Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-12-02 MinutesA MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY COUNCIL A meeting of the Fayetteville December 2, 1997, at 6:30 p.m. Administration Building, 113 W. City Council was held on Tuesday, in the Council Room of the City Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Aldermen Trent Trumbo, Donna Pettus, Kit Williams, Heather Daniel, Cyrus Young, and Randy Zurcher; City Attorney Jerry Rose; City Clerk/Treasurer Traci Paul; staff; press; and audience. ABSENT: Mayor Hanna, Aldermen Stephen Miller and Len Schaper Alderman Williams, acting as assistant Mayor, called the meeting to order with six aldermen present. CONSENT AGENDA Alderman Williams 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 November 18 regular City Council meeting; B. A resolution approving an executive lease agreement with Wings Avionics, Inc., and approving a budget adjustment; RESOLUTION 112-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. Alderman Daniel asked for a representative from the airport to make a statement regarding the executive lease agreement. Rudy Furr, Airport Marketing & Development Coordinator, explained that the lease agreement consists of a six-year term in one-year increments. It is for $3,000 a month. There is an adjustment to that; the lessee is making an investment not to exceed $50,000 and a $1,200 a month credit will be given until the $50,000 or less figure is achieved. All the improvements will revert back to the City immediately at the end of the lease or at any time the lease is not adhered to during its term. At the end of six years, the lease will be renegotiated. Until that time, the lease calls for the rent to be frozen at $3,000. Alderman Daniel moved the consent agenda. Alderman Pettus seconded. Upon roll call, the motion carried on a vote of 6 to 0. There was no old business. OLD BUSINESS 1 389 • December 2, 19.97 NEW BUSINESS ADMINISTRATIVE REOUEST AD97-18- Alderman Williams introduced consideration of a request for less than standard right-of-way dedication for a collector street as submitted by Richard Alexander on behalf of Wayne Keller for property located at Three iMorth Duncan Avenue. The Planning Commission -voted 4-3-0 to recommend approval. • Richard Alexander, representing Mr. Keller,stated they are requesting that the City waive the right-of-way requirement on this lot split. This is an as -built project. The right-of-way is supposed to be 35'. The unit built on the second parcel was built within the City setbacks at the time and otherwise conforms to all City requirements. If this right-of-way were required, it would make this a non -conforming property with the result that if these buildings were destroyed by fire, the applicant couldn't build'them again:_ Also, if the City widens that street, it would take the parking and otherwise takethis property without any compensation. He.is not requesting to build this project; it is already built. City codes address this situation in 159.46(C)'. He stated he understands that the planning administrator does not have the authority to waive this without going to the Planning Commission and the City has to approve any waiver of right-of-way. He read from 159.46(C) of the Code of Fayetteville, ". .. . the Planning Commission may approve a lesser dedication in the event of.undue hardship or practical difficulties. Such lesser dedication shall be subject to the approval by the City Council." Mr. Alexander stated Mr. Keller is asking to be allowed to have his lot split without the additional right-of-way on the basis that it is already built and otherwise conforms to City Code. Alderman Pettus asked how this request is different from what the Planning Commission approved. Mr. Alexander replied they are asking for no additional right-of- way. The Planning Commission basically took the 35' and only went around one portion of the house: If you do that, it puts.the setback lines in the middle of the houses. If the houses were destroyed, you could not rebuild them. If the City widens the street, it could then take all of the property with no compensation to the owner, taking all of the parking which would make the `property useless. He stated he understood Mr. Keller could 'get a lot split if` `he was i willing to give 'the right-of-way; but if he gives it, he'makes that propertyuseless. • • 391 December 2, 1997 Mr. Alexander stated the density is lower than the surrounding properties. It is an R-3 zone. It is surrounded by apartment complexes. Mr. Keller is willing to guarantee that he will not increase the density of his property. He gave 10' easements around both parcels to the utilities. Alderman Pettus asked what would prevent Mr. Keller from rebuilding if the property was destroyed. Mr. Alexander explained that if you gave the 35' right-of-way, then the 25' setback lines would start there, so the setback lines would be in the middle of the property and render it unbuildable. Getting a waiver for the setbacks would be another process with no guarantee on the front-end. The main thing is the City could take any part of the additional right-of-way with no compensation. He stated he checked this with the City Attorney. Alderman Pettus asked if there are plans to widen that street any time in the near future. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, replied there are not. Tim Conklin, City Planner, stated that at the Planning Commission staff recommended 35' of right-of-way dedicated from the center of Center Street. The Planning Commission did discuss whether or not the right-of-way should be required as a condition of the lot split approval. Mr. Alexander requested that the Planning Commission waive the entire right-of-way. The Planning Commission approved the lot split subject to the 35', except for where the house encroaches into the right-of-way. In order to grant a lesser dedication, it was brought to the Council to either affirm the Planning Commission's recommendation for the lesser dedication of right-of-way or to make a different decision. Mr. Alexander stated Mr. Keller wants the ability to separate those properties and sell, mortgage, or live in them separately. He suggested that the City gains nothing by not waiving the right-of- way. This is an as -built thing that will be there tomorrow whether the City grants the lot split or not. Conklin called the Council's attention to the site plan provided in the agenda. Mr. Alexander stated there are adequate sidewalks and it meets all requirements for parking and set backs for the second parcel that will be created by this split. That meets all current setbacks. All the utility easements were added by the petitioner to comply with City request. 392' December 2., 1997 City Attorney Rose stated the code section quoted by Mr. Alexander is applicable to this situation. He stated he has talked to Alett Little, City Planning Director, who agrees the Council may do this if.it wishes. Conklin confirmed this. Alderman Pettus proposed thattthe Council accept Mr. Alexander's request and waive the 35' setback requirement. She asked Rose what should be put in its place. Rose stated Mr. Alexander -is requesting that the City waive any additional right-of-way requirements. Conklin confirmed it is, other than what is already, there. Currently there is a 40'. right-of-way on Center Street at that location. Alderman Pettus stated that is what she would move. Alderman Trumbo seconded. There were no comments from the audience. Alderman Williams asked_ if the staff's original recommendation to deriy this request due to the nonconformity created is still its recommendation. Conklin stated the staff did recommend'denial of the lot split. The Planning Commission voted to approve it. Alderman Williams asked Mr. Alexander if his client iswilling to specifically make the density guarantee that there would not be a change in density. y ,. .'Alexanderzanswered.yes. Alderman Young stated there are_,two or three things going on here. The' firstquestion,-is,why1 do`'we need to split .the lot. If we didn't =split the lot, this `.question would not be before the - Council. The Planning Commission approved it without the full Xwaiver_ of "the right -of -xray. ",A .waiver could be obtained for the setback. Alderman Pettus stated the house has been there forever. The Master Street Plan caused it to le non -conforming. - Alderman Williams stated the Council needs to be- careful in preserving rights-of-way.. "However, it shouldn't make•roadblocks and financial burden forpeopletrying to fix up their property. Upon roll call, the motion carried on a vote of 6 to 0. 333 December 2, 1997 NEW PAY RANGES AND STEP RATES Alderman Williams introduced a.resolution adopting new step rates for civil service fire and police and adopting revised pay ranges for hourly, salaried, and executive employees as recommended by staff and Hay Management Consultants effective with 1998 payroll No. 2 beginning December 29, 1997. Don Bailey, Personnel Director, gave a history of the process. In 1990, the City and the Hay Management Group developed our pay plan. It was determined at that time that one of the problems was maintaining competitiveness with the external labor market. It is important for the City to attract and retain the better quality employees. One way is to be competitive with pay. Part of the process was to set standards of job grades, the manner in which we evaluate performance in internal, structure. The other dimension was developing a methodology to maintain the equitable external pay component. We determined in 1990 that we should run a survey every two years. We have done that up to this point. We determined that each pay line would be based on a specific segment of the market. We identified communities similar in size and scope to the City of Fayetteville for each pay line. We actually do a survey to support what is requested in terms of pay. The suggested new pay ranges are presented in the agenda cover letter. Alderman Daniel stated this is a thorough and fair approach. Alderman Young agreed and stated he has talked to employees who also agree. In the past, some mentioned the fairly high increase of police and fire relative to them, but this time they are not quite as high as the others. Bailey pointed out that since 1990, on a compound basis, we have raised the mid -point of the firefighters' range 34.6% and the police officers' range 29.6%. Alderman Williams stated you get what you pay for and we are in a very tight labor market here. Alderman Trumbo stated good pay is effective in keeping employees. It builds stability and saves money in retraining. Mark Stephens, President of the Fayetteville Firefighters Association, handed out fire step rate charts for 1990, 1994, and 1996. He stated he was present to discuss the process in which the salary ranges are figured. In 1996, the fire survey used Step G. For the 1992 and 1996 pay matrix, battalion chief and captain rank and firefighters were determined by Step G and Step H. For the new study, they used the 20 year longevity top out, which was a deviation from the prior practice. December 2, 1997 Stephens stated the firefighters are concerned about this deviation because it threw off the overall total on the current pay study from the Hay Group. It wouldhave made a difference of 7% for firefighters,. 51 for captains, and 6%.for battalion chiefs. Bailey explained that the complexity of the survey. was beyond comprehension when they tried to structure it as Stephens was talking about. The survey simply asked for the top dollar and low dollar paid. This includes everything; We tried to filter out longevity pay, but the various departments have such complex structures that it became impossible to do that. We have 36 departments here. Large numbers will take care of a lot .of the anomalies that come up. Stephens•stated their concern is_that there are two or three people on the fire department that have attained the 20 year longevity. If a person on Step G promotes before, he gets to the ten year point, he has to wait 20 years in that grade to get the longevity, so he would put in a.28 to 30 year career before getting a 20 year longevity step. There was;a difference of $1,500.a year for total maximum in the Hay Group.study and they feel if that was taken away from their maximum listing, that is where the difference would come up. The firefighter would come up with 7%, the captain 5%, and the battalion chief 6%,if we went with Step G and Step H as a top and as has been done in the past. - Alderman Pettus asked how they want, it rectified. Stephens replied they want the.Codncil to consider what has been done in the past and what has happened on this one. He stated they are happy with the plan. There is no problem with the starting.pay or the mid-range; it is strictty.using the longevity pay to base'a maximum on, as the longevity rate is so'hard -.to.attain. If it is determined that using the lower.figures is not the best -route for the City, they will go with the recommendation of the Hay Plan as is: There is just a concern that a standard had been set in the past that is different from this. - Bailey stated that on a step rate system, every firefighter will get anincrease, irrespective of where they are at the time the rate increase is approved. They_ are not'waiting ten -years. At. ylea'st'every other,year,there wi11%be a nominal increase based"on thewpaystudy• He stated to do what Stephens is suggesting would throw the entire study off. He`would have to peel longevity out and it.,would,take.a long time to do it. He stated longevity has been•built into the.study. .?k,e.1 Bailey stated various ways _There are -all it as broad a the reason for changing this is the complexity of the fire -,departments compute: salaries and incentives. kihdsof incentiveshe left in the base rate.to make study as possible, because we do some of those things 6 395 December 2, 1997 here. The 10 -year, 15 -year, and 20 -year is sort of longevity built in at the front end because we realized that in the civil service system a fireman cannot changejobs with the same ease as another employee can. There has to be recognition for time and grade. Bailey stated the City has raised the firefighters' pay over 30%. It is 20% greater than the increase given general employees. Alderman Williams stated that even though the new methodology may not be quite as favorable, it is fair if you look at the percentage increases for the firefighters. It is 5%, except for the captain, which is not a bad increase. Alderman Daniel did not see much increase from ten to twenty years. She suggested considering this at the next evaluation. Alderman Trumbo stated those increments are in effect if you are not promoted. Alderman Young asked what step would be used next time. He asked if this all would be separated out. Bailey replied it makes for an extremely involved and complex task. It is probably just as equitable to do it one way as another. The top will be somewhat less if separated. He stated the current way is much more efficient and quick. Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, explained the difficulty in surveying other cities' pay rates for firefighters. Alderman Young stated the problem is the change. Two years ago we were able to do it differently. He asked if this will be the standard two years from now. Bailey stated he thinks this will work in all situations. Pay is transitory and evolutionary and the systems are, too. You have to take a middle of the road approach to include every city in the survey. Mayes reiterated that Bailey is trying to get the different systems as comparable as possible. Alderman Pettus asked if Stephens was saying Fayetteville is not competitive. Stephens responded that most of the members of the fire department won't ever get into the 20 -year or maybe the 15 -year bracket in their fob classification, especially if they promote to captain or battalion chief. It depends on how long it takes them to get to that rank and how much time they have left in their career. They consider longevity as a bonus for the years of service to the City, 396 Mi December 2, 1997. not part of regular base pay. Alderman Williams pointed out. pure longevity doesn'tmake much difference; beingpromoted makes a much. more significant difference. It is better for employees to have quick raises early on, ratherthanbigger ones at the end that most people would not reach. . Stephens• stated they basically want to know if this is the Council's recommendation or would it be to go back to the way it has been done and adjust it, a 2% increase over what was recommended for the firefighter and captain and 1% for the battalion chief. Alderman Daniel stated she would be in favor of going with the proposed budget but looking at it differently the next time. Alderman Williams pointed out the cost to the citizens for the entire raise for all employees is $350;000 on top of what we are paying now.. He stated it is wisely spent. here for quality employees, but we do need to be careful with the taxpayers' money. He stated he agrees with what has been presented. Alderman Trumbo thanked Stephens of the Council. He appreciated Bailey, but would like to look steps from 10, 15, to 20. recommended. for bringing this to the attention the fob done -by the Hay Group and at increasing the amounts on the He favored going with what is Alderman Zurcher favored going with the G stip, though it is a lot more work.:„ There were no further comments from the audience. Alderman Trumbo encouraged ;uniformity and consistency -going forward. ... m ,.. +:Alderman Trumbo` moved 'to pass)the resolution. Alderman Daniel !'seconded.- upon'r'oli:call,athe&resolution failed on a vote of.4.to 2, with Aldermen Pettus and Zurcher voting no. Alderman Pettus asked that.this be brought back with something .different. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, asked if the Council would be interested in staff bringing back a proposal to have longevity pay included for all employees. Alderman Pettus stated she'would. 397 December 2, 1997 Mayes noted there are a lot more non -civil service employees capped out than are civil service employees. He stated this would be looked at and either a recommendation made for more intermediate steps or a different way of calculating the maximum. 1998 BUDGET Alderman Williams introduced a resolution adopting the 1998 City of Fayetteville Annual Budget and Work Program. Staff presented the budget at the November 25 agenda session. Alderman Williams noted that it had been anticipated by staff that the pay increase, which was not passed, would be part of this budget. Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, stated there have been a couple of hearings. A presentation was made to Council a week ago. He stated the funds are balanced. He pointed out that portions of this budget have been before the respective committees and boards that oversee those portions. Mayes stated there has been one recommendation for an amendment. It was in the general fund area to increase the transfer to the library by $50,000. The Library Board has agreed to this. Mayes stated inspections enforcement has been discussed. We are now stepping up enforcement and refocusing, at the direction of the Council. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, reminded the Council of staff's recommendation that with the excess in the general fund that $50,000 of that be dedicated to the Fayetteville Public Library. Alderman Trumbo moved to do this. Alderman Williams stated that as agreed to have extended hours if funds for more employees. Alderman Daniel seconded. a part of this, the library has we are able to supplement their There were no comments from the audience regarding the amendment. Upon roll call, the motion carried on a vote of 6 to 0. Alderman Trumbo asked for an explanation regarding the need for 30 new employees. Mayes referred to pages 102 and 103 of the budget, where this was summarized. He informed the public where copies of the budget are available for review. 398 December 2, 1997 Alderman Trumbo called attention t� another $400,000 for further progression on the odor abatement program... Alderman Williams stated this includes the capital improvement projects approved earlier by the Council as well as ongoing City work. Mayes stated the biggest increase is in the capital area. The biggest capital item is the town center. There is an additional $2 million in the water and sewer area, basically related to engineering contracts for the -.sewer collection - system and wastewater treatment plant issue. It is up about.$13 million over the prior year, and $9.5 million of it is in the capital. The total'budget is $84.7 million. Alderman Williams asked for public questions or comments. Rob Dzur, 822 Trust Street,. stated he'd watched the budget presentation on T.V. .and was unable to clearly read the charts presented. He stated he was pleased to see $250,000 for sidewalks. He asked if the increase on his utility bill went into the water and sewer fund or is that fund different. - Mayes replied it goes into the water -and sewer fund. Heexplained that part of the City sales taxis dedicated to capital improvements and approximately a third of that goes to construct water and sewer infrastructure. Peggy Smith, representative of the Juvenile Concerns Committee, had provided the Council with a - memo regarding funding. She stated they are asking. for $5,000, which they've received from the .Mayor in the past, to assist with activities for teens, particularly a .venue for teens at First Night Fayetteville. They are .also requesting $10,000 start out for a teen center fund. Alderman Williams stated this had been addressed at the budget Imeeting'.held.immediately before the Council meeting. The consensus ,was..that the best ,place,to begin this is the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board. Mayes' explained4that.in thepast'the Mayor has funded two outings for.'the•Juvenile Concerns'Committee out of his budget. He stated „he thoughtthere,is enough to do that again. 4 through the Parks. & Recreation Board for r-•,. 4`Crossom -supportedgoing funding. Mayes stated there is sufficient funds to do this meeting with the Parks & Recreation Board and proposal to the. Council. 10 •'He recommended making a joint December 2, 1997 Ian Beard, member of the Juvenile Concerns Committee and teen center subcommittee, pitched the teen center. He asked for initial funding from the City. He stated offerings are minimal for 13 to 18 year olds and are exclusive to athletics. A teen center would be a place to hang out and have good clean fun. He stated investing in a teen center would save money in renting facilities for events. A teen center would allow more opportunity for events at which attendance would not have to planned for far in advance. There were no further comments from the audience. Alderman Williams recommended postponing action on the budget due to the uncertainty of the pay increase. Alderman Williams stated he would entertain a motion to table the budget until the next meeting. Alderman Daniel so moved. Alderman Zurcher seconded. Upon roll call, the motion carried on a vote of 6 to 0. STARR DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS Alderman Williams introduced a resolution approving a construction contract with Tomlinson Asphalt Co., Inc., in the amount of $45,827.05 plus a 15% project contingency of $6,800 for the Starr Drive Street Improvements Project and approving a budget adjustment. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, stated this was discussed'at agenda session. It is a project that started out as an in-house project. This is considered mainly an intersection improvement. We are not able to do this as an in-house project. It is not part of the CIP, but there is a budget adjustment attached. Alderman Pettus asked if the money is going to be taken out of the money set aside for Highway 265 right-of-way. 399 Crosson replied it is. There were no questions or comments from the audience. Alderman Young moved to approve the construction contract and budget adjustment. Alderman Daniel seconded. Upon roll call, the resolution passed on a vote of 6 to 0. RESOLUTION 113-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. 11 ,. 400 December 2, 1997 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD Alderman Williams introduced a resolution approving a group medical contract with Blue Cross Blue Shield for th'e policy year of January 1, 1998, through December 31, 1998, with four consecutive one-year options for renewal and approving the additional premium cost to be paid by the City. Ben Mayes, Blue Cross rebid this Shield. Administrative Service's Director, stated we have used for the last five years. Our contract was up and was year. We had`One bidder, which was Blue Cross Blue Don Bailey, Personnel Director, explained there is no. change in the terms of the coverage for the employee. The.annualized .cost increase 'is $173,120. The total cost of the programis split between employer and. employee. In terms of premium, the employee pays 15% and the employer pays 85%. With family, the employee pays 35% and the employer pays approximately. 63%.. There is a small escrow from retro -premium returns which will play out in the next 12 months. Bailey stated one reason for the increase is loss ratios, which have been bad in the last three years. They are getting better. Projections are for an increase in medical costs over the next two years. This is basically the reason for the premium increase. Mayes stated that.. since ,there was only one bidder, the City.had 'Sed'gewick James bf Arkansas, Inc..., analyze the plan. Alderman Daniel stated the coverage provisions of the endorsed' dental ;also remain ,the same`, and".there is no change in the current employee`;premium`of',$14.26. The employee pays 1000 of thepremium cost. She asked if it'we're possible for the City to pick up the tslack.. ' - Bailey stated the employe& pays'1i00%of the premium cost. There has been a real good-loss,ratio on that. If it keeps the same, we'll go for some time without any increase. • Alderman Williams stated the City will spend over $1,160,000 for medical insurance. He felt it is fair for the dental program to be paid for by the employees. ; Bailey agreed the total cost for the City is $1.16 million and the employees pay around $400,000. Mayes stated this is included in the proposed budget. Bailey pointed out the policy lapses at the end of December and no arrangements have been made for any extensions. 12 401 December 2, 1997 Mayes stated there is no problem passing this and not passing the budget on the same night. There might be, if the budget is not passed by the end of the year. There were no comments or questions from the audience. Alderman Zurcher moved to pass it. Alderman Pettus seconded. Upon roll call, the resolution passed on a vote of 6 to 0. RESOLUTION 114-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. MILLAGE ROLLBACK Alderman Williams introduced a resolution concerning a millage rollback. Alderman Williams read a resolution he'd prepared concerning a millage rollback. He stated this had been slightly altered since the agenda session, as we do not have the proper figures to make an informed decision on this. He asked for comments from City Attorney Jerry Rose, who has been in contact with County officials. City Attorney Rose stated he has talked to the County Attorney. Rose stated he was told that the Assessment Coordination Department, by their letter in which they declared there was a county -wide reappraisal, instructed the County to roll back 1997 based on the 1996 figures. The County is challenging the Assessment Coordination Department's directions and whetheror not it was a county -wide reappraisal. Rose stated the County has provided figures that indicate what Fayetteville's percentage increase was from 1996 to 1997. He stated the figure comes out to be zero. Our assessment began in 1995, so there would be no change between 1996 and 1997. We need the 1995 figures to base our estimates on. Rose stated he'd asked Mr. Butler, County Attorney, for those figures and was told the County does not have them because they don't think they are required to have them. Rose stated he then asked if those figures could be provided. The answer was probably but it would take a great deal of work and time. Rose stated the State statute requires the County Collector to provide certain figures, assuming it is a county -wide reappraisal. The City or taxing unit then takes those figures and does its own computation. The statutes lay out specific forms and formulas. Until the City has those figures, we cannot make our computations. It is not known if we are above or below our 10% until we get these figures. We are making every effort to do that. 13 402 December 2, 1997 Rose stated that from thefigures we have, not from the Collector, it appears there is a good probability that we are not above our 10% limit, but it is pure guesswork. Rose explained that when the City was sued last summer, he thought his orders were to allow the courts to decide whether or not we should or should not roll back. We were operating under a do right rule in which we recognized ambiguity in :the law. We could wait for the courts to decide because our stakes are not as high as the other players' stakes. We only have one mil. His strategy has been to ride the coattails of the other parties, not to incur great legal expense or endeavor in pursuing the matter, and to essentially wait for the court. He stated this could be changed by instruction from the Council. Rose stated this resolution simply asks the County to provide the .figures. Rose stated he will ask for them. even if the resolution doesn't pass.. He cannot make the. Countyprovide the figures. Rose explained that the third whereas clause appears to commit the Council to rolling back if the figures provided by the County say a rollback is justified. In other words, the Council does not wish Rose. to pursue as a defense the .County's and school board's defense, which is this is not a county -wide reappraisal. This is the chief reason. There are other defenses, a list of .which he will provide`to the Council at.a'later date. Alderman agreed with Rose's interpretation of the .third whereas ,Williamslause. He pointed out it is too late for the millage - already voted on next year. He asked Rose if he'd spoken to the County about that. && Ro, sereplieds: thihas already been done for 1997 to be collected 'in .1998' and cannot ,be` undone:. ; Zt.=s poesible to .determine what the rollback should be and make refunds.'on that amount, which would.be a rollback, and then correct the ordinance by amendment and go forward.. Alderman Trumbo concurred with letting the courts decide and not rincurring,huge legal expenses.;.r ,_ .> . - € - ,'.. ..- Rose stated that other attorneys who are defendants have emphasized to him that in their minds there is no particular rush...:. Alderman Trumbo asked if the earned. investments over that period of time would also be recouped, or,would they get to keep that -part.. Rose replied he thought the earned investments would be retained. This is one reasonthere is no rush. 14 . 403 December 2, 1997 Rose stated this has not been set for trial. The next activity on it is December 29. It is a hearing on two matters, a hearing on consolidation and a hearing on class certification and definition issues. Trial dates have been running from nine months to over a year. Alderman Williams asked Ben Mayes for the amount the City received for the pension plans in 1995 as opposed to what was received in 1996 after the reappraisal. Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, stated we received $199,000 in 1996. He did not have the figures for 1995 with him. Rose stated new construction is the key to this. Those figures are the ones that need to come from the County. Alderman Pettus stated we should make a good -faith effort to comply with what appears to be the law. This resolution is only asking for information from the County. Rose agreed. He stated paragraph three does state the intent in using this is to make the rollback, but a whereas clause is not part of a resolution. Alderman Daniel suggested eliminating everything except the last paragraph. Alderman Williams felt strongly that when it appears a Constitutional amendment says a governmental entity should rollback the taxes, we should not have to be forced to do so by a court. He prefers the resolution as it is. Alderman Trumbo stated if he were a retired fireman or policeman, he would sue to do the exact opposite. Alderman Williams stated all the amendment does is say you cannot get more than a 10% increase per year plus the cost of new construction. This is not cutting taxes; it lust reduces the rapid rise of taxes. Alderman Williams stated he has no problem with tabling this until the other Council members are present. Alderman Daniel moved to table the resolution. Alderman Zurcher seconded. Upon roll call, the motion carried on a vote of 6 to 0. ADJOURNMENT Alderman Zurcher announced.a teen center subcommittee. Alderman Williams adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. 15