contract for the disposal of waste sandblast material. She said the staff recommended the contract be awarded to the firm submitting the low quote, USPCI of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, to dispose of 45 tons of material at a cost of $10,860. 24.4 The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Martin, 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 Martin, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the third time. 24.5 Director Marinoni said he had been "in shock" ever since this item was first considered last year, at how much this painting project cost. He said there was one price quoted for the project if the material turned out to be hazardous and a different price if it was not, and the difference between them was $19,000. Marinoni remarked that now the total project will cost around $130,000 just to paint the tank on the outside. He asked how long the paint job would last. Public Works Director Batie responded by saying that past history has shown such paint jobs could last 7-10 years, depending upon weather conditions. He said paints being used now are lasting longer than in the past. He told Marinoni that the paint used now does not have any lead content. 24.6 Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3397 APPEARS ON PAGE Y351 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK XX/ v LIBRARY BUILDING PURCHASE 24.7 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing a contract of sale for the purchase of the Medark Building at 207 E. Dickson, to be used as additional space for the City Library. 24.8 Linebaugh requested the item be tabled, stating the staff had not been able to reach agreement with the owners of the property. Linebaugh asked that the item be considered at the next agenda meeting on December 28. He said material relating to the item would go out to the Board in their next packet. 24.9 Martin, seconded by Kelley, moved the item be tabled. 1 December 20, 1988 The Mayor noted that, to take action on this item on December 28 would require.a 425.1 special Board meeting. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. ENGINEERING SERVICES - The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing an amendment to a contract with CH2M Hill, for engineering services for the wastewater treatment plant project. Dennis Sandretto, speaking on behalf of the firm, clarified that at a recent Board meeting a contract modification was requested for the plant construction, • which was stated in his opinion to be the last change order for the project. He said the amendment presently before the Board was not a construction change order, but one for engineering services. He said the- firm expects there to be another action (on the sludge project) which will likely remove money from the existing construction contract, to the City, to complete the job the bonding company and their contractors have not done. He said he did not.expect to see any other action on the plant project. Sandretto said'the task order before the Board included four items: 425.2 425.3 425.4 425.5 (Item 1) Engineer overtime of about $6700 - Sandretto said the -construction 425.6 contract had a provision whereby, when the construction contractor works overtime, engineering services to observe his construction activities _would be paid for by him. He said this was not a direct contract between CH2M Hill and, the construction contractor, nor is there a contract between the City and CH2M Hill to collect that money, but there is a construction provision. He said in • the past they have billed the contractor directly for their overtime services, but for a period of time he was paying those engineering overtime services. He said during construction the contractor decided there was a time at which he was not going to pay anymore of the overtime services for some of CH2M Hill's staff and sent a letter to that effect. Sandretto said his firm had incurred some costs up to that point and which the contractor has subsequently refused to pay. He said the services were provided on the City's behalf: Sandretto said .three other items include engineering services on site and 425.7 management services performed off-site for three periods. .As background, he explained that Task Order No. 10, with amendments 1 and 2, were for engineering services as a result of the default of the original contractor and the delay in completion of the contract, and those services were ,paidfor entirely from a settlement at the completion contract signing that the bonding company contributed to the City - that is, the City did jnot pay additional money for those services. 4 4t4•.. t •r - Sandretto said the construction cost to the City has not"increased throughout.the project for either change orders or the default of the contractor and the delay 425.8 December 20, 1988 ?6.1 in completion. He said the ending price is almost identical to the original bid price for the project. ?6.2 Sandretto said in late 1987 they estimated Amendment 2 to the task order, projecting what they thought it would take for their engineering services through July 1. He said the completion contract was through June 1, but they estimated the money would last until July 1, but as it turned out, the City awarded the contractor a thirty -day time extension and CH2M Hill ended up spending $6600 more for the period to July 1 than estimated. 26.3 (Item 2) Sandretto said the second period covered from July 1 to August 25, at which point the site was toured by the firm and the ADPC&E and it was determined the major amount of work was complete. He said that amount totals about $32,400. He said the contract time was up but the contractor was on site doing work that required CH2M Hill to be on site in the City's best interests. 26.4 (Item 3) Sandretto said the third period was the period following August 25, for about $12,600, when CH2M Hill continued to perform some services they considered to be significant although they were not on-site services. 2.6.5 Kelley asked how much of the $58,000 was attributable to the engineering overtime. Sandretto said that amounted to about $6700. Kelley asked if the fact that the contractor paid these initially didn't make them construction costs rather than supervisory costs. Sandretto agreed they should have been part of construction costs the contractor incurred. Kelley asked if the City couldn't be reimbursed for these. City Attorney McCord said he understood that was a matter now in dispute. Kelley said if the contractor was paying those, and the bonding company took over, it seemed to him the bonding company now becomes liable for the contractor's expenses. 26.6 Sandretto said during the second period, his firm didn't judge the contractor had met the terms of the completion contract, that is, to be finished by July 1. He said they met informally to pursue the overtime issue and the second time period issue, and were told by the contractor that was an issue for the bonding company, because the bonding company was reimbursing them for all the costs. He said they asked the contractor's help in setting up a meeting with the bonding company, but were told to expect a letter from the bonding company within a couple days. Sandretto said over 1 1/2 months went by, while CH2M Hill continued to try to communicate with the bonding company with no success. He said the bonding company finally wrote CH2M Hill a letter indicating that, if there was a claim, it needed to be presented to the contractor, but as far as they were concerned there was no claim, because CH2M Hill was not a contract party, and any claim coming either to the contractor or to the bonding company would have to come from the City. Sandretto said his firm then decided to present the request to the City. Kelley asked if the City had the option to file a claim, for CH2M Hill's overtime, with the bonding company, instead of paying it direct. Sandretto said his firm would support any action the Board would take in that regard. 26.7 (Item 4) Sandretto said his firm is at the point where it is not sure how much more money to spend and how much more time to spend to try to reach a final • December 20, 1988 42 resolution.• He said they'recently made an offer to the City, through Public 427.: Works Director Batie, that CH2M Hill would reduce their request by about $14,300, or about 25% of the total, if the City chose not to pursue the claim. He said this would reduce the total cost from about $58,000 to about $44,000. Marinoni asked for a staff recommendation. The City Manager said some of this, in -his opinion, is strictly a policy decision for the Board because someone is going to be facing litigation. Batie said the Board should decide whether..to pay for some of the items which may be in legal dispute between HH&N and CH2M Hill or the City. He said he had no problem with the City paying about $19,400 for items 1 and 3, but had some question with the original $38,700, whether it should come from the contractor or the City,' (which was reduced by CH2M Hill by about $14,000). Sandretto said, because the contractor has continued to state his belief that he is entitled to release of retainage, CH2M Hill is recommending to the City that retainage not be released without a "release of liens and claims" and would recommend that, if the City chooses not to pursue a claim for the $38,000 against the contractor, CH2M Hill would remit all but the costs for the two performance tests and $6,000 for some other performance tests, but the City provide the retainage in return for the release of liens or claims. • Bumpass said, in light of the fact that a bond was required as a condition to the initial contracts, it seems like it's not right to be coming back and asking for this money. Sandretto said the bond the citizens paid for when they accepted the bid from the construction contractor, was utilized very strongly, and the bonding company put up a lot of their own money to finish work that had been poorly 'performed by the original contractor and cleaned up the mess that was left by that contractor in his default. He said it was his firm's feeling that if they - could get a -release of liens or claims, they would go a long way toward trying to end this. Martin moved approval of the staff's recommendation of paying $19,100 on. Items 1 and 3, and $23,700 for item 4. The motion was seconded by Johnson. Bumpass said he couldn't support the motion, commenting that this was a legal issue between the engineering firm and the bonding company. ,He said USF&G was the insurer that the project would be completed at a' certain price and "the taxpayers are continuing to pay through the nose for those mistakes by those companies." He said he could not let the insurance company off the hook. Kelley asked if the bond existed to cover the cost to build the project or does 427.7 it come into existence when we exceed the anticipated costs of completion. Sandretto said the bond comes into play if there is a default, and it completes the job for the price of the construction contracts - and if there are change orders, those affect the contract price. Martin said it seemed to him that $24,000 was a small price.to pay for closure. 427.8 427.3 427.4 427.5 427.6 • 28.1 December 20, 1988 Bumpass asked if the City would be in litigation over this matter, and asked if HH&N and USF&G had gone on record as saying that a substantial amount of their costs are due to the fact that prior work was approved by CH2M Hill and payments were made by the City for work that was defective, and a second contractor had to re -do that work. Sandretto said he wasn't aware of any claims by the bonding company that quantify any claim such as that, although there had been correspondence from HH&N alleging some engineer -caused problems they indicate may be collectible. Bumpass said he heard the bonding company had spent additional money but a great deal of it was not to complete the job but to take out deficient work. 28.2 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-2, Kelley and Bumpass voting in the minority. RESOLUTION NO. 96-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK OTHER BUSINESS 28.3 Kelley said the staff had supplied a list of consulting contracts with the City which he requested so Directors could keep up with these items. He asked that the Directors receive this on a regular basis. ADJOURNMENT 28.4 The meeting was adjourned at 11:13 p.m.