MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Wichita, Kansas, February 14, 1995 Tuesday, 10:12 A.M. The City Council met in regular session with Mayor Broadfoot in the Chair. Council Members Cather, Ferris, Kamen, Reeser, Rogers; present. *Council Member Cole absent. Chris Cherches, City Manager; Gary Rebenstorf, Director of Law; Patricia L. Burnett, Deputy City Clerk; present. The invocation was given by Rev. Richard Brooks, Trinity United Methodist Church. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was participated in by the Council Members, staff, and guests. Minutes -- The minutes of the regular meeting of February 7, 1995, were -- approved approved 6 to 0. (Cole absent) AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS *Council Member Cole present. PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Broadfoot presented the Proclamations that were previously approved. Council Member Kamen momentarily absent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS LICENSE REVOCATION APPEAL OF LICENSE REVOCATION (ROGER CUNNINGHAM). Agenda Report No. 95-093. Roger Cunningham is appealing the decision of the Board of Appeals of Plumbers and Gas Fitters to deny renewal of his Master Plumbing Certificate. Mr. Cunningham's certificate/license lapsed in early 1994 when it was not renewed by December 31, 1993, or within the sixty-day grace period ending March 1, 1994. For such a lapse, the code requires re-testing for issuance of a new license. The Board of Appeals of Plumbers and Gas Fitters policies allow for exceptions to the code for documented extenuating circumstances (hospitalization, etc.). At its December 6, 1994, meeting the Board determined that Mr. Cunningham's situation did not meet these circumstances and denied his license renewal. The City Council may (1) concur with the decision of the Board of Appeals of Plumbers of Gas Fitters; or (2) Grant Mr. Cunningham's appeal and authorize renewal of his plumbers license. Roger Cunningham Roger Cunningham explained that failure to renew his certificate was a "human error mistake." Mr. Cunningham said he forgot to renew the certificate. At the present, Mr. Cunningham works for the Kansas Department of Corrections and has no City business license but the certificate does help him with regard to his applications for advancing in the Department of Corrections. There are advancement steps which he could apply for in the future. Mr. Cunningham said a notice used to always be sent out. For two or three years he remembered to renew but in 1993 it slipped his mind until the first week in March. He was, basically, one week late in renewing the license. "I just really need it to keep on going with the Department of Corrections." Responding to a question, Mr. Cunningham stated that he thought he had been a master plumber since 1981. Mr. Cunningham, continuing to answer questions, said, "I do not see why I should have to take the test again." Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection, responding to a question, said the test is given by Block and Associates and costs about $75 plus the $5 license. Roger Cunningham Roger Cunningham said he had never had a job turned down by the City of Wichita when he was working in Wichita, no red tagged jobs, nothing. Mr. Cunningham said he had plumbed over 100 houses for Mr. Hancock in the 1980s and never had any problem at all. "I have never had anything rejected or any type of work or anything." Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection, responding to a question, said the Block test is a nationally administered test which is given locally. It is an extensive test but it is for a master level certificate which is supposed to be someone who is extremely competent in the profession. That is the idea of the test. Roger Cunningham Roger Cunningham said he passed the master test in 1981. Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection, replied that the Board, in 1987, basically made a policy that the certificate had to be renewed by December 31st of each year. In 1987, a window of opportunity of an additional 60 days without retesting was given for late renewals. The idea behind that was that if someone is not working in the trade, or has not renewed their certificate for whatever reason, they may "fall out of touch" with the current codes and methods of installation, and that sort of thing. The Block Test is updated every three years to comply with existing codes. The Acting Superintendent said he did not believe Mr. Cunningham had been doing plumbing work in the City recently. He has not been taking out permits and that type of thing during the last couple of years. Roger Cunningham Roger Cunningham said he is involved in plumbing every day with the State. "I have to meet certain ACA criteria for everything we do. Plus, the State is not going to let me do shoddy work at one of the facilities. We are under scrutinized inspections all the time for keeping things up to standards and everything. As a matter of fact, we will be getting ready for another ACA accreditation audit which we passed with 100 percent at this facility three years ago; and we will be getting ready for another one -- I think it comes up later this year or the first of 1996. So, I am still involved with the trade and, not only that, I am involved with electrical, heating and air, and everything to keep a facility operational. That is my job." Regarding taking the Block Test, Mr. Cunningham said, "I do not really have time right now. Like I said, I went back and took a special class when it was time to take the master test for Wichita back when I did it. I took time to do it then and, like I said, I have plumbed for eight or nine years with my own business after that and I never had any problems or anything. I have never had a plumbing violation one." Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection, regarding any problems which might arise if the appeal were granted, said, "I think that the Board of Plumbers and Gas Fitters' opinion is that if people are not keeping up with the current codes and that kind of thing; if we are issuing a certificate, then we need to assure that those people are really up to date and know exactly what the installations, approved methods, materials, and all of those kinds of things are." Continuing to answer questions, Mr. Schroeder said Mr. Cunningham did meet with Mr. Shepherd. He may have been in and talked to someone in March. Roger Cunningham Roger Cunningham said that after he spoke to someone in Central Inspection about a handicap ramp the first week in March, he went right to Bob Shepherd who told him what procedures he would have to follow. "I did write a letter and I did not ever hear anything. I was not ever told that I had to appear there. I was waiting for somebody from the plumbing association to send me something to tell me to show up. Then when I did get ahold of them, there were some months they did not have meetings because they did not have anything; and it was just kind of an uncoordinated effort." Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection said there is no documentation that Mr. Cunningham was in the Office of Central Inspection in March. "The only documentation we have is a note that he wrote to Bob Shepherd in May, and he was in the office that day, requesting that he have this appeal. And, Mr. Shepherd gave him the notice of the date and time of the June meeting at that time when he was in the office." Council Member Cather Council Member Cather said it would not bother him if some kind of late fee were charged but it would bother him if Mr. Cunningham's certificate were taken away when he just did not get it done in time. Council Member Cather stated that he was ready to cut off the debate and make a motion to grant the appeal. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said there was a unanimous recommendation from a board that has heard the appeal. With regard to all other kinds of licenses, including a drivers license, if forgetting is the only excuse, the response is that a test must be taken. There are extenuating circumstances considered within the Plumbers and Gas Fitters Policies to allow for real reasons. "I guess I do not see that 'I forget' is a legitimate reason because that is what everyone is going to come to us with." Remembering to renew is a responsibility. "I am willing to uphold the decision made by people in the field who do not see this as, evidently, punitive but see it as a way to keep people current." Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection said that over the past four years there have been 20 appeals to the Board for this kind of situation; fifteen of those were unanimously denied; five of those were approved based on policy (i.e.; hospitalization which prevented renewal). "They also look at whether or not that person is actually working in this trade and that is how they are making a living and those kinds of things." One of the issues is that Mr. Cunningham is not technically making a living purely in the plumbing trade but he is in a more expanded area and plumbing is a part of what he does. And, by policy allowable exception would be a circumstance over which the applicant has no control such as hospitalization. The Acting Superintendent confirmed that it is not known whether Mr. Cunningham is or is not current with current codes. A judgment is being made and the Board feels that in order to have a certain answer, Mr. Cunningham should have to take the test over as opposed to accepting his explanation of his experience and what he has been doing over the last few years which has not been strictly plumbing. Roger Cunningham Roger Cunningham, responding to a question, explained that he had been working without a certificate which is not required to work for the Department of Corrections. The certificate is something he had when he obtained the job and he felt the certificate helped him get the job because his first job was to run the plumbing shop at the Hutchinson Correctional Facility. When he applied for his present job, the certificate also helped him get the job as Physical Plant Supervisor. Regarding whether he is being kept up-to-date with regard to the codes, even when Mr. Cunningham had a plumbing certificate, he never received in the mail from the City any amendments to the code to insert into his code book. He never received any mail regarding changes in the code. The certificate helps when applying for job upgrades. There is a section on the State's application that asks for certificates held for any skilled work to be listed. There could be upgrade positions available at any time in any of the nine facilities in the State. Each upgrade requires an application and relisting of certificates. Continuing to respond to questions, Mr. Cunningham said the appeal to the board failed with three voting against it and two not saying anything. "The two who did not say anything were a former boss of mine and a former warehouse associate salesman that I had dealt with in the past."..."I really did not get to say much that night because I felt like I was thrown in a situation where I felt like I had to get down on my knees and beg these five people; three of which I did not even know, to have my certificate back. And, there were a lot of people in the room." "I have no problem, I guess, with taking it again if that is what it comes to if they will issue me a journeyman's license to take the place of the master's license while I have a chance to study for the test." Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection said that, in the past, if someone was willing to go ahead and take the test, a journeyman's license has been issued for sixty or ninety days to allow the person to continue working in their trade until the test is passed. It may not be necessary in this case as a license is not required for his job. That is probably also what the Board was thinking in terms of pulling permits and that type of thing. Motion -- Cather moved that the appeal be granted and the permit fee be allowed to be paid late; and that the master certification be reissued. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said this would set a precedent with regard to forgetting to renew a license; and that the City should adhere to the standards. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said his peers should know best and that he should be issued a journeyman's license. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser spoke in favor of the appeal because Mr. Cunningham had remained in and worked in the same area of expertise for many years. Subst. Motion -- Rogers moved a substitute motion that this matter be sent back to the Board of Appeals of Plumbers and Gas Fitters with the instructions that Mr. Cunningham be heard and have the opportunity to provide additional information as to the specific plumbing projects he has worked on in the last year. Substitute motion -- carried carried 4 to 3. Cather, Reeser, Broadfoot - No. Kurt Schroeder Acting Superintendent of Central Inspection said this would probably go back to the Board in the first week of March. Roger Cunningham Roger Cunningham said he was just trying to better his life and the certificate is what is needed to continue working for the Department of Corrections for the next ten to fifteen years. It will not do any good to go back before the Board. One of the board members is a former boss and the other is a former salesman from a warehouse. "I am not going to get a fair shake. I can tell you that." Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot asked that minutes of this meeting be forwarded to the Board. Council Member Rogers Council Member Rogers said he could not see that the reason fit into a category of extenuating circumstances. And, the reason the motion was made the way it was made is because he said he did not have an opportunity to speak and to really let the Board know specifically what plumbing jobs he might have been working on. GYPSUM CREEK DRAINAGE GYPSUM CREEK DRAINAGE BASIN IMPROVEMENTS. (District II) Continued from February 7, 1995. Steve Lackey Director of Public Works reviewed the Item. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said staff has shown a need for this project. Motion -- Kamen moved that the design/study project be approved; the agreement be approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign; and the Ordinance be placed on first -- carried reading. Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance declaring it necessary to authorize improvements to Gypsum Creek Drainage Basin (Project No. 468- 82428), in the City of Wichita, Kansas; ordering and providing for the improvements thereof; and providing for payment of the cost thereof, read for the second time. Kamen moved that the Ordinance be placed upon its passage and adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Kamen, Reeser, Rogers, Broadfoot. NEW BUSINESS BID REQUIREMENTS CHARTER ORDINANCE AMENDING CHARTER ORDINANCE NO. 111 PERTAINING TO EXEMPTIONS EXEMPTIONS FROM BID REQUIREMENTS. Chris Cherches City Manager reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 95-116. On September 13, 1988, the City Commission adopted Charter Ordinance No. 111 which exempts the City under certain circumstances from the state law pertaining to bid requirements for public improvement projects. The existing charter ordinance specifically exempts projects financed by industrial revenue bonds (IRBs) from the statutory bid requirements, as well as projects constructed pursuant to a design-build method of construction. The proposed charter ordinance amends the existing charter ordinance to include a third category of projects that would be exempted from statutory bid requirements: projects constructed pursuant to a preferred developer agreement. The new provisions of the proposed charter ordinance require that the preferred developer be duly selected in accordance with applicable law and the procedures and policies of the City, and that the development agreement incorporates applicable City Codes. The proposed charter ordinance will provide the City with greater flexibility in negotiating fixed-price, turn- key development projects which take advantage of opportunities for economies which are often not available under public bid requirements, such as value engineering and guaranteed construction costs. According to the State Constitution and state law, a charter ordinance must be approved by a two-thirds majority vote on first and second reading. Following publication, the charter ordinance will go into effect after 61- days unless a sufficient petition for referendum is filed. Chris Cherches City Manager explained that the ice skating facility or the proposed convention hotel would be examples of a turn-key project. These would be projects in which the agreement might specify that the developer would have the responsibility of constructing a hotel or an ice rink within a given amount of money. The developer would be allowed to select the contractor/architect. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said, as movement is made toward public/private partnerships, this is absolutely necessary. This would allow work up front and early with preferred developers but would be limited in use by nature of the projects for which it would be necessary. This would make public/private partnerships much more viable and possible and would allow movement forward much more quickly. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney said this mirrors the exception and procedure provided for industrial revenue bonds. The amendments to the ordinance has three provisions that all the laws and ordinances of the city have to be complied with. If certain conditions were desired with a given contract, they would be a part of a development agreement. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser voiced concern that once the two projects mentioned are completed, this exception would still be available and could be misused. It might be wise to change the proposed charter ordinance to specifically mention the ice rink and convention hotel. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney explained that the ordinance probably should not be limited to specific projects because it is a broad grant of authority to enter into these types of agreements. The decision on whether or not the council is going to authorize development under this charter ordinance would always be left to the council when the developer agreements are brought to the Council. If two projects are specifically mentioned in the ordinance, then a new charter ordinance would have to be adopted every time the council wanted a new project to fall under this authority. A charter ordinance requires 61 days after the date of final publication before it is in effect. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser stated that each time a project would be identified, it would be done very openly, be on the agenda, and the public would have a chance to comment. As written, the ordinance allows an on-going loop-hole that could be used improperly. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney responded that every developer agreement the Council would approve would be subject to a public hearing and those provisions could be pointed out in the hearing for approval of the developer agreement. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said that discussion would probably get pushed to the back because it would be set up as on-going policy. If it were specific, it would be placed on the agenda and would be more open for the public to see. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney, answering a question, said if there were a developer agreement on the agenda, this matter would be a part of the discussion and part of the contract between the City and the developer as to the terms and conditions and how the bidding and that type of thing would be handled. The City would have control from the standpoint of approving or not improving the contract. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said the contract is drawn up before the public hearing without much time for the contract to be looked at. These are big projects. Chris Cherches City Manager said there is a selection process. If a project comes about, the normal process followed is an advertisement soliciting preferred developers to submit proposals (as with Old Town, the Ice Rink, the Convention Hotel). Requests for proposals are discussed with the City Council and approval or non-approval is sought. When the 30-day period is up, the Council reviews and selects a preferred developer. Staff is authorized to enter into negotiations with the preferred developer and returns again to the City Council. Through a letter of intent the major considerations are set out; and then the final agreement is again brought back to the City Council. Under the typical process the City has followed over the last few years, the preferred developer item has come to the City Council at least three times. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney, responding to a question, said wording might be added to the proposed charter ordinance which would require a simple ordinance to be passed for each project. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather said the Council should ask whether it is really a good idea to make it that easy for future councils to have preferred developers. "I am not really convinced that we ought to make it that easy for councils to avoid what is now the regular process and to have more and more preferred developers in the future just simply because it is easier to do." Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said it does not seem that having a preferred developer is an easy situation at all. These extra- ordinary projects are difficult to do and this will not be a regular way of doing things. It seems the approach of the end of negotiations would near and each time there would be a stop and the city would have to say there is a 60-day window. There are circumstances such as climbing interest rates and other things that make it important to move ahead. There is not always a guarantee that preferred developer projects are going to actually materialize. There has to be much progress before there is a point when enabling situations are needed. The Council can set forth conditions as desired in the contract and that is the time to spend time ensuring the desired conditions occur. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said he did not feel the Council should give up, through a charter ordinance, an on-going policy that has been used in the past to have a lot of local participation in projects. There may be merit in placing specific wording on the charter ordinance which would require passage of a simple ordinance for each project. It is also possible that the ice rink and convention hotel could be inserted. Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- Reeser moved that this item be deferred one week and that the Law Department return both options for consideration. Chris Cherches City Manager, answering a question, said it is suggested there be a council meeting next week. Subst. Motion -- Ferris moved a substitute motion that the ordinance be placed on first reading and that the second reading (in one week) would be placed on the regular (Unfinished Business) Agenda and not on the Consent Agenda; and that staff be directed to amend the proposed ordinance to require passage of a separate simple ordinance on each occurrence in the future. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said he hoped there would be inclusion that the public would have to be notified at least a week in advance of the public discussion; or when the ordinance is on for second reading, it could also be on the regular agenda for discussion. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said his concern was that the option of specifically including the ice rink and the convention hotel is not in the motion. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney said that if specific projects are named in the charter ordinance, the only way to remove them is also by charter ordinance. Amendment -- Ferris, with consent of the second, amended the substitute motion to add that the second reading of the ordinances would automatically be on the regular agenda for public discussion. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney, responding to a question, said a simple ordinance could also be made to require five votes. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said once the charter ordinance is passed, if it is not specific as to which projects it pertains, projects will be done in this manner from here on in the future. -- failed Substitute motion, as amended, failed 4 to 3. Cather, Reeser, Broadfoot - No. (Charter Ordinance requires five votes) -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. GENERAL OBLIGATION CHARTER ORDINANCE AMENDING CHARTER ORDINANCE NO. 133 PERTAINING TO ISSUANCE BONDS ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. Allen Bell Financial Projects Director reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 95-117. Charter Ordinance No. 133, as adopted June 25, 1991, provides the City with the authority to finance any public improvements, including land therefor, in an amount not to exceed $10 million per year, using general obligation bonds. In 1994, the City issued $6.8 million in general obligation bonds under this authority. Projects included Old Town parking improvements, State Office Building parking improvements, Multimedia Security parking lot improvements and the acquisition of the Allis Hotel. The plan of financing for the City's participation in the development of the East Bank Convention Hotel calls for an expanded use of the City's bonding authority under Charter Ordinance No. 133. While the cash flow to retire the City's debt for this project is expected to come from tax increment revenues and the transient guest tax revenues generated by the new convention hotel, the legal authority to issue bonds will rely in part on this charter ordinance. The charter ordinance replaces Charter Ordinance No. 133. The provisions of the new charter ordinance allow for the issuance of general obligation bonds for the purpose of constructing, purchasing or improving any public improvement, as deemed necessary by the City Council. The term "public improvement" is specifically defined to include the construction of a convention facility hotel located adjacent to the existing convention facilities when such hotel will be owned in whole or in part by the City. The total dollar amount of bonds that can be issued under this authority is amended to coincide with the amount that would be permitted under the statutes governing total bonded indebtedness for first class cities in Kansas. The adoption the the proposed charter ordinance does not by itself have a financial impact on the City. In order to use this authority, the City Council must adopt an initiating resolution for each project which is to be financed under the authority of this charter ordinance. According to the State Constitution and state law, a charter ordinance must be approved by a two-thirds majority vote on first and second reading. Following publication, the charter ordinance will go into effect after 61- days unless a sufficient petition for referendum is filed. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said he would like to have added to any motion that specific interest costs estimates on specific bond issues be mentioned in agenda items. Chris Cherches City Manager responded that all of the bonds are awarded by the City Council to the low bidder and there would be no way to know in advance what that interest would be. Allen Bell Financial Projects Director stated that at the time the Council would, by ordinance, authorize the issuance of bonds pursuant to this charter ordinance, the information would not be available to give a definitive answer as to the amount of interest. However, based on current interest rates at the time, a projected estimated total interest cost could be given for the proposed bond issue. Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- Cole moved that the Charter Ordinance be placed on first reading. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. CHARTER ORDINANCE A Charter Ordinance amending and repealing Charter Ordinance No. 133, of the City of Wichita, Kansas; providing substitute and additional provisions on the same subject relating to exempting the City of Wichita, Kansas, from the provisions of Section 13-1024C, Kansas Statutes Annotated that relates to issuance of General Obligation Bonds to pay for public improvements, introduced and under the rules laid over. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA RIGHT OF ENTRY PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCES 16.04.290 OR 16.04.300 (RIGHT OF ENTRY) TO ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CORRESPOND WITH THE JUNE 13, 1994, RECOMMENDATION OF THE KANSAS ATTORNEY GENERAL. (Requested by Council Member Kamen) Motion -- Kamen moved that the Law Department return to the City Council with a recommendation of how the codes 16.04.290 or 16.04.300 could be changed to correspond with the June 13, 1994, recommendation of the Kansas Attorney General. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney, responding to a question, said the language of the ordinance does not impose a penalty upon a person who refuses to allow an inspection. Basically, what the ordinance does is grant the authority to Central Inspection and the Water and Sewer Departments to conduct the inspections. There is no penalty if a person refuses to consent to the inspection. If the Water and Sewer Department and/or Office of Central Inspection wanted to conduct an inspection without permission, a search warrant would be required. The language in the ordinance is constitutional. The Constitution requires that consent be obtained or that a search warrant be drawn. The ordinance has been on the books since 1968. There have been no complaints from citizens. In June, 1994, when the hearing was held on this matter, the Director of Water and Sewer indicated that the only time there has been an incident where a citizen refused access, the matter was not pursued by the Water and Sewer Department. Regarding policy for employees, the City Attorney said there was a memorandum issued, after adoption of the current ordinance in June, 1994, to the Water Department indicating to them that if any searches were to be conducted, they were to consult with the Law Department. The memorandum spelled out the fact that they could not enter unless consent was received; and that if consent was not received a search warrant was required. If there were concerns, the Water and Sewer Department was to consult with the City Attorney's Office on those issues. A Memorandum dated July 5,1994, from David Warren, Director of Water and Sewer, to Susan Turner who is in charge of the Sewer Maintenance Department, indicates that "staff is, with input and assistance from the Law Department, to develop a department operating policy and procedure for carrying out the program and its enforcement. It is important to note that a person refusing access to a public official for inspection purposes cannot be penalized. You should work this out with the Law Department how search warrants are to be obtained." The City would have to be able to prove that there is an illegal sump pump before an administrative penalty could be put in place. There is an appeal process to the Department Director and then to the City Council. -- carried Motion carried 4 to 3. Cole, Reeser, Broadfoot - No. ART MUSEUM BOARD DISCUSSION ON EXPANSION OF ART MUSEUM BOARD. (Requested by Council Member Reeser) Agenda Report No. 95-137. The Art Museum Board is an Administrative (autonomous) body established in 1955 to administer the Wichita Art Museum and its collections and to promote the arts in the Wichita metropolitan area through educational activities, exhibits and other related programs. The Board operates independently except in budgetary matters where the City Manager and the City Council are involved in the establishment of the annual budget for the Museum. Members are appointed by the City Council. The l995 annual budget for the Museum is $1,136,530. The Friends of the Wichita Art Museum was established in l960 (and incorporated into an IRC 501(c)(3) organization) for the purpose of encouraging fine arts and to cultivate the public's support for art and to conduct volunteer service functions for, and on behalf of, the Wichita Art Museum. Over a period of time, the issue of governance has created conflicts in management and policy issues between the Wichita Art Museum Board (appointees of the City Council) and the Friends organization. The City Council has determined that certain action(s) may be necessary to clarify the roles of both organizations to effectively accomplish a common mission of making the Art Museum one of the finest art institutions in America. Toward this end, the City Council is being asked to consider several options. To ensure a common interest is promoted for the benefit of the Art Museum and to establish lasting relationships between volunteers, patrons and Museum members, it is proposed: Alternative #1 - the size of the Wichita Art Museum Board be expanded from seven (7) members to 13 - 14 members, appointed by the City Council. Membership could take into consideration that a number of these appointments be made from active and interested individuals which have been involved in the Friends or volunteer support organizations. This expanded Board would replace the existing Friends Board and be accountable to the City Council and citizens of the community. [This alternative is almost identical as the Library Board composition.] Alternative #1(A) - an option to #1 would be for the City Council to select/appoint the Chairperson for this body for a specific term. Alternative #2 - the Board be expanded to a specified number with the City Council appointing seven (7) members and the Friends organization nominating a specified number to serve on the Board. Likewise, this newly comprised Board would replace the Friends Board. Alternative #3 - absent the expansion of the Board membership, the Council can implement the provisions contained in the Memorandum of Understanding, as revised. Further, the City Council could consider requesting the assistance of the Mr. Stephen E. Weil, Deputy Director, Smithsonian Institution, to consult and help establish an expanded Museum Board's mission, direction and management/volunteer policy. The membership of the Art Museum is established by Charter Ordinance 119. To increase the number of members would require an amendment to the Charter Ordinance. Expansion of membership will have minimal cost to the Museum, estimated to be approximately $1,700 for added supplies, mailings, postage and printing. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said he had made attempts to bring the controversy between the Art Museum Board and the Friends of the Art Museum to a conclusion. In addition to the above options, Council Member Reeser offered the following options for consideration: (1) A Charter Ordinance to dissolve the current Wichita Art Museum Board and reshape in the manner desired by the City Council. The new Board could be seven members appointed by the City Council with two additional members being nominees from the Friends of the Art Museum. (2) A simple ordinance followed by a change in the Charter Ordinance making the Art Museum Board strictly advisory. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney said powers of the Art Museum Board can be changed by simple ordinance; a change in the the number of persons on the Board requires a charter ordinance. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said he would support dissolving the current Board and having a new nine-member Board, seven appointed by the City Council and two nominated by the Friends of the Art Museum and appointed by the City Council. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris said the next City Council may want to look at the boards and commissions as a whole. Perhaps the board members should serve at the pleasure of the appointing council member. Another problem sometime occurs when one council member leaves and the incoming council member inherits an existing board member appointee. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole questioned to whom the Friends appointments would be accountable. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said there is no accountability right now. "I have asked my appointee to support the original Memorandum of Understanding. The answer was negative in return. I talked to my appointee twice during the summer and asked that the winner take all, scorched earth approach to ending this controversy end. That did not end. So, right now, there is no accountability." If there is satisfaction with the current appointee, that person could be reappointed once the current Board is dissolved. The appointees from the Friends of the Art Museum would be nominees and the City Council as a whole would vote on the two to be appointed. The accountability would be to the whole Council rather than to individual Council Members. Gary Rebenstorf Director of Law, responding to a question, said the appointees from the Friends organization could remain as members of the Friends of the Art Museum. There would be no conflict of interest because one is public and the other is a private board. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser, regarding a question as to whether he thought the Friends Board needs to continue, said his conclusion was that it did need to continue because of the way people contribute to institutions. People contribute to organizations and want it to be in addition to what the City is doing in support. If a private fund raising or support organization were removed, contributions would then be given to an organization which is conceived as being directly attributed to the City Hall infrastructure and the concept may be that contributions would then be used to replace rather than supplement city funds. Council Member Reeser also clarified that he did not intend to imply that he did not have accountability with his appointee to the Art Museum Board or that the appointee has done a poor job; rather, his appointee has very strong feelings and has fought for her position. While that is respected, a point has been reached where drastic measures have to be taken to bring a conclusion. Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot said it was her understanding that, in a strategic plan which was discussed two years ago, there was a notion of moving towards one board. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said this could be a step towards that direction and it would automatically improve the communication between the organizations. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole stated that if the Friends of the Art Museum organization continues, she believed that a memorandum of understanding has to emerge and the memorandum before the Council today is one that the City Council agreed upon. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said he did not support the memorandum of understanding that is before the Council today. With a new Board with seven members plus two Friends members, a good dialogue on a memorandum of understanding could be started on a memorandum acceptable by both organizations. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney said a 501c Board is a private concern. The same people could be on each board but the 501c Friends Board is a separate entity and is not under City control. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather agreed that there is a need to dissolve the Art Museum Board and to eventually try to get friendly people on each side who will work toward keeping the collections and all in tact. Council Member Rogers Council Member Rogers said he is not in favor of the memorandum of understanding that is before the Council because both boards have not agreed to it. Ample opportunity, time, and consideration has been given to allowing the two existing boards to come up with something that was amicable and workable. A decision needs to be made by the City Council. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said he understood that there is also an option of bypassing the names nominated by the Friends and appointing someone of the Council's choice. Regardless of actions taken by the Council next week the Wichita Art Museum will come out of this stronger than ever before. Motion -- Reeser moved that the Law Department be directed to draft a simple ordinance and/or a charter ordinance (whatever is necessary) to dissolve the current Art Museum Board; and to create a new Art Museum Board that has seven members appointed by the Wichita City Council and two members appointed by the City Council from nominations (more than two) by the Friends of the Wichita Art Museum Board; and that there be no public hearing today but that the public hearing on this matter be held next week. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said he hoped this matter would be set for a time-certain hearing; and that it was his understanding a simple ordinance would be required to dissolve the Board, and a charter ordinance would be required to expand the board to nine members. It was also hoped the simple ordinance would include an emergency declaration. Gary Rebenstorf City Attorney said the time frames for implementation would be in the ordinance. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris added that many of the City's boards have requirements that members of the boards be appointed from certain organizations or groups. If all appointments were made but two, and none of the appointments were from the Friends Board, then the last two appointments would have to be members of the Friends Board. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser said that was his intent. And, the new nine-member board would have the option of embarking on a new memorandum of understanding. Motion restated -- Reeser moved that the Law Department be directed to draft a simple ordinance and/or a charter ordinance dissolving the current Art Museum Board and replace it with a new nine-member board that has seven members appointed by the Wichita City Council and two members appointed by the City Council from nominations (more than two) by the Friends of the Wichita Art Museum Board; that there be another option of a seven-member board from which two members are appointed by the City Council from nominations by the Friends of the Wichita Art Museum Board; and that there be a time-certain public hearing next week. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK'S DISCUSSION OF MUNICIPAL COURT & CLERK'S OFFICE. (Requested by Council Member OFFICE Cather) Council Member Cather Council Member Cather reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 95-138. The activities of the Municipal court have grown over the past few years and are continuing to increase. Some of this growth is the result of added case loads attributable to police officers being added to the Police Department, implementation of new focused programs of Domestic Violence and Snap-It, and a steady increase in "continued cases" by the Court. To meet these increased court activities will require an evaluation of existing practices, including Court rules. As the case load escalates, it has become necessary to re-evaluate the needs for expanded data processing and court records, prosecution services, caseloads, public defender services and procedures of the Court, including the concern with the growing number of case continuances. To address one element of the Court system, it is proposed that the City Council hire additional prosecutors to handle the increased number of cases. The increased number of continuances being granted and the practice of reducing felonies to misdemeanors in Municipal Court have overburdened current staff. Further, as case activity expands there are more "walk- ins" necessitating additional prosecutors to handle questions relative to the charges. More time is needed to prepare for trials and handle other unscheduled matters, such as police and citizen inquiries. In l993, the City added a full time prosecutor to handle only Domestic Violence cases; however, because of the increased caseloads (partly because of growing continuances in addition to regular (new) cases), this individual has been assisting in other prosecution work. A full time judge was also provided for Domestic Violence; however, the Court selected Pro Tem judges in lieu of an additional judge to handle strictly DV cases. It is proposed that the City Council: 1. Hire additional prosecutors which would allow for an equivalent to two lawyers per courtroom. The additional prosecutors will also allow for screening and review of cases prior to filing to keep out cases that do not have merit. Once the rules are re-established to reduce the ever- increasing number of continuances, the reduction of felonies to misdemeanors to Municipal Court, the Neighborhood Court established, and the Domestic Violence program is self contained, an evaluation could be made as to the number of attorneys needed to meet prosecution needs. 2. A loaned executive review task force be formed to review Municipal Court procedures, practices, court rules, and other areas to improve the court system. To retain four (4) prosecutors will cost approximately $200,000/annually. To implement this proposal will require a budget adjustment. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather said he would like to hire additional prosecutors as the most obvious and cheapest solution to the problem. Also, someone needs to look into what is going on in the Municipal Court to see how it could function more efficiently. It does not matter who is on the task force but, rather, that the matter just be looked into. The people that need to be talked to should be the judges, municipal court clerk, prosecutors, defenders, and parole office (particularly those who write pre-sentence investigation reports). The City should also look into the way the County Court system is working, particularly the new mandatory pretrial conferences. Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot stated that there has to be an extensive review before any kind of decision is made about any additional prosecutors or other personnel; and it is important who is on that task force because of automatic expectations that things will change. Chris Cherches City Manager suggested that the review could probably be accomplished within a 90-day period of time. Council Member Rogers Council Member Rogers said comparative information from other cities and how their court system is handled might be beneficial. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said she could support a loaned executive review task force and suggested citizens and "those who live with the results" might also be added to those on the task force. Perhaps procedures within other departments in City Hall need to be altered to resolve some of the problems. "I could not, at this time, support adding more personnel until we have a reason to know that that is going to provide a solution." Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris stated that he would rather do a comprehensive package than to do a bandaid that may not solve the problem and which may cause other problems. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather said he would like to remain involved in this process; and that he thought the clean team and snap-it program volunteers ought to be added to the list to be talked to. Motion -- Cather moved that a task force be established to look into all phases of Municipal Court proceedings, including the Municipal Court Clerk's Office, and that the task force be inclusive of a loaned executive task force; that suggested members for the review team/task force be brought back to the council; and that recommendations from the review be returned to the Council in 90 days. Council Member Rogers Council Member Rogers said the impact that other jurisdictions might make on the Municipal Court ought to also be reviewed. The task force ought to include members of other jurisdictions which may be part of the impact on Municipal Court. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. (ADDENDUM ITEM) FINANCIAL STATUS REVIEW REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STATUS (Requested by Mayor Broadfoot) Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot stated that the year end Financial Report indicates the City's financial picture ending 1994 was very positive and talks about the goal to maintain reasonable cash reserves. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the City Manager return to the Council in two weeks with a proposal for use of the cash reserves, making sure a level of reserves that is comfortable for the City is maintained, in three categories: (1) how reserves could help ensure adding additional police officers (matching and sustaining federal grant amounts); (2) a pool of money in the cash reserves to be set aside for economic development purposes; and (3) used to put off any tax increase, particularly for 1996. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris said he would be opposing using the cash reserves for anything except tax reduction or fulfilling obligations the City might have to continue off- setting any budgetary increases during budget time. Previously, it was determined that with the sales tax dilemma, there would not be much advantage to lower taxes because that would necessitate an increase to capture any decrease due to an archaic state formula for distribution of taxes. When money, cash reserves, is spent for matched grants which are not capital-type projects, there is a risk of having to offset that with tax increases due to the fact that those are on-going annual expenditures. Something that might be important to add, since those are cash reserves, is to look to some of the important projects in the Capital Improvement Program that could be funded on a one-time basis from cash. A one-time basis does not produce on-going budgetary requirements. Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot stated that in her discussions with the City Manager, she had encouraged sensitivity, if cash reserves are used, to having in place a mechanism to address the glut that could occur at the end of the grant period. And, in the adjustments already made in the 1995 budget, cash reserves were considered as a possible source of funding. Motion restated -- Broadfoot restated the motion that the City Manager return to the Council in two weeks with a proposal for use of cash reserves, making sure a level of reserves that is comfortable for the City is maintained, in three categories: (1) how reserves could help ensure adding additional police officers (matching and sustaining federal grant amounts), (2) a pool of money in the cash reserves to be set aside for economic development purposes, and (3) used to put off any tax increase, particularly for 1996; and being sensitive to items not budgeted in 1995 but have been brought up since then. This would be for public discussion. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. RAILS TO TRAILS SET PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE FOR RAILS TO TRAILS. Chris Cherches City Manager explained that this matter was placed on the Agenda to set a public hearing. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather said he had met with a committee of opponents of the Rails to Trails Project and there is interest in an orderly presentation by both City Staff and by the opposition (30 minutes each), with five-minute and three- minute rebuttals following. Motion -- Cather moved that there be a public hearing scheduled for February 21, 1995; that 30 minutes be allotted to each side with a five- minute rebuttal for each side, followed by an additional two- minute rebuttal period for each side; and that debate be cut-off at that point. Council Member Rogers Council Member Rogers said he was beginning to take umbrage with some of the media and organizations that imply that because the City has a workshop or requests information it means the Council has already made up their minds; and he wished the leadership of some of the organizations would come up with something logical for consideration. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said she became involved in this because there had been no effort to make hearings that were convenient available for the citizens who reside in Wichita. In Council Member Cole's District CPO, half of the people who spoke regarding Rails to Trails were not citizens of Wichita and were in opposition. These same persons had spoken previously and had three opportunities outside the City of Wichita to speak in opposition. There may be voices with reasons differing from the property owners. There needs to be an opportunity provided for speakers but not for city versus non-city residents. The hearing should be structured with the major focus on the citizens of Wichita. Council Member Reeser momentarily absent. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said he would rather cut the speaking time to three minutes each and give each person from Wichita an opportunity to speak. Council Member Kamen momentarily absent. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris said he could not support a motion which did not allow a public hearing. If the goal is to allow the opponents an opportunity, perhaps it would be best to have staff do a presentation, the opposition do a presentation, and then the public hearing rules allowing three minutes per public speaker be invoked. -- failed Motion failed 3 to 4. Cole, Ferris, Kamen, Broadfoot - No. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said she was interested in seeing both the opposition and staff video presentations at the beginning of the item. Consensus of the Council was that the Art Museum Board public hearing item would be in the morning on February 21st, and the Rails to Trails public hearing item would be at 1:30 p.m. on February 21st. Motion -- Kamen moved that the public hearing be set for February 21st at 1:30 p.m. with three minutes time allotted to each speaker. Motion, with consent of the second -- withdrawn withdrawn. Motion -- Ferris moved that the public hearing be set for February 21st at 1:30 p.m.; that staff be given 15 minutes to give a presentation; an organized group in opposition be given 15 minutes to give a presentation; that would be the end of organized presentation; and the guidelines would then be invoked to allow three minutes per speaker. Amendment -- Cole moved an amendment to the motion that, except for the 15 minute presentations, comments be heard solely from the citizens of Wichita. -- carried Amendment carried 4 to 3. Cather, Ferris, Kamen - No. -- carried Motion carried 5 to 2. Cather, Kamen - No. APPOINTMENTS APPOINTMENTS TO WICHITA PUBLIC BUILDING COMMISSION. Two appointments (Cather, Rogers) for terms to expire June 30, 1995. Motion -- carried Cather moved that the appointment be deferred one week. Motion carried 7 to 0. Motion -- carried Rogers moved that the appointment be deferred one week. Motion carried 7 to 0. APPOINTMENT TO THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION. One appointment (Cole) for a term expiring June 30, 1995. Motion -- carried Cole moved that the appointment be deferred one week. Motion carried 7 to 0. APPOINTMENT TO WICHITA COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN. One appointment (Kamen) for a term expiring June 30, 1995. Motion -- carried Kamen moved that the appointment be deferred one week. Motion carried 7 to 0. APPOINTMENTS TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD. Two appointments (Ferris, Reeser) for terms expiring June 30, 1995. Motion -- carried Ferris moved that the appointment be deferred one week. Motion carried 7 to 0. Motion -- carried Reeser moved that the appointment be deferred two weeks. Motion carried 7 to 0. REAPPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS. Due to the nonattendance of Doug Malone (Broadfoot), it is necessary that his reappointment be made to continue his term to June 30, 1995. Motion -- Broadfoot appointed Doug Malone and moved that the appointment be approved. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. PROCLAMATIONS PROCLAMATIONS. Motion -- carried Broadfoot moved that the proclamations be authorized. Motion carried 7 to 0. CONSENT AGENDA Broadfoot moved that the Consent Agenda, including addendum item, except Items 13a and 16, be approved in accordance with the recommended action shown thereon. Motion carried 7 to 0. BOARD OF BIDS REPORT OF THE BOARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS DATED FEBRUARY 6, 1995. At 10:00 a.m., Friday, February 3, 1995, pursuant to advertisements published, bids were received, publicly opened, read aloud and tabulated for the Board of Bids and Contracts: (Ref: Bid analysis report attached to Board of Bids Minutes 2/6/95) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION: SEWERS, PAVING AND WATER MAINS AS PER SPECIFICATIONS 1995 Contract maintenance concrete pavement repair of arterial streets at various locations (/132357/) Traffic to be maintained through construction (Council approval date 12-20-94) (District - all); AND, 1995 Contract maintenance concrete pavement repair of residential streets at various locations. (/131516/) Traffic to be maintained through construction. (Council approval date 12-20-94) (District - all) Pavers, Inc. - $325,300.00 (Engineer's Estimate) Improving Victoria from 49th Street South to 47th Street South and a school bus loading zone along Victoria Street south of 47th Street South (west of Hydraulic, south of 47th Street). (472-82397 & 472-82529/762245/762864/) Traffic to be maintained through construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 11-23-93/11-15-94) (District IV) Asphalt Construction - $188,976.10 Constructing sidewalk along the south side of 21st Street North, from the westerly line of Lot 1, Block 1 to the easterly line of Lot 2, Block 1, Bradley Fair Addition (21st Street, east of Rock Road). (472-82426/762336) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 02-01-94) (District II) Major, Inc. - $7,732.00 (Negotiated Contract for Engineer's Estimate) Total Base Bids Items W/Add Alt. Paving Stoney Point from the north line of Westport to the east line of Parkdale; Westlawn from the east line of Stoney Point to the east line of Timber Ridge Addition; Stoney Point Court from the west line of Stoney Point to and including the cul-de-sac; and Stoney Point Court from the west line of Stoney Point to and including the cul-de-sac in Timber Ridge Addition (south of 21st, west of Maize). (472- 82542/762914) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 01-10-95) (District V) Ritchie Paving - $169,614.90 Constructing Lateral 243, Southwest Interceptor Sewer (east of Tyler, south of 21st Street North). (468- 81700/742171) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 11-29-94) (District V) Nowak Construction - $14,679.85 The Board of Bids and Contracts recommended that the contracts be awarded as outlined above, subject to check, same being the lowest and best bid and within the Engineer's construction estimate. Broadfoot moved that the contracts be awarded as outlined above, subject to check, same being the lowest and best bid within the Engineer's construction estimate, and the Mayor be authorized to sign the contract for the City. Motion carried 7 to 0. FINANCE DEPARTMENT/PURCHASING DIVISION: FINE PAPER AND CARBONLESS PAPER REQUIREMENTS AS PER SPECIFICATIONS GROUP I Unisource, Inc. : Item 1 - $ 4.30 (Per M) Item 2 - $ 5.10 (Per M) Item 3 - $ 6.49 (Per M) Item 4 - $10.20 (Per M) Item 5 - $ 6.22 (Per M) Item 6 - $ 7.90 (Per M) Item 7 - $12.42 (Per M) Item 8 - $ 4.50 (Per M) Item 9 - $ 4.95 (Per M) Item 10 - $ 5.15 (Per M) Item 11 - $ 6.47 (Per M) Item 12 - $12.96 (Per M) Item 13 - $ 7.01 (Per M) Item 14 - $13.55 (Per M) Item 15 - $12.26 (Per M) Item 16 - $ 5.10 (Per M) Item 17 - $ 6.49 (Per M) Item 18 - $24.52 (Per M) Item 19 - $ 5.43 (Per M) (Terms 2%-10th Esc/De) TOTAL NET BID - $71,051.10 GROUP II Southwest Paper Company: Item 20 - $8.68 (Per M) Item 21 - $9.77 (Per M) (Terms 2%-10 Firm) TOTAL NET BID - $2,767.50 CITY MANAGER/OFFICE OF CENTRAL INSPECTION: DEMOLITION, REMOVAL OF STRUCTURES, AND CLEAN-UP OF EIGHT (8) PROPERTIES AS PER SPECIFICATIONS (2417 E. 3rd Street) Item 1: M & M Tractor - $2,642.00 (Lump Sum) (401 N. Estelle) Item 2: M & M Tractor - $2,891.00 (Lump Sum) (3004 E. 3rd Street) Item 3: M & M Tractor - $1,242.00 (Lump Sum) (2010 E. 3rd Street) Item 4: M & M Tractor - $1,340.00 (Lump Sum) (3017 E. 3rd Street) Item 5: B.J. Hauling and Demolition - $2,675.00 (Lump Sum) (4629 W. 2nd Street) Item 6: Midwest Contractors - $ 680.00 (Lump Sum) (3307 E. Pawnee) Item 7: M & M Tractor - $2,960.00 (Lump Sum) (2847 S. Davidson) Item 8: M & M Tractor - $1,680.00 (Lump Sum) The Board of Bids and Contracts recommended that the contracts be awarded as outlined above, same being the lowest and best bid. Broadfoot moved that the contracts be awarded as outlined above, same being the lowest and best bid. Motion carried 7 to 0. LICENSE APPLICATIONS APPLICATIONS FOR LICENSES TO RETAIL CEREAL MALT BEVERAGES. Renewal 1995 (Consumption on Premises) John E. Thien Jet Bar B.Q. 1315 E. Central (Consumption off Premises) John R. Leftwich C Mart #9102 7101 E. Lincoln John R. Leftwich C Mart #9109 400 S. West Street Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the licenses be approved subject to Staff review and -- carried approval. Motion carried 7 to 0. PLANS AND SPECS PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. a. 1995 Arterial sidewalk and wheelchair ramp construction (Phase II) at various locations. (472-82555) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 01-31-95) b. 1995 Contract maintenance quickset slurry seal of asphalt streets at various locations. (131557) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 12-20-94) c. Constructing Lateral 339, Southwest Interceptor Sewer, to serve Westridge Village Addition (west of Ridge, north of 13th Street). (468-82421/742148/480306) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date n/a ) (District V) d. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Westridge Village Addition (west of Ridge, north of 13th Street). (448-88867/732479/470325) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date n/a) (District V) e. Constructig a water distribution system to serve Ebersole Addition (west of Custer, south of 13th Street). (448-88862/732545/470332) Traffic to be maintained through construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 08-23-94) (District VI) f. Downtown parking improvements located at 319 South Broadway (between English and Waterman on Broadway). (472-82420/790840/435115) Traffic to be maintained through construction. (Council approval date 04- 12-94) g. 1995 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Phase I (various locations). (468- 82399/621045/533004) Traffic to be maintained through construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 05-17-94) (Districts II, IV, and VI) h. Constructing an eight-inch water main along Seneca at McCormick. (448-88836) Traffic to be maintained through construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 12-14-93) (Districts IV and VI) Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the plans and specifications be approved and the City Clerk be instructed to advertise for bids to be submitted to the Board of Bids and -- carried Contracts by 10:00 a.m., February 24, 1995. Motion carried 7 to 0. PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES. a. 1995 Contract maintenance concrete pavement repair of arterial streets at various locations - $246,550. (132357) Traffic to be maintained through construction. (Council approval date 12-20-94) (District - all) b. 1995 Contract maintenance concrete pavement repair of residential streets at various locations - $110,970. (131516) Traffic to be maintained through construction. (Council approval date 12-20-94) (District - all) c. Improving Victoria from 49th Street South to 47th Street South and a school bus loading zone along Victoria Street south of 47th Street South (west of Hydraulic, south of 47th Street) - $280,550. (472-82397 and 472- 82529/762245/762864) Traffic to be maintained through construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 11-23-93/11-15-94) d. Mid-America Indian Center parking and access improvements (Central and Seneca) - $516,361. e. Constructing sidewalk along the south side of 21st Street North, from the westerly line of Lot 1, Block 1 to the easterly line of Lot 2, Block 1, Bradley Fair Addition (21st Street, east of Rock Road) - $11,200. (472-82426/762336) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 02-01- 94) (District II) f. Paving Stoney Point from the north line of Westport to the east line of Parkdale; Westlawn from the east line of Stoney Point to the east line of Timber Ridge Addition; Stoney Point Court from the west line of Stoney Point to and including the cul-de-sac; and Stoney Point Court from the west line of Stoney Point to and including the cul-de-sac in Timber Ridge Addition (south of 21st, west of Maize) - $254,000. (472- 82542/762914) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 01-10-95) (District V) g. Constructing Lateral 243, Southwest Interceptor Sewer (east of Tyler, south of 21st Street North) - $55,000. (468-81700/742171) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 11-29-94) (District V) Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the preliminary estimates be approved and filed. Motion -- carried carried 7 to 0. STATEMENTS OF COST STATEMENTS OF COST (CHESNEY). a. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Lakeside Park Addition - $110,074. (448- 88717/731786/470255) b. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Lake Ridge Second Addition - $36,755. (448- 88728/731877/470264) c. Constructing a waterworks system (Phase 4) to make water and water service available to the property adjacent to Crestline Avenue and Edna Street from May Avenue to Carrwood Drive, May Avenue from Crestline Avenue to Carrwood Drive, Carrwood Drive from May Avenue to Edna Street and May Court in Prairie Park Second Addition - $41,530. (448- 88772/731943/470272) d. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Forest Lakes Addition - $35,525. (448- 88704/732073/470285) e. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Forest Lakes Addition - $28,491. (448- 88705/732081/470286) f. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Reflection Ridge Sixth Addition - $39,174. (448- 88802/732099/470287) g. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Rainbow Lakes West Third Addition - $32,986. (448- 88827/732115/470289) h. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Breezy Pointe Second Addition - $56,295. (448- 88658/732123/470290) i. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Socora Village Addition - $46,173. (448- 88641/732131/470291) j. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Towne Parc Fifth Addition - $43,640. (448- 88751/732149/470292) k. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Westborough Second Addition - $18,635. (448- 88830/732172/470295) l. Construction a water distribution system to serve Turtle Run Second Addition - $27,128. (448- 88723/732198/470297) m. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Auburn Hills Addition - $78,296. (448- 88831/732206/470298) n. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Savanna at Castle Rock Fifth Addition - $107,399. (448- 88792/732214/470299) o. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Huntington Place Third Addition - $27,134. (448- 88267/732230/470301) p. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Wilderness at the Park Addition - $51,262. (448- 88748/732248/470302) q. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Kansas Surgery and Recovery Center Addition - $61,867. (448-88789/732263/470304) r. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Stoneborough Addition - $38,661. (448- 88848/732297/470307) s. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Cottonwood Square Addition, now platted as Northrock Crossing Addition - $11,494. (448-88850/732339/470311) t. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Belle Terre Third Addition - $62,265. (448- 88844/732347/470312) u. Constructing a water distribution system to serve Lord of Life Lutheran Church Addition - $9,903. (448- 88866/732412/470319) Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Statements of Cost be received and filed and the City Clerk be instructed to prepare the proposed assessment rolls. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. PETITION PETITION (100%). Agenda Item No. 95-118. The signature on the petition represents 100% of the improvement district. The petition is a lot split requirement. An unattended auto refueling station is planned for the site. Petition for a sanitary sewer (Lateral 127, War Industries Sewer) to serve part of Lot 1, Golf Park Addition (south of Harry, east of Woodlawn). Estimated project cost is $14,000 - Special Assessments. (468-82451) Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Petition be approved and the Resolution be adopted. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. RESOLUTION NO. R-95-065 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Lateral 127, War Industries Sewer to serve part of Lot 1, Golf Park Addition (south of Harry, east of Woodlawn) (468-82451) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Broadfoot moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Kamen, Reeser, Rogers, Broadfoot. DEEDS AND EASEMENTS DEEDS AND EASEMENTS. a. Temporary Easement dated January 30, 1995, from Henry and Barbara Eli for a tract in Greenfield Addition (Meridian and McCormick). (Index #705467) (No cost to City) b. Easement dated January 4, 1995, from Walter and Gloria Westney for a tract in Westney Addition. (Private Project - Index #607861) (No cost to City) (Has been filed and recorded) Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the documents be received and filed and the City Clerk be -- carried instructed to record with the Register of Deeds. Motion carried 7 to 0. BOARDS MINUTES MINUTES OF ADVISORY BOARDS. Board of Park Commissioners, 1/25/95 CPO Southwest Council 4, 1/30/95 CPO North Central Council 6, 1/25/95 Historic Preservation Board, 1/24/95, 1/9/95 Sister Cities Advisory Board, 1/6/95 Motion -- carried Broadfoot moved that the Minutes be received and filed. Motion carried 7 to 0. STREET CLOSURES/USES CONSIDERATION OF STREET CLOSURES/USE REQUESTS. Agenda Report. The old Woolworth's building located on the south side of Douglas, between Market and Broadway, is being demolished by Cornejo & Sons. Some internal demolition has already been accomplished with minimal inconvenience to the public. At this time, additional room for demolition equipment is necessary to remove the external structure and to provide for public safety. Therefore, the contractor has requested shutting down one lane of eastbound traffic on Douglas and to prohibit through pedestrian traffic on the south side of Douglas. The proposed closing date and duration is February 15, 1995 through May 31, 1995. Eastbound traffic on Douglas will be restricted to one lane during the daylight hours and two lanes during the evening hours. Through pedestrian traffic will be prohibited during the duration of the closure and will be informed that the sidewalk is closed and to use the sidewalk on the north side of Douglas. The closure is necessary to facilitate building demolition and to provide safety at the demolition site. Motion -- carried Broadfoot moved that the closures be approved. Motion carried 7 to 0. FINANCIAL REPORT CITY OF WICHITA QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1994. Motion -- carried Broadfoot moved that the Report be received and filed. Motion carried 7 to 0. FIREFIGHTERS RELIEF DECLARATION FOR PARTICIPATION IN FIREFIGHTERS RELIEF FUND FOR 1994. Agenda Report No. 95-119. The Declaration of Participation must be executed and filed each year to allow the local Firefighters Relief Association to participate in the distribution of the State Firefighters Relief Fund Tax. The certification indicates that the Wichita Fire Department is a full-paid, public fire department with 368 salaried firefighters, and has fire apparatus and necessary equipment that is in serviceable condition with a value of $20 million. By State Statute, two percent of the total premium on fire and lightening insurance written within the State during a calendar years goes to the Commissioner of Insurance to establish the State Firefighter's Relief Fund. After certain payments required by law, the balance of the fund is paid to local firefighters relief associations to be used for benefits for firemen injured, disabled, or killed in the line of duty, payment of funeral expenses, payment of a pension benefit for full-time firemen who are unfit for service after serving 20 years with the department, and to purchase insurance which would provide any of the listed benefits. The City of Wichita has had a Wichita Firemen's Relief Association for more than 50 years. The Certification is for calendar year 1994. The Firefighter's Relief Fund was created by K.S.A. 40-1701, et seq., and K.A.E. 40-10-1, et seq. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Declaration for Participation for 1994 be approved and -- carried the Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried 6 to 0. (Reeser absent) MOU FOR CHENEY MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE RESERVOIR (CONSOLIDATED FARM SERVICES AGENCY) FOR CHENEY RESERVOIR - COST SHARE AGREEMENT FOR POLLUTION PREVENTION. Agenda Report No. Cheney Reservoir is a critical component of Wichita's water supply resources. On August 24, 1993, the City Council authorized staff to assist in submitting a grant request with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for a watershed improvement grant. As part of that action the Council approved the concept of the City cost sharing to give landowners an incentive to implement "best management practices" for pollution prevention in the watershed. City staff and other governmental agencies working cooperatively have determined that Cheney Reservoir has at least two significant pollution problems. One is sedimentation that washes into the reservoir from soil erosion. This sedimentation displaces water stored in the reservoir, and is a major factor in determining the "life" of the reservoir. The other problem is the amount of phosphates in the water. Measurements of phosphates in the North Fork of the Ninnescah River and in the reservoir indicate phosphate levels higher than desired for a water supply. High phosphate levels can lead to an increase in microscopic plant activity in a lake, and thus increased taste and odor problems in water from the lake. With the aid of a computer model that has been developed of the drainage basin above the reservoir, potential pollution sites in the watershed have been identified. Best Management Practices that can help reduce the pollution from those sites have been established. A Management Plan has been prepared, and approved by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Consolidated Farm Services Agency (CFSA) has a program, called ACP, that finances the installation of soil conservation practices that meet the goals of the Management Plan. Under that program the landowner can install Best Management Practices that will reduce pollution from their land and then apply for reimbursement. Under that program the landowner is eligible to receive reimbursement for 70% of the cost of those improvements. The intention of this MOU is to facilitate a means whereby the landowner can receive 100% reimbursement by having the City of Wichita provide up to a 30% cost share for the improvements. Under these programs the landowner would not be eligible for any costs that the exceed the County Average Cost for those improvements. There are several alternatives that the City could pursue in trying to reduce pollution in Cheney Reservoir and/or the effects of such pollution: 1) Participate in this program. The CFSA would provide 70% of the funds used to address pollution problems in the basin, with the remaining 30% coming from the City. 2) Wait until the pollution problems are more severe. The City would run the risk of not having any other funding sources participate in improving water quality in the drainage basin. Further customer dissatisfaction with taste and odor or the cost of treatment for taste and odor would have a detrimental impact. 3) Forego any efforts to work in the basin, and only respond to the water quality in the City's water treatment practices. Taste and odor can be reduced by various methods (granular activated carbon, ozone, etc.). The cost of these treatments could be as high as $800,000 per year. These treatment protocols do not address the sediment coming into the lake. To remove the sediment after it is in the reservoir, and thus extend its life, would require that the sediment be dredged out, a costly and environmentally destructive process. The maximum ACP cost-share to a single landowner in a fiscal year is limited to a total of $5,000. That amount is based on the County Average Cost, or actual cost, whichever amount is less. The City's cost share amount to a single landowner in a fiscal year would not exceed $1,500 for FY95. Total costs for the City would not exceed $10,715 per year for the next six years under this part of the watershed pollution abatement program. This is part of a total program in the watershed that is estimated to cost $3,481,400 over the next six (6) years. The total cost of the program would be shared as follows: USEPA Clean Lake Grant $1,411,400 State Water Plan Fund (WRCS/NPS) 570,000 USDA (ACP) 300,000 City Of Wichita 1,200,000 The City of Wichita has budgeted to provide $200,000 per year over the next six years in the Water and Sewer Department CIP Project W-500. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Memorandum of Understanding with the United States Department Of Agriculture (Consolidated Farm Services Agency) be approved and the -- carried Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. PROPERTY ACQUISITION ACQUISITION OF PROPERTIES. (Item 13a) a. Vacant lot Located at 1141 North Gordon for the Infill Housing Project. (District VI) Agenda Report No. 95-121. The Infill Housing Project, approved by Council on August 30, 1994, will require the acquisition of vacant lots on which to relocate the houses. Several vacant lots were identified as suitable for the project. The owner of one of these lots has agreed to sell the property to the City. The property is located at 1141 North Gordon and is described as the East 1/2 of Lot 1 except the East 30 feet for street, Park Vista Addition and is currently owned by Florence E. George and Carol A. Aramburu. The owners of the lot have agreed to sell the property to the City for $6,200 with the City assuming the remaining $323.86 in special assessments for paving Gordon Street. The office of Central Inspection, has inspected the lot and had agreed to the higher sale price due to the property's location. Funds for the acquisition of 32 lots at an average cost of $3,000 per lot was approved on October 18, 1994. Estimated cost for acquisition is $6,824 which includes $6,200 for the property plus $324 for special assessments and $300 for closing costs, title insurance, survey, and maintenance expenses. Motion -- Rogers moved that this Item be deferred one week to allow for additional -- carried information as to why this lot was so expensive. Motion carried 7 to 0. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen asked that staff provide a summary of the number of houses torn down (or lots actually cleared) by the city through condemnation procedures. b. 432 S. Laclede for the Ice Rink Project (Tract #14). (District VI) Agenda Report No. 95-122. The Ice Rink Project, approved by Council on August 30, 1994, will require the acquisition of 55 multi- family, single-family residential and commercial tracts. One of the properties identified for acquisition is the property located at 432 S. Laclede (Lot 10, Shirk's 1st Subdivision to Wichita, Kansas, Sedgwick County, Kansas) and is owned by Dorthea Smith. The property owner has agreed to sell it to the City for a negotiated value of $32,000. The property has a single-family dwelling with a detached garage and is presently occupied by the owner. The house and garage will be put up for sale to be relocated or be razed. Approved purchases for land acquisition, including this property, total $1,715,240. An additional amount is needed for site clearance, closing fees, title insurance, and other costs, including this property, with expenditures totaling $259,000. A budget of $38,000 in funds include: $32,000 for land acquisition, $4,000 for demolition of the house and garage, and $2,000 for closing costs, title insurance, survey, operating and maintenance expenses that are not offset by rental revenue. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the budget be approved; and the Purchase Agreement be -- carried approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. c. Vacant lot located at 1102 N. Mathewson for the Infill Housing Project. (District I) Agenda Report No. 95-123. The Infill Housing Project, approved by Council on August 30, 1994, will require the acquisition of vacant lots on which to relocate the houses. Several vacant lots were identified as suitable for the project. The owner of one of these lots has agreed to sell the property to the City. The property is located at 1102 N. Mathewson and is described as Lots 47, 49, and 51 Allen now Mathewson Ave., Getto's Add. and is currently owned by Pearlie R. Williams. The owner of the lot has agreed to sell the property to the City for $3,500. Funds for the acquisition of 32 lots at an average cost of $3,000 per lot was approved on October 18, 1994. estimated cost for acquisition include $3,500 for the property plus $300 for closing costs, title insurance, survey, and maintenance expenses. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the budget be approved; and the Purchase Agreement be -- carried approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. ACQUISITION OF PROPERTIES BY EMINENT DOMAIN. a. 363 N. McLean Boulevard for the McLean Realignment Project (Tract #25). (District VI) Agenda Report No. 95-124. The City's Public Works Department has identified the need to acquire 363 N. McLean Blvd. for street purposes over property in the McLean Blvd. project area. This right-of-way is needed in connection with the McLean Blvd. street realignment project. This property is owned by Deanna L. Budd. All the structures on the property, a commercial building and storage building, will interfere with the construction of the realigned McLean Blvd. and will require the Party Kloset to vacate the property. City staff has attempted to negotiate a purchase of the identified property but has been unable to reach agree- ment with the owner/occupants. This will require the taking of approximately 16,475 sq. ft. of land and a 4,137 sq. ft. retail/warehouse building and a 480 sq. ft. storage building. The full taking was appraised at $55,000 or approx. $3.34 per sq. ft. for this property. The Budd's reviewed the City's offer but felt that the cost to purchase, construct or renovate another facility and relocate their business would cost an estimated $180,000. The Budd's feel the City should assist in the purchase of a new facility and in the relocation of their businesses. The City is empowered to acquire this property under its eminent domain authority. Funds have been budgeted in the 1994/95 Capital Improvement Program in the amount of $1,490,000. Approved purchases to date have totaled $704,918. An additional $174,000 has been authorized for site clearance, closing, and other costs leaving a balance of $611,082. The costs of such acquisition will come from the McLean Blvd. project budget. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the ordinance providing for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain street right-of-way be placed on first reading; and the City Attorney be directed to file the appropriate proceedings in the District Court to -- carried accomplish such acquisition. Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance providing for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain private property, easements, and right-of-way therein, for the purpose of street improvements and to be known as the McLean Boulevard Realignment project in the City of Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas; designating the lands required for such purposes and directing the City Attorney to file a petition in the District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas, for acquisition of the lands and easements therein taken and providing for payment of the cost thereof, introduced and under the rules laid over. b. 3205 E. 31st Street for the 31st Street South Widening Project (Tract #5). (District III) Agenda Report No. 95-125. The right-of-way acquisition for the 31st Street South Widening Project, approved by Council on June 14, 1994, will require the acquisition of 11 easements or partial takings. Involved tracts include 5 residential properties and 6 commercial properties. One of the properties identified for partial taking, Tract #5, is located at 3205 East 31st Street South and is owned by Laurie J. Doyon. Staff entered into negotiations with the owner of this property, but were unable to reach a mutually agreeable sales price. The property owner, his attorneys, and City Staff have been working to resolve this issue. At this time, it appears that a timely resolution is unlikely and an eminent domain action appears to be the most prudent course of action. The costs of this action will be paid by the City at large. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the ordinance providing for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain street right-of-way be placed on first reading; and the City Attorney be directed to file the appropriate proceedings in the District Court to -- carried accomplish such acquisition. Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance providing for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain private property, easements, and right-of-way therein, for the purpose of street improvements and to be known as the 31st Street South widening project in the City of Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas; designating the lands required for such purposes and directing the City Attorney to file a petition in the District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas, for acquisition of the lands and easements therein taken and providing for payment of the cost thereof, introduced and under the rules laid over. c. 3349 E. 31st Street South for the 31st Street South Project (Tract #9). (District III) Agenda Report No. 95-126. The right-of-way acquisition for the 31st Street South Widening Project, approved by Council on June 14, 1994, will require the acquisition of 11 easements or partial takings. Involved tracts include 5 residential properties and 6 commercial properties. One of the properties identified for partial taking, Tract #9, is located at 3349 East 31st Street South and is owned by Jimmy C. and Jean D. Nail. Staff entered into negotiations with the owner of this property and a mutually agreeable sales price of $1,200 was arrived at; however, when title insurance was ordered, several major issues were discovered. The property owner and City Staff have been working to resolve these issues. At this time, it appears that a timely resolution is unlikely and an eminent domain action appears to be the most prudent course of action. The costs of this action will be paid by the City at large. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the ordinance providing for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain street right-of-way be placed on first reading; and the City Attorney be directed to file the appropriate proceedings in the District Court to -- carried accomplish such acquisition. Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance providing for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain private property, easements, and right-of-way therein, for the purpose of street improvements and to be known as the 31st Street South widening project in the City of Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas; designating the lands required for such purposes and directing the City Attorney to file a petition in the District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas, for acquisition of the lands and easements therein taken and providing for payment of the cost thereof, introduced and under the rules laid over. CIP DESIGN PROJECTS 1995 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) DESIGN PROJECTS. Agenda Report No. 95-127. The following is the list of projects included in the CIP for 1995: Project # Location/Description B-122 Eastern Bridge at Chisholm Creek B-9201 Mt. Vernon Bridge at Gypsum Creek B-9203 25th Street Bridge at Chisholm Creek D-100 Dry Creek Flood Alleviation D-9205 Dry Creek Basin Study D-9207 South Meridian Drainage F-9302 Landscape I-235 MS-432 Central from Zoo to McLean Following negotiations with consultant engineers, staff will make recommendations to the City Council for awarding the design contracts and request project approval. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Staff Screening and Selection Committee be authorized to -- carried select Consultant Engineers. Motion carried 7 to 0. (Item No. 16) JOINT USE AGREEMENT JOINT USE AGREEMENT FOR PARKING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF I-135 AND NINTH STREET PARKING - KU MED CENTER (KANSAS UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER). Agenda Report No. 95-128. The Kansas University Medical Center is requesting the use of a tract of land which was taken for part of the I-135 on-ramp on the northeast corner of I-135 and 9th Street as a parking area for its facility's users. The Kansas Department of Transportation agrees the proposed use will not adversely affect I-135 traffic. The area will provide approximately 60 parking spaces and will be improved by paving, fencing and lighting. There are no alternate parking sites in the immediate vicinity. There will be no direct costs to the City. Chris Cherches City Manager reviewed the Item and answered questions. Motion -- Rogers moved that the Joint Use Agreement be approved and the Mayor be authorized -- carried to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. BRIDGE PROJECTS AUTHORITY TO AWARD CONTRACTS AND COMMITMENT OF CITY FUNDS. a. Eleventh Street Bridge over the Little Arkansas River Agenda Report No. 95-129. The authorization document between the City and the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) is for the construction of the Eleventh Street Bridge over the Little Arkansas River. On September 20, 1994, the City Council approved the project for construction and approved an agreement with KDOT to administer the project and provide 80 percent Federal Funding. The existing structure is a concrete deck and beam structure built in 1935. The bridge surface, sidewalk areas and supporting structure have deteriorated to the point where major rehabilitation is required. The rehabilitated bridge will have new vehicular lanes, a sidewalk/bikeway, and landscaping. Bids for construction of the bridge were received on January 18, 1995. Utility Contractors, Inc. submitted the low bid of $816,361.30. In accordance with the agreement entered into by the City and KDOT, the City's share of the cost is $169,803 and will be paid by General Obligation Bonds allocated in the 1995 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) (Project B-119). KDOT will reimburse the City for 80 percent of the cost of construction engineering which has an upper limit of $79,994.86. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that award of the Construction Contract and payment of the City's share of the costs be authorized; and the Agreement be approved and the Mayor be -- carried authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. b. John Mack Bridge and Broadway Bridge over the Arkansas River Agenda Report No. 95-130. The authorization documents between the City and the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) are for the rehabilitation of the John Mack Bridge over the Arkansas River and the construction of a new bridge on South Broadway down stream from the John Mack Bridge. On September 14, 1993, the City Council approved the projects for construction and approved two agreements with KDOT to administer the projects and provide 80 percent Federal Funding. On October 31, 1994, the Staff Screening and Selection Committee selected HNTB Corporation to provide construction engineering services for the projects. KDOT has negotiated an agreement with HNTB and is prepared to enter into a contract, following approval by the City. The existing bridge structure is a two-lane, eight-span, Marsh Arch bridge erected in 1931. At the present time, Broadway Avenue is a four-lane street carrying about 17,000 vehicles per day. The proposed improvement will upgrade the old bridge to extend its life and construct a new two-lane bridge on the downstream side. Bids for the bridges were received on January 18, 1995. Wildcat Construction Company, Inc. submitted the low bids of $1,642,564.30 for rehabilitation of the John Mack Bridge and $2,864,640.40 for construction of the new bridge. In accordance with the agreements entered into by the City and KDOT, the City's share of the cost is $374,505 for the John Mack Bridge and $653,138 for the new bridge and will be paid by General Obligation Bonds allocated in the 1995-1996 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) (Project B-49). The three-party agreement between HNTB Corporation, the City and KDOT is on a cost plus net fee basis not to exceed $477,760. KDOT will make payment to HNTB. The City will reimburse KDOT for 20 percent of the cost. The City's share is included in the City's total costs outlined in the previous paragraph. Broadway will remain open to two-way traffic throughout construction. The new two-lane bridge will be constructed with traffic carried on the existing bridge. Traffic will then be diverted to the new bridge and the John Mack Bridge will be closed for the rehabilitation work. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that award of the Construction Contract and payment of the City's share of the costs be authorized; and the Agreement be approved and the Mayor be -- carried authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. Council Member Reeser Council Member Reeser asked for information on when construction on the John Mack Bridge would actually start. BROOKS LANDFILL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 1 FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - BROOKS LANDFILL DRAINAGE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS (SCS ENGINEERS). Agenda Report No. 95-131. Drainage improvements are needed at Brooks Landfill to manage the storm water runoff for the site. Federal regulations, including Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), require control of drainage at landfill sites and measures to assure water quality standards for environmental protection. On January 4, 1994, the City Council authorized staff to employ consulting engineering services to conduct a detailed investigation for drainage improvements at Brooks Landfill. In accordance with AR 7, the Staff Screening and Selection Committee recommended SCS Engineers to provide these services, and the City Council approved the Agreement with SCS on March 22, 1994. Under this Agreement, the services will be phased through Supplemental Agreements as follows: Phase I Study (On January 31, 1995, SCS presented its findings and recommendations to the City Council in a workshop session.) Phase II Design (Supplemental Agreement No. 1) Phase III Construction Inspection (If needed, a Supplemental Agreement will be submitted to the City Council later in 1995.) Phase I, Study, indicated that the drainage and maintenance problems occur because of topography and soil conditions. Poor vegetation cover has led to erosion and siltation which adversely impacts the site drainage and affects the runoff water quality. Solving the problems will require restoration and improvement of the cover soil and vegetation along with improved drainage controls. SCS recommended detailed surveying and soils testing work, design of terraces, cover material restoration, drainage let-downs, siltation ponds, wetlands, drainage structures under West Street, a new drainage structure through the Arkansas River levee and other related work. Phase II, Design, will provide for completion of detailed plans, specifications and cost estimates. Construction documents of the needed drainage improvements will be presented to the City Council later this year for approval. The improvements and restoration measures will be phased in over the next two years through a combination of maintenance operations and contracted work. Supplemental Agreement No. 1, Phase II, Design, cost is not to exceed $223,611. The funding source will be the 1995 Landfill budget of $100,000 and an under-run for the Derby Pipeline relocation of $125,000. These amounts are programmed in the Ten Year Projection of Brooks Landfill Programs and the 1995 Landfill tipping fee which were approved by the City Council on November 15, 1994. SCS has estimated the cost of the needed improvements to be approximately $3,000,000. Much of the work will be scheduled operation and maintenance measures already funded through the Landfill Operations budget. The remaining improvements will be scheduled in the Ten Year Projection of Landfill Programs. Programs currently scheduled for 1995-1997 (gas management and pipeline relocation) will be under-run or deferred, pending final legislation. This will make funding available within the Landfill fund to perform the drainage work over the next two years, and it will not require an increase in tipping fees for this activity. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the supplemental agreement be approved and the Mayor be -- carried authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. WATER TREATMENT PLANT AMENDMENT NO. 7 FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS (CAMP DRESSER AND MCKEE, INC.). Agenda Report No. 95-132. In July, 1990, the City Council approved a contract with Camp, Dresser & McKee Engineers (CDM) for engineering services for the expansion of the water treatment plant and associated facilities. The contract with CDM has been amended six times in the last four and one half years and presently has a total value of $2,847,000. Council approved amendment number six to CDM's contract in October, 1993. This amendment for $62,000 was for the design of a chlorine contact basin which was needed to meet federal water quality regulations and facilitate taste and odor control treatment protocols. At the time the amendment was approved, the engineer and staff believed that these improvements would be constructed and completed concurrently with other water treatment plant improvements. Thus, no additional fees for construction observation services were included. Both the engineer and construction contractor had anticipated this completion would be in late 1994. Presently it is estimated that the facilities will not be complete until April, 1995. CDM has requested that the City consider additional compensation for their construction management services in the amount of $48,400. Staff believes this request is reasonable and recommends approval of the contract amendment. The approval of amendment number seven to CDM's contract will increase the value of that contract to $2,895,400, a 1.7% increase. The total value of facilities designed and bid under the CDM contract is over $26,000,000. The engineering services for these facilities is about 11% which is on the low end of the scale for engineering costs as a percentage of construction costs for projects of this complexity. This contract will be paid from CIP Project No. W-115 which has a total approved allocation of $19,620,000. The encumbrances to date against W-115 total $18,014,187, including this contract amendment. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the amendment be approved and the Mayor be authorized to -- carried sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. CHENEY PUMP STATION AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR CHENEY PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS (BLACK AND VEATCH). Agenda Report No. The adopted water supply plan calls for the expansion of the Cheney Reservoir Pump station capacity. The City has recently received approval from the Kansas Division of Water Resources to construct the diversion facilities necessary to perfect additional water rights in Cheney Reservoir. At its June 21, 1994 meeting the Council approved a Professional Services Contract for $69,900 with Black and Veatch to perform an engineering evaluation of the existing pump station and raw water system to determine the best methods to expand the capacity of the station. Black and Veatch has now completed their evaluation of the pump station, and prepared a report with their recommendations. The major findings of the report include: o The firm pumping capacity of the Cheney Pump Station can be increased from the existing 60 Million Gallons Per Day (MGD) to 80 MGD through a combination of new pumps and modifications to the existing pumps. The probable cost for that work is $2,092,000. o There are hydraulic restrictions in the existing raw water transmission lines that reduce the potential flow from the Cheney Pump Station. Unless those restrictions are removed, the Pump station will be limited to 60 MGD. There are two methods of removing those restrictions: 1.) Build approximately four miles of new 72" transmission line (estimated cost $13,685,000); or 2) Install a control valve in the raw water system (estimated cost $715,000). While there are other benefits associated with the construction of the 72" line, because of the cost differential of these two alternatives, it is recommended that construction of the 72" line be deferred to a latter date and that the control valve be constructed now. o The Cheney Pump Station is in good condition despite the fact that the station has been in service for nearly 30 years. However some repairs are needed to rehabilitate the station for an extended life. In addition, some improvements will be needed to accommodate the increased power demands and heat loadings due to the the new and modified pumping equipment. The total probable cost for the pumping station improvements is $1,243,900. The Supplemental Agreement to the Contract for Professional Services before the Council will cover the engineering services for Black and Veatch to complete the detailed design memorandum for the recommended facilities, to prepare construction drawings and specifications, and to provide assistance to the City in acquiring qualified bidders to construct the improvements. The engineering services contract amendment is for $302,000, which would make the total engineering contract to date, $371,900. This project is budgeted in the adopted CIP, Project W-384, which has a 1995 authorization of $1,500,000. The total project authorization is presently $3,400,000. The funds for this project will come from the Water Utility Improvement Fund and/or a future bond issue. The current total estimated cost of this project is now $4,422,800, which is $1,022,000 higher than the amount shown in the current CIP. When this project was recommended in 1993, the amount of rehabilitation work that the pump station might need was unknown. That work is now estimated to cost $1,243,900, so the amount in the current CIP is less than the estimated project cost developed by Black and Veatch. Therefore the CIP will have to be amended. As staff will be presenting amended CIP documents to Council before this project is bid for construction, and as the amount encumbered by this engineering agreement is less the the currently approved CIP, staff recommends that the project proceed through bidding. The City's Administrative Regulations require that contracts in excess of $10,000 be submitted to the City Council for approval. The Law Department has reviewed the contract and approved it as to form. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Professional Services with Black and Veatch be approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign; and staff be authorized to proceed with the project through bidding. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. PROPERTY ACQUISITION PAYMENT OF APPRAISERS' AWARD AND FEES FOR KELLOGG AND DUGAN INTERCHANGE PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS. (District V) Agenda Report No. 95-134. Appraisers valued the interests that the City sought to acquire at $911,453. In addition, the Court ordered the City to pay the three appraisers $45,610 for fees. Court costs are to be paid by the City in the amount of $66.50. Tract $6 is the McDonald's Restaurant at the northeast corner of Kellogg Drive and Dugan ($230,000) for permanent easements for right-of-way of approximately 5,200 square feet. Tract #7 is the Sam's store at that intersection ($116,413 for permanent easements for right-of-way totaling approximately 11,900 square feet and temporary construction easements totaling approximately 12,500 square feet. Tract #8 is the Wichita Inn motel located just east of McDonald's and Sam's on the north side of Kellogg ($547,000) for permanent easements for right-of-way totaling 4,280 square feet and temporary construction easements totaling 2,140 square feet. Tract #15 is at the southeast corner of Hoover and Kellogg where a dance club is located ($18,040) for an access easement over the northwest corner of the tract and two temporary construction easements. Acquisition is in connection with the planned construction of improvements to the intersection of Kellogg and Dugan. Payment must be made to the Clerk of the District Court before March 14, 1995. Cost of fees, court costs, and expenses are to be charged to the project. The amount to be paid is $957,129.50. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that payment to the Clerk of the District Court of the appraisers' award, fees, and related court costs in the total amount of -- carried $957,129.50 be authorized. Motion carried 7 to 0. CONSULTANT CONTRACT CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. Agenda Report No. 95-135. The City has been involved in meet and confer sessions in 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995, for future labor contracts with the recognized bargaining units, the Fraternal Order of Police, Service Employees Union, and International Association of Firefighters. The City previously contracted with a consultant (Williams Dye) to serve as the City's Chief Negotiator for such sessions. Because of the numerous issues involved in the negotiation process, the supplemental contract has expired and it is necessary to provide an additional contract for services. The City Attorney has conferred with the Consultant for the purpose of determining further services in connection with such negotiations. Compensation is based upon an hourly rate and a not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 for hourly fees and litigation costs. Funding for negotiations comes from the City Manager's Nondepartmental Account for Union Negotiations. Other than the cost of the supplemental contract, there are no financial considerations. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Contract be approved and the Mayor be authorized to -- carried execute. Motion carried 7 to 0. ADDENDUM ITEM SETOFF PROGRAM SETOFF PROGRAM Agenda Report NO. 95-140. The Kansas Setoff Program is a program administrated from the State level and recoups bad debts owed to municipalities by withholding State Tax Returns from individuals and businesses. The Setoff Program has existed since 1981. As a result of 75-6201 et. sec. the benefit was made available to "municipalities". The Department of Finance performed a study of the Accounts Receivables past due, the City's resources spent to collect the bad debt and concluded that other methods should be explored. After further research the Department of Finance concluded that the Kansas Setoff Program would provide the most effective and efficient method of collections. The Setoff Program has approximately 50 participants within the state of Kansas utilizing the service. The Setoff Program is the only collection organization authorized to withhold Kansas State Tax Refunds for bad debt. The Department staff spoke with five (5) of the City's sister municipalities now participating in the program and received raving reviews. Staff was encouraged to expedite the process because debtors are filing taxes and that is what drives the success of the Setoff program. Debt information provided electronically requires a fee of 18.4% of collected revenue and information provided on hard copy requires a fee of 23.4% of collected revenue. The collection fee assessed by the Setoff program is well within the industry range of 17% to 50%. The City currently has a contract with Universal Credit Services to perform specific collections and the fee is 21%. The Legal Department reviewed all the information provided regarding the Setoff Program and concluded that the City Manager can authorize the contract. The Legal Department also provided the Department of Finance a list of debts eligible for collections via the Setoff Program. The total outstanding revenue listed under the background section falls within the list provided. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the contract with the Kansas Department of Administration be -- carried approved and the City Manager be authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. REVISED RESOLUTION REVISED RESOLUTION: DECEL LANE ON MAIZE ROAD, NORTH OF CENTRAL. (District V) Agenda Report No. 95-136. On February 1, 1994, the City Council approved a project to improve Maize Road between Central and 13th Street. The work was completed in 1994. As part of the project, a petition, submitted by the owner of the property at the time it was platted, was activated to build a deceleration lane to serve the Timber Grove Lakes condominiums and commercial building. The Resolution authorizing the deceleration lane has been modified to reduce the improvement district and project cost to coincide with the scope of work that was completed. The project budget has been reduced from $67,000 to $20,000. The funding source is Special Assessments. Motion -- carried Broadfoot moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. RESOLUTION NO. R-95-066 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of deceleration lane and major entrance on the west side of Maize Road to serve Lots 2 and 3, Timber Grove Lakes in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Broadfoot moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Kamen, Reeser, Rogers, Broadfoot. ORDINANCES SECOND READING ORDINANCES. (First Reading February 7, 1995) Z-3156 ORDINANCE NO. 42-614 An Ordinance changing the zoning classifications or districts of certain lands located in the City of Wichita, Kansas, under the authority granted by Section 28.04.210, the Code of the City of Wichita, Kansas, read for the second time. Broadfoot moved that the Ordinance be placed upon its passage and adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Kamen, Reeser, Rogers, Broadfoot. AMENDED BOND ORDINANCE AMENDED BOND ORDINANCE FOR FIRE STATION REPAIRS. Agenda Report No. 92-412 A. On July 28, 1992, the Council approved Resolution No. R-92-412, a bonding resolution authorizing the implementation of certain repairs to City fire station facilities. The repair project includes the acquisition and installation of exhaust extraction equipment at all fire stations and roof and concrete repairs at various fire stations. The statute cited in the original bonding resolution, K.S.A. 12-110c, applies only to the acquisition and financing of actual fire fighting equipment and does not, in the opinion of Bond Counsel, apply to capital improvements to fire station facilities. In addition, the legal proceedings required under K.S.A. 12-110c call for the resolution to be published in the City's official paper twice in consecutive weeks. The bonding resolution for this project was published in 1992 and in 1994. To correct defects in the authorizing procedures, Bond Counsel requested the City Council adopt the ordinance supplementing the action taken in 1992. The ordinance authorizes the project and its bonding under K.S.A. 12-1736 et seq., the public building statutes. The Fire Station repair project is part of the current temporary note issue which is scheduled to close on March 2,1995. Final adoption and publication of the ordinance will be timed to precede the note closing date. Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Ordinance be placed on first reading. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance of the City of Wichita, Kansas, authorizing modifications and repairs to public buildings, and authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds for the purpose of financing the costs thereof; and supplementing Resolution No. R-92-412 of the City, introduced and under the rules laid over. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion -- Broadfoot moved that the Council recess to executive session to consider consultation with legal counsel on matters privileged in the attorney-client relationship relating to pending and potential litigation and legal advice; personnel matters of non- elected personnel; and matters relating to employer-employee negotiations; and the regular meeting be resumed at 2:15 p.m. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. RECESS Council recessed at 1:08 p.m. and reconvened in regular session at 2:15 p.m. Mayor Broadfoot Mayor Broadfoot announced that no action was necessary as a result of the executive session. ADJOURNMENT The City Council meeting adjourned at 2:15 p.m. Pat Burnett Deputy City Clerk JOURNAL 158 FEBRUARY 14, 1995 Page 1