August 29, 2006
The Board of Commissioners of the City of
RECOGNITION/PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATION:
With Commission approval Mayor Amyx presented the Foundation Award to EMR, Inc.
CONSENT AGENDA
As
part of the consent agenda, it was moved
by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to
approve the City Commission meeting minutes of August 15, 2006. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive minutes from the Aviation Advisory Board meeting of June 15, 2006; the Historic Resources Commission meeting of July 20, 2006; and the Arts Commission meetings of April 12, 2006 and May 10, 2006. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve claims to 577 vendors in the amount of $1,098,729.61. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the
consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to approve the Drinking Establishment Licenses for Applebee’s Neighborhood
Grill & Bar, 2520
As part of the
consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to adopt on first reading, Charter Ordinance No. 38, repealing Charter
Ordinance No. 19, relating to City purchasing practices for certain City
improvements. Motion carried
unanimously. (1)
Ordinance No.
8028, allowing the temporary sale, possession, and consumption of alcoholic
liquor on the west side of South Park on September 9, 2006, was read a second
time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to adopt the
ordinance. Motion carried
unanimously. (2)
Ordinance No.
8031, adopting the 2006 Edition of the Standard Traffic Ordinance, was read a
second time. As part of the consent
agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to adopt the ordinance. Motion
carried unanimously. (3)
As part of the
consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to adopt Resolution No. 6676, authorizing the Mayor to execute the Surface
Transportation Project with the Kansas Department of Transportation; and
authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement for the construction of
As part of the
consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to adopt Resolution No. 6678, authorizing the issuance of general obligation
bonds in the amount of $1,200,000 for the construction of
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 Corene Nelson, 443 Maple. Motion carried unanimously. (6)
As part of the
consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to approve work of art permit for People’s Bank,
As part of the
consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to approve recommendation to enter into a contract with Treanor Architects to
conduct a feasibility study and needs assessment of sports and athletic
facilities in
As part of the
consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner,
to approve the Right-of-Way Permit Application and request for City financial
participation of $5,000 for “Get Downtown”, a live musical event; and approve Use
of Right-of-Way for sale, possession and consumption of alcohol. Motion carried unanimously. (9)
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:
During
the City Manager’s Report, David Corliss, Interim City Manager/Legal Services
Director, said last week City Staff participated in a Water Contamination
Training Exercise that was sponsored by the Emergency Management Department in
conjunction with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment. Staff thought it was very important to devote
resources to those types of training efforts and they had a number of city
participants that spent the morning learning about different responsibilities
in those types of situations.
He
said he wanted to highlight a meeting he attended last week at the League of Municipalities
on state legislative issues. He said he
learned about the legislation that was passed by the 2006 Legislature and staff
would begin to focus on next year’s legislative session. Some of the issues were the golden oldies of
the City’s concerns. He said he was
going to prepare a letter indicating the City’s strong interest in authority
under state law for excise taxes. He
said there was an interim committee that would conduct hearings and staff wanted
to be sure to chime in with the City’s interest in having clear legislative
authority to enact excise taxes because that authority was essentially removed
by the 2006 Legislature.
Also,
regarding bike lane pavement markings as opposed to the bike lane designation
that was placed on Naismith, he said staff thought it would be successful as
well.
Commissioner
Schauner said he wanted to extend thanks to Nowak Construction Company for their
quick and efficient work downtown.
Corliss
said staff thought the project was successful.
A number of the downtown merchants showed a lot of patience and
assistance to that company. He said the
Utility Department personnel were assistive on a number of projects. A key component of the project was the
electrical work and individuals from the Public Works Department were also very
helpful.
He
said they were proceeding with acquisition of the holiday lights that would be
part of Downtown Lawrence after Thanksgiving and staff was excited about that
as well.
He
said staff had learned a lot from this project and learned they could
successfully use incentives for a project to encourage contractors to place
additional resources and attention to a project. He said staff also learned some hard things
about coordination of waterlines and other things such as fire sprinkler
systems.
Vice
Mayor Hack said everyone knew it was a waterline project, but it became a street
project and therefore, in many people’s minds, a Public Works project. She said listing the accomplishments of the
Public Works Department along with the street improvements was important to
note and was extremely important to the City Commission. She said road work would be difficult in certain
places, over the next several years, as those roads needed to be fixed and
hoped people would have patience.
Corliss
said staff bid the work on
Mayor
Amyx said Commissioner Schauner had a piece of the service line pipe, and the
build up on that line taken from one of the downtown businesses, to view as a
piece of history. He said he wanted to
publicly thank Corliss for having an inspector at that location to help make those
field decisions. He said he believed
that Corliss and staff came up with a plan to expedite the completed project
date by two to three weeks to accommodate those events that would take place
this weekend.
Commissioner
Schauner said he thought there was some misinformation because the project was
not technically complete. He said there
was still some button up work on the corners and other work. He asked if the incentive piece had kicked
in.
Corliss
said it was his understanding the incentive piece had not kicked in yet.
Commissioner
Schauner said the entire project had to be completed before that incentive
piece kicked in.
Corliss
said the project would need substantial completion which included the curb ramps
and other work. He said the contractor
was currently working on the curb ramps and those ramps needed to be in good
safety shape for all of the activity during the weekend, let alone completion.
Mayor
Amyx said those items were being completed.
He said the inspectors were showing the contractor the various pieces
that were not completed.
Commissioner
Highberger said concerning legislative issues, he wanted to add the idea of
trying to raise the fund balance limit in order for budgeting to make
sense. He said he did not know how much
support there would be with the legislature or elsewhere in the League, but it
was something he was interested in.
Corliss
said staff would pursue that issue.
Commissioner
Schauner said he would second that idea.
He said he thought 5% made budgeting difficult and would like that
percentage to be a more realistic number. (10)
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
Receive comments from Kathy Gragg
concerning animal control ordinance.
Kathy
Gragg,
She said she wanted to talk about the lack of variation between a dog at large, an aggressive animal at large, a dangerous dog at large, and a threat to public safety. Clearly, regarding a dog at large, it was simply that a dog was in someone’s yard, the dog owner would be cited, and that was it. A person could get up to four offenses and each instance with the exception of threat to public safety, a person could have four more instances without anymore than just an increase in the fine and jail time. However, when it came to the descriptions on the other three, those descriptions were all very blanket and pretty much the same thing which made the entire ordinance vague so that in charging with no differentiation or no specifications, the City Prosecutor could go from a dog at large to a threat to public safety without ever having an incident of a fight. She said she did not believe this should ever happen. She did not believe that to say the dog had a propensity to be dangerous was enough. There was absolutely no valid scientific documentation to support that any one specific breed of dog had more propensity or more likelihood to attack. The only thing that governs that idea was the fact that a certain breed might be more popular from time to time, such as Dobermans. She said with Dobermans in the 1970s, the fallacy was the dog’s brain was too large for its skull cavity and as the brain grew, it pinched and they were considered dangerous dogs. She said that breed of dog could be seen everywhere and those dogs were not biting everyone, because they were not the popular breed of dog.
She said she believed there should be something beyond someone saying, “Hey this dog scared me.” She said if her ex-husband came and bashed her car window in and she called a law enforcement officer to her home, which was a real and true story, then the officer was going to tell her that he did not see it, therefore it was a civil matter and he was going to take a report and document it, then walk away. She said if an officer came to her house because her dog went into the neighbor’s yard and she said, “Yes my dog went into the neighbor’s yard,” the officer could give her a ticket. She said for someone to say “a dog had scared me” or “I thought he was going to attack me” based on the word of another person that should not open the door for a dog to be taken and being a threat to public safety without any form of a hearing. She said when they said a judge could determine that a dog was a threat to public safety, that was great, but on what evidence? She asked if it would be on the evidence that an individual felt afraid because they might be afraid of dogs in general, or based on the testing.
She said
the testing was supposed to be done within five days of the animal being housed
in a shelter. She said in her situation
it was not five days, the hearing was sped up, it was within 24 hours. She said the Stafford Test was a huge issue
because, in court, it was admitted the shelter did not even have the supplies
necessary or required by the Stafford Testing requirements. She said the shelter did not have the
videotape and did not have the pamphlet.
She said yet, the document they submitted in the courtroom said in bold
letters at the top, “Tester must read pamphlet and view video prior to each
test given.” She said they did not have
that, but it really did not matter in
She said she also believed that dogs were held in legal holding. She said she had over 200 e-mails from Grinstead on her computer because she asked her every day if her dog had been walked, was allowed to play, or was allowed out of her cage. She said dogs in legal hold did not get walked or bathed; they get whatever necessary emergency medical care if they were injured. She said she was very fond of Grinstead, but what was being said and what was being done were two different things.
She said out at the fair grounds there was a big fundraiser for the Humane Society for the City Shelter and Grinstead was quoted as saying in the Lawrence Journal-World that a dog that was not exercised, not bathed, or handled had propensity to become agitated. She said when they talk about dogs that were in legal holding, even with the Akitas that were seized a few years ago, they were held, not exercised, not bathed, and the most that was ever done was their food was taken in, their excrements cleaned up, then those dogs were put back in their cages. She said they were talking about dogs that had been sitting in those cages for 2 months, 3 months, 5 months, 8 months, whatever it took to get through court cases. She said it looked like hers was going to be a long one. She asked if they thought the dogs were going to get agitated. She asked how long they would want to be in a small cage and people coming in twice a day to feed and hose the cage out. She said conditions needed to change. She said she knew the shelter was short on staff and did not want anyone back in legal holding as far as volunteers because of liability issues, but she thought that was where staff needed to be trained.
She also noticed when she looked at the City site for the qualifications of an animal control officer there were absolutely no guidelines that an animal control officer had to know anything about animal behavior or animal sciences. She said any “Joe” on the street could become an animal control officer as long as they passed a criminal background check, according to the City site and qualifications for animal control officer. She said it was about the same as becoming a meter maid. She said there were no guidelines and it was not a high paying job.
She said to be a Kansas Law Enforcement Officer a person did not need to know anything about animal behaviors or what appeared to be aggressive behaviors in animals. She said it was based on a person’s experience or how they felt. She said if they did not like dogs, or big dogs, and they were not comfortable with dogs, then they were afraid and therefore, the dog was dangerous.
She said she did not want to talk about how open it was for due process violations by not having any steps. She said she knew the City did not want to change the ordinance because it was already clearly stated in the newspaper the City did not want to change the ordinance. She said the City needed to add steps and procedures that protected the average citizen who would read the ordinance. She said if someone read this ordinance, she did not know without having an incident of a dog getting loose or having your dog bite someone, if a person would know if they were within the confines of the law and which category they would fall under.
She said in
her situation, she went into court a second time, second dog at large and no
animal bite. She said she read the
ordinance thoroughly. She said when she
walked into the courtroom with money for a fine, and even after talking to
Grinstead and the animal control officers and found out her dog could be
considered dangerous, she volunteered to build a pen. She said she was not even ordered to build a
pen when she went into court the first time, yet her dog was determined
dangerous and that order did not happen.
She said if the City was going to say that a dog was dangerous and
upgrade that charge, the City needed to notify the owner and needed to have
some type of hearing. She said if the
City was going to upgrade a charge that the dog was vicious, then they needed
to have another hearing, even if they were going to go straight to a threat to
public safety, she thought there needed to be some justification and some
incident such as injury for a dog to even be looked at as a threat to public
safety besides what they look like. She
said if the City started handling this problem this way, then a boxer, which
has a broad chest, would be under the scrutiny since police and animal control
officers did not have any animal science training and were not required to have
that type of training. She said she
brought it up because it had happened in
Mayor Amyx asked Gragg if she had additional comments about the ordinance.
Gragg said
she was addressing the ordinance. She
said she was talking about the due process, inappropriate application,
procedural guidelines, and the people that were victimized by this issue. She said this was a huge problem and people’s
rights were being violated. She said
that was why they were in the appellate court with her case right now. She asked if the appellate court would have
accepted her motion, had there not been something valid to accept her case. She said there was a lack of procedure in
this ordinance and the Commissioners needed to look at the ordinance because
what was going to happen was people were going to start suing the City of
She said people could feel however they wanted to about her and about her attitude and her feelings and openness in the community about this issue, but the reality was that her coming in and opening her mouth, she was doing the City of Lawrence a favor because there were some loopholes that were going to cost the City some money. She said her biggest concern was the people it was going to affect and how it was going to affect the City and everyone in the community if the City would get sued.
Mayor Amyx asked staff to provide some information about the testing used.
Corliss said staff could provide that information.
Commissioner Schauner said he thought it might be helpful to have more discussion from staff about due process concerns that Gragg raised and the notice issues around due process. He said he was not real sure about the answer, but would like more information about due process.
Corliss
said staff could provide that information as well.
Receive staff report concerning
population estimates from the
He said in a nutshell, through their research, staff determined the methods they used to project population and estimate a yearly population, were common in methods used around the country. Therefore, staff felt comfortable enough with the methods being used.
He said the
next step along this path was to figure out ways they could test the U.S.
Census Bureau’s numbers to find some reasoning why staff believed the Census
Bureau’s estimate was low for
He said as
of July 1, 2005 for the City of
He said what staff decided to do next was to test the Census Bureau’s population. He said the first method staff used, was a building permit method. He said it took residential housing units that were issued every year, subtracted the demolished residential housing units, multiplied that by an occupancy rate, multiplied by an average household size to come up with the population estimate which of June 1, 2006 was 89,643 people. He said he wanted to point out in both the building permit method and the Census Bureau method, the occupancy rate and the average household size, used the same numbers. He said an average household size was 2.3 people per unit and the occupancy rate was 95.8%, which translated to a vacancy rate of 4.2%.
Commissioner Highberger asked how the City’s estimate dealt with the group housing that was added in separately in the Census Bureau calculations. He said he did not see it referenced.
Commissioner Highberger asked if the population was presumed to be the same.
Miller said they presumed the population to be a re-constant.
Warner said while staff was in the process of testing the Census Bureau’s numbers, staff thought it would be a good idea to test the City’s numbers as well. He said a table presented to the City Commission showed the effect of different vacancy rates and household sizes on the 2006 population estimate. He said staff applied different vacancy rate household size to the new residential construction between 2000 and 2005. He said staff used a 15% vacancy rate along with an average size of 2.1 persons per household to get a population estimate of 88,169, which was about 1500 or so less than their building permit method.
Commissioner Highberger asked if the vacancy rate was 15% in new construction or 15% overall.
Warner said it was 15% on new construction.
Miller said determining vacancy rates were quite difficult, especially in terms of reliability, if staff was going to try and predict a current vacancy rate in terms of the rental market. In calculations for the building permit method, they used what the U.S. Census also used for their estimates, which were the figures from the 2000 Census. She said staff analyzed the differing effects of vacancy based on the new permits that were issued. In addition, it was important to keep in mind that as the total stock of housing increased, the amount of vacant units could increase and they could still have the same rate. She said in addition to that, staff tested the building permit method using utility billing records and by doing so with active meters, they could say the vacancy had remained relatively constant and had increased in line with the building permits that had been issued.
Commissioner Schauner said a gross number of vacancies increases, but the rate remained the same.
Miller said that was because the vacancy rate was a ratio of total stock to vacant stock. She said as total stock increased, they could also have an increase in vacant stock.
Warner said, as mentioned, staff also tested their methods through a utility record method. He said the Census Bureau accepted only a few different methods from local governments while they were challenging estimates. He said one method was the building permit method, which they had used over the years, and the other method was the utility record method.
He said the growth in residential water accounts through calculations, staff came up with an estimated population increase of 8,824 from 2000 to 2005, and added that number to the census figures of 2000, which was 80,098 to get 88,922. He said that was a difference of less than 1% of the building permit method. He said if the Census Bureau estimate was correct, then according to the amount of residential water accounts added since 2000, the average household size for the population size added would be .47 people.
He said staff
believed they were following the best practice methods in estimating population
and recommend the City challenge both
He said they wanted to include the County in this challenge because the Lawrence population was a share of the Douglas County estimates. He said if they would just challenge the City alone and were successful in raising their estimate that would likely mean the rest of the County would lose population in order to fit that into the overall county estimate. Therefore, staff recommended challenging the County and City estimates at the same time.
Mayor Amyx said the Census Bureau accepted both the building permit and utility billing methods to consider for a challenge, and asked if the Census Bureau requested that type of information if those were the two areas they looked at in determining the City’s population.
Warner said the Mayor raised a good question. He said the Census Bureau had their set methodology which was one group of information they could apply around the country. He said he would imagine adding another set of data would be troublesome for their calculations, but he was not sure.
Commissioner Schauner asked historically how had our City’s population estimates compared with the U.S. Census population estimates.
Warner said staff had been using the permit method from 1990 to 2000, but he did not have the exact numbers.
Mayor Amyx asked if the 2000 figure of a population of 80,098 was ever challenged.
Warner said he was not familiar with the City’s history back that far. He said they were high, but they were pretty close.
Mayor Amyx asked if staff was in the 1% range.
Warner said yes.
Commissioner Rundle asked, in addition to projecting demands on infrastructure, what else was important to make the estimate accurate.
Warner said there was federal money that came to local governments that was based on population numbers. He said there was transportation funding based on population numbers.
Commissioner Rundle asked if it was significant with that type of difference.
Warner said it was a pretty significant difference.
Commissioner Schauner asked if the Census Bureau used the same mathematical formula used today that was used in 1990 and was the City using the same formula the City used in 1990.
Warner said he believed the City was using the same method, but he did not know about the Census Bureau.
Commissioner Schauner asked where KU students fell into this equation.
Warner said the students were included in the 2000 census.
Commissioner Schauner asked if the students were part of the census in 1990.
Warner said yes.
Commissioner Schauner asked if other jurisdictions experienced a similar discrepancy between census numbers and their own internal population numbers.
Warner said
yes. He said in the second memo called
Population Estimates City Method, there was a discussion about other
communities that were challenged. He
said some recent examples were
Commissioner Rundle asked if there was an option for students to be counted in their home towns at some point.
Corliss said he understood that it was the state that adjusted the federal census figures and changed how they counted college students. He said it hurts the City for state census purposes.
Mayor Amyx said in that 1990 figure, he asked if there was a lot of discussion about making a determination on what was residency. He said if he recalled, there was discussion about the residency, who was a resident and who was not, which was how the best practice on estimating came about.
Corliss said the change occurred after the 1990 Census when the state changed the rules for how college students were counted for state census purposes. He said the state could not change how the federal government counted people, but the state could say how the City was going to count people for state purposes. In addition to the federal grant issues, he said those numbers had some play for any number of different state funding formulas as well.
Commissioner Rundle asked if it remained in effect.
Corliss said correct.
Mayor Amyx said other than the obvious loss of federal funds, he asked if there were other things those population estimates affected that had a financial tag.
Corliss said one of the things that came up when this issue was initially discussed was best practices for population estimating. He said staff wanted to make sure they had the best estimates available. He said staff did not know how many people were living in Lawrence today and did not know what it was going to be tomorrow and less certainty in the future, but for a number of reasons, which Commissioner Rundle made the comment earlier, was infrastructure planning and how it was important to be as on target as possible and use the best practices so that they fit in the right range of numbers for allocating public resources such as wastewater plants, police officers, or whatever the City was trying to calibrate their services for. He said that had a value. He said he thought it was important to follow through on this issue and consider the challenge, learn more about it, and continue to refine their practices. He said he thought they had good practices and knew they had good people trying to get the City the right numbers. He said he thought that had value, but also had value from a funding standpoint. He said it was indicated in his memo while they were focused on the numbers for population, they did not want to just talk about chasing the number. He said they were also focused on underlining issues as well such as growing the economy in this community for the right values and goals. He said it was not just chasing the Census Bureau and trying to argue about a number. He said the City wanted to make sure they were growing appropriately and needed those good numbers.
Commissioner Schauner asked how long the appeal process would take.
Warner said he was not sure, but they definitely would not be at the end of the year, but likely sometime next year.
Corliss said staff had already done a lot of the work.
Warner said that was correct. He said all of the data presented in the memos was the stuff the Census Bureau wanted to see. He said staff had been in the process of collecting the information for the County and was a matter of filling out the worksheets and kicking it back to the Census Bureau.
Corliss
said he mentioned to the
Mayor Amyx called for public comment.
James Dunn,
He said regarding the water bills, he discovered from his own personal experience the City Water Department had been approved for some changes in such a way that even if the water meter was off and there was zero water consumption, there was still a substantial charge. He said a lot of landlords were not turning off their water meters in vacant units so that basis of determining population based on the number of water meters that were off, was not valid anymore because of that change in the policy. He said they were paying whether those meters were on or off, so there was not a lot of motivation to turn the meter off.
He said as a person who had been involved with the census process, during that timeframe that they were discussing, his properties were selected for random sampling and the samples they picked were vacant units. He said the Census taker had called from time to time to see if the unit was still vacant and would have an impact because they were doing that on a random basis to determine the vacancy factors in population. He said they were using 2.3 as occupancy per household level and his experience was that as time had gone on, the occupancy level had decreased per unit and there were more people living in single places. He said he decided he would make some comments this evening because he was concerned about the taxpayers cost to pursue this with the Census Bureau. He said he thought as a citizen, he should be more involved at this stage.
Vice Mayor Hack asked staff to respond to the utility issue.
Warner said
he could not answer the utility question.
He said he could speak to the household size, which typically from 1990
to 2000 it went down from 2.35 to 2.29.
He said he was speaking about a decreasing household size which was a
national and
Corliss said the system development charges were enacted 10 years ago when there were certain increases. He said that sometimes generated additional building permits. He said they had changed some of the City’s fees for reconnection, but those were landlords that did not want to pay a continuous service charge on a vacant property and would disconnect over time. He thought Dunn had good comments and staff could look into those comments. He said staff wanted to get accurate figures.
Commissioner Rundle asked if staff could sort user information to bring out the properties where there was minimal or zero use of water.
Corliss said they could look at that idea and see the trends over time.
Mayor Amyx asked if staff had an idea on how much money would be spent on this challenge.
Corliss said existing staff time had been used to produce those documents and they would make sure they had the right contact to be sent to the Census Bureau. He said he did not think they were talking about major costs.
Mayor Amyx said other than the additional information the City Commission might have requested and items brought up by Dunn, he asked if this information was ready to be mailed.
Warner said within a couple of weeks the information would be ready.
Corliss said staff had an October 1st deadline and they would meet that deadline if it was the City Commission’s direction.
Vice Mayor Hack said the financial implications of not pursuing this issue were huge. She said the City was hurting for CDBG money and the City could always use additional funds to support the transit system. She said it would be irresponsible not to at least push this census issue to the limits. She said it was appropriate to have the right numbers.
Commissioner Schauner said he supported going forward with this issue. He said a 10% discrepancy now versus a 1% discrepancy 10 or 12 years ago told him something was not right and the City Commission owed it to their constituents to find out what that was.
Commissioner Rundle asked if there was any participation the City needed to secure with the County.
Corliss
said if staff pursued this issue, they would forward the information to
Mayor Amyx said authorizing the City to proceed with a challenge included the County’s participation.
Corliss said staff would include asking the County to participate.
Commissioner
Highberger said he appreciated staff’s work on this issue and Dunn’s
information. He said he wanted to make
the census for
Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to authorize staff to proceed with the
challenge to the US Census Population Estimates. Motion carried unanimously.
(12)
Receive meeting summary report from Black
& Veatch for the Wakarusa Water Reclamation Facility – Public Meeting #4.
Mike Orth,
Black & Veatch, presented the meeting summary report. He said there had been a highly involved
public process. He said there was a
potential
The primary factors that drove that site to be the optimum site was residents would not need to be relocated. There were property owners, but no houses that would displace a resident. He said the site had very few close proximity neighbors which the neighbors had a major concern dealing with odor and construction traffic due to isolationism of this site, the site scored very well from the public perception standpoint. He said they were also located in the flood plain of the Wakarusa and Coal Creek which provided a wide barrier from separating the site from the adjacent public areas and was a direct impact to odor control facilities. He said that site right now was very rural in use as a farm field and in the future it was all floodplain or vacant land, therefore, it fit with current and future land use. He said it was midway between the Four Seasons Pumping Station and the existing plant. He said it would allow them to optimize the existing infrastructure and allowed them to connect into it to maximize the entire infrastructure already paid for. It was a very flexible site and very neutral to the SLT so it allowed a lot of multiuse function of that site.
He said
they had a public meeting a couple weeks ago and received a lot of
feedback. He said as it was forecasted,
some of the major concerns related to flooding and the near property owners in
what the site was going to do to their property, and they would need to do some
additional engineering to validate the site having no impacts on adjacent land
owners. He said they would have to
advance the engineering design now, to produce the information to provide to
the Corps of Engineers and to the State of
He said odor control had always been a factor for the site for the facility, but odor was not the main factor, it was the flooding. He said flooding was the number one point of discussion of topic of that evening.
He said
from an environmental concern, its impacts on the
He said a lot of issues were about how the site would be developed and where they were going to build the facility. He said everyone wanted answers right now, but they really had not gotten to those answers. He said they had to do the engineering again and find out how it was best to build the site away from it so they could build the future phases and not have impacts. He said they have some ideas, but now need to implement them and look forward.
He said there were some concerns about it being a very isolated area and what was construction traffic going to do to trips by people’s homes. He said there were some concerns also because the roadway was gated and non public maintenance beyond the gated portion. He said people asked if they would open it up, would they be drawing more people to the area. He said they were going to have a controlled site in the sense they would not want the general public at the site doing things and they did not want them out anyway. He said they would probably have a higher level of control on this site anyway.
He said there were annexation questions related to the surrounding areas. He said people asked if they were going to spot annex or annex the entire UGA at this point and time. He said they had discussions with the general public related to housing annexation into their UGA might occur over time, but certainly not instantly.
He said people also asked what it would do to people’s property value and taxes. He said those were all good concerns for the folks out there. He said there was probably no significant impact today, but there would be potential for a rise in property value as that area would became more developable because it could now be sewered.
He said
people asked where they would route the borders and pump stations. He said they did not have that detailed yet
to answer those questions.
Commissioner Schauner asked about the biosolids distribution on the site along with flooding concerns, and the potential impact of well water from that operation.
Orth said there were specific counts that had to be met to meet the clients B biosolids. He said they were basically, from a land application standpoint, were in compliance with the City’s wastewater utility in regards to the National Biosolid Management Program. He said it was a realistic concern and they were looking at putting the biosolids on farmland, but when there were flooding conditions, they were getting a lot of dilution, but then they were also getting a lot of other runoff that came associated with that through pasture land that flowed into the river. He said it was not just the biosolids that was the issue. He said biosolids was a controlled application that was put on agronomical rates, the crops needed and consumed. He said they had to test for heavy metals for all types of different material. He said it was a much more regulated application than what a farmer might have regarding ammonia on a site.
Commissioner Rundle said based on the recommendations of the size of the footprint and other considerations, they would continue the basic treatment process that was in use now and they would not need to invest in the other methods if they had a very small footprint. He said he wanted to confirm that it seemed like it was inevitable.
Orth said they were heading toward a conventional route because of their isolationism. He said when he looked at the proposed site of 59 Highway and 458, they had a lot more near neighbors and they had to confine the site and did a lot more odor control issues to control that. He said that drove those project costs up. He said what helped the Wakarusa Site, was they had that isolationism that they could go with more conventional technologies that required more land space, but were more economical to build.
Commissioner Schauner said if and when the plant was expanded, assuming they build a conventional treatment facility, would that site permit the use of more advanced treatment processes, as they might be developed in the future, as the plan was expanded.
Orth said absolutely. In the hydraulic profile they were going to accommodate for forecast and crystal balls of different regulations that were going to come out of the regulatory world and try to do the best of their ability of forecasting what the future might hold and have conscious decisions on how much they accommodate and put in the existing facility regarding cost versus what they had to plan for and potentially find a way to figure out a way to accommodate in the future. He said it was a fine line of investing too much money up front now than guessing where the regulations were going because there was no question that they were going to get more stringent.
Orth thanked City staff and City officials who were involved in this process because their leadership in the process showed to the general public they had a desire to move forward with this project and were willing to be a good neighbor.
Mayor Amyx thanked Orth and City staff in making this a very good process because it was the City’s goal to be good neighbors. He said this facility would be the largest infrastructure improvement they would ever invest in as a community. He said there were a number of valid question brought up at those meetings and he would work hard to make sure staff gave the best and honest answers to those questions although a lot of those questions could not be answered due to design and other things. He said the entire process showed that this was the best site for Wakarusa Water Reclamation Facility.
Mayor Amyx called for public comment.
After receiving no public comment, Vice Mayor Hack said when they first started thinking about this facility, the task was overwhelming to think about where to put this facility where they would gain the most reward, but do the least amount of harm. She said Orth and his staff and the City staff had done a remarkable job of locating this facility in a place that she felt was extremely comfortable in supporting and she felt it was the best of all possible situations and without the information and timing it took for Orth to walk everyone through, she did not think any of them would feel as comfortable.
Commissioner Schauner said if he would have any regrets in this process it was they were not going to use anything other than conventional methods in this treatment facility and he thought in the long run as operational costs continued to go up, they would want to look again and perhaps even harder at trying to find more natural methods of dealing with some of the product the Wastewater Treatment Plant would be dealing with. He said today’s new technology would be tomorrow’s old technology and at some point, they were going to find some of the processes they looked at, but chose not to use to be good future choices if they were not good choices today. He said until they continued to look at how they could do things in a different way, they probably would not improve their processes and he hoped as they looked at additional facilities or expansion of this when they did look at different ways of creating a whole process.
Commissioner Rundle said there was capacity on this site for construction of the wetlands.
Mayor Amyx said concerning the eco-machine, he learned that particular application did have a place in this community at smaller sites and hard to sewer sites. He thought they were not ready at this point to have that be the driver for the main facility. He said he thought they had enough throughout this process to realize there was technology out there used in specific locations and maybe be a better fit on taking care of reclamation needs.
Commissioner Schauner said he would like the City Commission to keep their eye on those other options as they did look harder to sewer sites and not always look at what they were used to using as the only answer.
Commissioner Hack said she thought that was why the City hired Black & Veatch because that firm was on top of those issues as well as City Staff.
Orth said from a technology standpoint when he said conventional treatment, because of their isolationism and cost, they could do that and did not preclude them from the next phase to look at an MBR type plan and higher technologies as they moved into it because they had that flexibility and had to mitigate for their no rise situation. He said he was very confident they would have some type of mitigation out in that flood plain area that they would need to dig out to compensate for fill. He said that was a natural place for wetland to be located at adjacent to their site and put a public feature on that site. He said it was meeting their needs, but also provided needs for the public along with an environmental benefit. He said they would be more involved in the next phases as they tried to figure out what they were going to do with the buffer space and how they were going to incorporate green design within the infrastructure, and what they were going to use for alternative power sources which were the next steps coming.
Commissioner Rundle said he thought the Commission could direct staff with enough information to not just keep their eye out, but actively pursue that type of technology. He said he thought they had some hurdles to overcome in getting a permitting process. He said this was not something that was done that frequently and they should be prepared if they had an opportunity to implement that technology.
Commissioner Schauner asked if there was something like a Certified Treatment Facility that would grow water for its own on site irrigation purposes and et cetera.
Orth said traditionally, in the actual process areas, that concept had not been applied to those areas because they were much more hardened concrete areas in their tankage. He said with the certification concept was applied as a lot of the admin facilities, operations building, the front entrance if public features were associated and that was the concept they were taking forward with the architectural design of the admin building and the public spaces. He said whether they get certification or design to the standards and not get certified were some of the decisions that they were going to be talking to staff. He said there was cost associated with getting that certification.
Commissioner Schauner said there was cost, but there was amortization to that cost as they saw energy prices increase and so forth. He said they would be looking at siting in a way that would make solar gain an issue.
Corliss asked if there was a task or site the City Commission wanted staff to pursue.
Commissioner Rundle said he did not think the Commission had enough information to relay that kind of direction at this time, but he thought it could be a future topic of discussion so they kept it active rather than just having an opportunity fall into their laps.
Mayor Amyx said it would not be a part of the initial development.
Commissioner Rundle said this would be on-going.
Commissioner Schauner said that they should look at very strongly doing a non-conventional treatment facility to the extent that something like that was in the realm of affordability.
Commissioner Rundle said it would seem there might be some code issue if it was localized to a particular development.
Mayor Amyx said one of the things they needed to be a careful of was if they had a site on the north side, obviously they had discussed industrial development in and around the airport area, that area would be hard and expensive to sewer. He said if they were going to look at a non-traditional type of machine that would sewer that area, they needed to look at the costs of being able to extend their sewer lines they did through normal, conventional extension of utilities as compared to they might want to put in place no matter how friendly it really might be. He said they had to have those cost estimates so they were comparing apples to apples. He thought it was important to look at the new type of facilities, but understand they had an investment in this facility to be able to carry out all those functions.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to direct staff to proceed with land acquisition for recommended site for location of the facility. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC COMMENT:
Hubbard
Collingsworth,
Mayor Amyx asked Corliss if staff could provide Collingsworth with all the information.
Corliss said he would be happy to sit down with Collingsworth and go over the living wage and the minimum wage issue. He said he did not want to speak off the top of his head because he did not know of the State Law currently pre-empts the City in that area or not, but he knew there was a state and federal minimum wage and he could learn a little bit more about that and sit down with Collingsworth. He said in addition, he would put the information together in memo form.
He said the wage floor was in the tax abatement ordinance and applied to companies that would seek property tax abatement and the company would need to enter into a performance agreement whereby the company indicated they were going to meet the wage floor requirements along with the health care for their employees for covered projects.
Commissioner Hack said it was important, in terms of public comment, to make sure that people know the City Commission did not consider companies that pay less than what the community agreed upon living wage for tax abatements. She said normally, they would like a company to pay more which was why it was called the base line. She said she thought they could be sure those companies they wanted, in terms of job creation, they would like to see pay far above what they set as the living wage.
Collingsworth said he understood that and agreed with it. (15)
FUTURE AGENA ITEMS:
|
09/19/06 |
Continued discussion of retail marketing analysis items |
|
TBD |
Future land use items include:
|
(16)
COMMISSION ITEMS:
Consider motion to recess into executive
session to discuss possible acquisition of real estate for 20 minutes. The justification of the executive session is
to keep possible terms and conditions of possible acquisition confidential at
this time. The regular meeting will
resume in the Commission meeting room.
It was moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack,
to recess into executive session at 8:15 p.m. to discuss possible acquisition
of real estate for 30 minutes. The
justification of the executive session is to keep possible terms and conditions
of possible acquisition confidential at this time. Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission reconvened in regular session at 8:45 at which time, it was moved by Schauner, seconded by Rundle, to extend the executive session for 15 minutes to 9:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission reconvened in regular
session at 9:00 p.m. at which time, it
was moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. (19)
APPROVED _____________________________
Mike Amyx, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk
1.
Charter Ordinance No. 38- 1st Read, City
purchasing practices.
2.
Ordinance No. 8028- 2nd Read, temp sale,
possession, and consumption of alcoholic beverages on west side of
3.
Ordinance No. 8031- 2nd Read, adopt 2006
Standard Traffic Ordinance.
4.
Resolution No. 6676- Surface Transportation Project
- construction of Kasold.
5.
Resolution No. 6678- GOB construction of Kasold.
6.
Mortgage Release - 443 Maple, Corene Nelson.
7.
Work of Art Permit - People’s National Band, 4831
W. 6th .
8.
Contract - Feasibility Study & Needs Assessment
-of sports & athletic facilities.
9.
“Get Downtown” musical event: Right-of-Way application
& City financial participation.
10.
City Manager’s Report.
11.
Comments from Kathy Gragg concerning animal control
ordinance.
12.
Staff report concerning population estimates from
U.S. Census Bureau.
13.
Meeting summary report from Black & Veatch for
Wakarusa Water Reclamation Facility.
14.
Executive session; real estate acquisition.
15.
Public Comment.
16.
Future Agenda Items.
17.
Commission Items.