June 12, 2007

The Board of Commissioners of the City of Lawrence met in regular session at 6:35 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers in City Hall with Mayor Hack presiding and members Amyx, Dever, Chestnut and Highberger present.  

CONSENT AGENDA

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to approve the City Commission meeting minutes of May 22, 2007 and June 5, 2007.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to receive the Board of Electrical Examiners & Appeals meeting minutes of April 4, 2007; and the Uniform Building Code Board of Appeals meeting minutes of May 17, 2007.  Motion carried unanimously. 

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to approve claims to 657 vendors in the amount of $5,188,920.77 and payroll from May 27, 2007 to June 9, 2007 in the amount of $1,795,586.58.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to approve the Drinking Establishment Licenses for Carlos O’Kelly’s, 707 West 23^rd; Panda Garden, 1500 West 6^th; Duffy’s at the Econolodge, 2222 West 6^th; Scarlet Orchid, 2223 Louisiana Ste: C; Milton’s Coffee, 920 Massachusetts; the Retail Liquor License for Cork & Barrel Downtown, 901 Mississippi; and the Cereal Malt Beverage License for China Buffet, 2907 West 6^th.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to approve the sale of surplus busses on egov deals.   Motion carried unanimously.             (1)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to authorize the City Manager to execute the annual renewable contract agreement with Marsh McBirney, a Hach Company, for Sanitary Sewer Collection System Flow Monitoring Data Delivery Services, for $210,000.  Motion carried unanimously.                                              (2)

The City Commission reviewed the bids for Kaw Water Supply Low Service Pump Station No. 2 Improvements for the Utilities Department.  The bids were:

BIDDER                                  BID AMOUNT           

Walters Morgan Construction                         $569,750

                        Foley Company                                               $613,590

                        P1 Group                                                         $620,900

                        CAS Construction                                           $674,000

                        Facilities Construction Group                         $741,663

                        Engineer’s Estimate                                       $650,000 

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to award the bid to Walters Morgan Construction, in the amount of $569,750.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                  (3)

Ordinance No. 8115, rezoning (Z-09-46-04) of 11.93 acres from UR (Urban Reserve) to RM12 (Multi-Dwelling Residential, located at the southeast corner of George Williams Way and Overland Drive in the recently recorded Final Plat of Oregon Trail Addition, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Dever, Chestnut, Hack, and Highberger.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                           (4)

Ordinance No. 8116, rezoning (Z-09-47-04) 16.47 acres from UR (Urban Reserve) to RS7 (Single-Dwelling Residential), located at the northeast portion of the recently recorded Final Plat of Oregon Trail Addition lying north of Overland Drive, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Dever, Chestnut, Hack, and Highberger.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                    (5)

Ordinance No. 8117, rezoning (Z-09-48-04) 31.93 acres from UR (Urban Reserve) to RM12D (Multi-Dwelling Residential), located in the northwest portion of the recently recorded Final Plat of Oregon Trail Addition lying north of Overland Drive as well as the southeast portion of the plat, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Dever, Chestnut, Hack, and Highberger.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                    (6)

Ordinance No. 8114, Special Use Permit (SUP-03-03-07) for The Castle Tea Room, located at 1307 and 1313 Massachusetts Street, Lawrence, Kansas, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Dever, Chestnut, Hack, and Highberger.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                            (7)

Ordinance No. 8113, rezoning (Z-01-02-07) of First Step Facility, 7.73 acres from RS10 (Single-Dwelling Residential) to RMO (Multi-Dwelling Residential-Office), located at 3015 W. 31^st Street, Lawrence, Kansas, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Dever, Chestnut, Hack, and Highberger.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                     (8)

Ordinance No. 8118, establishing a west Baldwin Creek gravity sewer line connection fee, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Dever, Chestnut, Hack, and Highberger.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                     (9)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to adopt Resolution No. 6726, authorizing the issuance of additional General Obligation Bonds for construction of Kasold Drive, Bob Billings Parkway (15^th Street) to Clinton Parkway.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                           (10)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to approve amendments to Chapter 20, Development Code for (TA-05-07-07 previously TA-05-03-07) and direct staff to draft an ordinance.  Motion carried unanimously.                               (11)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to initiate a text amendment for Section 20-218 GPI, General Public and Institutional District; and refer to the Planning Commission for consideration.  Motion carried unanimously.            (12)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Jean Wright, 813 Madeline Lane.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                       (13)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger to receive a request from Oregon Trail Holdings, LC, to waive the bidding requirements for the Oregon Trail Park Benefit District.  Motion carried unanimously.                                         (14)

Commissioner Amyx pulled from the consent agenda the first reading of Ordinance No. 8120, establishing a domestic partnership registry.

Toni Wheeler, Director of Legal Services, said following up on the meeting that occurred on March 22^nd, staff drafted an ordinance for the City Commission’s review that was substantially similar to the ordinance that was presented to the Attorney General’s Office for review and consideration.  She said the ordinance included a residency requirement recommended in the Attorney General opinion.  Section 10-201 was amended to require domestic partners be residents of the City of Lawrence.  In Section 10-202, a resident was defined as:

“A “resident” shall mean a person who has established at least 60 consecutive days prior to filing a Declaration of Domestic Partnership with the office of the City designated by the City Manager, a present and fixed residence within the city limits of Lawrence, Kansas where the person intends to remain for an indefinite period and to which the person intends to return following absence.”

“In Section 10-203 staff added the residency requirement to the criteria for establishing a domestic partnership registration.  Also, 10-206 was added that permitted a partnership to be removed if the City received information those people no longer met the definition of a domestic partner, for instance, if one or both of those people moved outside the City and were no longer City residents.  She said after an opportunity for review, if the City had sufficient evidence, those people might be removed from the registry. 

She said finally, in Section 10-210, made it unlawful for any person to attempt to register a domestic partnership without the consent of the persons to be registered. 

She said a question was raised regarding people residing outside of the City of Lawrence, but were employed within the City, and whether that issue was contained in the ordinance, but it was not in the ordinance.  The direction staff received from the City Commission on May 22^nd was to pose that question to the Attorney General’s Office and provide a report to the Commission at a later date which was staff’s intention.  

Mayor Hack said typically, a pulled consent agenda item would be postponed a week for discussion, but instead, she would allow 20 minutes total for public comment.  She said the Commission was not avoiding public comment, but they had received a fair amount of public comment and had time to digest the information.  She said she would appreciate the public’s understanding of that time restraint. 

Reverend Leo Barbee, Jr., Lawrence, provided petitions on this matter and read the following statement in opposition to the proposed Domestic Partner Registry:

“On the accounted matter on God’s merciful grace that the final votes on this ordinance would not take place until June or July.  With that additional time for reflections, he urged them in the strongest way, to vote against the establishment of this registry.  They may have voted in favor of it, in principle, at the May 26^th meeting, but one element of a wise and courageous leadership was to keep thinking.  Please turn back from this dangerous course.  There are dozens of reasons why you should vote against the registry here are just a few. 

1. This registry would weaken our commitment to strong marriages, building blocks under any stable society.  This weakening comes by leaking out benefits which traditionally are reserved for marriages and giving them to heterosexual and homosexual partnership which fall far short of unnecessary commitment of marriage;

2. Public comments 15-4 in favor of the registry on 5/22 do not reflect the thousands of citizens were against this;

3. You cannot believe that a DPR would be the final step in the promotion of a gay rights agenda and into tearing down a traditional marriage in our community.  Stopping it now would prove to be the wise course. 

4. This ordinance works against the spirit of the law expressed by Kansans in the marriage amendment.

5. You’re Commission always makes moral decisions.  Drug sales, prostitution, smoking bans, speed limits, all have a moral element.  Encourage what was good, restrict or forbid what was bad. You will symbolically honor National Arbor Day because you think that more trees would be good for Lawrence, but you will not honor National Nazi Day because you think genocidal racism is wrong, and that was true.  Here is another occasion for you to choose between what is right and wrong.  What lifestyles and relationships would be encouraging in our City, six God, Moses, Jesus, and Paul all said God created the male and female, a man should leave his father and mother, and should cling to his wife and the two shall become one flesh so they were no longer two, but one flesh that God had joined together let no separate

6. All governing authority is from God, but with your authority you are to praise goodness and judgment against evil as God defines those.  You are called to be ministered of God for our good and you must never call evil good or good evil or give approval to those who practice sin.” 

He said Lawrence citizens needed to acknowledge the fact, when talking about heterosexual and homosexual that behind that push was a homosexual and lesbian community.  He said the community needed to acknowledge that and not dance around it. 

Reverend William A. Dulan, Lawrence, spoke in opposition to the proposed Domestic Partner Registry, and said he was speaking from the heart and was basing his brief remarks from the foundation of the scripture as he understood it.  “Righteousness exalts a nation.  Sin is a reproach to any people.”  He said he knew they might have varying degrees of what they called sin, but anything that was against God’s word, it came under the category of sin.  He did not feel this register was going to help the community and certainly did not believe it was based from the foundation of God’s word and morality and in righteousness.  He knew the City prides itself in tolerance and in inclusiveness, but sometimes they could be so politically correct that they become spiritually wrong.  He prayed that they reconsider and do what was right in the sight of God. 

Natalya Lowther said she was a devout Christian and that had nothing to do with this issue.  She said for her this issue was about letting people have access to health insurance and other benefits that many, many other people in the community, whether they were married or not, had access to.  Those benefits were given out regardless of whether a man beats his wife, regardless of whether someone had committed murder or were greedy or committed any hundreds of thousands of other things that God might see as sinful.  It was not the business of businesses to decide who was sinful or of the City Commission; it was God’s job.  It was the business of the City Commission and businesses to treat all individuals in a fair and equitable manner to and to try to provide necessary services such as health care for everybody on an equal opportunity basis.  She said she hoped the Commission would vote in favor of the Domestic Partner Registry.  She said there were many, many families in this community that needed health care.

Marci Francisco, Lawrence, spoke in support of the proposed Domestic Partner Registry.  She said anything that could be done to help individuals strengthen themselves through partnerships through their families really did build stronger communities and a stronger state.  Working in the Kansas Senate, she realized that they were not going to be able to take care of all the needs for their citizens and again the more they could help each other, the more they could build those connections and the better it was going to be for everyone.  She thanked the City Commission for their courageous vote and encouraged the Commission to continue on that path to allow that ability for Lawrence citizens.

Lisa McFarland urged the Commission to reconsider the vote on the proposed Domestic Partner Registry.  She said there was discussion about what God thought about this issue and about the pros and cons financially and how people would benefit.  She said she hoped the Commission would reconsider so that they would not be choosing benefits for people based on money, convenience or based on public opinion.  She agreed there might need to be some benefits for other people in this community.  As a Christian, she believed healthcare should be provided, but that did not mean giving up on what they believed was right or wrong or give in because it was public opinion.  She said those rights they were talking about for domestic partners were healthcare benefits or insurance benefits, but she would say why not offer the benefits to individuals who were seniors that were widowed or widows or people who were single.  She said by doing this registry, based on saying it was for their benefits and for their insurance benefits, what about the people that were not married and about people that did not have domestic partners and did not think the issue was about benefits.  If they were talking about benefits then they should make some kind of health care benefits and insurance that was available to everybody regardless of their race, age, or status of living with someone or not with someone.  She said as far as the Domestic Partner Registry, she was against it and hoped that the City Commission would reconsider it.  She said she did not think it was going to benefit the community and believed it was step one of seeing a further tearing down of civilization and families with children.

Ron Armstrong, Lawrence, said Lawrence was getting out of step with leaders of the state with their public announcement of trying to make Kansas a great place to move to in the year 2020.  He said he wanted to bring attention to the leaders of Lawrence of the 105 counties that were in Kansas, the last time they had a registry Lawrence was the only county that voted in favor of the registry.  He said he could not understand why our county and our City were getting out of step with other leaders. 

Valerie Howland said she was a retired school teacher and Pastor establishing new work in Lawrence called Zion International Ministries.  She asked what it gained a person, to gain the whole world and lose their soul.

Gloria Gardner, Lawrence, said she had done extensive work with troubled people.  She said the scripture stated that, “Righteousness exalts a nation and sin is a reproach to any people.”  In the times she was out helping street people, even in jail, there was always a need to try to help those who were against themselves and she reached out to several at the last part of her ministry where she was working with homosexuals and gays.  She said she did her best to point those people to the right way because God loves all people.  She said she pointed those people to the right way and had seen many deliverance and healings, people that were healed of AIDS that came out of trouble and wanted their lifestyles to be different.  She said she thanked God for the working ministry. 

Shelley Vann, Lawrence, said the first thing that crossed her mind about the registry was moral values.  She asked what happened to their moral values.  She thought if Lawrence passed this registry, it was going to send the wrong message to the City’s young people that it was okay to live with one another, it was okay to be dating a man and a man or a girl and a girl. She said she worked at Lawrence High School and she saw a lot of it and tried to steer those young people in the right direction.  She said she was a Christian and a witness for God.

Betty Alderson said she wanted to say how proud she was of the City Commission when they voted for the registry.  She said she saw it only as a matter of fairness to people and did not see it as any threat to marriage.  She said it was not a threat to her in any way and thought that it was a fair thing to do for people to have equal opportunities in the community.

Lorraine Messinger, Lawrence, said she wanted to comment on a point raised earlier about Lawrence being out of step.  She said it needed to be recognized Lawrence was not out of step.  California, Hawaii, Maine, Oregon, Washington State, and the District of Columbia all had statewide Domestic Partner Registries.  Large cities they thought of, Boston, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, but southern cities Atlanta, New Orleans had those registries.  Kansas City and St. Louis had registries and small cities like Ashland, Oregon, Boulder, Denver, Cleveland Heights, Eureka Springs, Tuscan, and a lot of places that sound a lot like Lawrence like Ann Harbor, Michigan, Athens, Georgia, Austin, Texas, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Hartford, Connecticut, Iowa City, Iowa, Madison, Wisconsin, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Urbana, Illinois, all college towns, places that wanted to be welcoming and have a welcoming message and wanted to bring a variety of people and businesses and academia to where they lived.  She said she also thought it was important to note that she was a Jew and the Commission represented a variety of people of diverse religions and this was not a religious issue, it was a civic and civil issue so she hoped that the City Commission would recognize that in their vote and hoped they would continue to support the Domestic Partner Registry. 

Piercia Burgess said she came to Lawrence in 1962 and had been around many different cities.  She said Minneapolis was mentioned and she just came back from that area where she saw the destruction of Minneapolis and saw what it did to the morale of Minneapolis.  Minneapolis became a blood city and had no morals and no foundation.  She saw other cities go through the same situation and pleaded with the City Commissioners to take a look at the destruction and what it had done.  She said she was a Christian and really understood what God was saying.  She said God was saying that they were to be one man and woman, and asked the City Commission to please reconsider.  

Mr. Armstrong said he was born in Lawrence, but lived in New York City for about 39 years of his life and worked in Sing Sing Correctional Facility.  He said Jesus was a Jew, but Jesus loved everybody, and he agreed with that love, but disagreed with the homosexual gender in Lawrence today because God and the Bible said it was an abomination before God.  He said someone might live in other cities, but New York City and the prison system were crumbling because of its morals and values. 

Commissioner Amyx said he had an opportunity to read many letters regarding this matter, but he said his vote would stand the way it was three weeks ago.

Commissioner Chestnut said he supported the Kansas Marriage Amendment, but he thought it was important to note this ordinance had no comment on sexual orientation and the Attorney General had basically said the ordinance was not in contrast to state law.  There was no recognition of legal rights and it was stated directly in the ordinance.  He said he had to look at the ordinance as it was written, not at what he thought was going to happen or what might happen on either side of this issue.  He said he appreciated all the dialogue, but he was holding his position on this matter.

Commissioner Highberger said he received a lot of public comment, but respectfully disagreed with some of the comments.  He said he did not see the action as a threat to individuals’ marriage or marriage as an institution.  He said in fact, the data he had seen from some of the Scandinavian countries who instituted domestic partnerships as early as 1989 and the 1990’s, marriage rates had gone up in those countries during that time. 

He said he agreed with Senator Francisco that anything that could be done to encourage long-term partnerships among individuals strengthened the communities in this society.  He also agreed with Ms. McFarland in that this country should provide healthcare to every individual and wished that could be done on a city level, but the City did not have the resources and this ordinance did not dedicate any of the City resources to that cause.  He said he hoped there would be elected representatives on the state and federal level who would step up and address that situation. 

He said this issue was about freedom, and freedom was one of the values this country was founded on, but freedom was never absolute.  He said a freedom infringes on someone else’s freedom, obviously had to be limited in some way, but this was a freedom that did not impose on anyone else’s freedom and expanded the possibilities for people in this society.  He said he strongly supported the Domestic Partner Registry and thought it was the right thing to do, whether or not it was the most popular thing to do.

Mayor Hack said this was a very strong and emotional issue which touched a lot of people’s hearts. This issue was a difficult issue for many folks and applauded everyone who expressed their opinion in a way that was not harmful or hurtful to people on the other side of the issue.

She said Pastor Peter Luckey stated, “It was simply the right thing to do” and that was how she felt about this issue for a long time.  She said she was proud of Lawrence, Kansas, in having this ordinance enacted. 

Moved by Highberger, seconded by Hack, to approve on first reading Ordinance 8120 establishing a domestic partnership registry.  Aye:  Chestnut, Dever, Hack, and Highberger.  Nay: Amyx.  Motion carried.                                                                                                    (15)

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:

David Corliss, City Manager, said there were a number of stormwater improvement projects that were helping a number of different neighborhoods.  Also, a rain garden was recently constructed near the SWAN Building in North Lawrence which was another related stormwater project. 

He also reported that Steve Stewart, Central Garage Superintendent, was one of the first in the nation to receive the Public Fleet Professional Certification.  He said Stewart had been a great asset to the City and a wonderful person to work with in working with a number of different departments that Stewart and the mechanics in the Fleet Division served.

Also, the Lawrence Arts Commission hosted the 20^th Annual Outdoor Sculpture Exhibition which was featured in the newly released edition of “1,000 Places to See in Canada and the USA Before You Die.”                                                                                            (16)

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 

Receive staff memo regarding Transit System Issues.

Cliff Galante, Transit Administrator, presented the staff report.  He said a couple months ago, he was before the Commission providing a report regarding the increased demand for paratransit service and how that was creating a challenge for staff in terms of maintaining cost of this service to stay within the budget and how it required needing to dedicate additional revenues to keep up with the demand.  At that time, he was working with the Public Transit Advisory Committee to look at an immediate and long term solution to better manage the costs of paratransit service as well as demand.  One of the immediate solutions the Commission approved, at that time, was to extend service hours to keep pace with the demand the City had for the first part of the year.  He said he was looking for approval from the Commission on implementing recommendation to address the long term, cost and demand for service.  He said those recommendations were:

1.         Revise T Lift Certification Process - Currently, that process was based more on an honor system.  The person would fill out a form indicating their disability and supply physician’s contact information to be certified for the T Lift service.  He said staff recommended that a qualified professional certify a person’s disability, such as a Physician or registered nurse, Physical or Occupational Therapist, Psychiatrist, Psychologist, Mental Health Counselor, Vocational Counselor, Rehabilitation Specialist or Independent Living Skills Trainer, Licensed Social Worker or Case Manager, Orientation and Mobility Instructor or Travel Trainer, or Ophthalmologist. 

2.         Implement a Recertification Process - Currently, there was a one-time certification process and there was no mechanism in place to keep that database current and no way of knowing how many people were active in using the system.  He said staff was recommending recertification every three years.  He said for people currently certified, there would be a 6 month grace period to allow time to certify under the new process.  One concern was individuals with permanent disabilities.  Staff was suggesting people with permanent disabilities go through a recertification process, but would not need to see a professional again and would only need to convey they were still interested in utilizing that service.  Only people with temporary disabilities needed to go through that recertification process again and see a professional.

3.         Enforce Conditional Use Eligibility for T Lift Service on a Trip-by-Trip Basis – Currently, people were certified into three categories: 1) Unconditional, which meant under any circumstance a person was eligible to use the service; 2) Conditional, which meant under certain conditions that person’s disability qualified that person to use the fixed route service; and 3) Temporary disability, for instance, a person broke their leg and could not walk to a bus stop.  Right now, there was the conditional eligibility, but it was never enforced.  He said it would require more work in scheduling trips to manage and evaluate on a trip-by-trip basis.  The City had scheduling software that assisted in that function and he was assured by the contractor, they would be able to handle that task.  He said the software would help with the demand in making sure the service was truly available for those who really needed it.

4.         Reduce T Lift Advanced Reservation Period – Currently, people could call two weeks in advance to schedule a reservation and what was found, was one out of every three trips that were scheduled resulted in a trip cancellation.  Instead of the trip being completely cancelled, a day before their trip, a person would have a better idea of their schedule and would rebooking their trip for a different time.  He said anyone else trying to call to schedule a trip in that period, that person was unable to schedule because all the time slots were filled.  He said to try to make the service more user-friendly for everyone who was trying to utilize the service, it was recommended to reduce the advanced registration period from two weeks to three days.  He said within three days people had a pretty good idea of where they were going three days in advance and what their schedule would look like.  He said that proposed change did not impact people that were on a subscription type service.

5.         Eliminate Honor System Policy to Obtain Reduced Fare for T Service – Currently, the fixed route service offered a reduced fair for students K-12, Haskell Indian Nation University Students, Seniors age 60 or older, and people with disabilities which had been functioning under the honor system.  He said the bus drivers found people were indicating they had a disability, pay the fair, and no one questioned it.  He said he believed there was abuse of that policy, but how severe, he did not know.  He said as a best practice, identification would need to be seen to qualify for the reduced fare.  Students grades 10^th through 12^th should have a School ID; age 60 plus, show any ID of their age; Haskell students, Student ID’s, and under the ADA to qualify for the reduced fair, Medicare Card could be shown.  Anyone else with a disability, those people would need to go through the T Lift certification process to show they had a disability and a card would be issued to that individual to show they qualified for the reduced fare.  He said K-9 students would not need to show an ID and he thought it would be easy to tell whether or not those students would qualify. 

6.         Suspend T Lift Riders who Cancel 50% of Scheduled Trips over a 90-day Period – Currently, the policy was 6 or more late trip cancellations or a no show within a 90 day period.  He said booking trips and canceling at the last minute impacted everyone else’s ability to use that service. 

7.         Increased Fares for Fixed-Route T Service and T Lift Paratransit Service – Fares had not been increased since this service had started.  He said he conducted a statewide analysis to compare this City fares as opposed to other communities and by far Lawrence charged the lowest of any community in the state.  Typically, most transit systems, in the state, charged about $1.25 for fixed route service per trip and for paratransit service was about $2.00.  Right now, Lawrence charged a $0.50 fare for fixed route service and $1.00 for paratransit service.  He thought it was appropriate at this time, especially in light of some of the budget challenges they were facing, they needed to look at all ways of increasing revenue and raising fares was certainly one way to do that.  What was being proposed was phasing those increased fares to try and minimize the impact on individuals or social service agencies that might have financial hardships.  The proposed increase would be 50%, effective July 1^st and the other 50% effective January 1^st.  Thereafter, he would be working with PTAC and at some point, present the City Commission with a long range plan on how to address fare increases in the future.  He said he did not think waiting every 6 years was the appropriate way and there needed to be some type of mechanism such as raising the fares incrementally based on operating costs, which go up every year and was unrealistic for the revenues to stay flat.  The revenues had to grow if the expenses were going to grow or they needed to cut back on their expenses. 

            He said one new idea they would be adding to the service, was an unlimited daily ride pass at a discounted rate.

8.         Children Under Age 12 Must be Accompanied by an Adult for T and T Lift Services.  He said regarding minimum age, they would like to table that recommendation for further discussion.  He said there was some disagreement, but thought there were merits on both sides and needed further discussion. 

Commissioner Amyx asked if the proposed fare increases and recommendations would help bolster the City’s revenues to get to 2008.   

Galante, said correct.

Commissioner Amyx said with those changes, based on the same ridership, he asked what the City would be placed in, heading into 2008.

            Galante said their revenue should increase.  He said he did not know what level of ridership would be lost as a result of those fare changes because they had never increased fares.  He said if fares were doubled, he did not want it to be the expectation that revenues would double.  He said revenue might double over time, but it should be expected they would lose a percentage of their ridership.  He said he believed over time, they would get that ridership back because at $1.00 a ride it was still the cheapest transportation around besides walking or riding a bike.  The fare increase would help bolster revenues for this year which should hopefully offset some of the spending they would be spending this year and should help them with the budget for next year and offset some of the need for next year.

Commissioner Amyx said he appreciated that better ideas in addressing this issue were being looked at to manage revenues.  He said anytime revenues could be better managed, would make more sense in the end, especially as they looked at shortfalls that might be faced over the next two years when going through the cycle of downturn in the economy.

David Corliss, City Manager, said he wanted to make it clear to the City Commission that the primary reason changes were being pursued was for an attempt to reduce the success they were experiencing with the paratransit service.  They experienced success that was outstripping what they had budgeted for that service this year.  They could not sustain the ability to provide that service and could not eliminate that service.  If they had a fixed demand route, they had to have paratransit.  In fact, if there were a pattern of denials in the paratransit, they were in trouble in meeting the federal regulations that would allow them to access money for both the paratransit and the fixed route.  They were essentially trying to ration the demand of paratransit for those who truly needed it and could not use the fixed route system as an alternative.  They were also trying to increase revenue so they would have additional resources to fund the system this year.  That additional revenue would help a little bit for next year, but would still be looking at budget options for the 2008 budget that would indicate what additional resources they thought would be necessary to sustain the same level of service for the “T” next year.  He said they were not making that decision tonight but were trying to bolster the situation for 2007.

Commissioner Chestnut said there would be some assumption about ridership and that elasticity of demand, how much it would decrease versus fare increases and come up with an estimate of what the fare box would be because obviously, they were still talking about a substantial increase in property tax to fund that program.  

He said regarding the policy issues, he looked at the number of ridership and paratransit was up and fixed routes down 2% year-to-date which was a somewhat counterintuitive based on where energy prices was going.  He asked how on would count rides.

Galante said staff did a 100% count of all rides and the drivers had to turn in numbers daily.  He said in other larger metro transit systems areas, the volume was so large that trip sampling was practiced.  He said the “T” also did trip sampling and was required to report all numbers annually to the federal government. Those numbers were what helped dictate future funding in coming years.  He said the drivers of the “T” were very specific on counting passengers and miles and had to certify the methodology used in counting and it was a very standard process to follow.

Commissioner Chestnut said paratransit might see that ridership go up further if putting some of those changes in place which had the opportunity to increase efficiency.

Galante said in looking at paratransit in the long term, as demographics of the community ages, the community typically had more health related problems which then required those people to have specialized services and transportation obviously fell into that category.  He said this was something the City was going to be dealing with for a very long time.  He said he had a conversation with the transit administrator from Ft. Collins, Colorado, and Ft. Collins was dealing with the same issue two years ago, where the demand for paratransit service was outstripping their available resources.  As a result, Ft. Collins had to take a variety of steps to better manage demand and cost for that service and many of the recommendations that were presented, Ft. Collins implemented and they took further steps beyond.  He said this issue was not unique to Lawrence, it was a nationwide issue.  Transit provided an important service to people and staff wanted to make sure they continued to provide that service for those who needed it.

Mayor Hack called for public comment.

Marcia Johnston, Lawrence, said it was a crucial time with high gas prices and information on global warming that Lawrence should be thinking of those things such as increasing routes and ridership.  She said there should not be talk about raising prices and transit should not be expected to be a profit maker because it should be a public service.  She said the statistics in the paper indicated that in 2005 ridership was increased by 200,000.   She said cutting hours and eliminating Saturday service should not be discussed because Saturday was probably the biggest day for people to ride the bus downtown to spend money,

As far as children under 12 riding the bus, it should be up to the parents.  If the child was disruptive, that child should realize he or she could be put off the bus. 

She said they moved to Lawrence 5 years ago from Boulder, Colorado, which had a great bus system, and found no bus service on Kasold, north and south, from 23^rd Street to 6^th Street and people were stuck, particularly in the winter.  She said the City should get its priorities straight and place the bus system at the top of the list.  The new library, roundabouts, new recreational building, and other things on the wish list, should be at the bottom.

Robert Pearson, Lawrence, he had been all over the world and just about every country subsidized the public transportation system extremely heavily with gasoline taxes.  In Europe, about half the taxes were used for gasoline and public transportation was considered to be a right.  In this country it seemed to be rather optional, depending upon the economy.  He said he knew this issue was beyond what the Commission could do, but it did seem unfortunate at a time when things were getting very expensive for people that the City was contemplating cutting back service when service should be increased.  He said he used the public transportation system a lot in and hoped it would continue.  He said if the transportation efforts were cut in half, the City should just shut the entire transportation system down.

Rick Slingerland, Lawrence, said it was mentioned the City would not be discussing ridership or cutting down transportation services and the City needed to bring the newspaper to task for propagating misinformation.  He said he would applaud the consideration of raising fares in the use of the “T” service and certification process for a person with disabilities.  He said as far as re-certification, he suggested people be notified.  He said as a registered nurse, he often dealt with making sure his patients knew about public transportation.  He said his family had physical disabilities and were non-drivers and because of his work he was not around to take his family places.  One of the reasons his family moved to Lawrence was because it had one of the best public transportation systems of all the communities they looked into.  He said he would hate to think that just being here five months seeing this benefit for his family go down the tubes.  He hoped the Commission would consider many other options before reducing the ability of people who needed this service to use it.  He said 9-5 Monday through Friday did not work because people needed to get around in the evenings and on weekends.    

Hubbard Collingsworth said he was speaking as an individual and as Co-Chair of the Community Coalition on Homelessness.  He said they wanted to strongly emphasize to keep in mind the poorest of the poor, homeless, elderly, and people with disabilities and numerous segments of citizenry relied on the Transit System.  He said they were for anything they could do to improve the system, but asked that the Commission not put the burden on the back of the poorest in the community. 

Ron Armstrong, Lawrence, said he worked for the “T” and was speaking on behalf of many of the individuals who ride the paratransit bus.  He said he had been in the transportation business for over 30 years and it was rewarding work.  He said at one time he was a volunteer for Meals on Wheels and the same people that were home bound with Meals on Wheels ride the paratransit bus.  He said those people were so happy with having the ability to get around.  He said the Commission should take some time to meet those people from blind people that were still going to work, to people in wheelchairs and those people were working and contributing to the community.  Those people would not have a way to get around if working at 7:00 in the morning and getting back from their workplace 8:00 at night.  

He said Lawrence was always in magazines and people back east came to Lawrence to see why he moved from New York City to Lawrence, Kansas.  He said he had been visiting Lawrence since 1977, and people say it was a great place, but sometimes people did not really know what was going on.  He said he knew the bottom line was always money, but they needed to learn how to parlay their money and use that money where it was important and served the community the most.  He said there needed to be a balance of where Lawrence was going. 

Commissioner Highberger asked Armstrong whether he thought the procedural changes would impact the riders in using the service.

Armstrong said he could not honestly speak on that issue because he was involved in other issues and only heard some of things that were going on at the end.  He said he thought in the long run, people would still be riding the bus.  He said he was on the driving end, not the administrative end. 

He said he wanted to add the junior high school kids had identification cards in the four schools in Lawrence.  He said it was known how Lawrence got labeled as being a mean city to the homeless and that it was lax process in riding the “T”.  He said the drivers did not have any teeth in the situation in challenging anyone for the fare.  He said it was an honor system, but some people these days and times did not live by that. 

Jeff Eubanks said he had been a long term resident of this town and was born and raised in Lawrence.  He said he was happy to see the turnout on behalf of this community to speak for keeping the system alive.  He said there were a lot of people in this town that relied on this system and people could not get to where they needed to go if they did not have the transit system.  He knew people, due to various issues with the transit system, been in and out of jobs because they had missed being picked up.  Lawrence still needed transit for its people in this community.  He said with gas prices being what they were, there were people who commute to and from work and rather than drive their cars, they take the bus.  He was proud to see that because it kept this town going, but at the same time, those people if they were forced to go back to driving their cars, would put a financial crunch on their families as well and they had to keep this going.  He said rather than looking at ways they could cut money with the system, he thought they needed to find ways that they could keep the system running even later at night because there were people that worked nights that if they took the bus to work, they did not have a way to get home and they needed to find a way to do this for the community.  He said this had been an issue since the transit system started in Lawrence.  He knew with his own fiancée when she worked at NCS she worked nights and he would have to find friends to go pick her up from work because the bus did not run late enough to get her home from work when she would get off.  He said he had been a transportation driver himself for a number of years in Lawrence.  He had driven for Laidlaw and a number of the taxi companies and the City really needed to find more qualified drivers and a way to get them here and a way to keep them on the road for this town.

Vashti Winterburg, Lawrence, said she was a property owner and wanted to state that she would be more than happy to see her property tax increases in support of the bus system.  She thought it was too important not to have a bus system.

Commissioner Amyx said he remembered Winterburg was present at a meeting earlier in the year and there was a question about fare increases and wanted to know if she had looked at those increases.

Winterburg said a fare increase was probably due.  When they originally started the bus system, the idea was to charge a fare, but the intent was they would never rely on that money.  She said she did not know enough about what part of the budget that was, but suspected it was still pretty small.  She said she would like to see the fares increased to 50%, but conduct a review in January to see if they should increase it another 50% or just hold for a while.  She asked if $0.75 was a lot of money to some people and she said probably.  She asked if it was a good deal and she said it was a great deal.  She asked if they needed to move people around in this City by public transportation and she said yes.  She asked if they needed to be moving as many people as possible and she said absolutely.  She said people needed to get out of their cars and was hoping some day she would win the lottery and finance the bus system so they could go every 30 minutes on the bus system.  She said personally, she would like to see that as a goal and thought they would pile a lot more people on the bus system if they could figure out the way to do that.   

Anthony Duran said he worked for MV Transportation as a paratransit driver.  He said he lived in Lawrence for about 13 years.  He was with MV when they first started, left for other venues, and came back.  He said he dealt with the handicapped, the elderly, and people that really needed the system.  He said a lot of times he was their only contact other than their medical physician or their physical therapist.  He said they did not get out enough to see what was going on in this world, so they tried to make their trip as pleasant as possible. 

He said as for an impact about the changes for the proposed fares, everyone he had spoken to had been rather adamant and willing to make an increase in fare.  He said this City needed a bus system that was for the people because 90% of the people who he dealt with could not afford to drive to work because gas prices were too high and there was no parking.  He said the Commission had to look at this issue from where they would be if they could not drive their car for two weeks and had to rely on the “T”.  He said if they had to rely on this bus service, they needed the bus service to run as efficiently and effectively for the person who needed it the most, which was the public, the entire public and not just the people who lived up at KU or the people that lived out south.  He said the ones that were looking for property tax increases were the people who were actually riding the bus and were the ones who needed the service.  He said before any changes or decisions were made, they needed to decide whether or not it was in the City Commission’s best interest because they had to put themselves in the riders’ shoes.  He said if they service went early enough for him to ride it in the morning, he would not be driving in the morning and would ride the bus to work and ride it back to home, but it did not unfortunately. 

Mayor Hack said the issue of the age limit would be tabled and brought back to PTAC for additional discussion.

Commissioner Amyx said Galante did a very good job of walking the Commission through the reasons behind those recommendations and the revisions that were necessary.   He said he had no reason to believe that this was not the right move.  He said the fares were probably the best value in town and they made up a very small part of the budget.  He said everyone would agree that bus systems were not designed to make money and could not make money because they were a service that was provided to the citizens of the community.  The Commission’s job was to make sure there was efficiency and those were long term goals, but the Commission needed to look at those short term setbacks such as funding.   He said the Commission was looking at every line on the budget.  He said there were some changes, but he thought those changes were positive.

Mayor Hack said Galante and staff from MV Transportation worked hard and complemented them for their great service.  The increases seen in bus ridership, she did not know of a business in Lawrence that would not love 20% increases every year over what they had the year before.  She thought it was important to reemphasize that a fare increase was not to turn a profit on the “T”, but to help maintain the service.  She said the Commission needed to have serious conversations when proceeding through the next phase of their budgeting as to what emphasis they were going to place on public transportation because she thought the community made it clear that it was important to many folks and was an issue the Commission had to address to see where they would go in future decisions.  She agreed with Commissioner Amyx that the fare increases were necessary along with the “T” lift changes.  She said she did not think anyone would be excluded from riding the “T” lift, but it would make it more efficient and allow for more people to ride the paratransit. 

Vice Mayor Dever said he and Galante discussed the average government reimbursement rates for mileage over the last 5 years and those rates had gone up about 12 cents a mile, so if multiplying that number over a 6 mile trip on the “T”, it was about 72 cents and he thought that was a fair estimate a three mile each way kind of trip would be an average trip for someone.  In reference to what everyone else was being paid and what everyone else paid, it was a fair contribution to those who were receiving the benefit from the “T”  He said he thought the increase was needed in a good way for the community to try and recover a little bit of its operating costs.  Ultimately, they were going to have to make some decisions on how they were going to fund the T because he thought it was very important and everyone who was in support of the “T” had good reasons, but there were many reasons that were not discussed today.  He said in general, he hoped they were able to implement some of those changes to tidy up the process and to hopefully be able to continue the service for years on end.

Commissioner Highberger said he supported the recommended changes, but for the record he said he supported the PTAC recommendation on the age limit and was glad that was going back for further discussion. 

He said he did not support any cut back in routes or service times for next year and hoped they could do whatever they needed to keep the current level.  He said he would still like to see what they could do to implement the recommendations for their bus study earlier this year that did recommend consolidation routes and increased hours on some of the routes realizing those things did cost money.  He said he looked up the subsidy of the bus service that they budgeted for fare box revenues to cover 9.28% of the cost of running the bus service this year and with the increases in expenditures for the “T” lift, it was going to be less.  He said he did not really like the fare increases, but thought those fare increase were the only realistic thing to do at this time.

Commissioner Chestnut said he and Galante spent time talking about this issue and he had gotten a much better feel for what was being considered.  He said they had some difficult discussions, but they were all very committed to having the best system they could have given the constraints.  He said regarding the comment about the choice between the library and PLAY and all the other things, the realistic issue they were dealing with was the difference between finding the ability to fund it at the current level and looking at core city services.  He said it was not a place where they were selecting between “wanting”, they really did have some issues to talk about for another time.

Moved by Amyx, seconded by Dever, to approve the seven PTAC and staff recommendations regarding T and T Lift service and fare policy changes to be implemented effective July 1, 2007 (recommendation 8 regarding Children Under Age 12 Must be Accompanied by an Adult for T and T Lift Service will be indefinitely deferred).  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                   (17) 

Consider amendments to Chapter 20, Article 8 (Subdivision Regulations) regarding access (20-810(d)(2)(iii)) of the Development Code for TA-04-04-07.

Joe Rexwinkle, Planner, presented the staff report.  He said section 20-810(d)(2)(iii) currently stated, “No new subdivision shall be approved in which more than 35 dwelling units or lots or more than 25,000 square feet of non-residential space will have access to the public road system via a single outlet to the arterial or collector street system as shown on the major thoroughfares plan.”  He said the amendment was proposed by a member of the public.  The applicant had proposed to amend the language to state, “That up to 100 dwelling units may be permitted with a single access point,” which was an increase of approximately 65.  He said as long as those units were sprinkled, had an automatic sprinkler system.  He said that language was placed in the staff report as well.  He said the intent of the existing code language was not only to ensure public safety, fire protection and police protection, but also to ensure adequate connectivity among streets and subdivisions and new developments and overall neighborhood connectivity.  Generally, the existing code language stated that larger developments should provide multiple access points and thus greater connectivity.  He said it was a goal of Horizon 2020 in Chapter 5.  He said in addition to public safety, greater connectivity helped to disperse traffic and reduced congestion; helped to reduce impact on collector and arterial streets and also encouraged walking and bicycling in the community. 

The development code provided review and decision making criteria for all text amendments.  It stated that amendments must correct inconsistencies in the codes and must meet the challenge of a changing condition and whether or not the proposed amendment was consistent with Horizon 2020.  It was staff’s opinion that it was not consistent with Chapter 5 of Horizon 2020 and did not correct a clear error or inconsistency nor did it meet the challenge of a changing condition and for those reasons staff was recommending denial of the request.  The Planning Commission voted 9-1 at their May meeting for denial and there was also communication from the League of Women Voters on this item.

Mayor Hack called for public comment.  

After receiving no comment, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Chestnut, to deny amendments to Chapter 20, Article 8 of the Development Code (TA-04-04-07).  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                     (18)

Consider initiation of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Horizon 2020, Chapter 14 Specific Plans to add a reference to the Southeast Area Plan.

Michelle Leininger presented the staff report.  She said this item was a result of a Commission study session that was held on May 22^nd with the County Commission.  Staff was given direction to proceed with the planning process for the southeast area plan using the land use concept provided by the Peridian Group which was dated June 22, 2005.

This Comprehensive Plan Amendment was a new process started.  Previously, the process for plans would be that the Planning Commission, City Commission or County Commission would initiate a plan, taking it through the planning process and once there was a draft staff would bring it back before the Planning, City, and County Commissions for public hearing to adopt or approve the plan.  New steps were added and there would be a new chapter coming before the City Commission.  She said Chapter 14 would add the policies that were approved in those plans.  As policies to the Comprehensive Plan it would give those adopted plans teeth and would add more descriptions to those specific areas and more guidance as far as land use policies and directions to those specific areas.  She said how it would work now was the same process in the beginning, initiate the planning process, and initiate a Comprehensive Plan Amendment which would allow the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the draft of the plan to move forward together.  She said the Chapter would be before the Planning Commission in June and also included the Planning hierarchy. 

            Mayor Hack called for public comment. 

After receiving no public comment, Commissioner Amyx said after several years of discussion and after the meetings with the County Commission three weeks ago this was one of the items they visited with the County Commission about.  They talked about the initiating process beginning and it was probably time they did that. 

Moved by Amyx, seconded by Dever, to initiate the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Horizon 2020, Chapter 14.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                           (19)

Consider KDOT Applications for KLINK, Geometric Improvements, and Economic Development

Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report.  He said every year the City received three applications from the state for KLINK, Geometric, and Economic Development projects.  Every year the City submitted application for a KLINK project and it was a 50/50 cost share with the state up to maximum of $200,000.  The City’s projects were typically somewhat larger in costs in the range of $500,000 - $600,000.  He said next year the City’s project was to mill and overlay 23^rd Street from Iowa to Louisiana.  Staff was seeking Commission’s approval to send in an application to KLINK requesting joint repair on 23^rd Street from Haskell east to the city limits.  He said the Geometric Improvements were improvements on a state highway those projects were limited to City connecting links (i.e. state and federal highways).  He said those improvements were typically intersection projects, lane configurations, widening projects to accommodate traffic congestion and sometimes safety.     

            He said this year staff was recommending submittal of the center left-turn lane on 6^th Street from Folks Road to approximately 1,000 feet west of Monterey Way. The traffic counts were high and that section of 6^th Street was the only section left that did not have the center turn lane.  The speed limit was 45 mph in that area.  He said unsafe conditions occur when motorists stop in the through lane to make a left turn onto side streets.  The estimated cost of the project was $1.2 million, requesting from the state, $900,000 with the City’s share of $300,000. 

He said regarding Economic Development, in 2003 they submitted the purchase and consolidation of curb cuts and acquisition of public access easements on 23^rd Street between Iowa and Louisiana.  He said the City was working with El Mezcal and CVS to obtain a consolidated entrance.

He said the City would like to submit an extension of East Hills Drive to Franklin Road, and Franklin to K-10 making that a signalized intersection to provide a safe outlet to K-10.  This project was submitted last year and was well received by the Highway Commission.  The City must provide at least a minimum of 25% of the total project, but KDOT encouraged that percentage to be more to allow KDOT to do more projects.  The estimated cost of the project was $3,500.000.  Staff was looking for City Commission direction on which project to submit and those applications were due July 2^nd. 

Commissioner Amyx said regarding the KLINK project on 23^rd Street from Haskell to the east City limits, he asked if that roadway was overlaid two years ago. 

Soules said typically overlaying was about a 5 to 6 year cycle, where they were overlaying all the areas on 23^rd, Iowa, and 6^th Street.  He said he would find out for the Commission when that stretch of road was last overlaid.

Commissioner Amyx said if that part of the road was milled and overlaid two years ago, he asked what might be wrong underneath that roadway.

            Soules said underneath the base, the concrete was deteriorating.

Commissioner Amyx asked if they would be putting good money after bad.

Soules said not this time.  He said any time mill and overlay was done, the bad sections were addressed if they knew where those sections were.  Sometimes those sections were not caught and would keep deteriorating.  This proposed project would not only be milled and overlaid, but every joint in the pavement would be fixed.  He said the roadway might look patchy until the next time they milled and overlaid, but the roadway would ride much better and would not need to be maintained.

Commissioner Highberger asked about the lane widths on that stretch of 6^th Street.

Soules said the lane widths were 12 feet which was maximum width, but he did not think they would need that amount of width.  He said staff was looking at narrower lanes and would look at that section.  He said the width of the lanes would definitely affect the cost.

Commissioner Highberger asked if the amount that was submitted would affect the likelihood of getting the project.

Soules said if KDOT liked the project, he thought the project would be funded.  He said there was more of a limit on the economic development grants. 

Commissioner Amyx asked if there was any concern of the left turn lane on 6^th Street in front of Hy-Vee, with the raised median in that area.

Soules said that issue was discussed in the past when that real estate company located in that area.  The success of the project would determine whether they would revisit the median issue.  He said part of the reason was a center turn lane did not exist in that area and many people were turning. 

Commissioner Amyx asked Corliss if those projects would be both budgeted and debt financed. 

Corliss said yes.  He said the City traditionally debt financed KLINK participation even though it was maintenance.  He said geometric and economic development type improvements would also be debt financed.  One of the things that would be discussed when moving into the Capital Improvement Plan was the CIP budget.  He said next Tuesday the City Commission would see the list of projects that the City already committed to for 2008 that would be debt financed.  There were a number of KDOT grant projects this year that were debt financed such as 2^nd and Locust Street.  That project was applied for 2 ½ to 3 years ago and was a geometric improvement.  He said there were a number of projects the City made commitments to, when the City received those grants.  He said when it came time to pay, the City essentially squeezed out other capital improvement worthy projects and used that grant money and the City’s match as well in order to accomplish the project.

Commissioner Amyx said concerning the East Hills Economic Development Project, he said it was suggested the City’s participation might not be considered because the City’s participation level was too low. 

Soules said it was encouraged to participate at a greater rate than the minimum.

Commissioner Amyx said there was a lot of concern about traffic in East Hills Business Park area by several of the businesses in that area.  He asked if it was appropriate to ask for those businesses in that area to participate.  He said he did not mind the City’s 25% participation and he wanted to make sure the City had the opportunity to make sure those business employees were safe. He said he would suggest some discussion with those businesses located in East Hills Business Park about participating in this particular project.

            Corliss asked if participation would be on a voluntary basis.

Mayor Hack said it was not a bad idea to have that conversation.

Corliss said staff would talk to those business owners to see if they were willing to participate.  He said in the discussions staff had about economic development in East Hills Business Park and the Farmland property, the Commission heard staff recommend that they thought the long-term solution, in part, was attached to this project where there would be a separate grade intersection at Franklin and 23^rd Street and traffic would be able to move safely with an improved Franklin Road that served both the improved Farmland property and the East Hills Business Park including that portion that was not developed.  He said in the City’s long-term transportation plans Franklin Road was an important north/south arterial road.  In discussions, staff indicated the community would probably need to step forward and help finance that project.  There would be probably State financial participation perhaps at this level and perhaps at a greater level, but it was going to be an expensive project. 

Vice Mayor Dever said he hated to spend a lot of money on something that might be torn out in the short-term.  He asked what the long-term would be for that area.

Corliss said this project was the extension of East Hills Drive to Franklin Road and would be a surface street going over to Franklin Road to connect, at grade, to Franklin Road.  He said staff thought it was a good additional safety benefit.  He said the signalization would be the cost. Eventually, staff thought the long term solution was a separate grade intersection and they would not have the signalization in that area.  He said he did not think they would be tearing out very much of what they would put in at that point.  He said the road they would be building at that location would be necessary in the first place.

Commissioner Chestnut said if a long-term plan was being looked at, money would not be spent twice.

Soules said the interchange would be more expensive.

Chestnut said the interchange would be more, but not twice. 

Mayor Hack said they were hoping it would be a short-term.

Soules said not necessarily short term, but a safe intersection during that term until that interchange was funded. 

Corliss said it was a doable project within the next couple of years.   He said it was fiscal year 2011 and by the time the project was designed and property was acquired it would be close to that time.  He said it made sense to proceed along with a longer term solution.    

Mayor Hack said it was a good idea to contact those businesses because when the Commission had their visitations that was a serious concern among those businesses with the safety of their employees crossing that intersection.

Commissioner Chestnut said having worked out in that area during inclement weather it was seriously problematic.  He said they had to make allowances for people being late because they would travel down Noria Road and double back because it was too dangerous to cross at that left turn going eastbound.

Mayor Hack called for public comment.  

            After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Chestnut, to approve the staff recommendations subject to the possible benefit district discussions for the East Hills Drive/Franklin Road project.  Motion carried unanimously.                               (20)

Consider approving projects to be included in the 2008-2013 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the City of Lawrence.

Casey Liebst, City Budget Manager, said each year their CIP process had changed and was a work in progress.  She said there were some common elements; projects were submitted each year by departments, by neighborhood associations, by private developers, and by other interested parties.  Those projects that were submitted by the City departments were submitted along with a score.  That score used the City’s evaluation criteria and scoring matrix to prioritize the project.  Those evaluation criteria were contained in the CIP document.  The criteria helped in prioritizing in terms of the project’s consistency with the City’s community goals, the public perception of need, whether or not the projects support economic development and a number of other prioritizations.  There was also a scoring matrix which explained what a score of 0, 1, or 2 point meant for each individual criterion. 

            The City’s projects were reviewed by an Administrative Review Committee and that committee was made up of representatives of the number of the major City departments, Public Works, Police, Fire, for example.  A Planning Commissioner also served on the Review Committee and in the years past, a City Commissioner.  She said this year due to the timing of the Committee meetings and the election, they were unable to have a City Commissioner, but hoped to into the future.  She said Planning Commissioner Finkeldei served on the committee this year. 

The duties of that committee were to discuss the scores that were submitted by the different departments, making the necessary adjustments, and discussing those scores until a consensus was developed for each one of the projects and for each one of the criteria.  The committee also determined if projects needed to be moved to a later or earlier year within the plan.  State statutes required that because the City had a Comprehensive Plan, any public improvements must first be approved by the Planning Commission.  She said rather than sending 200 individual projects to the Planning Commission, the City placed those projects all together and submitted those projects all at once which occurred on May 21 ^st, 2007.  The Commission indicated the projects in the plan were approved as being in conformity with their comprehensive plan by a vote of 8-2. 

One project was discussed in great detail, which was the project to make improvements to Iowa Street.  The project as it appeared in their document was labeled Iowa Street from Harvard to University Drive and unfortunately, it was an oversight on staff’s part.  The Administrative Review Committee had discussed the project in light of the City Commission’s discussions and Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, indicated that something needed to be done along Iowa and it needed to be included somewhere in the plan.  The committee decided to push that project out into a later year in the plan so the Commission would see the project appeared in 2010.  She said that change had been made to the project request form in 2010 to change the project to Iowa Street Improvements and the description read improvements to Iowa Street, including possible widening and/or sidewalk improvements, and in parentheses not to include a left turn lane.  She said that was done because a member of the public and some of the Planning Commissioners brought it to staff’s attention that that project might not be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan as cut through traffic was specifically mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan and was something staff wanted to avoid. 

Once the Planning Commission approved the projects in the plan, staff added in some narrative and some re-charts and that information was compiled in the preliminary CIP.  Once the plan was approved the City Manager, using direction from the City Commission, selected projects from the first year of that plan to include in his recommended operating and capital improvement budget. 

She said as she mentioned the CIP was a work in progress and some of the changes made over the years were moving from a wish list of projects to more of a plan that prioritizes the City’s capital needs and to forecast when those needs needed to be met with available funds or if additional funds were needed. 

The City expanded their set of scoring criteria in order to give more ability to prioritize those projects and make that process a little more objective.  The scoring matrix was created to make the scores more consistent across the departments and across the committee members.  Representatives from the Planning Commission and City Commission were added not only to gain additional input about priorities and needs in the community, but also to educate the two Commissions about the City’s department needs and priorities and about the CIP process itself. 

She said there was still work to be done to this plan and more projects in the first year of the plan than realistically could be funded.  The financial aspects of the plan needed to be more developed.  Staff was working to project available resources for each year of the plan, factoring in projected assessed valuation growth and using debt service schedules to account for retirement of debt service.  Staff also needed to widen their focus to other potential funding resources.  Right now, debt financing was the focus, but could move to include other funding resources including reserve funds and cash financing. 

Another area to continue work was in quantifying the impact of those improvements on the operating budget.  She said when capital investments were made, such as a new fire station, there were operating costs associated and staff was good at identifying those costs, but actually putting a number to those capital investments and forecasting that out was another area staff was trying to make some improvements. 

The Capital Improvement Plan and the Capital Improvement Budget were not the same.  Their plan prioritized projects in terms of the need for the projects and forecasts those out over a 6 year period of time.  It provided cost estimates and anticipated funding sources, but they were subject to change.  Each year a new CIP was adopted, the priorities change, the costs change, etc. 

The budget, on the other hand, was the funding plan for a particular budget year.  She said not all the projects in the first year of the plan would make it into the budget.  Currently, only $5 million of new projects could be supported by the existing debt levy and the KDOT projects that were previously committed to, other Public Works projects that were previously committed to, get funded first and resources available, started to decrease. 

The document included a summary of the City’s funding sources and a breakdown of General Obligation Bonds according to the anticipated source of debt service payments.  The plan showed that approximately 68% of the funding was anticipated to come from General Obligation Bonds, backed by property tax. 

The Administrative Review Committee score sheets were also provided in the summary section of the document so each project could be seen how it scored for each particular criterion.  The document contained a section for each year of the plan and repeated the scores, the cost and funding sources, but also included project request forms.  Those forms showed some additional information about each project; a description, justification, the cost in funding sources, the detail of the anticipated impact on that operating budget, in some cases maps, other comments, and other information that related to each project. 

Mayor Hack said she wanted to commend Liebst for the change in the process because she was the Commissioner that went on record when the process first started to change.  She said it was a much more educated and informed decision making process with the input from City departments, and the City, County, and Planning Commissioners now understood the “what” and the “why” aspects of the CIP process which was extremely important.  She said it was more than just a wish list and the CIP had some backbone behind it. 

Commissioner Amyx asked if the left hand turn lane on Iowa Street from Harvard to University was in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.

Sheila Stogsdill, Acting Planning Director, said Horizon 2020 could be read many different ways.  She said it was a balancing act to determine whether projects conformed or did not conform, but sometimes it was very clear. 

Commissioner Amyx said in Stogsdill’s professional opinion, did the left turn lane on Iowa from Harvard to University conform on not conform, with the Comprehensive Plan.

Stogsdill said support could be found for the Planning Commission’s recommendation.

David Corliss, City Manager, asked if the Planning Commission recommended going back to look at all the other 5^th lanes in the community and change those as well. 

Stogsdill said the Planning Commission did not.

Corliss said that was an issue.  He said the City Commission had given staff direction on Iowa Street improvements, which was not to proceed until there was a comprehensive look at all the traffic needs in that area.   Instead, the direction for staff was to look at the global traffic patterns on Harvard to 15^th to Iowa, both east and west Iowa, and also into the West Campus Neighborhood.  That study had not been conducted and might or might not even be able to proceed this year.  He thought it was important to recognize and it was not necessary to be in that document. 

Commissioner Amyx said the City had money in its hands twice to do that project.

Corliss said staff had a public meeting with the neighborhood and before those commitments were made with KDOT staff wanted to give the public an opportunity to talk to the elected officials about proceeding with the project and at that time the elected officials said “no.” so they were not going to proceed. 

Commissioner Amyx said he would like to have a quarterly update on the accidents along that strip of roadway. 

Mayor Hack said she absolutely appreciated the tone of Commissioner Amyx’s questions and his thoughts, but from her perspective, not to proceed with that project was because there was a very partial view of an entire traffic area that she wanted a bigger picture of.  She said they might ultimately end up with that, but Commissioner Amyx’s point being that they might need to pay for the entire project.

Commissioner Chestnut said 9^th and Iowa made the geometric improvements list, but he was not sure how much sense it made to put a double turn lane to feed traffic down to a place where there was no left turn lane.  It seemed that particular project would exacerbate the issue.  He said there seemed to be some confliction about that entire area and the Commission needed to take a comprehensive look at that area. 

He said regarding the debt service, it was important for the Commission to understand to look at the debt levy for 2008 and to finance $5 million worth of capital projects basically over the next four or five years, the assumption of assessed value was made going up 3% in 2008, but going back to increasing 6% in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012.  Even with that, they were going to be depleting that fund balance at a $5 million level.  He said there were a lot of variables the Commission needed to understand and the Commission needed to have discussion about the fund balance lower threshold the Commission felt comfortable with.   

            Corliss said staff did a major review of the City’s capital improvement budgeting process in the early 1990’s.  The Commission, at that time, wanted to focus on some long range planning.  A refinancing of the City’s debt was done and the number they were able to keep a stable mill levy at was 9.7 mills and were now down to almost below 7 mills.  He said the community’s commitment to capital improvements had been reduced in the past 10 years.  He said the community was growing and were paying more, but his point was the community was putting less back into its infrastructure as a percentage of its growth, its wealth, than it was in the 1990’s.  He said he did not think that would likely be sustained when looking at the long list of projects.  He said everyone liked to talk about the roundabouts and some of the other things, but when looking at the list, it was pretty hard to say which projects should not proceed.  They could clearly say there were a number of projects that could wait or a number that had a deleterious impact on a neighborhood and they did not want to proceed with, but there were a number of meritorious projects the City was not able to fund, but just a small fraction.

Commissioner Chestnut said it was much like the operating fund when there was discussion about the percentage that was wanted relative to the total spending for the year.  He said there also needed to be discussion on the fund balance in the CIP because with the numbers he had seen, they were going to be going from a lot to not much.

            Corliss said when looking at the recommended budget, they would be talking about that right mill levy and what was the Commission’s comfort level with the fund balance.  He said it was good practice to have a fund balance that met debt obligations over a certain period of time and staff wanted to look at that information. 

Mayor Hack called for public comment.

Ted Boyle, speaking on behalf of North Lawrence residents, said the residents would like to see a quiet zone that had been discussed for the past three years and that the quiet zone might be included in the Capital Improvement Plan for next five years.  He said the Union Pacific (UP) Railroad needed an upgrade.  The City and neighborhood association worked very closely with UP trying to get a quiet zone from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and then during the day those trains would be able to blow their whistles for the traffic for the busses to make it safer. 

He said the Union Pacific Railroad indicated that the 3^rd Street crossing needed anywhere from around $130,000 - $180,000 worth of improvements.  He said those improvements were a big surprise because they had been dealing with this issue for three years and he thought it was a way to get the City to pay for the UP Railroad’s improvements.  He said North Lawrence residents would like to see the quiet zone placed in the Capital Improvement Plan for the next 5 years.  He said the North Lawrence Neighborhood would be persistent about the quiet zone. 

Commissioner Dever asked if anyone from the City tried to talk to the Union Pacific Railroad about the quiet zone. 

Jonathan Douglass, Management Analyst, said they had very little influence over what the railroad was required to do.  The railroad was regulated by the federal government and some improvements would need to be made before a quiet zone could be established.  Those improvements did not need to be made otherwise and the railroad could continue to operate the way they were now with no problem, but if the City wanted to establish a quiet zone, there was no way to compel the railroad to make those improvements. 

Boyle said UP Railroad was stubborn and for about 4 -6 months he had been talking to City staff about the potholes at the 3^rd Street crossing at the spur, not at the main crossing.  He said those holes were 2 to 3 feet wide and maybe 8-10 inches deep and the residents called him complaining about those potholes.  He said City staff tried to communicate with the railroad to get something done and finally staff took care of the problem, throwing black top in those potholes which improved that crossing by about 80%.  He said the residents appreciated that, but it was the type of thing the residents were dealing with the UP Railroad.   

Corliss said staff estimated that it would be a $400,000 project and that project was in the CIP for the year 2013 which was not any level of guarantee or promise that project would ever be funded, let alone in 2013. 

Commissioner Highberger said it was his understanding there was another alternative that was less than the $400,000.

Douglass said $420,000 was the lowest cost alternative; the other option was closer to 1 million.

Commissioner Amyx said the plan was probably an appropriate plan and covered all items of importance and priority throughout the community.

Moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger, to approve the 2008-2013 Capital Improvement Plan.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                  (21)

Receive staff memo regarding budget reductions for 2007. 

David Corliss, City Manager, presented the staff report.  He said last week meetings were conducted with City Departments, the Library, and the Health Department and continued discussion about what needed to be done for the 2007 expenditures to provide a better fund balance and respond to some of the revenue shortfalls in sales tax.  He said there was also going to be a shortfall in building permit fees that would be experienced this year.  He said with that in mind, the direction from the Commission was to take a look at 94% budgeted expenditures in 2007 in which was seen in Spreadsheet A accomplishes that expenditure.  It was essentially a 6% reduction to the different departments within the City. 

He said the outside agencies also received a 6% reduction.  The City funded outside agencies through the general overhead division, which was in the Finance Department and that information could be seen in other spreadsheets, the listing of the impact on the outside agencies. 

The other spreadsheet was at the recommendation of Commissioner Chestnut which accomplished a similar goal, the 6% reduction in aggregate in the General Fund to City departments.  There was just a 4% reduction in the outside agency expenditures that also included a 4% reduction to the Health Department and put in funds for funding the City Auditor position in the 4^th quarter of this year.  He said none of this information had any application to the Library Fund.  It was talked about when they talked about the library fund budget.  He said he would work with Bruce Flanders, Library Director, and the library board and in that circumstance and not reduce the amount of money that would be transferred to the budget in 2007, but staff would be working with the library so the City would not establish a mill levy increase for the library in 2008. 

He said it was helpful to know that a few items in the reduction of the 6% in the City departments, 15 of those were slated for meeting or exceeding the 6% reduction and there were some departments where it was difficult to achieve a 6% reduction.  Some of those departments, such as Finance, had a lean budget that would require reduction in force and that reduction was not being recommended along with Information Systems.  In the public safety departments, it would not be appropriate to provide the full 6% reduction, but he wanted to talk about reducing some of the transfers to the equipment reserve fund in those departments.  He said it was his understanding the City Commission did not want the City to reduce their expenditures on Street Maintenance. 

            He said in the reductions to the reserve funds that would mean they would not make any transfers to those reserve funds this year and would be backing out of the transfers already made. 

In the equipment reserve fund, which had a balance of about $3 million, staff had hoped to be able to make some expenditures in some key areas and staff was still going to look at that and whether or not they had other unanticipated items that they needed to make expenditures on.  He said he would like to eventually move toward the cameras in the Police Department patrol vehicles and was something that was wanted from the District Court Judge and District Attorney, but he was not sure it could be done.  He said the equipment reserve fund was also going to be tapped to help with fire apparatus needs.  There was $600,000 in the capital improvement budget that was scheduled to be debt financed to begin helping on fire equipment needs.  He said there would be consequences to not fully funding the equipment reserve fund, but staff followed a philosophy they were going to minimize those consequences and were not trying to show visible cuts to the public and service to the extent that the City could.  He said they were removing from the Police Department some expenditure that were in their general operating budget for equipment and would be making those purchases out of the equipment reserve fund.  He said they would need to balance all of those things and look at the historic use for unanticipated expenditures.  He thought as staff tried to highlight in the infrastructure study session in April where staff started looking at infrastructure comprehensively.  He said there were some major equipment needs and thought staff was getting their hand on systematically evaluating.  He said the City would want to keep those reserve funds at an appropriately healthy amount and historically did not have a policy on what that amount was.  He said the reserve fund was there for those emergencies and staff could not anticipate. 

He said as staff was preparing the 2008 budget, with the exception of those positions that staff decided to remove from City services, staff was still putting in other positions for the 2008 budget.   

Vice Mayor Dever asked someone at some point to comment on fund balances historically so the Commission could talk intelligently when making a decision on what the Commission would like the fund balance to be.

            Corliss said staff would make sure the full City Commission received the fund balance policy that had a lot of narrative to it and the long and short of it was the City wanted to be in the range of 15% - 30%. 

Mayor Hack called for public comment. 

Hilda Enoch said she was having trouble with a budget that cut the people that were the least able to afford cuts.  She said they would only have more need for the services if those services were cut.  She said that went for kids who were at risk in the high schools and junior highs.  She said it felt this was a very foolish thing to do.  She said she realized this was a tough spot, but wondered if the Commission had looked at every possible alternative for this caring community that would support them.  She said she appreciated Commissioner Chestnut came up after a lot of work with a 2% take back of the 6%.  She said she thought there were things that were high priorities and the people who were most in need were given this priority because some need those programs much more than other programs that were going to be locked at the same amount.  She said it was a real challenging job, but she did not know if they were able to raise sales taxes or property taxes or do anything to get them through, but to her those were reasonable alternatives than to cut on the backs of the poor who could not afford cuts from this decision. 

Commissioner Amyx said we are talking about mid year expenditures and the Commission could not go back through and raise taxes at this point. 

Hubbard Collingsworth urged the Commission to not do anything to effect the borrowing capabilities with the bond agencies because it was one of the City’s primary resources and had a good financial base and he would hate to see that eroded in any way.

Commissioner Highberger said looking at the projected fund balance for general funds with their expected sales tax, they needed to make some corrections.  He personally thought the 94% reduction went too deep, but after a conversation with Commissioner Amyx on what sales tax might do for the rest of the year, he was a little more comfortable taking that approach with the City budget. 

He said he appreciated Commissioner Chestnut’s alternative proposal for the outside agencies and going ahead with the City Auditor position and really believed the auditor position was something that will more than pay for itself and move forward even in these tight times. 

He said he was still not comfortable with making cutbacks to the social service agencies at this time, even with Commissioner Chestnut’s recommendation, at this point in the year it was an 8% budget reduction for the rest of the year and in 6% in effect would be a 12% budget reduction.  He said if the City’s sales tax revenues were down because people’s budgets were tight and they were not spending any money that meant the converse side of that the demand for those services was going to be higher and those agencies would be stressed on both sides.  He said there was the philosophical question if it was the City’s responsibility, but as he saw during his term on the Commission more and more of those responsibilities were trickling down to the local level because state and federal governments, in his opinion, stepping up to their full responsibilities.  He said he could support 94% level for city expenditures, but could not support the cuts to social service agencies at this level.

Commissioner Amyx said one issue the City Commission needed to take into consideration was managing the City’s revenues and the City needed to prepare for this long term and short term time frame. The direction given to staff several weeks ago about coming at a 94% level was reasonable based on some of the business trends seen.  He said it was pointed out in the City Manager’s Report the City was down $150,000 year to date on building permits and he thought it was safe to say that one of the areas that was hardest hit as an industry was probably the construction industry and at the same time the sales tax the City tried to collect off the materials that contractors buy to build houses and buildings.  It was obviously a place the City had really fallen behind and there were probably other areas from vehicles to whatever expenditures, but the truth of the matter was the City was going through an extremely tough time and the City had to prepare for a time that the City might not come out of this for a while. 

He said he would support the 94% level as recommended by staff and thought they went through every area in City departments where money could be saved.  He had been trying to be supportive to the outside agencies through the old days of federal revenue sharing until today when federal revenue sharing has dried up.  He said the Commission brought those outside agencies into the City budget to find ways to help those agencies.  He said at the same time when money dried up, the City was asking everyone to help and take a 6% hit, in this particular case.   He said if the City took the 6% reductions as recommended by staff, if per chance the sales tax revenues increased over the next quarter, then the City would transfers to those agencies in the fourth quarter payment, the increases the City might receive to help those agencies get through their situations.

He said he, as an elected official, had never been involved in going through this process.  He said as much as this situation was bad for a number of people, it was something that should be done every few years to make everyone appreciate the good times.  He said the Commission did a good job in understanding expenditures and at the same time work on developing the City’s revenues.  He said Commissioner Chestnut showed the Commission different avenues to raise the fund balances and stay in compliance and after staff’s recommendation it was a question of wanting to be at 21% or 13%.  He said with staff’s recommendation of 94%, the City was not spending more than the City was bringing in if the revenues hold.

Commissioner Highberger said for the record, he had been through this process once before in 2003 when a million and a half of state demand transfers disappeared.  

Corliss said the state budget took away demand transfers because of state budget shortfalls which was a reaction to 9-11, the economy, and a lot of other things.  He said the City was not getting state demand transfers for the rest of the year and the City had to make adjustments and that had to be reflected in the City’s next year budget.

Commissioner Amyx said concerning the 2003 transfer, he asked if the City’s fund balance was healthier at that time.

Commissioner Highberger said he recalled that those fund balances were at a 30% level.

Commissioner Amyx said there was a difference between the recommended 14%.

Commissioner Highberger agreed, he would not like to see the City get below 15%.  He said he would be comfortable at 17%.  He said he thought that was what fund balances were for, but obviously if the City was at 20% they would be in a better position to weather whatever happened next year.  He said he was willing to go along with the 94% for the City budget, but people had made actions and reliance from commitments from the City Commission and at the same time when there needs were rising, he did not feel right about making those cuts to social service agencies. 

Mayor Hack asked if in Commissioner Highberger’s calculations, if the City retained outside agencies at the agreed upon funding, the City would still have a 20% fund balance.

Commissioner Highberger said the money in the overhead was not all outside agency allocations.

Corliss said correct.  He said by reducing funding for outside agencies, the City was reducing those grants to the agencies by 6%.  The City would save approximately $95,000. 

Commissioner Highberger said that was still under the City’s budget.  He said if the total cuts proposed to the outside agencies under the City version of the changes would amount to approximately $100,000 and if putting those agencies back in that would leave the City with a total revenue over expenditures of about $100,000 and a fund balance in the vicinity of 20%.

Commissioner Amyx said he had to disagree because they had asked staff to take a 6% cut, but yet they would fund all those outside agencies.

Commissioner Highberger said he understood that perspective.

Commissioner Amyx said it was hard to ask the City employees with all the work they did to take a 6% cut.

Commissioner Highberger said the Commission was not asking staff to take a pay cut, but work a little harder and a lot harder in some cases.  He said for the social service agencies there were people who were working at those places who either volunteer or were not getting paid a living wage.

Commissioner Chestnut said he tried to look at this issue on an equity standpoint.  He said the City departments were all ranges and thought there was a tremendous amount of work done to see what could be done and was not an afterthought of going across 6%.  He said he stood at looking to achieve the reduction that was requested at 6% and what they really needed to do was look at funding that was done when talking about the capital improvement and equipment reserves and workers comp and liability transfers because those were issues that were not really 2007 operating expenditures, but transfers that needed to be done and something that could not be avoided every year.  He said he looked at transfers that were allowed based on having some reserves in the past.  He said he wanted to look at that and say realistically if they wanted to add those back in, across the board they were at 4% excluding those.  He said not having visibility to outside agencies budgets and where they were at, he felt it was reasonable to ask a commensurate amount from those agencies.  He said he agreed with Commissioner Highberger that they were asking for more than 4% or 6%, but were asking the City staff to do the same thing and by doing this mid year there were a lot of activities initiated and staff was going through the same pain.  He said they were doubling up on staff because it was not just 4%, if taking the transfer out, it was really 8% which made it apply uniformly.  He said it this was not an attempt to reprioritize the commitments that were made in 2007 which was why he wanted to do it more uniformly because he did not think it was reasonable at this point to go through agency by agency and try to do something that was not uniform across the board because those priorities were made and committed to in the budget process for last year.  He said if looking at transfers for 2008 and taking the City’s base line going up 4%, unless there were some significant changes, the City was still going to be in a deficit position of a million and half to two million dollars next year.  He said that break even point for this year was achieved artificially and the City could not forgo those transfers in perpetuity.  He said that was his methodology to try and look at what he considered to be equitable.  He said he wanted to compliment City staff because in talking to the department heads, everyone had an incredibly professional attitude at a really difficult time.  He said he looked at this issue analytically and thought this was how this issue made sense.  He said the City would still be in a deficit position next year and a long term plan needed to be figured out to get out of that deficit.

Vice Mayor Dever said he looked at this as a stop gap measure.  He said he thought Commissioner Chestnut did a tremendous job in alerting the Commission to some options.  He said staff did a tremendous job in presenting the cuts in a reasonable fashion.  He said part of the reason he was more in favor of a systematic cut was because he did not have a knowledge of all the outside agencies, their needs and the specific hardships some of those agencies would face and thought the only fair way to measure up a dose of vinegar was to make it easy and call it across the board a percentage.  He said it was simple and perhaps not the right way, but unless they had months of time to go through each agency and identify what they could and could not do without, time was flying by and the City’s deficit was growing and thought it was important the City act quickly and reasonably and then take a hard look at each agency to see what could be done for those agencies in 2008.   

Mayor Hack said her problem was she probably knew too much about outside agencies and she did not tend to look at things analytically.  She said the agony she saw was shared in her heart as well.  She said if there was any way she could not do this to City staff across the board and outside agencies, the Commission would not wish this on anyone. 

She said the only thing the Commission could do from an equitable standpoint was to go with staff’s recommendation for reducing outside agency funding by 4% and moving with the auditor position.  She said it was important to keep in mind that if by some turn of fate and things improved and sales tax dollars were better, that the Commission commit themselves to replace, equitably, the funding as soon as possible.  She said the Commission had some tough decisions ahead and she believed the social service agencies were core City services and thought it was a responsibility that a caring, good community had.  She said it did not mean she did not see the value, but believed they had to consider that as well. 

Moved by Chestnut, seconded by Dever, to approve the level of expenditure reductions in 2007 for the General Fund (including outside agencies) as recommended by Commissioner Chestnut (Spreadsheet B in the June 7, 2007 staff memo) reducing the outside agency funding by 4% as well as including a fourth quarter addition of the Auditor position.  Aye:  Chestnut, Dever, and Hack.  Nay:  Amyx and Highberger.  Motion carried.                    (22)

Corliss said staff would send out letters to outside agencies indicating the Commission’s actions.     

Commissioner Highberger noted for the record that his vote in opposition was only because of the reductions to outside agencies, but he was otherwise supportive of the recommendations.

Commissioner Chestnut said this was a hard time, but everyone needed to remain optimistic about this great City and were fiscally in good shape, but this was an economic situation that was being suffered by municipalities across the country.   

PUBLIC COMMENT: 

David Pippin, Kansas City, said he drove to Lawrence last week to visit a book store on Massachusetts, pulled up in front of a parking meter and put two quarters in that meter.  He said when he came back from the book store there was a parking ticket on his vehicle.  He said he looked at the meter and it said one hour on the meter.  He said a passerby told him that he put his money in the wrong meter.  He said he went to pay his ticket and a person working at Municipal Court told him that he put his money in the wrong meter and that that happened to people all the time.  He asked why the City would not correct that problem.  He said the arrows on the meters were more confusing than helpful.  He said if that many people were finding those meters to be a problem, it was unfair and if that was not enough maybe the cost of a $2 parking ticket, might alienate the out of town guest who might decide not to come back to Lawrence and dine or shop on Massachusetts Street again because they were frustrated about putting money in the wrong meter.  He said with gas about $3 a gallon, he figured it cost him $12 to bring this concern to the Commission. 

Mayor Hack said this was a community issue and staff probably needed to take a serious look at those meters.  She said she had to think about which meter she was putting money into, and she lived in Lawrence.  She said the question and concern about those meters needed to be addressed. 

Corliss said staff would take a look at those meters because it was a valid and genuine concern that staff wanted to respond to.  He said the saw tooth parking could be confusing.  He said for some of those who had been at it for so long, they know where to go instinctively, but did not help someone who was visiting the community and it was a fair comment.  He said there might be some way such as adding signage that did not detract from downtown Lawrence. 

Vice Mayor Dever said those meters were confusing and they had been talking about how to improve the downtown parking situation and perhaps letting people understand when it was okay to park and when it was not and when to give tickets and when it was not, but in general they were new to it and it had been frustrating for many people and did not want to push people away.  He said he thought ticket forgiveness was an option, especially from someone who was out of town and the first time it happened.  He said more importantly they did not want the frustration because it was something that ruined the consumer experience and they wanted to encourage people to come to Lawrence and make it simple for them to spend their dollars here and not frustrate them.  He said staff would take care of the problem and consider the idea of first time forgiveness even if someone stuck money in the wrong meter. 

Corliss said staff would need to look at signage that would impact someone who was visiting Lawrence for the first time. 

Betty Alderson said she wanted to make general comments about taxation.  She said she read in the paper about how the Commissioners felt about a mandate for no new taxes.  She said she did not want her taxes to go up and was in that generation of fixed income.  She said it became difficult, but at least she could still manage to pay taxes.  She said property tax was the most equitable overall tax for whom it hit and what it did for all of them; it spread the cost of the government.  She said there have been a few of them in the years past talking about the tax rebates they received and how gleefully the politicians think they had done this great thing, but she did not get enough to make a difference, the only thing she saw was she had fewer community services and more potholes.  She said they saw this thing discussed earlier this evening about trickle down. The federal government did not give it to the state, the state did not give it to the city and there was no one left, but the citizens and if they wanted those services, just like when they want more money when they were working, someone had to pay for it and it might just be the citizens.  She said she shared Commissioner Highberger’s concern that they seem to be consistently hit the people who were the least able to take the hit; the homeless people, the people who did not have a permanent job, the people who might just be getting by until they get sick and no health insurance and were off work and lose their house and everything invested.  She said it was not a pretty picture.   She said she did not recall voting for the Commission not to raise her taxes.

She said regarding another matter, she was old enough to remember when they had good bus service in Lawrence and could get a bus every 15 or 20 minutes and people rode the bus because it was convenient.  She said the City needed to make those things as easy for people to use as they possibly could and as convenient as possible, which cost money, but she was certainly willing to pay an increased tax to do that because it was extremely important for the community to have those services. 

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: 

TBD

●         Salvation Army Site Plan and Rezoning; ●              Retail Marketing Analysis Code provisions ●              Neighborhood Revitalization Act proposals for target neighborhoods and downtown; NRA policy statement ●              Special Use Permit information for Alcohol Establishments and Entertainment Venue Ordinance   ●              Adoption of Joint City Ordinance No. 8097, and County Resolution No. ____, to replace Chapter Seven – Industrial and Employment Related Land Use, in Horizon 2020  with a revised Chapter 7 entitled “Chapter 7 – Industrial and Employment Related Land Use in Horizon 2020, CPA-2004-02 Edition”, and repealing the existing chapter. ●     Pesticide Free Parks Recommendations

COMMISSION ITEMS: 

Moved by Amyx, seconded by Hack, to adjourn at 10:20 p.m.  Motion carried unanimously. 

APPROVED:  

_____________________________

Mike Amyx, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________________                                                                       

Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk

CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 12, 2007

1. Sale – Surplus Busses on egov deals.

2. Renewable Contract Agreement – Sanitary Sewer Collection System Flow Monitoring Data Delivery with March McBirney for $210,000.

3. Bid – Kaw Water Supply Low Service Pump Station No. 2 to Walter Morgan Construction for $569,750.

4. Ordinance No. 8115 – 2^nd Read, Rezone (Z-09-46-04) 11.93 acres, UR to RM12, SE corner of George Williams Way and Overland Drive of Oregon Trail Addition.

5. Ordinance No. 8116 – 2^nd Read, Rezone (Z-09-47-04)16.47 acres, UR to RS7, located NE portion of Oregon Trail Addition north of Overland Drive.

6. Ordinance No. 8117 – 2^nd Read, Rezone (Z-09-48-04) 31.93 acres from UR to RM12D, located in NW portion of Oregon Trail Addition north of Overland Drive and SE portion of the plat.

7. Ordinance No. 8114 – 2^nd Read, Special Use Permit (SUP-03-03-07) for The Castle Tea Room, 1307 & 1313 Mass. St.

8. Ordinance No. 8113 – 2^nd Read, rezone (Z-01-02-07) First Step Facility, 7.73 acres from RS10 to RMO at 3015 W. 31^st Street.

9. Ordinance No. 8118 – 2^nd Read, West Baldwin Creek gravity sewer line connection fee.

10. Resolution No. 6726 – Additional GOB, Kasold, Bob Billings Pkwy to Clinton Pkwy.

11. Text Amendment – Development Code (TA-05-07-07 was TA-05-03-07)

12. Text Amendment – 20-218 GPI (General Public & Institutional District).

13. Mortgage Release – 813 Madeline Ln, Jean Wright.

14. Bidding requirement waived – Oregon Trail Holding LC for Oregon Trail Park Benefit District.

15. Ordinance No. 8120 – 1^st Read, domestic partnership registry.

16. City Manager’s Report.

17. Transit System Issues.

18. Amendments – Subdivision Regs (20-810(d)(2)(iii) Development Code.

19. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Horizon 2020 – specific plans added to SE Area Plan.

20. KLINK – Geometric Improvements & Economic Development.

21. 2008-2013 Capital Improvement Plan.

22. Budget reductions for 2007