June 6, 2006

 

The Board of Commissioners of the City of Lawrence met in regular session at 5:00 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers in City Hall with Mayor Amyx presiding and members Highberger, Hack, Rundle, and Schauner present.

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

Tom Singleton said that each year, by Kansas Statute as well as by federal law, the City must have a financial audit.  He wanted to emphasize, because of the recent discussions about employing an internal auditor, the financial audit they performed for the City for 2005, was not a performance audit.  The internal auditor, should they choose to hire one, would perform an entirely different type of audit with more detail. 

He wanted to mention what the financial audit was intended to accomplish.  The primary goal of the audit was to audit the financial statements and issue an opinion on those financial statements as to whether the financial statements accurately and fairly represent the financial position and the financial activities of the City.  In the auditor’s report they issued on the basic financial statements, they indicated the City presented the financial position and the activities or operating results of the City for the year 2005.  As auditors, they could issue a number of opinions, but this was the highest opinion that they did issue on financial statements which reflected in a very positive way on the City. 

There were two other aspects on the audit that he wanted to mention briefly.  The first was the City’s Finance Audit Financial statements issue reports on compliance with laws and regulations as they related to the financial statements and internal controls.  There were no findings and no negative items in either one of those categories. 

Secondly, the federal government did require that for the major programs that on a rotating basis would be audited.  They audited the Transit Formula Grant in 2005 as a major program and there were no findings in that area.  He said there were very positive outcomes in those areas as well. 

They did issue a separate management comment letter.  They had a couple of fairly minor comments.  He said he wanted to cover the two major changes that were coming along from the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. 

First, in 2006 there would be a change in the statistical section of Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which would change dramatically.  He wanted to emphasize that it was going to be adding new information regarding operations, specifically it would include information about the number of governmental employees by program, operating indicators to show the level of services such as fire calls, police calls, and so forth, and capital asset information to indicate volume and nature such as lane mile streets or average daily water consumption. 

He said the big news from a financial reporting standpoint was GASB Statement 45.  He said they were one year closer to implementation, which he believed for Lawrence would be in 2008. Right now the city should be gearing up to have the actuarial studies completed, considering some of the options for funding.  GASB Statement 45 would require the City to determine a liability for the other post employment benefits.  Specifically, those would be the benefits related to cost of providing health care to retirees.  The way the standard was written, the City would begin accruing liability, not just for the people who were about to retire, but for the entire employment base who would be participating in these benefits in some future date.  He said for many entities, this liability could be a very large number, so the questions was ask ed how could they go about calculating that liability and whether it would be funded.   

He said as far as emerging issues, one thing that had caught the attention of the public was Sarbanes Oxley.  This law was passed several years ago to address concerns revolving around scandals of WorldCom and Enron.  Sarbanes Oxley did not require their standards be applied to governmental entities or so called non-issuers.  However, some of the recommendations in Sarbanes Oxley were beginning to filter down into the governmental community, specifically adoption of a code of ethics, which Lawrence already had, and secondly the adoption of an audit committee, which Lawrence currently did not have, but he would be more than happy to discuss the specifics with the City Commission at another time. 

He concluded his remarks by saying that he appreciated the opportunity to serve the City of Lawrence and wanted to compliment the fine City staff and assistance they provided during the audit process. 

Commissioner Schauner asked what they should know about 2007 Budget about GASB 45 and its impact on things like the City’s bond rating.

Singleton said one of the major issues with Statement 45 was the question of whether to fund it or not.  One of the things the City needed to find out from the bond underwriters was their sense of what effect it would have on the bond rating in the event the City would chose to fund, not fund, partially fund, however they want to go about that.  He said in the State of Kansas there was currently no statutory vehicle to set up a funding mechanism.  He said they believed there might be some options using the home rule which would allow the City to establish a plan to fund this.  He said that if the City did not fund it, the GASB statement would then basically force the City to leave the liability on the balance sheet, which could possibly have a negative effect on the bond rating.  He said there were many issues and he would be more than happy at a later date to spend a little bit more time with staff and Commission and discuss it in more detail.                           

Corliss said the City continued to look for opportunities to not only improve this document, but to try and improve the translation from this document to a budget document.  He said he discussed that issue with Singleton and Ed Mullins, Finance Director, along with Professor Justin Marlowe, who was in the Public Administration Department at KU and had done a lot of work in this area and indicated that was a challenge that a number of other communities had, but staff wanted to try and make the budget and CAFR document intelligible, not only for staff, but for the City Commission and public as well.                                                        (1)

The City Commission deferred for one week, the Mercado rezonings that were approved at the May 9, 2006 City Commission meeting.  (Z-03-05-06, Z-03-05-06, Z-01-10-05, Z-01-11-05, and Z-01-12-05)

CONSENT AGENDA

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve the City Commission meeting minutes of May 9, 2006, May 16, 2006, and May 23, 2006.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive the Lawrence Memorial Hospital Board meeting minutes of April 19, 2006; the Human Relations Commission meeting minutes of February 15, 2006; the Historic Resources Action Summary of April 20, 2006; the Mental Health Board meeting minutes of April 18, 2006; the Planning Commission meeting for March 13-15, 2006; and the Board of Plumbers and Pipe Fitters Meeting of April 19, 2006. Motion carried unanimously. 

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve claims to 494 vendors in the amount of $2,511,352.30 and payroll from May 14, 2006 to May 27, 2006, in the amount of $1,602,185.13.  Motion carried unanimously.     

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve the Drinking Establishment Licenses for Paisano’s Ristorante, 2112 West 25th Street; Scarlet Orchid Restaurant, 2223 Louisiana Ste: C, the Retail Liquor License for Cork & Barrel Downtown, 901 Mississippi; and World Wine & Beer, 3106 SW Iowa Ste: 202.   Motion carried unanimously.  

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the recommendation of the Mayor and reappoint Travis Atwood, Gary Fish, Theresa Klinkenberg and Stanley Sneegas to the Aviation Advisory Board to terms which will expire May 31, 2009; appoint Brad Finkeldei to the Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Commission, to a term which will expire May 31, 2009.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve the appointment of Lynne Zollner, Historic Resources Administrator, as City representative to the University of Kansas Community Program Advisory Committee for new practice fields and parking lot expansions near Memorial Stadium.  Motion carried unanimously.

The City Commission reviewed the 6 surplus vehicles that have met or exceeded the criteria for replacement.  The vehicles were:

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve the sale of surplus vehicles through Gov Deals.  Motion carried unanimously.                 (2)

The City Commission reviewed the bids for the 2006 Overlay and Curb Repair Program, Phase 3 Street Improvements.  The bids were:

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to award the bid from Kansas Heavy Construction in the amount of $1,127,500.00.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                      (3)

The City Commission reviewed the bids for the purchase of six FC200 Itron handheld computers for reading water meters for the Utility Department.  The bids were:

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to award the bid to Utility Solutions, in the amount of $18,772.00.  Motion carried unanimously.           

                                                                                                                                           (4)

The City Commission reviewed the bids for the Comprehensive Housing Rehabilitation for 1619 East 18^th Street.  The bids were:

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to award the bid to Penny Construction Inc., in the amount of $16,346.00.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                                (5)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 7879, authorizing the codification of the general ordinances of the City.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                          (6)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 8006, rezoning (Z-02-03-06) .26 acres from M-2 (General Industrial District) to C-4 (General Commercial District), located at 827 Garfield Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                        (7)

As part of the consent agenda it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 8007, rezoning (Z-02-04-06) .34 acres from M-2 (General Industrial District) to RS-2 (Single-Family Residence District) located at 824 Garfield Street and property abutting 827 Garfield Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                      (8)

As part of the consent agenda it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 8009, annexing (A-01-02-05) approximately 17.52 acres, located north of Highway 40 and east of K-10 Highway.  Motion carried unanimously.        (9)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to adopt Resolution No. 6653, establishing June 20, 2006 as the public hearing date to consider establishing a special assessment benefit district for the improvement of Stoneridge south of West 6^th Street. Motion carried unanimously.                                                                             (10)

As part of the consent agenda it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to adopt Resolution No. 6654, calling for the establishment of a recreational pathway between Lawrence and Topeka.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                        (11)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to approve the Final Plat (PF-04-09-06) for MP Addition, a replat of Lot 40 less the south 115 feet, Addition No. 11, North Lawrence, a three lot residential subdivision containing approximately .484 acre, located at 200 North 9^th Street; and accept the dedication of easements and rights-of-way subject to the following conditions:

1.                  Provision of the following fees and recording documentation:

a.         A current copy of a paid property tax receipt.

b.      Recording fees made payable to the Douglas County Register of Deeds.

2.                  Agreement Not to Protest the Formation of a Benefit District for street and sidewalk improvements.

3.                  Submittal of public improvements plans for extension of sanitary sewer, prior to the recording of the final plat.

4.                  A signed copy of the Master Street Tree Plan.

 

Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                      (12)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to approve the Final Plat (PF-04-11-06) for Lake View Commons, a replat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 2 of the Lake View Addition No. 2, a three lot planned commercial development containing approximately 4.725 acres, located at the northwest corner of Clinton Parkway and Lake Point Drive; and accept the dedication of easements and rights-of-way subject to the following conditions:

1.       Provision of the following fees and recording documentation:

a.      A current copy of a paid property tax receipt;

b.      Recording fees made payable to the Douglas County Register of Deeds;

c.      Revised Master Street Tree Plan graphic showing trees outside the utility easement along Clinton Parkway.

2.       Provision of the following revisions to the final plat:

a.      Mark and label the portion of Lot 3 along Lake Pointe Drive from Clinton Parkway to the detention basin as ‘no access’.

b.      Remove the easements along the front property line, except those that are required for sanitary sewer.

c.      Show that previously dedicated easements which are no longer needed are vacated.

d.      Pinning of the lots in accordance with Section 21-103 of the Subdivision Regulations

 

Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                      (13)

 

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to adopt the findings of fact and approve the request for rezoning (Z-03-05-06) approximately 45.31 acres from A (Agricultural District) to PCD-2 (Planned Commercial District).  The property is generally described as being located north of Highway 40 and east of K-10 Highway; and, direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                          (14)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to adopt the findings of fact and approve the request for rezoning (Z-03-06-06) approximately 31.12 acres from A (Agricultural District) to RO-1A (Residence-Office District).  The property is generally described as being located north of Highway 40 and east of K-10 Highway; and, direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.                                                                (15)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to adopt the findings of fact and approve the request for rezoning (Z-01-10-05) approximately 25.82 acres from A (Agricultural District) to RS-2 (Single-family Residential District).  The property is generally described as being located north of Highway 40 and east of K-10 Highway; and, direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.                                                                (16)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to adopt the findings of fact and approve the request for rezoning (Z-01-11-05) approximately 7.63 acres from A (Agricultural District) to RM-D (Duplex Residential District).  The property is generally described as being located north of Highway 40 and east of K-10 Highway; and, direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.                                                                (17)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to adopt the findings of fact and approve the request for rezoning (Z-01-12-05) approximately 12.77 acres from A (Agricultural District) to RM-2 (Multiple-Family Residential District).  The property is generally described as being located north of Highway 40 and east of K-10 Highway; and, direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.                                                                (18)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the distribution of Request for Proposals for the development of a Traditional Neighborhood Design Code.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                       (19)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the write-off of certain water, sewer, sanitation and miscellaneous receivables deemed uncollectible by the Finance Department for the period of January 1, 2004 through December 21, 2004.  The total requested write-off is $114,018 for 753 utility billing customers and $16,820.93 for 52 miscellaneous receivable accounts.  Motion carried unanimously.        (20)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the City Manager to amend the current service contract with MV Transportation, Inc., to add an FTE Road Supervisor.  Motion carried unanimously.                                (21)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Adeta Allen, 1345 New Jersey.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                        (22)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Daniel Hellyer, 1535 Rhode Island.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                     (23)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Tammie Hughes, 626 Locust.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                             (24)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for George and Ardith Shove, 1614 East 18^th Terrace (2 mortgages).  Motion carried unanimously.                                                       (25)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Carol Thrasher, 2025 Vermont.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                             (26)

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 

Receive draft Memorandum of Understanding with the International Association of Firefighters Local 1596.

 

David Corliss, Interim City Manager, said he was pleased to present a draft Memorandum of Understanding that staff had prepared for the City Commission’s consideration this afternoon.  He said he was joined by Kathy Elkins, President of the Local International Association of Firefighters.  He said he believed the Commission was familiar with the content of this document.  He said Chief Bradford had provided a memorandum that outlined and highlights the changes.  He said within the memorandum, it indicated staff was going to work this year with changes to Resolution 5063 regarding to timing of the City Commission’s consideration of those Memorandums of Understanding which the needed to focus on during the budget process.  Elkins was joined by Russ Brickell and Ed Noonen, part of her executive board of the International Association of Firefighters.           

Kathy Elkins, President of the Local International Association of Fire Fighters, said Brandon Holloman was also a member of the executive board, but was working and not able to be there.  She said she could not do without her executive board because they did the leg work and helped her understand a lot of the numbers and things and wanted to thank her executive board publicly.  She also thanked Corliss and his staff; it was a good process and a lot of respect was given both ways, which was the only way to do this.  She also thanked Chief Bradford.  Everything worked out well and they appreciated the City Commission’s support.

Corliss said Frank Reeb, Administrative Service Director was a strong participant and also Scott Miller, Staff Attorney, participated as well.

Mayor Amyx said that the City Commission appreciated all of the work Elkins and her executive committee had been able to accomplish along with the City staff in making sure this process was able to work and they were able to get through issues and come out with a positive.  He said it spoke highly of the wonderful job staff did for the City of Lawrence.

Mayor Amyx called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the International Association of Firefighters Local 1596.  Motion carried unanimously.                               (27)

 

Receive draft Memorandum of Understanding with Lawrence Police Officers Association.

 

Debbie Van Saun, Assistant City Manager, presented the staff report.  She said all four LPOA members were detained in other engagements.  She said Chief Olin was present and assisted his staff.  She said Frank Reeb, Administrative Service Director, and Johnathan Douglas, Management Analyst, participated in those discussions. 

Mayor Amyx said he appreciated Van Saun’s work and asked Chief Olin to pass onto all of his officers the good work that had been done. 

Mayor Amyx called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to execute Memorandum of Understanding with the Lawrence Police Officers Association.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                   (28)                   

 

 

Consider the recommendation from the Traffic Safety Commission that protected-permissive phasing be implemented on Iowa Street at 34^th Street on a trial basis.

Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report. He said on March 6^th the City Commission heard a request to implement protected-permissive left-turn phasing for Iowa Street at 34^th Street.  The traffic signal at 34^th Street & Iowa Street was coordinated with the other traffic signals along Iowa Street using a 120-second cycle length; therefore, a vehicle entering the left-turn lane could wait as long as 120 seconds before receiving a left-turn arrow. During high traffic periods a 2 minute wait did not seem that long because some traffic would be moving at all times; however, during low traffic periods, a 2 minute wait seemed much longer if there was little or no traffic. Protected-permitted left-turn phasing would allow left-turning vehicles to turn left during the left-turn arrow phase and during the straight-through green-ball phase after yielding to other traffic.  Protected-permitted left-turn phasing was currently in place at many intersections in Lawrence.  Most of the protected-only intersections were in place due to the number of crashes resulting from drivers miscalculating gaps in the traffic stream and attempting a left-turn when there was not enough time.  Protected-permissive left-turn phasing could be implemented at this intersection on a trial basis; however, it should not be continued if there was a significant increase in left-turn crashes (4 or more left-turn crashes in one year, or 6 or more left-turn crashes in 2 years on one approach; or 6 or more left-turn crashes in one year or 10 or more crashes in 2 years on both approaches).  The Traffic Safety Commission recommended on a 5-1 vote that protected-permissive left-turn phasing be implemented on a trial basis until the intersection meets the established criteria for protected-only phasing.

Commissioner Highberger asked if staff had any accident history on other protected phasing intersections that would indicate that would be a problem.

Soules said if allowing the permissive turn on the green ball became a problem, staff would change the signal to protected phasing, allowing left turns only on the green arrow.  Staff needed to do this at a few intersections, after the number of crashes met the criteria.   

Commissioner Schauner asked if there was any consideration given to the fact that north bound traffic on Iowa would be coming from a significantly higher rate of speed than one expected to see on inner streets.

Soules said that was the initial reason for setting the signal up as a protected left turn only.  However, when people were sitting there waiting for the green arrow and there was not a lot of traffic, those people might get impatient and turn without the arrow. 

Commissioner Schauner said phasing could be done in another way, for example, the way people drove at 6^th and Wakarusa.  He said if there was no oncoming traffic and no left turn arrow; the traffic signal could be intelligent enough to permit a left turn arrow.

Soules said if that idea was implemented, it would take the traffic signal several cycles to pick back up.  He said that idea could technically be done, but he did not think there would be problems.    He said with Wal-Mart at 33^rd Street that street would reduce the traffic.

Mayor Amyx asked what the difference was between what was being recommended at this location and the light at 27^th and Iowa.  He said if he was on 27^th Street trying to make a left turn onto Iowa and there were no cars around, the traffic signal would not change.

Corliss said 27^th and Iowa was completed about four to five years ago.

Soules said at 27^th & Iowa was completed when he first came to Lawrence.  That intersection should be set up with video detection, but he would get back with the Mayor to answer his question. 

Mayor Amyx called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, Commissioner Schauner said his concern was to make sure staff monitored the intersection for increased incident of left turn crashes.  He said that was one of his major concerns since the traffic northbound was coming quickly and a left turn at the wrong time could not just be a fender bender, but something worse than that.

Mayor Amyx said unfortunately, warrants had to be in place to be able to make a change. 

Moved by Hack, seconded by Highberger, to concur with the recommendation from the Traffic Safety Commission that protected permissive phasing be implemented on Iowa Street at 34^th Street on a trail basis.                                                                                     (29)

Receive staff memo regarding overweight vehicles and vehicle safety requirements.

Scott Miller, Staff Attorney, presented the staff report. He said the ordinances were not meant to impose any new or additional burdens on anyone, but meant to procedurally proceed with prosecution in the Municipal Court.  Currently, the traffic unit of the Lawrence Police Department had individuals who were trained to do commercial vehicles inspections and enforcement.  He said in enforcing inspections, those issues proceeded to fruition either administratively or those individuals would need to file charges through district court.  He said from the perspective of enforcement expediency, it would be better for those charges to be filed and processed through Municipal Court; it was easier for the officers to charge and allowed the process to be handled locally. 

The last time these ordinances were before the City Commission was November 29^th, 2005, and at that time the drafts were presented and the City Commission indicated it would be proper to have the meeting with stakeholders that might be interested in those ordinances.  Staff invited fifteen heavy truck operating firms and three firms were present, Penny’s Concrete, LRM Industries, and Capital City Oil.  Those firms concern was the perception that if those ordinances would be adopted based upon pavement management concerns the City was pushing a burden of pavement management on private industry, but exempting itself from any of the requirements of the ordinance and of the State statute.  He said based upon that input, the ordinance was amended to indicate the City would not participate in any exemptions or exceptions to the ordinance’s application that would not also apply to private industry, with a couple of exceptions.  One exception would be for firefighting apparatus, because that was not designed to meet weight requirements when loaded with water.  The other exception would be for emergency situations.  All other situations under this ordinance, in order for the City to have an exception or exemption, a private contractor performing the same service would also have an exception or exemption.  He said other than those situations and other minor changes to address state law, those were the same drafts presented before.

Commissioner Rundle said concerning the ordinances that Miller mentioned from Lenexa, he asked how Lenexa treated those exemptions or exceptions.

Miller said as far as he knew, Lenexa did not exempt themselves. Lenexa adopted state statute.  He said Lawrence would be one of the few, if not the only city, that would write out an exception or exemption that would apply.

David Corliss, Interim City Manager/Legal Services Director, said the current state law provided an exemption for municipal vehicles.

Miller said in some circumstances, but not all municipal vehicles.

Corliss said what staff was proposing was to include more municipal vehicles other than what was required by state law.

Commissioner Schauner asked staff what specific vehicles would be included in that exemption.

Miller said staff would take advantage of exceptions that apply for hauling highway sand, rocks or gravel, fire apparatus and fully loaded garbage trucks.  He checked with Steve Stewart, Central Garage Superintendent, who believed the garbage trucks could comply even when those trucks were fully loaded.

Commissioner Schauner said he wanted to understand how the exemption worked.  He said if someone received a ticket for being overweight, he asked if that person could say the City was doing it, and therefore, would become an affirmative defense for a ticketed operator.

Corliss said staff needed to ensure that City vehicles, such as a fully loaded sanitation truck, would not be violating the weight standards that were set out in the ordinance, whereas under state law, there was already an exemption.   

Miller said in other words, City vehicles would get tickets as well.

Commissioner Highberger asked if the City could prosecute itself.

Corliss said the City would look to see why it was not in compliance with law. 

Mayor Amyx said if a police officer pulled a sanitation truck that was fully loaded over, he asked if the officer would ticket the City’s driver.

Corliss said he would likely find out about that incident and would ask why the Department Director was not in compliance with the law.  He said the City would not give itself a fine, but the City would be in compliance with the state law.  Technically, right now, the City did not need to be in compliance with that particular state law.  

Mayor Amyx said if the City was not going to exempt itself, and the City had an overweight vehicle and would only talk to the department head, he asked if the City would give the private hauler the same consideration.

Corliss said the private hauler would be ticketed.  He said City vehicles would be in compliance with City law.  He said they could get tickets for things like speeding and they could get a ticket for overweight vehicles.   

Commissioner Schauner asked what it would take from an operational standpoint to have equipment in place to make the ordinance enforceable.

Miller said the City would purchase a set of portable scales.

Commissioner Schauner asked if it was the City’s intention to purchase those portable scales.

Miller said yes.

Commissioner Schauner asked what the probable cause was to stop somebody for being overweight.

Miller said that was under circumstance; it was generally administrative inspection.  He said those were closely regulated industries and those vehicles were always subject to being stopped for inspection.  He said there was no necessity for probable cause determination or reasonable suspicion.

Corliss said he wanted to make sure the Commission understood what staff would do with City vehicles.   He said right now for state law purposes, which was the only law that applied, the City had an exemption.  When looking at that exemption, staff found out that the City would be in compliance in all circumstances according to the different departments with the exception of fire apparatus vehicles.  The City would still need that exemption for emergency purposes.  He said staff had the intent of complying with the ordinance.

Mayor Amyx said if the City was just going to talk to a City driver and not ticket that driver, he asked why the City would go after the private hauler when both would have the same effect.

Corliss said that was a good comment and he understood.  He said they would give a ticket to that individual.

Commissioner Schauner said he understood that when a private hauler left the loading site, he assumed there was a procedure in place to weigh that truck to see if that truck was in compliance with the State overweight rules.  He asked if staff had any way to weigh city vehicles. 

Corliss said staff would find a way to be in compliance with law.  He said he had been told by Department Directors that City vehicles would be in compliance.  He said non compliance would not be an issue.

Mayor Amyx called for public comment

Steve Glass, LRM Industries, said he wanted to briefly address the issues he raised in his letter to the Mayor.  First, they were dealing with 2 ordinances, Ordinance No. 7990, dealt with weight issues, and Ordinance No.7991, dealt with safety regulations.  He said it was his understanding and interpretation of the two ordinances that the exclusions for municipal vehicles were different in those two ordinances.  Under the safety regulations, all governmental vehicles blanket any level of government, federal, state, or local, were exempted from the safety regulations.  He said he was not going to speculate how that happened and it was probably like Congress exempting themselves from various regulations, which hardly seemed fair, but it seemed reality in the world. 

Under Ordinance No. 7990, the overweight regulations, certain municipal vehicles were exempted, specifically fire apparatus and sanitation trucks.  He agreed the section was added to Ordinance No. 7990 which stated the City was not going to avail itself with that exemption.  However, within the wording for that section which was Chapter 17-913, it stated: “however, if a private entity was exempted under a particular category, such as sanitation trucks, then the City was still exempted under that exemption.”  He said if he was reading that wrong he would like someone to tell him, but that was the way he read that section.  He said when being told the City would need to legally comply with the overweight regulations for sanitation trucks, he would differ on that under the ordinance as it was currently written.  He argued the City should be covered under that regulation, not for fire trucks because he understood that exemption, but certainly for sanitation trucks.  He thought sanitation trucks were already covered under the state regulations and therefore under this ordinance for dump trucks, etc.  He thought in addition to adopting Chapter 17-913, staff needed to go back to Chapter 17-902(e) where it exempted solid waste trucks and remove that exemption for anyone, which for Lawrence would be the City and the University because the City had a monopoly on hauling trash within the City. 

He said Ordinance No. 7891, which dealt with safety regulations, exempted all federal, state and municipal vehicles.  He said as he read that ordinance, he did not see specifically that the City was waiving that exemption.  He thought the City should set an example to private businesses by complying.  He said it was very difficult, in some cases, to address the issue on how to know when a truck was overloaded, which was the question Commissioner Schauner raised. 

He said when his business was loading asphalt they had scales where they weighed the truck before it left and in the case of concrete, they weighed how much material was added to the drum and those methods could be controlled.  It was the same way if going to a quarry or a sand pit because charge by the ton.  What would become more difficult would be if they were hauling dirt from an excavation for a new building and trucks were loaded on the site hauling the dirt to some other site.  There they would rely on the judgment of the truck driver for amount of load and it would be hard to look at a pile of dirt or rock and get it exactly right.  He said that was something his company dealt with and understood they were at risk everyday when they were loading trucks. 

The City had the same situation with sanitation trucks in that they are at the mercy of the judgment of the drivers and loaders of the sanitation trucks.  He said it was really not a risk that private businesses were not already asked to take and he felt it was one that was reasonable for the City to take.

He thought those corrections needed to be made.  Also, in the letter, he mentioned there was one section in Chapter 17-104(b) in Ordinance 7991, which appeared to contain language from two separate sections of the State statute and as a result, in his opinion, did not make sense.  He thought it was a typographical error, but it needed to be corrected before the ordinances would be approved.

He said in his letter he raised a few more issues.  One of the problems in the ready mix industry was they were dealing with a perishable product.  Particularly, in hot weather, concrete would begin to set, whether in the drum or outside the drum.  He said this issue was something the state association had worked with the State enforcers of the weight ordinances that currently enforced those weight limits through highways that passed through the City of Lawrence.  Those State enforcers realized that a loaded ready mix truck could not be unnecessarily delayed because once the concrete hardened the drum would need to be replaced.  The State enforcers would typically weight the truck quickly and if legal, let the truck go on or if they wanted to conduct a safety inspection, which was more time consuming, they would direct the loader to come back to a certain place at a certain time.  He said they had no problem with that procedure and had invited the highway patrol, on occasion, to come to their plant sites and inspect their trucks right there for their convenience and LRM’s convenience.

He thought it was important that if those ordinances were adopted, the Police Department be made aware of that issue with concrete trucks.  He said with asphalt trucks there were issues in cold weather, but it was not as big an issue as with concrete trucks.  He was not asking for any change to that ordinance, but simply recognition by the people who were enforcing that ordinance. 

He said his final concern was by adopting this ordinance and presumably having the City invest $6,000 in portable scales and investing more time of the police officers in enforcing those ordinances than they currently spend, he asked if they were really making the best use of the time for law enforcement officers.

He said an article in the Kansas City Newspaper ranked a variety of cities on levels of service provided and it did not rank the police department particularly high, which surprised him because he thought the Police Department was a well run organization.  He said one of the comments made in the newspaper, was the Police Department in Lawrence, based on their survey needed more officers.  He said he or the general public would not disagree that Lawrence needed more police officers, but he understood the budget constraints that the City operated under.  It did raise the question of if the City wanted to give more duties to the police officers who were already, at least by one survey, undermanned or did the City want to devote those resources to other demands.  He said if the City planned, in their budget, to add 10 officers, it might be a moot point, but if that was not the plan, it would be something the City Commission might want to consider. 

Mayor Amyx said he would suggest taking one week to review the document from Glass. 

Commissioner Schauner said absent the exemption question and perhaps the question on whether or not to spend $6,000 for a scale, it seemed this ordinance was not doing anything more than what the state statutes already mandated.

Amyx said he agreed.

Commissioner Schauner said he would not want Glass or others to leave thinking the Commission was trying to impose something the state did not already impose.  He said concerning the $6,000, he thought it was a small expenditure when considering the additional expense the City taxpayers incurred for City vehicles.  He said he would like to move this agenda quickly rather than have it delayed until the construction season was over.

Mayor Amyx said he agreed with Commissioner Schauner and suggested that the City Commission receive a response from staff as soon as possible so that it was placed back on the City Commission’s agenda to consider the exemptions and especially the weight issue of the scales. 

 Moved by Rundle, seconded by Schauner, to defer first reading of Ordinance No. 7990, regulating the sizes, weights and loads of vehicles and required licensing.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                              (30)  

Moved by Rundle, seconded by Schauner, to defer first reading of Ordinance No. 7991, adopting Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, as amended, and providing supplemental provisions related to the operation of certain types of commercial motor vehicles.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                     (31)

Receive staff memorandum concerning downtown safety issues.

Scott Miller, Staff Attorney, presented the staff report.  He said he was present to share ideas that other communities used to face problems of safety in their city centers and downtown areas in their entertainment venues.  He said in a situation that was received by the public as problem liquor establishment, citizens ask why the City wouldn’t revoke that liquor license.  The fact was the City’s control over liquor licenses was extremely limited.  All the City could do was to impose itself in the procedure in Topeka with the Department of Revenue who actually had control over liquor licenses.  He said since the City did not have ultimate control in that circumstance of licensing, some of his suggestions, would grant the City control over licensing, which would be seen as increased local control of those businesses and the problems that existed. 

One idea many cities had adopted regarding bars, nightclubs, and things that were termed to be entertainment venues, were Entertainment Venue Licensing schemes.  Olathe was the closest neighbor that had one of those schemes.  The licensing scheme applied to warehouse clubs which were clubs that had capacities over 350 people. The idea of those licensing schemes was to make certain the clubs where they existed mitigated any impact those clubs would have either on the City or the surrounding neighborhood from a noise or crime standpoint.  He suggested the Commission needed to make certain the fact that larger clubs were a larger drain on City resources because sometimes the entire Police Department that was on duty would need to respond to an emergency at that location. 

Some of the concerns that were legislated against were disorderly conduct, violence, crimes by individual in the establishment or immediately after leaving the establishment, and repeated over occupancy issues.  He said those ordinances and licensing schemes provided for the quantity and the training of the security that had to exist based upon occupancy loads, required that venues had security cameras with recordings available to the police, and provided minimum acceptable levels for technical issues, such as lighting.  He said that would be one thing the City Commission could consider doing was to try and formulate some type of licensing scheme for those venues to address those issues or other issues.  He said in order to draft such an ordinance, the pertinent questions would be: 1) What type of entertainment must be regulated; 2) Did the Commission want to regulate some entertainment venues above a certain occupancy, and if so what the occupancy should be; 3) What the primary harms that were being legislated against were and whether the City worried most about criminal activity or the impact of the club or entertainment venue on surrounding areas; 4) Safety of individuals within the club; 5) Should security measures or other technical requirements be included in the ordinance and if so, how to determine the appropriate levels; and 6) To what extent business owners would be responsible for the overall impact on the area around their club that those owners did not have direct control over, but indirect control.  He said those were some considerations.  If the City Commission would be favorable on the idea of entertainment venue licensing, he would ask the City Commission to provide some answers prior to drafting any type of licensing scheme.

He said another idea that could be pursued separately or in conjunction with this idea was the idea that bars and entertainment venues would need to have licensed security officers that had gone through a training course.  The specifics of the training course could be legislated by the City, but would not necessarily need to be provided by the City or the Police Department.  He had received correspondence from training companies who provided this training to other cities and other entertainment venues elsewhere.  The idea beyond having well trained security personnel was that they might be able to detect or cause a problem not to escalate.  The main idea from the City standpoint on why this would be beneficial was the City could impose a duty to report criminal activity by those security personnel or they would lose their license.  He said sometimes that did not happen because security personnel’s main loyalty was to the people that employ them; they had no independent duty to the City.  He said that would give the City another means of knowing what was going on.  He said if there was a problem, they could take care of that problem before it escalated too far.

A third idea, used in Canada and the United Kingdom which was just starting to make the inroads into the United States, was the Pub, Club or Bar watch program.  The most famous implementation of that program was in Vancouver.  He said that program was modeled after neighborhood watch program. It was basically a program run or directed by bar owners with the participation of the police.  The main goals were to improve the relationship between the police and the bar owners and to have solidarity among the bar owners so that if they ban a person from one bar, then that person would be banned from all bars that were in the pub, club, or bar watch program.  He said in their estimation, it gave individuals a greater incentive not to violate rules within those bars because they knew if they were banned from one place, they might not have no place to go as opposed to being banned from one place and there would be no communication knowing that person could go to the next place down the street. 

He said there were also many permutations of this program and many other factors in this program that people adopted.  He said in Vancouver it was a controversial program because they used card readers at all of their bars and there was a central computer database of bar customers.  When walking into a bar, the bar would run your ID through a card reader, a picture was taken, and if someone was banned from a bar, they immediately know when you go to the next bar, they had been banned.   He said some civil liberty advocates thought that type of program went too far from a civil liberties standpoint.  He said Vancouver apparently had success on their crime rates. 

The final suggestion involved police response.  The police in Lawrence had been very proactive in utilizing technological resources in order to supplement their manpower.  Computer assisted dispatch was an example.  KU had a system where they had thirty plus surveillance cameras which were mounted throughout campus fairly unobtrusively and actively monitored.  He said KU mounted those cameras in 2004 and by 2005 they had seen a 7.7% decrease overall in crime and in parking lot crime they had seen a 23% decrease in the crime.  He said in KU’s experience it was fairly effective and something the City could consider doing would be to concentrate only on the downtown area.  There was a concentration of public establishments trying to establish program or perhaps a full blown program of actively monitored cameras during peak times so an individual was consistently scanning the area on the look out for trouble.  He said those could be used not just by the Police Department, but also gave public access to those cameras so that individuals who might own businesses in the area could check on their businesses in the middle of the night.  He said some people had suggested the cameras could also be used to make sure the police were doing their job effectively because they would be monitored by cameras during the time they were doing enforcement actions downtown.  He said there were a lot of potential uses for those cameras and if that was something that interested the City Commission at all, staff could provide some price estimates or some efficiency or effectiveness data because that data existed. 

Passively monitor cameras did not work well and staff would be asking for the implementation of some actively monitored cameras at least during peak time.  He said most camera systems in place had the capacity of automatically blanking out things like windows, so a person would not need to worry about the police using the camera system to invade someone’s privacy by trying to peer in their window.  A computer algorithm automatically detected a window and flags it out when getting to a certain level of resolution.  He said if anyone was interested in seeing those camera systems in action, he had received permission from KU to take people singly or in groups to their camera station to show people how those cameras worked.

Commissioner Schauner asked about the cost of cameras system at KU.

Miller said for the first 17 cameras and installing the system was approximately $250,000.  Since that time, KU had steadily built up the number of cameras they had because those cameras had proven to be effective.  The main complaint about the camera system that KU had been receiving recently was there were crimes occurring on campus where there were no cameras which frustrated people.

Mayor Amyx said the item on the agenda was to simply receive the staff report.  One important issue was that Miller was asking a number of questions throughout his report and those questions should be addressed by the City Commission because the entertainment venue might be concerned about what the City Commission’s answers would be to those questions.

He said one important issue was that a homegrown effort should occur.  He knew people in the entertainment business wanted to make sure that downtown would be a safe place and he was willing to work with bar owners throughout the community along with City staff to come up with something that would work for everyone in the next couple of weeks.  He asked that the City Commissioners provide direction to the questions raised by Miller along with compiling a list of questions for Miller and come up with a proposal that would be good for everyone.

Commissioner Schauner said in looking at Miller’s memorandum about Olathe’s licensing scheme, he said if the City issued drinking establishment licenses now and if the City was to have entertainment club licensing, he asked how would that be any different on its ultimate ability to have an impact on the license if in fact they found an operator in substantial disregard for the health and welfare of the community.

Miller said this was an entertainment license.  If the entertainment license was pulled, that person could still operate their business and could still sell alcoholic beverages, but depending on the definition of entertainment, could not have live music, DJs, or performances.  He said if that person did have entertainment, they would be in violation of the law.

Corliss said certain occupancy could be an initial restriction.

The City Commission received staff’s memo            .                                                    (32)

Receive request from Downtown Lawrence, Inc. for marketing assistance during the downtown waterline project.  Receive status report on downtown waterline project and fire line improvements to businesses.

 

David Corliss, Interim City Manager, presented the staff report.  He said a memorandum was drafted by Chris Stewart, Assistant Director, Utilities Department, about staff’s work with downtown property owners regarding what the City could do as an incentive for business to add fire line connections between the water lines and the structure.  He said staff would work with individual property owners on a business by business basis to see if those fire lines could be effectively accomplished. 

The City Commission also had a request for Downtown Lawrence Inc. and other interested businesses for assistance for marketing during waterline project.  He also provided a staff memorandum where he tried to lay out the pros and cons of providing assistance.  He thought the next step would be to hear more about that request for the marketing assistance.

Mayor Amyx called for public comment

Rick Marquez, Director of Downtown Lawrence Inc., said after speaking with a lot of the businesses on the 700 and 800 Block of Massachusetts, they wanted to commend the construction crew and City staff on this process.  He said on behalf of their member businesses and other businesses on the 700 and 800 blocks, Downtown Lawrence Inc., wanted to discuss a marketing proposal to try and alleviate some of the business terms that might be associated with this project and based on that they came up with a proposal.  He said after reading Corliss’ memo concerning this issue, DLI agreed with many of Corliss’ points that the project in Downtown Lawrence was a bit different than some other projects because it was physically closer to the front of the businesses.  The safety fencing was close to some of the front doors of the businesses and parking spacing issues such as the street being closed on one side of the street.  The request was in place to assist with marketing, event planning, and other items.  Downtown Lawrence would be working with member businesses to come up with a funding program for cooperative advertising.  The actual expenditures would exceed the requested amount.

Mayor Amyx said they were talking about essentially only 64 spaces on one side of the street.  He thought the crews had done an excellent job.  He knew that they have been working quite a bit and the project was moving along quite rapidly. 

He asked Marquez to give him any horror stories he may have heard from some of the businesses downtown.

Marquez said he had not heard any horror stories, but speaking with businesses the past two weeks, a number of the businesses had a hard time ascertaining whether or not the project itself had anything to do with the slowdown in business. It just happened to be at the time the University was out of session and business owners expected things to be a little slower. To be perfectly honest there were three or four businesses who noticed that business was the same.  He said DLI wanted to continue to remind people that all the businesses were open all of the time regardless of the construction. DLI also wanted to remind everyone there were parking spots available and wanted to point out those spots such as the parking garage on 9^th and New Hampshire and they wanted people to use that parking lot now and continue to use that lot.  He said he had not heard any horror stories, but he believed that Fields Gallery had water in the basement which was the closest horror story that he could come to. 

Mayor Amyx said they needed to thank customers who came to shop downtown. He said it was important to understand the amount of work DLI, the businesses downtown, along with staff and the City Commission did to make sure that street was half open at all times.  The real problem was the fire line installation and the impact on his businesses in which he would not vote on that issue.  He said there had been a lot of effort put forward to make sure this project was done in a timely manner.  He turned the meeting over to Vice Mayor Hack.   

Vice Mayor Hack asked about the additional staffing request for $6,400.

Marquez said for clarification that would not be for additional staffing.  It was a number that was arrived at by figuring out the amount of time that he, as a director, would be devoting to this project specifically. 

Vice Mayor Hack asked if that amount would be subtracted from the $48,100 that DLI was asking from the City.

Marquez said yes it would be subtracted from the $20,400 that DLI contributed.  He said they had a total marketing budget of $68,500.  Of that amount $48,100 was being requested from the City and $20,400 would be contributed by DLI through cooperative advertising for a number of businesses and staffing contribution.

Commissioner Schauner asked if he was asking the City for an additional $6400 as part of this request to provide additional salary for staffing work Marquez would be doing on those projects related to the waterline.

Marquez said no.  He said Downtown Lawrence Inc. would contribute $14,000.  Looking at the type of marketing and advertising that DLI wanted to do, DLI should get $10,000 in cooperative advertising dollars from Downtown businesses.  Also, during those meetings it was felt that DLI should list the time DLI was spending on this project and assign a dollar amount to that time which was $6,400.  Adding that to the $14,000 contribution from Downtown Lawrence Inc. and from members buying into cooperative advertising, it will come to $20,400.  The request from City was $48,100.

Ron Culvert, Vice President/General Manager of KLWN/KLZR and KMXN, said he had been in Lawrence for about a year and half and had tried to do everything he could do to make sure that they do what was best for the community in general.  He knew the City and tax dollars were going to improve the downtown with the new waterlines.  He said a better way to go about this marketing endeavor would be to let the radio stations and hopefully the other media in town come together.  He said instead of using another $48,000 in tax dollars, he suggested letting the media come together and come up with a solution so they could give back to the community because he did not feel it was right to use tax dollars to help businesses because of something they were trying to improve.  From the standpoint of the radio stations, he would donate air time, promotions, and news stories for downtown owners.  He said if there were other areas in town that they ran into that had those problems, they needed to help everyone because if they set a precedent at this location, then later a lot of tax dollars would go to buying advertising.  He said tax dollars should be used to continue to improve the community.  The media should get together with Downtown Lawrence Inc. to come up with comprehensive plan to help the community in general.

Commissioner Schauner asked how Corliss arrived at $2,400 in the staff recommendation.

Corliss said he had a little bit of difficulty completely understanding the scope that DLI was discussing, but he did see some items that were not as worthy of funding as others including the event sponsorship and the advertising for the public benefit of the waterline.  He thought he expressed in the memorandum the concern about the precedent.  While they could distinguish this project from other projects, he knew he had animated discussions with property owners about the inconvenience that public projects had on their property and he had told those property owners the City did not pay for that inconvenience.  Staff would work with the business owner and contractor to minimize that inconvenience, but it might be more difficult for customers to get to that business.  He said he had to contrast that with the fact that in this situation parking was being taken away and construction was a lot closer to the businesses than almost any other project he could think of. 

He said the Commission needed to look at the proposal, recognizing the precedent concerns he had and cut the proposal in half.  Staff’s focus on this project was to get this project moving and be ready to go as soon as graduation was over, have a good qualified contractor, look at the incentives which staff had included, and know the City had a good staff that was on top of the project.  He said the main issue was to get the project completed.  He thought it was fair to look at assistance, but staff needed to be mindful of the amount.

Vice Mayor Hack asked if the cost of the project was increased when the work order was changed to speed up the project.

Corliss said no, it did not increase the amount when two blocks were being done at one time, but because there were liquidated damages in the project and there were expectations about the completion of the project, the rate payers were paying a premium, which was justifiable to get this project done as quickly as possible.

Vice Mayor Hack said the incentive to speed the project up was the public at large.

Corliss said yes, if the contractor qualified for incentives.  The key was to get this project done at a quality level and expeditiously as possible and staff was focused on that idea and thought it was appropriate to have that level of incentives given the importance of this project and the inconvenience on those properties.

Commissioner Rundle said this area was a big sales tax generator and wanted to know how much was offset if they did not address concerns to get people to go downtown and keep spending money.  

Corliss said this project was affecting 2 major blocks of retail component of the community and he thought it was important to have that assistance, but he had difficulty in knowing what level to fund that project and the impact would be.  They were not shutting the businesses down, but they were making it more inconvenient for people to shop there at most times. 

Commissioner Highberger said the memo summarized the issue well in that this project was a unique situation.  They were not only inconveniencing the downtown businesses, but people who used downtown.  He was intrigued by the prospect of giving City money and knew that time was of the essence.  He would be willing to defer this issue for two weeks to work things out with DLI and the media and if something could not be worked out in a couple of weeks, he would be ready to approve the amount Corliss suggested in the memo.

Commissioner Rundle said often times the City Commission approved up to a certain amount and if that amount could be brought down by that type of effort that would be great.

Corliss said Lisa Patterson, Communications Coordinator, would to talk to KLZR about free time and advertising.  He said if the Commission thought that funding an amount was appropriate, the Commission needed to understand that the first effort should be to get the free time and the advertisement and use the City’s existing marketing efforts whether it was Channel 25 and look at opportunities to step that effort up.  

Vice Mayor Hack asked if Commissioner Rundle’s proposal would be up to the amount that Corliss suggested.

Commissioner Rundle suggested to authorize that amount, but if the amount could be brought down that would be good.

Vice Mayor Hack said her preference would be to help because they had inconvenienced a number of businesses in this community.  She liked the staff’s proposal of up to $24,000 and encouraged the cooperation with the local media to begin some additional advertising.

Commissioner Schauner said he would like to condition whatever the City spent on a 50/50 match with DLI.  DLI suggested they were wiling to spend up to $20,000.  He said he was suggesting to spend up to $20,000 with a dollar for dollar match with DLI, up to, but not to exceed $20,000.  He said that number came from DLI’s offered participation as opposed to Corliss’ number.  He did not have a problem with $24,000, but would like a dollar for dollar share up to $20,000 and he also liked the idea of working with the media.

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Highberger, to authorize spending not more than $20,400 on a dollar for dollar match with DLI expenditures for the items listed in the marketing campaign memorandum from DLI.   Aye:  Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner.  Nay:  None.  Abstain:  Amyx.  Motion carried.

Commissioner Schauner said what was more important in the longer term than this marketing piece was the fire line installation downtown.  He would really like to make sure that every business, whether they opt to ultimately install sprinklers or not, have the line installed.  He said it had to be cheaper to do it now than retrofitting that line later.  He said the per line costs in the aggregate should not be a budget buster on this project.   He said he did not know if they needed to do a no interest loan, but he would like to see some specific details to provide a specific incentive to sprinkle their building then the Commission had done a terrific service to downtown and to the community.

Corliss said it was important to hear from the Utility Department and the concern they had about installing a fire line that was not used within a certain period of time and its integrity by sitting there over the years. 

He said staff had been in contact with property owners over the years on this issue.  He said staff wanted to, on a case by case basis, work with those property owners to install the fire line even though the property owners might not want to install the fire sprinkler systems at this time and find ways to reduce those costs and think about the idea of a payment plan.  If those properties did not want those sprinkler systems now, staff was not so certain that it was wise to go ahead and install the fire line.

Chris Stewart, Acting Utilities Director, said there were 11 working days to date and 24 working days remaining on the east side.  The contractor was on schedule and looked like he was moving fast in terms of getting the 1200 feet of pipe installed in those two blocks.  He said there was a lot of work left to do with the electrical system and with individual service transfers, pressure testing, and disinfecting the waterline.  There were still approximately 4 weeks of work left on that site and the contractor was on schedule.

In terms of the fire line issue it would cost about $6,500 to put in a fire service line from the main to the inside of the building about 6 inches and then cap it.  Later, they would have the businesses install a fire sprinkler system if the business chose to install that system. The timeline would be 5 year period.  Staff really did not want to put in a line and let it sit and do absolutely nothing because the integrity of that line would be in question after a certain period of time.  It really did not make much difference on how they were going to install the line because they would just make a tap to the existing waterline and install the main into the building and the plumber connected the line inside the building and puts in the fire sprinkler system.  He said that needed to be done during the evening hours.  If a number of business owners decided on the fire line program, it would take approximately 7-8 months to do that work since they could only do that work during the night time hours because they did not want to close the sidewalk everyday. 

As indicated in the memo, they were proposing a $3,000 cost that the business owner would pay for the materials and the City would donate the labor in order to install that line.  He said staff would like direction on whether on not to proceed with this idea.  If yes, staff would meet with business owners on an individual basis and staff would have an application available for the property owner to sign off on indicating that the property owner understood they needed to install a fire sprinkler system in accordance to NFPA requirements for that particular business within a five year period. 

Commissioner Schauner asked if those lines would be pressurized fire service lines.

Stewart said no.  Staff would install the tapping valve and a sleeve on the existing main and extend the pipe into the basement and valve off that line at that point.

Commissioner Schauner asked why an unused fire line was any more prone to suspect of serviceability than the waterline that was being tapped.

Stewart said when placing a piece of pipe in the ground and no water was flowing through that pipe, over time the pipe would deteriorate, but he did not understand the concept of why that would happen.  The integrity of the pipe itself did come into question after time.  He said if leaving a pipe installed for 10 years before someone was ready to install a fire sprinkler system, then 10 years of service life would be already taken out of that fire line which would have an impact when installing that fire sprinkler.  

Mayor Amyx asked if metals in the ground would have an effect on the copper pipe.   

Stewart said yes.  The minerals in the soil would deteriorate the piping.

Commissioner Schauner said he assumed some sort of diode would be attached on those lines as well.

Stewart said no.  He said most water systems did not have that protection.  In fact, with electrical service lines a lot of grounding systems in buildings and homes were attached to the water service and there were times that would corrode existing pipeline or service going into that building or home.

Commissioner Schauner said whatever was decided, he wanted to make sure it was made affordable to people to incentivize putting those fire lines in now.   

Corliss said this issue should be seen as part of the entire budget package.  Also, installment plans had been discussed with those business owners.

Vice Mayor Hack said regarding the waterline installation, she said if they lost one of those buildings, the community would lose a significant part of community history, not to mention the lives that could be lost by the spread of fire.   

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Highberger, to direct Downtown Lawrence, Inc., to proceed with marketing assistance during the downtown waterline project; direct staff to work with the media to help provide media coverage as a way to assist downtown marketing efforts during the waterline improvement project downtown Massachusetts Street; and, receive the status report on downtown waterline project and fire line improvements to businesses.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                   (33)

 

RECOGNITION/PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATION

The Mayor proclaimed June 7-11 as “World War II Army Ranger Days”; June 8^th as “Dump the Pump Day” and Proclaimed the month of June as “Lawrence Native Plant Appreciation Month”.

 

REGULAR AGENDA (cont’d)

 

 

 

Receive public comments related to the 2007 budget.

Mayor Amyx called a public hearing related to the 2007 budget.

After receiving no public comment, Mayor Amyx said the Commission met various times during a four to five month period and now was the time the Commission considered any and all projects.  He said the Commission tried seeking out as much public comment as possible and hoped that some day everyone would be more involved in the budget process, but there would be future opportunity. 

He said a correspondence from the Lawrence Preservation Alliance was received and hoped the Commission had an opportunity to review that correspondence.                       (34)

Consider the action plan related to UPR-09-06-05:  Lawrence Community Shelter.

Mayor Amyx said a lot of time had been spent addressing this time over the last six months.  The item before the Commission was the Lawrence Community Shelter’s action plan as one of the conditions that was placed on the use permit and whether or not the City Commission believed the action plan met the spirit of that condition.

Lisa Pool, City/County Planner, presented the staff report.  During the City Commission’s March 14, 2006 meeting, the Commission recommended the approval of the UPR-09-06-05 for the Lawrence Community Shelter, subject to several conditions.  She said Condition No. 4a stated the Shelter should submit an action plan within 60 days of March 14^th to address Options 1 and 2 listed in the March 9^th memorandum.   The LCS submitted an action plan within 60 days which was submitted on May 10^th.  The Shelter had chosen Option 2 in their action plan. 

Loring Henderson, Director of Lawrence Community Shelter, said he would like to make a brief statement about the effort LCS put into their Action Plan.  To develop the action plan, the Shelter held three public forums at the Public Library and had proposed a series of follow-up actions and meetings to continue discussion with the neighbors to discuss security measures, traffic control, and to finish the completion of their good neighbor agreement.  The LCS would also work with Community Cooperation Committee which had been appointed by the Community Commission on Homelessness. 

He said relevant to the conditions that were in staff’s letter of March 14^th, he read Roman Numeral II which stated the following:

II.         Maintain the LCS property in good condition.

 

A.        Instruct all guests that persons are not permitted to lie or sit for an extended period of time on the front property of the LCS. 

B.         Guests are permitted to sit, stand and congregate on the front porch of the shelter.  

C.        The LCS will provide picnic tables and cigarette disposal containers for guests. 

D.        Daily pick up and maintenance of the LCS property will occur as follows:

 

1.         Clean up all trash, cigarette butts and other litter around the LCS property. 

2.         Remind guests that all bicycles are to be parked at the bicycle rack on the side of the LCS. 

3.