HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-10-16 Minutes233
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council was held on Tuesday,
October 5, 1993, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Room of the City
Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
PRESENT: Mayor Fred Hanna; Aldermen Woody Bassett, Fred Vorsanger,
Len Edens, Joe Box, Heather Daniel, Stephen Miller, Kit
Williams, and Conrad Odom; City Attorney Jerry Rose; City
Clerk Sherry Thomas; City Treasurer Glyndon Bunton;
Administrative Services Director Ben Mayes; Planning
Management Director Alett Little; Assistant to the Public
Works Director Cheryl Zotti; members of staff, press, and
audience.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hanna called the meeting to order with eight aldermen
present.
OLD BUSINESS
Items that have been brought before the Council but were tabled or
no decision made to allow further information to be presented.
A. CRYSTAL SPRINGS SUBDIVISION: A public hearing on an appeal of
the Planning Commission decision to approve Crystal Springs
Subdivision, Phase I.
The Planning Commission voted to approve the Crystal Springs
Subdivision, Phase I, at their August 23, 1993 meeting.
Alderman Joe Box filed an appeal on behalf of the persons
desiring to be heard on the question of whether the -Planning
Commission's decision was in error. The City Council voted'at
their September 21, 1993 meeting to hear this appeal.
Jim McCord, attorney representing Tom Muccio and others, who4are
concerned about the Crystal Springs Subdivision. They lore%
concerned about their quality of life, traffic problems, and
property values. They are not seeking to prevent development of
the subdivision, but are seeking to make the development comply
with the new master plan. The new plan calls for transition zones
with minimum lot sizes of 1/2 acre. Crystal Springs lots are
planned to be 1/3 acre. He felt it would be bad for the City to
approve a subdivision that does not comply with the new zoning
ordinance. He referred to case law that supports this theory.
Wilson Kimbrough stated his property abuts the original 275 acres
of the proposed subdivision and is close to the proposed phase I of
the project. He has attended the various meetings held on this
matter and read the minutes of numerous hearings. He stated the
testimony from many of the citizens over the past 5 months
expressed many concerns about the adverse affects of the Crystal
Springs Subdivision. He is especially concerned about the
2
October 5, 1993
hazardous traffic on Salem and Mt. Comfort roads and that the
proposed land use is not compatible with the new land use plan. He
asked the Council to consider these concerns when making their
decision. He stated there was a lot of open land around this
proposed development, and a decision would have to be made about
the use of this land.
Jim Kimbrough, 2424 N. Salem Road, stated there are to be 115 lots
on 39.9 acres. He stated this density is not in character with the
surrounding area and is inconsistent with the new land use plan.
He stated the lot sizes should be from .5 to 1.5 acres. The only
access to the subdivision will be on County Road 892, Salem Road.
He asked that this item be referred back to the Planning Commission
for revision to comply with the new land use plan.
Jim Silvey stated he lives 1/4 mile from the proposed subdivision,
and he is a retired highway engineer. He stated Salem Road has a
20' surface with a 60' right of way, and it is just barely above a
dirt road. Heavy construction vehicles like cement trucks will
tear the road all to pieces. According to the City's traffic
count, there are 578 cars per day on this road. Phase I of the
development will increase the total to about 1720 cars per day, and
this does not include the proposed new school traffic. He stated
this was far too many for this size road. When there are 570
vehicles per day, a Class 3 road requires a 24' paved surface with
20' shoulders on each side. He stated the City requires developers
to develop 1/2 of the road, so there will be curb and gutter on
only one side of the road for a distance. He stated there will be
fatal accidents on this road if this project is approved, and he
feels the developer should pay to make the road safe.
Michele Harrington, attorney for JED, Inc., stated she wanted the
City Council to remember the laws that are in effect today, not
proposed changes. She stated property owners' rights need to be
considered as well as the neighbors. The developers are relying on
current regulations when they purchase and make improvements to
property. She stated in a Little Rock case, Richardson v. City of
Little Rock, the court stated that a city is bound by the
regulations it adopts and shall enforce them. She stated it would
be arbitrary to deny a plat if it meets the subdivision standards.
She stated there was no way her client should be expected to comply
with the 2010 Plan when it has yet not been adopted by the City.
Subdivisions bring good things to an area. This one will bring a
new school and a 15 acre park. She stated her client has made
every attempt to address all of the issues. The City does not have
any jurisdiction over County roads. The County has already
addressed the road issue, and her client has lost the entire
construction period because of the wait.
Jeff Koenig, School Board President, gave the Council a brief
history of siting a school for this area. He stated, with the
assistance of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission,
2.15
October 5, 1993;'
they had studied enrollment patterns and demographics. He stated
the conclusion of the studies indicated the 20 acre site to be
donated by JED will be an ideal location for the school. They
would like to see the area annexed, and would be willing to work
with the City to build a youth center in the area.
Alderman Williams asked how far past that area is the school
district limits.
Koenig stated the school district goes several miles farther West,
and this is a fairly centrally located site.
Mel Milholland, engineer for Phase I;. stated of the total 280 acres
planned for this project, about 80 acres are in the flood plain'and
probably will never be developed. Phase I is less than 40 acres.
He stated Salem Road has a compacted subgrade, is well ditched'on
both sides, and has 6 inches of SB2, and then chip and seal. He
stated the road is straight, has shoulders on about 90% of it, and
is safer than Highway 112. He feels the Council has to consider
that this is not the only subdivision the Planning Commission has
approved in the last 30 days. The plans for this subdivision have
been ongoing for some period of time. Both the City and County
Planning Commissions voted to approve this project, and he
requested the Council concur with these decisions.
Howard Davis, president of JED, Inc., stated he had relied on the
current laws and was advised to do so by his counsel. Obviously,
Jim McCord has more foresight into what the City will be adopting
in the future. He stated his development will be about .7 of a
mile from the bypass. Since traffic is the problem, he feels it
makes more sense to develop closer to the bypass than farther away.
He stated they were converting farm property into residential
areas. Years ago, this process was started with the surrounding
developments. He just wants the land to be used for its best and
proper use compatible with the area, and he asked the Council to
uphold the Planning Commission decision.
Virginia Fidosky, resident of North Salem Road, stated she walks
every day on Salem Road, and there is no shoulder.
Jim McCord stated he did not mean to be presumptuous about the 2010
Plan, but the City has paid thousands of dollars to a consultant to
develop this plan for the City, and he assumes that it will be
adopted. Hestated the school site is not an issue in this
subdivision request. JED has offered to donate the school site
irregardless of the outcome of the development. He stated the
safety of Salem Road has been debated by people who have knowledge
in the field, and they have differing opinions. He feels this is
a good reason to send the whole thing back to the Planning
Commission. McCord stated the major consideration here is if the
City of Fayetteville will comply with its own rules. The Planning
Commission was aware of the new 2010 Plan. Again, he requested
October 5, 1993
this be returned to the Planning Commission so the development
could be redesigned to comply with the new minimum lot size.
Alderman Bassett asked at what stage is the annexation of this
area.
Alett Little stated annexation follows the adoption of the land use
plan. The zoning ordinance is in the same status.
Alderman Bassett asked what is the process for developing the rest
of the acreage.
Little stated as with Phase I, each subdivision request goes
through two phases, a preliminary and a final plat approval. The
preliminary plat goes to the Subdivision Committee, and then the
plat is sent to the Planning Commission.
Alderman Bassett asked if all of that comes to pass, City Staff and
the City Council will have the right to require off-site
improvements.
Little stated that was correct. In addition, on-site improvements
can be required.
Alderman Miller stated he was weighing the pros, such as R-1 zoning
of 3 lots per acre, the Richardson v. Little Rock case, JED seems
to be conscientious developers, JED has been good to offer to
donate land for the school and park areas, and this is a growth
area for Fayetteville. He has also looked at the cons, such as the
narrow road that has some bad spots in it, he feels the concerns of
the neighbors about the density of the new residential area, his
desire to protect trees and wet lands, and his fear that a bond
issue might be needed if the City outgrows its ability to provide
infrastructure facilities. He feels the City needs to get on with
the 2010 Plan and adoption of a revised zoning ordinance.
Alderman Daniel stated she would like to hear City Attorney Rose's
comments about the new land use plan and how it applies to this
issue.
Rose stated the City Council has had the benefit of two fine
attorneys that have laid out the law for them to review. His
advice to the Council is to follow the present law. Is the law so
clear that it makes a decision for the Council? Rose stated he
could not tell the Council that. He advised them to listen to the
legal and factual arguments and make their best decision.
Alderman Daniel asked if the Council could ask for additional off-
site improvements.
L.i /
3 October 5, 1993 ""
Little stated under the way this was appealed, the Council may
affirm, reverse, or modify the plan or the Council may send the
item back to'the Planning Commission.
Alderman Williams stated he can see why the residents are concerned
about maintaining the beauty of the area. He is not in favor of
developing Fayetteville as fast as possible. This has been a rural
area, and the houses on the north do have larger lots. However, it
looks like Fayetteville will be needing a lot of land, so he feels.
the density may be needed. He agrees that concrete trucksJwill
tear up the road. He would be much less receptive to this proposal
if they were asking for 4 houses per acre. He has more of a '
tendency to agree with the Planning Commission. There have been.8
hearings on this already, and he thinks that is enough.
Alderman Daniel stated she understands the developer will be
required to make some improvements to Salem Road. Salem Road looks
better than many of the city streets she drives on in Fayetteville.
However, she too is concerned about the increased traffic.
Alderman Edens asked if the Council adopts
related ordinances, would the other phases of
zoned at R-1 with the possibility of 4 houses
the 2010 Plan and
this subdivision be
per acre.
Little stated the new plan calls for transition zones, whereby the
closest land to the city would be zoned R-1, beyond that, the zone
would call for lots up to 1 1/2 acre, and the farthest from the
city would call for lots in excess of 1. 1/2 acre. So, this
subdivision would probably still come in as R-1.
Alderman Edens asked if the current houses could be considered as
the transition zone.
Little stated she felt they could.
Alderman Edens stated he rarely will vote to overturn the Planning
commission. He considers the City Council almost like a higher
court. If a matter is appealed to them, they have to look to see
if the Planning Commission acted in error or not. He believes
Howard Nichols Road will be used some to access this area. He does
not feel there is problem with the infrastructure. There will be
problems with the streets, and it will need some modifications by
the developer. He does not feel the Planning Commission erred in
their decision, and he will vote to uphold them.
Alderman.Vorsanger stated he was impressed that any developer would
volunteer land for a park and a school. He is also impressed that
in all of the materials, this is the first time he has seen these
types of restrictive covenants.
Little stated the developer did this to address the concerns of the
neighbors. The houses will be a minimum of 1,600 square feet, will
October 5, 1993
have a 2 car garage, and no carports. Public streets will be paved
hard surface construction.
Alderman Vorsanger stated it will probably cost about $100,000 to
purchase a lot and build a new house in this subdivision. He
stated he would feel differently if the developer were asking for
a change in R-1 zoning. But, he feels R-1 is the most restrictive
zone, the lowest density. He will vote to uphold the Planning
Commission.
Alderman Bassett stated all of the people who have addressed the
Council have done a good job. He understands why all of the people
who live in the area are concerned. However, he does believe that
after 7 public hearings and all of the efforts the developer is
making by donating 20 acres for a school and 15 acres for a park,
the developer has gone above and beyond what is required. It is
possible the City may adopt the new 2010 Plan and zoning ordinance.
But, he does not know when that will happen. He does not feel the
City Council should apply a law retroactively. If this developer
comes back and wants to develop some of the additional acreage, he
will have to comply with the laws at that time. Bassett stated he
was reluctant to overrule the Planning Commission.
Alderman Odom stated he agrees with the other aldermen. It would
take a lot for him to overrule the Planning Commission. He stated
he would like to hear from Alderman Joe Box why he filed the
appeal. He has heard good legal arguments on both sides, but he
agrees with upholding the Planning Commission's decision.
Alderman Box stated he does not regret having filed the appeal. He
had many questions about the development, and he feels they have
been adequately answered. He stated there are some beautiful homes
in this area and some that are not as large as 1,600 square feet,
and there are many mobile homes. To put in mobile homes, a person
does not have to go to any planning commission. He is also
impressed with the donations of land. He wanted to make sure he
listened to the very end and had not missed anything regarding this
issue before making a decision. He is still worried about the
road. However, there are several other roads leading to this
development area, and no one appealed the approval of this to the
County Planning Commission. The City can't force a developer to
fix a road that is not even in the City. He does not have a
problem with overturning the Planning Commission if they were in
error, but he has not heard of any error being made.
Alderman Daniel stated she appreciates the developer's generosity
in donating the land. She had heard the term "affordable housing"
used when describing this subdivision. She would like to be able
to afford an $80,000 house.
vorsanger,
Commission
of 8 to O.
October 5, 19934
seconded by Edens, made a motion to uphold the Planning
decision. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote
4:
239
CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Hanna 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 September 21, 1993 regular City Council
meeting.
B. A resolution approving Change Order 1 in the amount of
$33,109.82 to the Mitchener Excavation contract for taxiway,
blastpads, fencing, drainage, clearing, grading, and
obstruction removal work under Airport Improvement Grant #17,
and approving an $18,000 contingency to the contract.
The change order will cover the cost of clearing an area of
trees that was not earlier identified as an obstruction and
for the associated seeding and mulching. There was no
contingency approved when the contract was approved, so the
engineer is recommending an $18,000 contingency.
RESOLUTION 98-93 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
A resolution approving Amendment 2 to Task Order 1 with
McClelland Consulting Engineers for additional design services
relating to obstruction removal in the Airport Improvement
Project AIP 17.
This amendment deleted the language in Amendment 1 regarding
payment for overtime engineering. The additional design work
which will cost about $1,800 will now be performed by the
prime contractor, Mitchener Excavation.
RESOLUTION 99-93 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
D. A resolution granting a 30 foot utility easement on City owned
property in the Industrial Park South at 15th Street and Happy
Hollow Road for the City Street/Sanitation Service Center
Facility.
This easement will be utilized for .above ground and below
ground utility services and involves Lots 2 & 3 of the
Industrial Park South.
RESOLUTION 100-93 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLEAVE OFFICE
October 5, 1993
E. A resolution granting two utility easements to Southwestern
Bell Telephone Company along City owned properties north of
the Airport and across the airport property.
These easements will be used by Bell to place
telecommunication systems underground along South School
Street and across airport property.
RESOLUTION 101-93 AB RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Miller, seconded by Odom, made a motion to approve the consent
agenda. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 8 to 0.
REZONE APPEAL
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an appeal of a Planning
Commission decision denying rezoning of .96 acres as requested by
Betty and Randy Adkins for a lot located adjacent to the Leverett
Elementary School on North Garland from R -O, Residential -Office, to
C-1, Neighborhood Commercial. The Planning Commission denied the
rezoning by a vote of 6-2-0 at their August 23, 1993 meeting.
Alderman Edens stated he would be abstaining from the discussion
and vote because he owns a like business in the area.
Alett Little stated there are adequate services in the area. The
principle reason the Planning Commission and planning staff
recommended denial is because this land was just rezoned to R-0
less than a year ago and has not been developed. They feel R -O is
the appropriate zoning for this land.
Randy Adkins stated he and his wife own Oak Plaza Laundry. They
are not asking for commercial zoning, rather they are seeking a
conditional use. They are very environmentally and socially
concerned people. They are willing to save as many trees as
possible. They also are willing to accommodate some of the
concerns of the residents on Hall Street. They are willing to put
in a privacy fence at the back of the property. He visited with
faculty at Leverett School, and they do not want anyone to build on
the land. He is not planning on having an arcade, but they had
planned a couple of video games for patrons to use while they wait.
Regarding the traffic concern, school opens at 7:45 a.m. and they
open at 8:00 a.m. He would be willing to change his hours during
school times and not open until after school starts. In addition,
he would be willing to use a "community" driveway with the other
two lot owners. He will put in a parking lot between his building
and the school, and he would be glad for the school to use the lot.
Mr. Adkins stated his laundry currently offers on a limited basis
service for the disabled and elderly. They plan to expand this
service. On the back of the lot, they would like for the school to
be able to expand their playground. He stated they are willing to
441
October 5, 1993 t
a,
compromise. He stated someone else could buy the land and do what
they want with it and not have to come before the Council.
Kim Smith addressed the Council and stated he lives on Hall avenue
and represents the property owners. In the early 1990's, the
Planning Commission voted not to rezone the property to commercial.
The Board of Directors voted 6 to 1 to deny the appeal. Last year
the property owners wanted to rezone to R -O, and there was no
opposition. He feels that is a wonderful compromise. Now, less
than a year later, the neighbors are back to fight another rezoning
request. Commercial zoning is not correct for this area. There
are some turns onto Leverett that are now illegal because of the
large amount of traffic. In addition, it is not good to have
commercial property abutting the playground of Leverett School.
This would be a bad precedent for the City. There is plenty of
commercial property for sale on down the street.
Jan England, who lives on Garland across from the property,
addressed the Council. She asked the Council to consider whether
or not the rezoning would be an asset to the City and whether or
not denying the rezoning would be a great detriment to the
applicants. She stated there is a lot of commercial zoned property
available to them in this area.
•Pat Green, 962 Hall and a teacher, stated there is already a
problem with juvenile crime. She is concerned that commercial
property next to a school might increase this problem. If there is
a commercial parking lotnextto a school, undesirables could have
an easy way to approach elementary kids.
Audrey Peterson, 930 Hall Avenue, stated she agrees with her
neighbors. This is not about the character of the Adkins, she is
comfortable with them. But if the business were sold, who knows
about the next owners. She is glad the Council has been listening
and upholding the Planning Commission decisions.
Alderman Bassett stated this is in his ward. There is nothing
personal about this issue, and he wishes the Adkins well with their
business pursuits. However, he agrees with everything Mr. Smith
has said. He does not feel this would be an appropriate location
for commercial use, and he does not want to overturn the Planning
Commission.
Bassett, seconded by Miller, made a motion to affirm the Planning
Commission's decision to deny the rezoning. Upon roll call, the
motion passed by a. vote of 7 to 0 -to 1, with Alderman Edens
abstaining.
SEWER CONNECTION REOUEST
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of a request by Harley Brigham
for a sewer connection to his property which is located on Fox
October 5, 1993
Hunter Road and is outside the city limits. Mayor Hanna stated Mr.
Brigham has contacted him twice about his Red Wolf Park he has been
developing into a nature park and nature study center. Mr. Brigham
states he is nearing completion and wants to be able to have public
restrooms. He owns about 4 acres, and he has his original house on
the lot that is hooked to the City's sewer system. The smaller
house contains the nature center. He is requesting that he be able
to tie this smaller building to the sewer system. Mr. Brigham's
rates will be nearly double that of in -town rates. Mr. Brigham has
also stated he wants his property annexed into the City when
possible.
Williams, seconded by Killer, made a motion to approve the sever
connection.
Alderman Bassett asked if this would cost the City anything.
Alderman Vorsanger stated the sewer runs next to Mr. Brigham's
property.
Cheryl Zotti stated the sewer tap outside the city limits will cost
Mr. Brigham $330.
Mayor Hanna stated Mr. Brigham has to run the sewer lines out to
the city's lines to be connected, so there will be no cost to the
City.
Upon roll call, the motion to approve the sever connection passed
by a vote of 8 to 0.
RESOLUTION 102-93 A8 RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
REZONE R93-41
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance rezoning 66
acres located on the north side of Drake Street and west of Gregg
Avenue from A-1, Agriculture, to R -O, Residential -Office, as
requested by Robert Whitfield. The Planning Commission voted 8-0-0
to recommend rezoning.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time.
Williams, seconded by Odom, 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 8 to 0, and the City Attorney read the
ordinance for the second time. Williams, seconded by Odom, made a
motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its
third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a
vote of 8 to 0, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the
third time.
Los
4 October 5, 1993,'
gh � iz�4
Little stated the Planning Commission voted to recommend the
rezoning. Construction of a frontage road will be required for
development.
Upon roll call, the ordinance passed by a vote of 8 to 0.
ORDINANCE 3725 APPEARS ON PAGE 0120 OF ORDINANCE BOOR X )(✓rI
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of a resolution approving the
1993-1998 Capital Improvements Program for the City of
Fayetteville.
Ben Mayes stated staff is asking the Council's adoption of the 5
year working plan. There have been public hearings, meetings with
the Council, and meetings with the Water & Sewer and Street
Committees on this plan. Mayes stated this plan is to provide
direction and is updated annually.
Mayor Hanna stated the Council will still vote on each individual
project when it comes before them for spending approval.
Vorsanger, seconded by Daniel, made a motion to approve the 1993-
1998 Capital Improvements Program Upon roll call, the motion
passed by a vote of 8 to 0.
RESOLUTION 103-93 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
1993 CAPITAL PROJECTS
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of a resolution appropriating
funds for the 1993 capital projects listed in the 1993-1998 Capital
Improvements Program.
Mayes stated there are several projects that need to be started
this year. Those items are detailed in the plan. When the sales
tax was overturned, all of these projects had to be stopped.‘,By
approving these appropriations, the Council will appropriate ,the
funds, but all formal approvals will still come back to Council for
final approval. . x
Alderman Williams stated he had some questions on item #10, the
Lake Fayetteville South parking lot. Before any additional money
is spent on parking, the feasibility of the botanical gardens
proposed for this site needs to be determined.
Alderman Vorsanger asked that Council be given a list of the
streets that will be done in-house.
r
October 5, 1993
Mayes stated staff would provide that list. In 1993, the goal has
been to pave all gravel streets remaining in the City. For 1994,
the Street Committee will address the street priorities.
vorsangsr, seconded by Odom, made a motion to approve appropriating
funds for the 1993 capital projects. Upon roll call, the motion
passed by a vote of 8 to 0.
RESOLUTION 104-93 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
LIGHTING BID WAIVER
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance waiving the
requirements of competitive bidding for the purchase of lights for
the Lighting of the Ozarks Festival in the amount of $11,200.
The City will be sharing the cost of lighting the City during the
winter holiday season with the Advertising & Promotion Commission.
The City will be providing lights for the Downtown Square, Air
Museum, Municipal Airport, City Hall, and the Police and Fire
Stations.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Miller,
seconded by Odom, 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 8 to 0, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for
the second time. Odom, seconded by Miller, made a motion to
further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and
final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 8 to
0, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the third time.
Ben Mayes stated these funds are coming from the Advertising &
Promotion Commission budget. They will be jointly funding the
Ozark Lighting Festival. The bid waiver is required so the same
type of lights can be purchased. The City will be getting them at
cost.
Mayor Hanna stated the Advertising & Promotion money of $17,760
will be used for electrical upgrades on the square. These upgrades
will also be helpful to the Farmers Market and other festivals that
use the square. The lights should last three years, and there may
be more lights added over the next two years.
Alderman Bassett stated he sits on the
electrical upgrade on the square will
Lights of the Ozarks Festival has been
& Promotion Commission, and they feel
additional revenues for the City.
A&P Committee. He feels the
be of benefit to many. The
approved by the Advertising
this will be a way to raise
Upon roll call, the bid waiver was approved by a vote of 8 to 0.
ORDINANCE 3726 APPEARS ON PAGE 09.02 -
OF ORDINANCE BOOK KXV1i
October 5, 1993 "
TROLLEY/BUS EQUIPMENT BID WAIVER
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance waiving the
requirements of competitive bidding for the purchase of used
trolley and bus equipment in an amount not to exceed $70,000 for
utilization in the proposed Downtown/Dickson Street Tourist
Transportation Program.
The Advertising & Promotion Commission voted to approve: the
purchase of up to 2 passenger trolleys/buses. They also approved
funding for operators and tourist guides, custom painting of the
trolleys/buses with a tourism logo denoting Fayetteville, and fuel
for at least the remainder of 1993.
Mayor Hanna stated they have found a bus that costs $17,500 that is
equipped with a lift. It is a 1985 with high mileage. However,
the dealer has agreed to replace the engine, put on new tires,a
new front end, and several other things to improve the bus. Mayor
Hanna stated the lift units alone cost $6,000.
Alderman Daniel asked if a decision has been made about the routes;
for the bus.
Mayor Hanna stated those are still being decided.
Alderman Miller asked if there will be a charge for riding the bus.
Mayor Hanna stated there would not be a charge.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Miller,
seconded by Odom, 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 8 to 0, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for
the second time. Williams, seconded by Miller, made a motion to
further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and:
final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 8'to
0, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the third time.
Alderman Vorsanger stated he too is a member of the A&P Commission,
and he thanked all of the other members of this committee. They
are making a $70,000 grant to the City with their HMR funds to'
start a trolley system. _'
Mayor Hanna stated Alderman Odom stated he would prefer to have a
regular trolley vehicle. This bus will allow the City to have a
trial run at the project. The merchants thought the City might
need to double the routes during the lunch hour. Trolleys cost
about $200,000 each and the upkeep is considerably higher than with
the bus. Even if the City got a transportation grant, it would
still cost the City between $60,000 and $70,000 for a trolley.
October 5, 1993
Upon roll call, the ordinance passed by a vote of 8 to 0.
ORDINANCE 3727 APPEARS ON PAGE ,(3 OF ORDINANCE BOOK XX✓I]
OTHER BUSINESS
NOMINATING COMMITTEE
Aldermen Edens stated there was a vacancy on the Library Board.
Edens, seconded by Odom, made a motion to appoint Michael Thomas to
fill the unexpired term which will end April 1, 1998.
Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 8 to 0.
SALES TAX HEARING
Alderman Bassett stated the hearing on awarding attorney fees in
the sales tax lawsuit will be held Thursday, October 7.
Mayor Hanna thanked City Staff for all their hard work on the sales
tax refund project. He stated Judge Mobley was very complimentary.
JUVENILE CONCERNS COMMITTEE
Alderman Bassett stated there will be a meeting of the Juvenile
Concerns Committee on Tuesday, October 12 at 6:30 p.m. on Room 326.
SALES TAX LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT
Alderman Bassett stated because this case is still in court until
the attorney fee is decided, he has written his statement. He
asked why the City agreed to stand mute on the attorney fees. He
stated we have to remind ourselves why we settled. It looked good
back in mid April. Settling out -weighed the risk of not settling.
By settling, the City avoided default on the $33 million bond
issue. This saved the City's credit rating so that the City will
be able to engage in future bond issues. It also protected the
City's financial reputation and credibility. The refund office
saved the City lots of money. He commended all of the people who
worked with the office and helped process the approximately $1.3
million in refund claims.
Alderman Bassett stated the City knew that the risk of refunds
might exceed the collected but unspent sales tax; however, the
Council felt this was a risk worth taking. After the attorney fees
and expenses are deducted from the unspent sales tax funds, the
remaining funds will be spent on capital improvement projects.
Settling the lawsuit also stopped the litigation in its tracks back
in April. Had the case continued, the City would have had to pay
thousands of dollars to Arvest and there would have been increased
attorney fees to Lisle. In addition, the City did not need another
October 5, 1993
lawsuit hanging over its head. The time had come to put this
behind us, clear the air, and move forward. The citizens passed a
new sales tax and at the same time dropped the 3.8 mill property
tax so the schools could pass this for their needs. All of this
was done without increasing the tax by even 1 cent to our citizens.
This also put our city on a basis to fund pay-as-you-go projects.
Regarding the attorney fees, the City lost the lawsuit. Lisle is
entitled to a fee, and he held most of the cards. Alderman Bassett
stated he felt both sides did their best to negotiate in good
faith. But, an agreement could not be reached on attorney fees.
The City agreed not to refute Lisle's claims for attorney fees. He
has requested $4 million.
Alderman Bassett stated he is willing to accept all blame if the
City gets slammed on the attorney fees. However, he reminded
everyone that asking for and getting are different things. He
stated he trusts Judge Dawson to be reasonable and fair and do, the
right thing. Alderman Bassett stated the City cannot and should
not violate the agreement that was entered into last April. He
stated both sides have agreed not to appeal the attorney fee. He
stated all citizens do have the right to attend the hearing to be
held Thursday morning.
•Alderman Bassett stated the local television news reported that
there was money left after the refunds, and the City of
Fayetteville would be making off like bandits. This is WRONG!!
Any available money will be used for capital improvement projects.
How much the City can do all depends on how much money is left.
Mayor Hanna stated he echoes what Alderman Bassett has stated. The
City took a risk. There were $12 millions collected in sales tax.
85-90% of the people did not request their tax refunds. The refund
total is larger because several businesses claimed their refund to
protect the rights of their clients.
Alderman Williams stated he would like to thank the 90% or more of
the people who did not seek a refund. He stated most citizens did
not seek a refund because they have voted for the tax and wanted
the money to be spent on capital improvement projects. Alderman
Williams stated he was the only City Council member who voted
against the settlement. He did so because he wanted to be able to
argue the attorney fees. However, he feels the City Council stands
together, and all will share the responsibility.
Alderman Daniel thanked Alderman Bassett, his sister Beverly, and
Jerry Rose for all their many hours spent in helping settle this
case
City Attorney Rose stated the hearing starts at 9:00 a.m. on
October 7 in Judge Kim Smith's court room on the second floor in
the Court House Annex.
October 5, 1993
Alderman Vorsanger stated he owed a debt of gratitude to Alderman
Bassett who took the lead when this Council needed leadership
badly. He wanted to thank all of the citizens who did not apply
for a tax refund. He stated the Northwest Arkansas Times ran a
daily tally on the number of refunds and the total. He was very
shocked that so many people said they had not heard about the
refund until the last few days. This city gave every possibility
for people to apply. The refund office was open for 4 months and
nothing was made secret. He understands this is the first time
anything like this has been done in the State of Arkansas.
AUTUMNFEST
Alderman Daniel stated Autumnfest is this weekend, Oct 8, 9 and 10.
She asked if there was a schedule of events available to the
public.
Mayor Hanna stated it has been published in the newspaper.
Ben Mayes stated the Chamber of Commerce has a brochure.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.