Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-02-15 Minutes29 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TBE CITY COUNCIL A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council was held on Tuesday, February 15, 1994, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Room of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Fred Hanna; Aldermen Heather Daniel, Stephen Miller, Kit Williams, Conrad Odom, Woody Bassett, Fred Vorsanger, Len Edens, and Joe Box; City Attorney Jerry Rose; City Clerk Sherry Thomas; City Treasurer Glyndon Bunton; Administrative Services Director Ben Mayes; Planning Management Director Alett Little; Public Works Director Kevin Crosson; members of staff, press, and audience. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hanna called the meeting to order with eight aldermen present. ELDERLY TAXI PROGRAM Mayor Hanna introduced a report by Elaine Walker, Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission, regarding the Fayetteville Elderly Taxi Program. Elaine Walker stated there were 315 participants in the Taxi Program during 1993. There were 193 elderly users of which the average age was 78 and the average annual income was $6,394. She stated 37% of the trips were for shopping, 32% were for medical reasons, 20% were to grocery stores, and about 10% was for personal and social reasons. There were 520 trips taken to beauty shops. They found no abuses in the system. Participants were very resourceful in utilizing other modes of transportation in conjunction with the taxi program to enable them to reach their ultimate destinations. Walker stated there was an average of 799 coupons used per month. The average trip cost was $2.51, which was a decrease from the 1992 average. The cost was down because people are sharing rides and paying for round trips rather than for two one-way trips. Walker applauded Jam Simco and the Community Development Block Grant people for all their work in this area The total administrative cost was around $1,000, so most of the money is going to the users and the taxi program. Walker stated each year she sends out a questionnaire to the participants asking for comments. She read from several of the quotes received about how appreciative the elderly were for this program which enables them to be independent because they do not drive, is safer than them trying to drive, enables them to go to the doctor, etc. Dorothy Plumlee, Olivia Vaughn, and Johnnie Hurd addressed the Council and expressed their appreciation for the taxi program. Mayor Hanna thanked Elaine Walker and Jan Simco for their dedication to this program. He stated during his administration, 30 February -15, 1994 they- have been .able :to 4increase the number of coupons per participant .from ,8 :to .10 the first .year, and up to 15 for 11994 . • OLD BUSINESS • -Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of items that have been .brought before the Council but were tabled or no decision made to 4 -allow further information to be presented. ▪ Discussions regarding further litigation in Jones, et al. vs. City of Fayetteville, et al. City Attorney Rose stated he received a letter from the City's attorney, Dody Angulo, warning of the risks of proceeding .with , litigation in this case. He stated Angulo outlined several options -for the Council to consider. Rose reported that Angulo stated he had received a call from the plaintiffs stating they would accept $37,5004in attorney fees.=.in addition, he received a call from the City's insurance carrier, Scottsdale Insurance, who said they would pay the $7,500 above -the '$30,000 attorney:fees the City had offered to settle for. They would -not add this to the deductible, and.it would also avoid any problems there might be with insurance coverage. • Rose !stated Municipal, Judge Rudy- Moore stated he was against - conceding on the issue of fees being coilected.for the municipal - judge's retirement program. This retirement program is a statutory • program in which the City participates'. Angulo stated he felt the • settlement offer would be accepted by the plaintiffs if this issue • was.•not included. The City would then state they would abide.by Act 904 of 1991 in the collection of court fees. There will be a cap of $60,000 -established for refunds of the court fees. Alderman Williams stated he did not agree with Mr. 'Angulo where he . said there.is no basis for the City to avoid liability. : Rose stated the City had better arguments on a couple of points and not so good on another point. He stated the City has already admitted -liability regarding wrongly assessed court costs that were collected between 1988 and 1991. Whether or not the City collected illegal - fees from 1991 until recently is still in question. If the City did, it could not have- been a 'very large amount. The allegation-.about=collecting court•costs'when dismissing a•case•is one that is in question. There is no -.case law about this°issue, and most municipalities collect this :fee. • However,-, there statute that says fees can only be collected during two. or three different situations, and it does not mention when dismissing case. . The collection offees going to the municipal judge retirement program is really not in question at' this point because the 31 February 15, 1994 plaintiffs have agreed to leave this issue out of the settlement. However, the City could argue there is no difference in funding retirement programs through any other fees, and there is no immediate advantage to a judge who assesses these costs. Rose stated the plaintiff probably has the better legal arguments. The City would only have to pay attorney fees associated with the parts of the case it loses. However, it is hard to determine the exact amount of fees devoted to each issue. Alderman Edens stated he really did not think any of this makes any difference because the City is still going to have to pay $50,000. Alderman Williams stated he did not think the City would have to pay $50,000 if we admit liability on the one area that we already have and contest the other two allegations. He proposed_ letting the court decide the attorney fees. When these were paid and any possible refunds, he stated he feels the total may be less than $50,000. Alderman Bassett stated he agrees with Alderman Edens and somewhat disagrees with Alderman Williams. He pointed out that the legislature is the only body that can address the question of attorney fees in class action suits against governments. He stated this issue has to be addressed by the legislature immediately. He stated he is 110% convinced that the City will have to pay $50,000 between the costs of refunds, the plaintiffs' attorney fees, and the City's attorney fees. He feels the City should take the plaintiffs' and Scottsdale Insurance Company's offers and settle this case. He stated the offer should be contingent upon -them dropping the claim on the municipal judge retirement fund. Other cities have settled this case and been able to keep this issue out of the settlement and continue to assess this fee. Bassett, seconded by Edens, made a motion to make the settlement offer of $37,500 in attorney fees, with Scottsdale Insurance paying $7,500 of the fee, with a $60,000 cap on refunds, and to omit the municipal judge retirement issue from the case. Alderman Miller asked why Scottsdale was being so generous. Alderman Bassett stated because they want to get this case settled. Alderman Williams stated the insurance company will be paying the same amount anyway, and so will the City. He stated he would not support this settlement offer because he feels the legislature caused this problem and not Fayetteville. Alderman Bassett stated he did not think this was right either, but he does feel settling would be the smart thing to do. 1 4 32 February 15, 1994 Upon roll call, the motion tosettle:passed‘by a.vote ;of 5;toaB,. with Miller, Williams, and Vorsanger voting no. rr CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of items which maybe approved by motion, or contracts and leasesf which can be approved by resolution,and which may be grouped- together and. approved simultaneously under a."Consent Agenda": A. Minutes of the February 1,.1994 regular City Council meeting. V B. A resolution awarding Bid 94-1 to 88I, Inc., in the amount of $123,000 plus a 5% contingency of $6,150 for restrooms at Gulley and Walker `Parks, approvalt,of $10,120 to complete% a hard surface path and run electrical service to,the.restrooms., -for -a. total . project amount of° -•$139,270, and ' approval or a .budget adjustment. _ RESOLUTION 26-94 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLEWS OFFICE A resolution awarding Bid 94-2 to 88I, Inc., in the amount of $63,000 plus a 5% contingency of .$3,150- for restrooms at Finger Park, approval'of $880 to.provide electrical serviceto the, restrooms, for a .total 'project cost -of -$67,-030, and ...; s.approval of a budget adjustment. RESOLUTION 27-94 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. s - Odom, seconded by Vorsanger, made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. • . Alderman Miller stated the estimated cost of construction for the restrooms was about $35,000 each when he came on the.City.:Council. •.Now, the price -has increased to $67,000 each; and he feels this -is an incredible amount of money,•and something must be wrong with the bidding' process. ..'• - . - -. Upon roll call', the Consent Agenda was approved by a vote of 7 to 1, with Miller voting -n�.- - -VACATION V94 -1c • • Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance vacating -the north -7.5 feet of.a-20 foot east -west -utility easement'on property located at 637 E. JoycesBoulevard as requested by Robert Brownfon behalf of C1ary'Development:- The Planning Commission voted 6-0-0 to recommend the vacation. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time.- Odom, seconded by}Daniel, made a motion to suspend the rules -and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion 33 February 15, 1994 passed by a vote of 8 to 0, and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. Miller, 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. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the third time. Alett Little stated this was basically a clean-up item. There were no utilities in the easement and none were planned. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed by a vote of 8 to 0. ORDINANCE 3761 APPEARS ON PAGE /30 OF ORDINANCE BOOK XX V// ANNEXATION AND REZONE R94-2 Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of ordinances annexing 101.65 acres and rezoning 77.2 acres located south of Mission and west of Fox Hunter Road from A-1, Agricultural, to R-1, Low Density Residential, as requested by Mel Milholland on behalf of Ben Caston Construction Company. The Planning Commission voted 5-1-0 to recommend the annexation and the rezoning. City Attorney Rose read the annexation 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. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the third time. Fran Alexander, a resident on Fox Hunter Road, addressed the Council in opposition to the annexation and rezoning. She stated she and her neighbors were being affected by this annexation, and by being a county resident, they have no representation on this City Council to protect their interests. She stated if this property is annexed, the City needs to work with the county on the improvements to Fox Hunter Road. The sewage treatment plant trucks go up and down this road, and mixing them with a lot of local traffic will have disastrous effects. She stated there are now beautiful trees that line both sides of Fox Hunter Road. If the City annexes this property, all of the trees on the City side will be removed to widen the road. Alexander stated there is only one lot in the subdivision that is proposed for greenspace instead of the 3.5 acres that was recommended by the Parks Board. Mayor Hanna stated Alexander did have a voice because she was able to come and speak before this Council. However, he stated he has had several calls from people in the growth areas wanting to be allowed to serve on the various City committees that affect them. 34 February 15, 1994 .Alexander•!stated:for-two.years she has beem trying to telltpeople' 1 about the trucks on this -road: There will •be.accidents-if:they. open this road up to be traveled by many cars with these trucks-. Alderman Williams asked if_the -City -would be cutting down:the trees. Little stated if Fox Hunter Road is widened and .brought to the standards, the trees will have to be cut.. • Alderman Williams asked who owns the other side of the road: •- Little.stated the 6 to.l0 individuals residing in the county.: She stated the road was narrow and could only be widened on the side the City owns. -•.Alderman Bassett stated he too has had a.number of people living in 'the growth areas call about being. able to.,serve•on city committees and being represented. He would -like to see the City Council give this"•some thought.. He asked what the Planning Commission had:asked :.the developer to -do -in order to. get his subdivision approved. ... Little stated there were several things they asked him to do: 1 To:build the entrance off Highway 45 at a 90 degree.angle'i- 2. . To bring Fox Hunter Road to the north up to City standards. 3. Move the entrance of Hennessey Lane two lots to the west.. -.4. .Improve fox Hunter Road to -the east.. - Provide access to the property to -the .south . to a 100 acre tract owned by Sid Johnson and to a 10 acre:tract•owned by David Wilson. ly ;Provide additional access to the west toCityowned property. - . ... 7. Build sidewalks on the front and/or outside of the lots rather Tthan at the back of the lots as the developer had proposed. Alderman Williams stated he felt this.development was contrary::to the village concept that•.was included in the 2010 Master Plan,- and the development was more of a."sprawling" development that the City -was 'trying to:discourage.. In. addition, he.ifeels the ,'2/3�acre dedicated for greenspace is -not enough. He would be in=favor..of, smaller lots and more greenspace. • Mayor Hanna stated:there are.twot4ifferent things being discussed here.. The subdivision .plat went before the Planning Commission at their February 14 meeting. The -issue -before the Council at this time is the annexation and then the rezoning of this property. 35 February 15, 1994 Alderman Williams asked if there was a way to get the subdivision plat before the Council. Mayor Hanna stated there is an ordinance that states a member of the City Council can request a subdivision plat be brought before the Council for consideration. In essence, the Council would be re -doing the Planning Commission's job. Alderman Williams asked if the Council could require the developer to comply with the master plan. Mayor Hanna stated the laws of supply and demand will set the type of standards the developers need to comply with. Alderman Williams asked what powers the Council would have. Rose stated the Council could accept the Planning Commission's decision, reject it, or put themselves in the place of the Planning Commission and work with the developer to get an acceptable plat. He stated a notice of appeal of the Planning Commission's decision must be filed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 days of the date of the decision. Alderman Daniel asked when the City was going to start putting into place the concepts from the Vision Plan. She stated the City is already 5 years late in getting this started. She also expressed concern about the lack of representation for people in the growth areas. Alderman Miller stated he does not like piecemeal annexation. People in the growth area that want to be annexed can call for an election. He would rather see the City annex large chunks of land. He asked why the developer was being asked to put in sidewalks when the City would have to give up the long line of trees. Little stated the Planning Commission made the decision about requiring a sidewalk because of the proposed school to be located across from this area. Little stated the people in the growth areas do have representation. They are members of Washington County. This annexation request first came before the County and was approved by them before it was presented to the City. Alderman Edens asked if this development could be put in as planned in the county without being annexed into the City. Little stated it could, and there would be less restrictions. They already have permission to connect onto the City's water and sewer system. 36 Alderman -Edens has planned in is placing on annexed, the development up February :15, 11994 • -stated-Mr. Milholland coulth do the same' buildingAhe the county without all of the restrictionscthe-City, his development. By requesting this property be'-. developer will then have to bring all of his to City -codes and standards. Alderman Box stated he agrees with the point Alderman Edens just, brought up. He stated this land could be annexed at this time, buts the Council could wait -on the rezoning issue. Mayor Hanna stated the Village Concept called for the City to annex'i more land. • Alderman Williams asked who gave the developer permission •to connect.onto.the City's water and sewer system.... .. -Mayor- Hanna stated the Council .did. several months ago. ?:decision was.:made because it was felt it would be much better this development to be on thesewer system rather than to have ,:of those -septic: -tanks adjoining City -property.,r:He stated Council needs to move ahead: with the annexation and rezoning; . if there is a problem with the subdivision plat, then one of aldermen can appeal:it to the City Council. Alderman�Odom asked what the Council was..supposed.to look at when ,..considering..an..annexation. • Rose stated the Council is basically being asked to affirm the .court order issued by the County Judge granting the'right for this , ;property -:to .be annexed. The :Council should. be deciding- if4-they „-want the .City to. be responsiblefor this land. •When considering rezoning,. the Council., should consider 'if. the. -.rezoning'= -is appropriate and compatible with the surrounding land. .The Council IS not .supposed to look at specific :uses of'the property, rather they are only supposed to look at the various uses allowable under a specific, zoning classification.. This' -for all the .'and'., the Alderman Vorsanger Ardemagni who is Vorsanger.-asked if ` roads in that area. about the.water_and stated he has received- a letter. fromA Mr.. concerned about this annexation. Alderman the City was planning to do anything with'tthe He stated Mr. Ardemagni also expressed concern sewer services. A4 w . . Little stated with this development, the developer -is beingasked to develop and improve roadsthat will..be.taken-into the CityJ% • • Kevin.;crosson stated this is not -a unique situation in town. He ;.stated. theCity, works with the county all of the'time on these , jointly owned. roads. Little stated there are two water lines'in have been tied to the new 36" water line. the area, both of which In addition, there is a 37 e February 15, 1994 40 foot sewer easement and service that goes treatment plant. There have been no problems service since the new plant was put in service in to the sewage with the sewer 1989. Mel Milholland stated the petitioner wants both the annexation and the rezoning, not one without the other. He stated this planned subdivision is a very nice one with large lots. They have submitted the plans to the Planning Commission and complied with all of the ordinances of this City and done all of the things the City has requested. The subdivision was approved by the Planning Commission after all of the requests they made were agreed upon by the developer. This includes extensive shrubs and landscaping and a lot more money spent on the park than was required. In addition, the park will be maintained by the property owners' association, and there will be no costs to the City for this upkeep. Once Fox Hunter Road is widened, it will be safe. He is getting frustrated because the developers have agreed to do everything the Planning Commission requested, and now they keep running into obstacles. Alderman Williams stated the large lots tend to make the development more of a sprawl situation, even if there are nice homes and lots. He feels Mr. Milholland has been a conscientious developer in the other subdivisions he has been associated with. He is concerned about the only park being just 2/3 of an acre. He is in favor of reducing the lot size and adding more to the greenspace, such as the 3 to 3.5 acres as recommended by the Parks Board. Milholland stated they feel they have complied with the greenspace requirements because they are providing a park area as well as paying greenspace fees. He stated there is a 20 acre City park less than 1/2 mile from this subdivision. Alderman Williams stated he would like for the subdivision to have trails to the City park. Milholland stated there are trails already included in the plat that go to the City park. He stated he understood the 2010 Plan was only a concept and not an ordinance that had to be complied with. Alderman Edens stated it is an option and not a mandatory plan. Alderman Bassett stated the City is working on ordinances that will make it advantageous to follow the plan. Little stated people who purchase the lots will be the influencers of the development. The development will have trails, there will be no visible garages from the front, they will either be to the side or rear of each lot. This is part of the Village Concept. February 15., 1994 Alderman Edens stated he felt -the Council was, getting away out- .of line and considering. things they should not in deciding. -Jen annexation and a rezoning. Milholland.stated the Council was only to consider the highest and best use of the land. This:subdivision.will add $23 million in new homes to the City. The lots will cost about $175,000 each. Fran Alexander stated she was not an adjacent property owner, but one of her neighbors who is an adjoining property owner stated she did not receive any notification regarding. the annexation: Alexander asked how a county landowner has representation on this City Council to.appeal this -annexation decision. Rose stated the county held a public hearing. There. was30•days notice given in advance of the hearing, and they.have-notifications on file. Alexander stated the Washington. County Planning Commission approved this development, but when it was presented to them, therewas,on_ly 58_lots, now.there are 134. She stated she would like for.:them to seek -:.an -entrance to Highway 45 and to; save- as .-ivany trees as possible. She stated the:county....told.her the City will do whatever it wants to do no matter what the county does. - . : Harley Brigham, 1801 Fox Hunter Road, addressed the Council and asked where the access would be on the Johnson and Wilson property. Little stated Mr. Wilson attended the Planning Commission meeting, and the proposed location is between lots 21 and 22. Brigham stated he is in favor of -the annexation and-of'thepproposed improvements to Fox Hunter Road. He stated he wants to be a citizen of Fayetteville • and to -be able to•save money.on his fire insurance rates, have police protection, and for the police department to start giving tickets to speeders on Fox Hunter Road. He also wantsdthe..benefits of having' fireworks_prohibited,»»the protectionrof the zoning laws, and the grading -and tree ordinances.. Upon roil vote of 5 ORDINANCE call, the ordinance to annex .the property passed.by.=a to 3,. with Daniel, Miller,. and Williams voting no. 3762 APPEARS ON PAGE /3a OF ORDINANCE BOOK XX v,'/ City Attorney Rose read the rezoning ordinance far-the•first.time. Odom, seconded by Edens, 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 Daniel,-: 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 39 February 15, 1994 vote of 8 to 0. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the third time. Upon roll call, the ordinance to rezone the property passed by a vote of 5 to 3, with Daniel, Miller, and Box voting no. ORDINANCE 3763 APPEARS ON PAGE /35/ OF ORDINANCE BOOR XX Vii OTHER BUSINESS PAY PLAN Don Bailey, Personnel Director, stated the City adopted the Hay Pay Plan in 1989. The pay plan calls for routinely reviewing the salary scale to keep compensation competitive and equitable. The salary range was adjusted in 1992. With the recent salary survey, there have been significant changes in the uniformed police and fire categories. The recommended increase for firefighters is 12%, for fire captains is 9%, and for battalion chiefs is 9%. The recommended increase for police officers is 10%, for sergeants is 8%, and for lieutenants is 10%. There is money budgeted in the 1994 budget for this increase. The salary and hourly pay ranges are recommended to be increased only about 3%. Alderman Vorsanger asked when the proposed increase is to become effective. Bailey stated the proposed effective date is with payroll 6 beginning February 28, 1994. Alderman Miller stated he has received some feedback from several firefighters and a few policemen about making the increase retroactive to January 1, 1994. They stated raises have always been retroactive when done after the first of the year. Bailey stated this is correct since the adopting of the Hay Pay Plan, but there is nothing in the plan that says the increases have to be retroactive. He stated the increase in the police and fire categories is much larger than anticipated. Therefore, there is insufficient funds budgeted to pay for a retroactive increase. Alderman Odom stated it would be a huge financial burden to the City to go back to January 1. Mayor Hanna stated if the raises had been in the normal range, there would have been enough money to go back to January 1. The City is going to have to come up with about $100,000 more than expected to fund the recommended raises with the effective date of February 28, 1994. 40 rot February 15, 1994 Alderman Williams stated the more money firefighters and police officers make, the more difficult it will be to increase the size of the departments. He stated the salary survey shows Fayetteville closer i•n'line with the salaries of surrounding Arkansas;, cities and farther out of line with out of state departments.. He stated he understood there were about 100 applicants for the last openings -,:on the police,department. Mayor Hanna stated there were about 25 qualified applicants for the last 3 openings. Alderman Williams- stated he feels the City pays very well. as compared to other area police and fire departments. . He hopes constituents will let the City Council know how they -feel, about this increase between now and the next meeting,. as well as how,they feel about the other employees only -getting 3%. - Alderman Daniel asked if the cost of living. in FayetteVille,.was lower than some of the places that pay higher wages. Bailey :stated that was hard to determine.. Alderman Miller stated•this would be a major catch up.raise,forthe police and firedepartments._:He asked if the cost of the increase could be presented both ways at the agenda session, effective either February 28 or January .l...0 ,,, Mayor Hanna stated staff will also be making a proposal for elected officials compensation for 1995 to be.discussed at this same. time; WARD 4 MEETING Alderman Daniel stated Ward 4 would have a meeting at 5:00 -p.m. on February 23 in the Asbell,Schooi Cafeteria. - . ,., WARD 1 MEETING Alderman Miller stated Ward 1 would have a meeting at 6:30•p.m-. on February 22 in Room 111 of•City Hall. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS MEETING Alderman Miller stated the Environmental Concerns Committee would meet at 5:30 p.m: ,on February 28 in Room 326 of City Hall. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m..