HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-05-21 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
A regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was
held on Tuesday, May 21, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. in the Director's Room
of the City Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
PRESENT: Mayor Fred Vorsanger; Assistant Mayor Mike Green;
Directors Ann Henry, Dan Coody, Julie Nash, Shell
Spivey and Bob Blackston; City Manager Scott
Linebaugh, City Attorney Jerry Rose, Acting City
Clerk Gaylene Bunch; members of staff, press and
audience.
ABSENT: City Clerk Sherry Thomas
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by the Mayor, with five Directors
present (Director Julie Nash arrived at 7:45 and Director Shell
Spivey arrived at 8:45). The Mayor asked those present to stand
and recite the Pledge of Allegiance, and then asked that a brief
moment of respectful silence be observed.
The Mayor welcomed comments from the public on any item on the
Agenda. He explained that comments should be limited to 15 minutes
per item, and a spokesperson be elected for comments made on the
same issue.
REPORT TO THE PUBLIC
City Manager Linebaugh introduced a report to the public and Board,
which is presented by the City Manager at the second Board meeting
of each month. This report, for the month of April, included
financial information, an update on staff activities and items of
general interest.
Financial Condition
Linebaugh stated the City was in good financial condition and
better than was anticipated for this time period. The City has
total assets of $181.9 million, total liabilities of $46.7 million,
and a fund balance of $135.2 million. As of April 30, 1991,
revenues were $16.4 million, which are up $3.8 million from last
year primarily because of the water and sewer franchise tax being
collected for school construction. Expenses are at $15.3,million
as compared to $12.3 million for last year. The $3 million
increase in expenses is due primarily to the increase in
contractual services and depreciation of capital associated with
the Capital Improvements Program.
17
171
May 21, 1991
Adult Center Proaram
The City is proud of its association with the Adult Center Program
which is administered by the Council on Aging. There is a wide
variety of activities and services offered by this organization for
the elderly. In addition, the nutrition program is offered
throughout the county providing meals Monday through Friday.
"Meals on wheels" is also an important function of this
organization which delivers nutritious meals to home -bound
individuals. The nutrition center serves approximately 400 meals
each day.
Taxi Program
The taxi program, which is provided through C & H Taxi Company, is
administered through the Community Development office. This
program provides transportation for the elderly to the hospital,
doctors, and shopping. Through the first quarter of 1991,
ridership has increased by 28%.
Fire Department
The Fire Department has completed the construction of the "Brush
Pumper" unit which is parked outside of City Hall and will be
available for public inspection after this meeting. The Fire
Department staff built this unit which will be of great benefit in
the fighting of brush fires.
MAIN STREET PROGRAM
John Merrell, Planning Management
Street Program and gave a slide
regarding the revitalization of
Street, and stated a comprehensive
revitalization.
Director, reported on the Main
presentation for those present
the downtown area and Dickson
approach was needed for downtown
Mayor Vorsanger stated he felt Fayetteville was doing a lot to
revitalize downtown and asked if this program would be appropriate
for the Dickson Street area. Merrell stated that it would and
plans were to include the Dickson Street area in the Main Street
Program application.
Director Green asked if the program provided grants and/or low
income loans to participants and how the advantages of the program
were transferred to the business owners.
Merrell reported that this program is primarily a technical
assistance program and does not provide grants or loans. However,
staff will be recommending to the Board to allocate some of the
Community Development Block Grant money provided by HUD to this
project.
Director Henry stated
this program but was
that Fayetteville has
area, and she stated
program.
May 21, 1991
that in 1983 or 1984, the City applied for
not successful in the attempt. She stated
come a long way in revitalizing thedowntown
shewas not sure Fayetteville needs this
Merrell stated he had studied the records from the previous
application. There are several different explanations as to why
the attempt failed. However, the City has received a good response
from the current effort.
CONSENT AGENDA
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."
A. Minutes of the May 6, 1991 regular Board meeting.
B. Removed from Consent Agenda at Board Agenda Session..
C.. A resolution approving a. three year heating and air
conditioning maintenance contract to cover all parts and
labor for the Administration Building, Police, Interim
City Hall, Administration Annex (R -HOG), and the new
Police/Court Building (Systematics) at an annual price of
$13,681.00 to the low bidder, Johnson Air Conditioning..
•
Staff recommends approving the contract.
RESOLUTION 87-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOR
D. A resolution awarding a bid for
R -HOG and Systematics buildings
Bids will be opened May 10,
recommendation available at the
asbestos removal in the
to the low bidder.
•
•
and staff will have ,a
Agenda Session.
0
RESOLUTION 88-91 APPEARS ON PAGE
BOOR
OF ORDINANCE`AND RESOLUTION
f
A resolution approving Task Order #3 to the engineering
contract with McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc.,.in
the amount of $159,252.29 of which the city's share is
$7,962.61 for survey, easement, and plat work required
for easement and property, acquisition.
Staff recommends approving the task order which is
necessary to fulfill FAA easement and land acquisition
113
May 21, 1991
requirements for the runway protection zones and
transitional surfaces purchase project.
RESOLUTION 89-91 APPEARS ON•PAGE OP ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOR
F. A resolution amending the current "Damage Claims -Sewer
Back-ups" Policies and Procedures dated October 6, 1989.
Staff recommends approving the amendments which will (1)
allow City Staff, with the property owner present, to
assess damages; (2) would require that claims be
presented within thirty (30) days of the incident; and
(3) require the claimant seek "reasonable" costs for
repair and recommend that the City contract with a
cleaning service to provide repairs and/or replacements
to claimants.
RESOLUTION 90-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOR
Blackston, seconded by Nash, made a motion to approve the consent
agenda.. Upon roll call, the consent agenda was approved by a vote
of 6 to 0, Director Spivey being absent at the time of the vote.
ATTORNEYS FEES
Mayor vorsanger introduced a resolution authorising payment of
629,640.04 to the McDermott, Will i Emery Law Firm for February and
March and of $14,078.19 to the Niblock Law Firm for February and
March for services rendered on the incinerator disengagement, FOIA,
and Barnhart (formerly Robson) lawsuits.
Vorsanger reported that Staff recommends
law firms.
Green, seconded by Blackston, made a
resolution.
approving payment to the
motion to approve the
Director Coody stated that the reason this was pulled from the
Consent Agenda was because most of this bill revolves around the
incinerator public hearing that was held March 21, 1991. He stated
that the attorneys defended themselves, rather than the City, and
a $15,000 bill was submitted to the City for this. Coody stated
that this was not fair to the public and deemed further discussion
before payment is made for this.
Jerry Rose stated that the view of the other attorneys probably was
not the same as Director Coody's. He stated that they would view
their activity as defending the Board's decision, rather than
1
t: 174
May 21, 1991
defending any position that they may have individually, as
attorneys, one way or another.
Director Blackston asked the Board if they didn't feel over-
represented on behalf of the City presently, by legal counsel both
locally and nationally. He asked if the City would weaken its
position if only one attorney from each firm was to work on the
case.
Rose stated that the attorneys would do whatever they are directed
to do. There presently are two law firms involved -- McDermott,
Will & Emery (Chicago and Washington D.C.), and the Niblock Law
Firm. He stated that the trial attorney from McDermott, Will &
Emery is located in Chicago and the expert in bonds, etc. is in the
Washington D.C. office. The reason for having the Niblock Law Firm
is that you need someone to associate with in Arkansas that has an
understanding of Arkansas law.
Director Coody stated he felt the attorneys being here was a
complete waste of time and taxpayer's money. He stated no one's
mind has been changed as a result of that meeting.
After discussion, it was the consensus of the majority of the Board
that attorneys could not be asked to represent the City, and then
refuse payment to them. The Board decided to ask the Niblock firm
to be the local representative counsel, which would hold down
travel expenses from Chicago and Washington D.C.
4
Director Green stated the City has to treat this as a client
attorney relationship and that what they are doing is in our best
interest. •We have to have confidence in them. This is the only
way to have a proper relationship. The City is not in a position
to place restrictions on the attorneys because tying their hands
will limit their ability to defend us.
Director Henry stated the frustrating part is that the case is on
hold waiting for trial, and we are still paying attorney fees. ;
Director Blackston stated we have to the pay the bills we have been
presented with. He was just wondering if the same things could be
accomplished with fewer attorneys from each office and cut down on
some of the expenses. He stated he wasmerely asking for,
clarification and not being critical.
Director Coody asked if there would be an answer to Director
Blackston's question or would the question just die.
Mayor Vorsanger stated these things needed to be discussed with our
attorneys. He also stated that this team of attorneys have been
preparing for this case, and we do not want to hinder them now.
Mayor Vorsanger stated that it was at the insistence of Mr.
•
.175
May 21, 1991
Froelich that a special hearing was held on the incinerator
disengagement. It was not by the choice of the Fayetteville Board
of Directors.
Robert Reus, a member of the audience, stated that he felt like
$45,000 for five or six weeks is a bit much for one night's
attorney's fee. He stated that even with all of the thousands of
dollars spent on the FOIA lawsuit, we still lost. He asked that
this be kept in mind.
Upon roll call, the resolution passed by a vote of 5 to 1, with
Coody voting in the minority, and Spivey absent at the time of the
vote.
RESOLUTION 91-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOON
ANNEXATION
ar
Mayor Vorsangsr introduced a request by Ben and Nancy Israel for
annexation of their 31.17 acres located on Highway 43 to the City
of Fayetteville.
Linebaugh reported that the Planning Commission voted 9-0-0 to
recommend the annexation be approved by the City Board. There was
no opposition to the annexation, and Staff recommends approval.
John Merrell stated this was a relatively inexpensive annexation,
and the property taxes that would be generated far outweigh the
other cost of services.
Henry, seconded by Coody, moved to approve the resolution to annex
the property in question.
Merrell stated their needs to be a policy established for
annexation procedures in the near future in order to have certain
guidelines and procedures when annexing property. This annexation
will call for the creation of about 56 lots in the range of 1/4 to
1/2 acre lots.
Director Henry asked if anyone has checked with the school system
to see if they could handle the additional students. Merrell
stated it is not felt that this will create an over -burden for the
Fayetteville schools.
Director Green stated he had always favored annexation when it will
not cost the City. He would like to have an annexation plan
adopted before the various annexations make the City unbalanced.
Mickey Jackson, Fayetteville Fire Chief, stated that as far as fire
protection is concerned, the annexation would not have any adverse
16
May 21, 1991
effect on the Fire Department. However, if no guidelines are
followed, and as Fayetteville keeps growing, problems with fire
protection could develop.
A member of the audience stated that this would not affect the
school system since the children living in this area are already
included in the Fayetteville school system.
Upon roll call the resolution was passed by a vote of 6 to 0, with
Spivey being absent at the time of the vote.
RESOLUTION 92-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOK
REZONE ORDINANCE'
•
Mayor Vorsanger introduced an ordinance rezoning property located
on Highway 45 East consisting of 31.17 acres from A-1,
Agricultural,to R-1, Residential, as requested by Jim Lindsey on
behalf of Ben and Nancy Israel.
The Planning Commission voted 9-0-0 to recommend the rezoning be
approved by the City Board. There was no opposition to the
rezoning, and Staff recommended approval.
The ordinance was read for the first time.
Director Green asked if the neighbors had expressed any concerns
about the rezoning.
John Merrell stated that immediate neighbors had been notified, and
there was no opposition.
Mayor Vorsanger asked if there would be greenspace provided with
this development. Merrell stated there is a section in the zoning
ordinance called the "PUD" regulation, which if a developer chooses
that route, he or she is required to put in green space in certain
areas. This has not been a popular development tool. This will be
a conventional subdivision with one loop street going off of 45
east, and extending north, looping around and coming back down into
45.
Director Coody asked if there was a way to avoid covering all of
the best agricultural land up with foundations.
Merrell responded by saying that annexing and developing
agricultural lands has been a growing problem throughout the
nation, particularly in areas where major crop production 'is
practiced. However, at this time this does not seem to be a major
issue locally. It will be studied further in the annexation study
that has been proposed for next year.
177
May 21, 1991
Vorsanger stated that he had cause for some concern on this issue,
and suggested that since there were 31 acres involved, and this had
come up with "a lot of notice and knowledge of the public,"
instead of rushing through the ordinance, he suggested this be left
on its first reading and tabled to the next meeting to give the
public a chance to comment on this issue.
BASEMENT ACOUISITION
Mayor Vorsanger introduced a resolution authorising the purchase of
easements located on the property owned by Kenneth Yourton in the
amount of $17,750.00.
Linebaugh explained that the utility lines have been across the
Mourton property for at least 20 years without any easement
acquisition on record. Staff recommends purchasing the easements.
Green, seconded by Nash, made a motion to approve the resolution.
Director Green asked that after 20 years would there not be some
sort of acquisition by right.
Rose stated that the general rule to gain property through adverse
possession is that the possession has to be open and notorious. It
is difficult to prove to people that these easements were there
because they were all underground and the railroad owned the
property at the time the lines were installed.
Director Blackston asked how Mr. Mourton happened on this
discovery.
Rose stated through researching the City's files, this became
apparent to Mr. Mourton.
Director Henry stated these lines have impinged on Mr. Mourton's
ability to do anything with this land because of these easements.
Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
RESOLUTION 93-91 APPEARS ON PAGE O! ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOK
CABLE TV
Mayor Vorsanger introduced a resolution assigning the three Access
Channels and an ordinance establishing a Cable Television Board.
The Ad Hoc Committee on Cable recommended the establishment of a
Cable Television Board to oversee the operations of the Access
Channels as well as the performance of Warner Cable.
1
1
May 21, 1991
Staff recommends establishing the board and assigning the channels
as designated.
Blackston, seconded by Coody, made a motion to approve the
resolution.
Robert Reus, a member of the audience, inquired what kind of
programming we would be looking forward to on the government access
channel.
Linebaugh stated that it would be much the same as it is now out of
the city government and county government. However, in addition to
that, a scroll would provide information, like Channel 4, on all
three channels, which would have public school information,
governmental information, etc.
Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
RESOLUTION 94-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOK
CABLE TV BOARD ORDINANCE
The committee recommended that the public access channel be
administered by Open Channel, the University of Arkansas be given
the use of the educational access channel, and the governmental
access channel be administered by the City.
Staff recommends establishing the board as designated.
The ordinance was read for the first time. Green, seconded by
Blackston, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the
ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed
by a vote of 7 to 0. The ordinance was read for the second time.
Green, seconded by Blackston, made a motion to further suspend the
rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon
roll call, the motion was passed by a vote of 7 to 0. The
ordinance was read for the third and final time.
•
Linebaugh stated that a new staff position would be added to fill
this need. This position would be partially funded by Fayetteville
Open Channel. This will be a citizens' committee, with
applications being submitted and appointments being made by the
City Board. This committee would also look into complaints made
against Warner Cable.
Upon roll
ORDINANCE
BOOK xX
call, the ordinance passed
3549 APPEARS ON PAGE 903
•
by a vote of 7 to 0.
OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
•
"1 8
May 21, 1991
9BniLarn FIRE CONTRACT
Mayor Vorsanger introduced a resolution approving a five year
contract with the City of Greenland for fire fighting services to
be rendered by the Fayetteville Fire Department.
Linebaugh reported that city Staff has negotiated with the City of
Greenland and reached an agreement to enter into a five-year
contract at a price of $45,000 annually.
Staff recommends approval of this contract.
Henry, seconded by Blackston, made a motion to approve the
resolution.
Linebaugh stated this was a negotiated situation with Greenland,
and both parties feel the contract is beneficial to both parties.
Upon roll call, the resolution was passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
RESOLUTION 95-91 APPEARS ON PAGE 07 ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOM
36N WATER LINE
Mayor Vorsanger introduced a resolution approving a contract with
McClelland Engineers for engineering work related to the
construction of the south part of the 36 -inch rater line, storage
tanks, and related system tie-ins at an estimated price of
$741,977.00.
Linebaugh reported that staff recommends approving this contract.
Henry, seconded by Nash, made a motion to approve the resolution.
Upon roll call, the resolution was passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
RESOLUTION 96-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOK
ELKINS WATER PURCHASE CONTRACT
Mayor Vorsanger introduced a resolution approving a contract with
the City of Elkins for the purchase of water.
City Staff has been negotiating with the City of Elkins on the
terms of the contract for Elkins to purchase water. Final
negotiations have been completed and it is stated that Elkins
approved the water purchase contract that Fayetteville sent to them
after numerous meetings.
ecru
May 21, 1991
Kevin Crosson, Administrative Services Director, explained a few
minor changes that were.made concerning this contract and handed
out printed reports to the audience. Rate reductions have been
included due to the storage.capacity Elkins has available. They
will also have a part in the rate making process. In addition, a
disengagement fee would be assessed for those no longer wanting to
be on the water system. They also computed a formula for Elkins to
pull out of the system. The final item included in the contract is
the ability to enter into binding arbitration on contract terms.
He outlined the eleven changes that were made in the contract.
Vorsanger asked if were offering the same basic contract to Mt.
Olive and West Washington County.
Crosson stated this contract is substantially the same contract
that was offered to Mt. Olive and Washington Water. There has been
no response from these two places to date.
Director Blackston asked if the back payment issue had been
resolved. Crosson stated that the back payment issue would be
included on the next billing date, assuming the contract passes.
Henry, seconded by Coody, made a motion to approve the resolution.
Upon roll call, the resolution was passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
RESOLUTION 97-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOK
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Mayor Vorsanger introduced a resolution approving and awarding a
construction contract for improvements to the Fayetteville High
School.
The City Board and the Fayetteville School Board met in a joint
special meeting on May 14, 1991. The School Board approved the
contract. The City Board tabled the item to allow further
Consideration.
City Staff recommends awarding the contract.
Coody, seconded by Spivey, made a motion to remove the item from
the table and continue discussion, which was tabled at the last
meeting.
•
Upon roll call the motion passed by a vote of 6 to 0,•with Green
abstaining.
r
Spivey, seconded by Blackston, made a motion toapprove the
resolution.
•
$DIttt
May 21, 1991
Director Spivey stated that after attending a Fayetteville Vision
meeting, it was the consensus of those attending the meeting, that
education was one of the top priorities in the community. He
further stated that after visiting Fayetteville High School, it was
apparent that the building is antiquated, severely overcrowded, and
in critical need of renovation. He stated that the passage of the
sales tax was an alternative vehicle to the failure of the millage.
He stated that the Municipal League is afraid that other cities
will follow suit if the construction is allowed to happened through
a sales tax instead of a millage. This is a risk that we take, to
go on with this thing and proceed as planned, but he feels this is
a risk the community needs to take. He stated we need to look for
alternative funds as well to finance our schools as well as teacher
salaries.
Director Henry stated that when she teaches, she teaches finder the
constitution, and doing things in a legal method and not skirting
the law. She stated that the Arkansas constitution is somewhat
antiquated and it may not be fair, but schools are funded through
property taxes. Her feelings were that a legal way needs to be
found to fund the schools; therefore, she stated that she would not
vote to approve that contract because she deems that it is
unconstitutional. She does not feel that it would be right to
"buy" another lawsuit for the City. She recommends working to
change the constitution to allow for this type of funding.
Mayor Vorsanger stated that the question before the board was that
everything had been done to react to the wishes of the people. He
stated that he was not a part of the incinerator. The people voted
before his term on the board 2 to 1 for a sales tax to build school
facilities. Then we found that we could not use the sales tax to
issue bonds for school facilities. He stated that he felt
confident that the City Manager and City Attorney, working with
others, have come up with a plan which is legal to do this very
thing. By the same token, the school system has taken bids for the
building ($500,000 below their estimates). That bid will run out
in the next day or two, and if the Board does not approve them
entering into a construction contract, they will lose that bid, and
if it is re -bid, it will cost more. He further stated that there
is a new law on the books, that may be illegal. He stated that the
law indicates that we can issue bonds with them to be paid off with
sales tax money for educational facilities (Act 645 of 1991). He
called the Municipal League and discussed this with Don Zimmerman.
Vorsanger stated that his point was that he felt this construction
contract should be approved this evening and then move ahead
because the Act says that you have to have a vote of the people,
and that has already been done. We can issue bonds that can be
paid off with the one percent sales tax. He is calling for the
Board to approve the contract and then call for an election as soon
as possible on issuing the bonds.
=189!82
4
y May 21, 1991
Director Nashstated that any time the Board votes on an issue
there is potential for a lawsuit. She clarified that we are not
under Act 25, but under 645, which may not be legal, but this may
be something that will have to be settled by the courts one way or
another. She asked if the Board was being asked to put the cart
before the horse by approving the bonds and then asking for the
people to vote on bonds.
Mayor Vorsanger responded by saying that his thoughts on this issue
were that he knows the school board has some money at present, and
he suggested that perhaps in the first month or two before we get
this to a vote, that the school board spend some of their money and
not the city's appropriation until it has been approved by the
voters.
Director Coody asked if any of the contractors had been asked to
extend their bid time. He stated that he wanted Fayetteville to
have some of the best schools in the country, but he felt it
counter-productive to- get into a situation where the City could
lose millions of dollars and still not get the facilities that are
needed. He stated that he was not totally convinced that this was
a legal situation and did not want to bet on the legality based on
a couple of wording changes.
Vorsanger responded by saying that there are three other bills
involved in this issue. They pretty well say that this can be
done, and HR 1382 also deals with this issue.
Coody asked Jerry Rose if he felt confident in this gamble.
Rose responded by saying that he respectfully disagreed with
Director Henry. He stated that in order to issue bonds we must
have a bond counsel opinion. We could not get this opinion under
the old Act 25. Assuming bond counsel will allow us to issue these
bonds under the new local government act, then it is certainly a
viable way to go. It puts to the court, if we do get sued,,a very
clean proposition as to whether or not this new act is either
constitutional or unconstitutional. If we go forward.with our
present plan, it probably has a higher degree of legal risk,but at
least you know that it will begin to build a school building:
There are indications from the Rose law firm, that they, if asked,
would approve and issue a bond counsel opinion. We may not be able
to deal with them as we are suing them on a previous bond opinion.
Director Nash asked if we needed another election.
Rose stated that another election would be needed to get a bond
issue. This would eliminate the legal risk.
Director Nash asked what should be done with the $2 million that
has already been collected. Rose stated that the $2 million should
be used in an attempt to pay off the bonds.
Nvgigs
May 21, 1991
Director Henry stated we could go back to the voters for a property
tax increase to fund the school construction. If the citizens of
Fayetteville are as committed to education as they say, they would
vote for this tax increase:' She stated she would be willing to
campaign for this tax increase.
Director Coody asked where the City would be if they signed the
contract for construction but could not find a bond counsel to
issue and sell bonds.
Mayor Vorsanger stated that the construction contract would be
signed by the school board and not the Board of Directors.
Spivey stated he too agrees with Director Henry. This is different
from the incinerator issue because we have a mandate of the people
to fund the schools. Just because we pull out now, does not mean
that we will not be sued because this project has been in the works
for two years. He stated that there are legalities in all aspects
of this issue. The kids will be the ones to suffer while this is
being fought.
Director Coody stated that it was his desire to find a more legal
vehicle to pursue this issue.
Winston Simpson, Fayetteville School Superintendent, urged the
Board to approve awarding the contract that is now held by the
schools, and to award those based on the plan that Mr. Rose and Mr.
Moore has presented. Then we should proceed as expeditiously as
possible to examine the question as to this new law, and if that
would allow the City to sell bonds as a basis for funding the
balance of the $10 or $12 million in school facilities. Again, he
urged the Board to take positive action on this matter this
evening. The crowding in the schools only gets worse. There is no
assurance against lawsuits, no matter how the Board votes. There
is a variety of lawyers with differing opinions.
Director Coody asked Mr. Simpson to not hold it against the Board
if they vote against the issue. He stated that he pictured this as
being the same thing as if he signed a contract to buy a $100,000
piece of land, and then sought financing. That is a sure way to
get into serious trouble. There are ways this could be done where
all the lawyers could agree that this is legal, and that is to go
back to the voters for a millage increase.
Simpson responded by saying, indeed, that is a legal way to fund
school construction, but he speculates that until the people of
this community know for sure that you can't build school
improvements with some participation from the city, they are not
going to approve a property tax to do it. They've said very
strongly that they want it to be done this way. Simpson asked the
Board to approve those contracts, based on monies already escrowed,
•
1 a1 0a
May 21, 1991
sufficient to fund your obligation under those particular
contracts.
Director Nash stated should just could not vote to approve this
funding mechanism.
Jack Butt, vice president of the school board, stated that there
are some political realities that we all face this evening. The
City has promised the citizens that $10 million of that sales tax
will be used for the schools. If it is not used for the schools,
there are going to be 6,000 children, 3,000 parents, 400 teacher
and seven school board members that are going to be immediately
angry about that. Not to mention another 4,000-5,000 people who
voted in the election, and the Chamber of Commerce, and Citizens
Advisory Committee, that designed that device. That money has been
entrusted to the City for the sole purpose of building schools.. If
for legal reasons, you don't want to build schools, the lawsuit
will be much quicker, much more direct, and it will be a class
action joined by most of the prominent people in Fayetteville. The
City Board is not committed to spend $10 million right now. The
Board has until next January to figure out how you might come up
with the rest of it. We will only be shifting around tax money,
and we won't be depriving anyone of their basic fundamental rights.
or anything of that nature. He stated that time is running out,
and he urged the Board to proceed as planned.
Robert Reus stated that the crux of the problem is the promise that
was made by a previous board to use $10 million for the schools.
No one can guarantee that this is legal. He stated that the
citizens might turn down a millage increase because they might feel
they are being burned, by paying twice, $10 million in sales tax
and then have their property taxes raised. He suggested that the
City rebate the $10 million, via rebates on the utility bills and
then ask for a millage increase.
Rudy Moore, representing the Fayetteville School Board, urged the
Board to consider that regardless of what legal counsel can try to
convince you about, about the bond issue, the constitutional versus
the statutory matter -- we have reams of opinions that are in
conflict, just as in 1988. Failure to enter into the contract does
not change that. He asked what would be done with the $10 million
if the Board does not approve this contract. He asked the Board to
consider this: Go on and approve these contracts. The maximum
extent of this liability at this point in time is $2.7 million.
The school district cannot get any more money out of you until next
January if you decide to put another $1.3 million into the building
fund, via this transaction that is before you. He suggested that
the Board direct Mr. Rose to look into the alternate Diamond Center
legislation. He urged the Board to comply with the wishes of the
people.
May 21, 1991
Director Coody asked if there was any way the school board could
complete the school construction.
Moore stated that the school.district has enough money in -hand to
build a new facility, but not some of the other amenities and not
some of the equipping and parking lots and that sort of thing. The
brick work could be done, but to finish it out you would probably
have to go back to the voters.
Director Coody asked if the millage increase necessary to fund the
schools had been calculated. It was stated that this has not been
calculated.
Director Blackston stated that he has reached a decision on how he
will vote on this issue. Not having great legal knowledge, he has
decided to go with the majority and vote in support of this issue.
He urged the people not to judge this vote in light of the
incinerator issue.
Joel Furring, a member of the audience, addressed the board in
support of a positive vote of the Board on the contract in
question. He stated constituents would be very angry if the
contract is not approved by the Board.
Director Coody asked if there was a clause that stated the
contractor would be able to stop construction and he would be paid
up to that point, plus stoppage and a five percent bonus. He
inquired if this had been discussed with the contractor.
Rudy Moore stated that the proposal at the meeting was: Would the
school board hold you harmless up to a certain point? That certain
point was undefined. The school board could not be held
responsible for the entire bond issue. He stated that the
contractor expects to be paid for the work he does, plus a margin
of profit. This is a fourteen month contract, so you will have
quite a bit of money into it to begin with.
Director Coody stated he was trying
where the City might be limiting its
has more of a risk than the school
asked Mr. Moore if this was right.
to get more information about
liability. He stated the City
board does in this issue. He
Rudy Moore said that was not correct. Unless you are talking about
the underlying bond issue. You have no more liability to the
contractor than the school board.
Jerry Rose agreed and stated that however this goes, he would
attempt to represent the city to the best of his ability. He did
not anticipate recommending to the City that they hire any other
outside attorneys. He stated we were playing a lot of "if" games.
43888
May 21, 1991
Mayor Vorsanger stated people kept talking about returning the
sales tax to the voters. However, more than Fayetteville voters
are paying these taxes.
Harley Brigham, a member of the audience, stated that he voted for
the six mill tax and would vote for whatever it takes to build a
high school on a millage because it is legal.
Tiny Hamilton, a member of the audience, addressed the Board in
opposition of the way the ballot was worded in regard to the sales
tax increase for the school and urged the Board to uphold their
oaths of office and uphold the Arkansas Constitution while voting
against this issue. He stated the people did not know when they
voted for the school bonds that this was illegal.
A member of the original Citizens Advisory Committee addressed -the
Board in support of an affirmative vote on behalf of the Board. He
stated that Staff worked very hard to come up with the proposal on
the ballot and to uphold the legalities involved in the decision of
putting the sales tax vote on the ballot. He disagreed that Staff
made mistakes. This was the accumulation of many people working
very diligently for over three years to come up with the plan. He
hates to see the Board subjected to idle threats.
Director Henry stated that she felt the decision made by the
Citizens Advisory Committee at that time was not a
misrepresentation to the voters and was thought to be a legal
method. She stated that at this particular meeting, the Board has
been threatened with lawsuits from both sides of the issue.
Goody said that he assumed that the sales tax issue was legal when
he voted on it, but now he seriously questions the legality of the
vote. He is not going to assume that just because the majority of
the people voted for this issue that means it is a legal method.
Upon roll call, the motion to .award the school construction
contract passed by a vote of 4 to 2 to 0, with Henry and Coody
voting in the minority and Green abstaining.
Director Nash stated she was basing her yes vote on the fact that
they will find something in the legislation that can be used by the
school board and City.
Director Coody stated he was glad he voted his conscience and glad
that the motion passed.
•
RESOLUTION 98-91 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
BOOK
May 21, 1991
NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT
Director Spivey reported that there were openings on the Library
Board of Trustees, an opening on the Board of Adjustments, and we
are appointing a Vegetation Management Advisory Committee.
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Spivey reported that Jeffrey Koenig was the nominee for the Library
Board of Trustees position.
Spivey, seconded by Green, made a motion to appoint Koenig to the
Library Board of Trustees.
Upon roll call, the motion was passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
•
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS
Spivey reported that Marion Orton was the nominee for the Board of
Adjustments position.
Spivey, seconded by Green, made a motion to appoint Orton to the
Board of Adjustments.
Upon roll call, the motion was passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Spivey reported that by the make-up of the committee, there has to
be people appointed with expertise in specific areas, and then
there are some community at large positions. He stated that the
nominees were as follows:
Position 1 -- Dr. Ronald Talbert (herbicide use)
Position 2 -- Dr. John King (integrated vegetative
management)
Position 3 -- Dr. Edward D. Dale, Jr. (toxology)
Position 4 -- Dr. Charles J. Amlaner, Jr. (wildlife ecology)
Position 5 Al Vick (community)
Position 6 Marcia Donley (community)
Position 7 Linda Telthorst (community)
Spivey, seconded by Henry, made a motion to approve the nomination
of the preceding.
May 21, 1991
Upon roll call, the motion was passed by a vote of 7 to 0.
OTHER BUSINESS
AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
Director Coody asked if there
Attorney General's office on the
the airport. City Attorney Rose
spoken with Senator Malone, but
received.
had been any response from the
improvement district language from
stated that they have not. He has
to date, no information has been
ELECTIONS BY WARD ISSUE
Bill Stiles, a resident of Fayetteville thanked the Board for their
proclamation for historic preservation. He asked about the
redistricting the wards for electing City Board of Directors and
maybe even paying the board members. He asked that these issues be
discussed at some point in time.
Vorsanger responded by saying that no concrete plans have been
developed regarding these issues, but they have been discussed some
by the Board and the Chamber of Commerce.
Director Nash stated that the Board has asked the Staff to give
them information on options on how to hold public hearings
concerning voting on wards. But, she stated she did not remember
seeing a report on this.
City Manager Linebaugh stated that was not his understanding of
what the Board wanted. He understood that the Board wanted to wait
until the League of Women Voters and the Chamber of Commerce
developed their ideas, and then hold public hearings discussing the
issues.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned around 11:00 p.m.
•