Loading...
02-25-1974 Minutes82 City of Salina, Kansas Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners February 25, 1974 The Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners met in the Commissioners' Room, City -County Building, on Monday, February 25, 1974, at seven o'clock P.M. The Mayor asked everyone to stand for the pledge of allegiance to the Flag and a moment of silent prayer. There were present: Mayor Jack Weisgerber, Chairman presiding Commissioner Robert C. Caldwell Commissioner Mike Losik, Jr. Commissioner W. M. Usher comprising a quorum of the Board, also: L. 0. Bengtson, City Attorney Norris D. Olson, City Manager D. L. Harrison, City Clerk Absent: Commissioner Norma G. Cooper The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 11, 1974 were approved as mailed. THE MAYOR PROCLAIMED The Week of March 3 to 9, 1974 - "DISTRIBUTIVE EDUCATION CLUBS OF AMERICA WEEK IN SALINA, KANSAS". The proclamation was read by Jerri Simpson, Student at Salina Central High School. THE MAYOR PROCLAIMED Saturday, March 2, 1974 - "TOOTSIE ROLL DAY, sponsored by the Knights of Columbus. The proclamation was read by Al Jankord or Frank Thelen. STAFF AGENDA AN ORDINANCE was introduced for second reading entitled: "AN ORDINANCE providing for the amendment of Zoning Ordinance Number 6613 and the Zoning District Map therein and thereby adopted and providing for the rezoning of certain property within the City and prescribing the proper uses thereof." (Rezoning of Lots 6, 7, 8, Block 4, and Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, Block 5, Southern Heights Addition to District "D" (Local Business District), requested in Petition Number 3383, filed by Ashton Brothers, Inc.) No protesting property owners were present to speak against the rezoning. The City Manager reported on Petition Number 3401, which was filed by John E. Davis against the rezoning, which appears on the public portion of the agenda, that it is a valid petition, but not a sufficient petition to require a 4/5 vote of the Commission. A petition signed by 20% of the residents within 200 feet of the property to be rezoned would require a 4/5 vote of the Commission. This particular petition was signed by 15.7%. A motion was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell to adopt the ordinance as read and the following vote was had: Ayes: Caldwell, Losik, Usher, Weisgerber (4). Nays: (0). Commissioner Cooper absent. Carried. The Mayor approved the ordinance and it is numbered 8335. The ordinance was introduced for first reading February 11, 1974. AN ORDINANCE was introduced for second reading entitled: "AN ORDINANCE annexing certain land to the City of Salina, Kansas, in conformity with the provisions of K.S.A. 1972 Supplement 12-520." (Annexation of Country Club Estates Addition, Blocks 3 to 12, requested in Petition Number 3387, filed by Presley Builders, Inc.) A motion was made by Commissioner Caldwell, seconded by Commissioner Usher to adopt the ordinance as read and the following vote was had: Ayes: Caldwell, Losik, Usher, Weisgerber (4). Nays: (0). Commissioner Cooper absent. Carried. The Mayor approved the ordinance and it is numbered 8336. The ordinance was introduced for first reading February 11. 1974. AN ORDINANCE was introduced for second reading entitled: "AN ORDINANCE providing for the amendment of Zoning Ordinance Number 6613 and the Zoning District Map therein and thereby adopted and providing for the rezoning of certain property within the City and prescribing the proper uses thereof." (Rezoning of Lots 10 and 11, Block 5, Replat of Faith Addition to District "B" (Two -Family Dwelling House District) requested in Petition Number 3388, filed by William J. Stover.) A motion was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Losik to adopt the ordinance as read and the following vote was had: Ayes: Caldwell, Losik, Usher, Weisgerber (4). Nays: (0). Commissioner Cooper absent. Carried. The Mayor approved the ordinance and it is numbered 8337. The ordinance was introduced for first reading February 11, 1974. A LETTER was received from the Metropolitan Planning Commission recommending that both the City and County Commissions proceed with an application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for participation in the Flood Insurance Program for their respective jurisdictions. A motion was made by Commissioner Caldwell, seconded by Commissioner Losik to accept the recommendation of the Metropolitan Planning Commission and to proceed with the application. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. A LETTER was received from the Metropolitan Planning Commission concerning Petition Number 3391, which was filed by Kenneth J. Nordboe for an amendment in Section 21-29 of the Salina Code to read; "provided, however, that a mobile home court which provides a minimum area of forty-six hundred (4600) square feet for each mobile home may be located within a distance of the width of a platted street, sixty (60) feet, of any public par-, public building, school or college." The Metropolitan Planning Commission reported, "On February 5, 1974, the Salina Metropolitan Planning Commission unanimously approved the request pending a favorable recommendation from the Salina Board of Education. "On February 5, 1974 and again on February 17, 1974, the Salina Board of Education considered the request in a slightly different version. Although taking no official action on the matter, the following phrase is suggested by the Board of Education for addition to the present Section 21-29: 'or that a mobile home court which provides a minimum area of six thousand (6000) square feet for each mobile home may be located within a distance of one hundred and ten (110) feet of any public park, public building, school of college.' "The suggested addition is consistent with the regulations for residenti areas of the City and would protect any schools or other buildings which are not separated from residential areas by a street, either existing or platted. "Therefore, in summary of the two actions by the two boards, it is my opinion that the suggested addition would give the petitioner what he would like and yet would not impair the protection afforded by the existing code. It will, also, allow a more reasonable recognition of the problems associated with mobile homes while awaiting adoption of the new mobile home ordinance." A motion was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Losik to accept the recommendation of the Metropolitan Planning Commission and introduce an ordinance for first reading amending Section 21-29 of the Salina Code. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. Ordinance Passed: Number: 1 1 1 84 THE CITY ENGINEER filed a feasibility report for improvements in Engineering Project 74-564 for street and utility improvements in Country Hills Addition Number 2 and for sanitary sewer system for Blocks 1, 2, 3, Georgetown Addition. A motion was made by Commissioner Caldwell, seconded by Commissioner Losik to accept the feasibility report, and proceed with the project. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. Commissioner Losik asked if Resolution Number 3113 will apply to these improvements. The City Engineer replied the Resolution will apply to both improvement because there is no development in the area. COMMISSION AGENDA "A STATEMENT AND POSSIBLE DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENT SITUATION BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY COMMISSIONS ON METROPOLITAN PLANNING." (Sponsored by Mayor Weisgerber) Mayor Weisgerber read a written statement: "The City has a written, binding contract with Saline County establishing a Metropolitan Planning Commission and prescribing certain legal procedures in the areas of Land Use, Zoning, and Sub -division Regulations. "Last week the County Commission was reported by the news media to have passed, on a 3-0 vote, a motion to abolish the Metropolitan Planning Commission. This action was taken just a few days after receiving a letter from the Attorney General's Office reaffirming the legality of the contract. Such a move by the County Commission is completely unreasonable. When you have a written and binding contract you either adhere to it or request the other party to the contract to consider a change. Since receiving the Attorney General's Opinion, the County Commission made no request to re -negotiate this contract before they took official action. 11Over the last few weeks, there had been some questions by the present County Commissioners about this City -County Contract, but the City had every reason to believe the opinion of the Attorney General settled these questions both for the City and for the County. The Attorney General held the contract to be just as the City Commission and the prior County Commission had intended. 11Human nature being what it is, my first reaction to this unique and improper County Commission action, and I think the first reaction of the City Commission was one of disbelief and anger that a County Commission would take such a step to reverse the trend toward better intergovernmental cooperation. We are of the opinion we can enforce this contract in a Court of Law. "Now that our feelings have been clearly expressed; let's see what we are going to do. We have set up a conference with the County Commission for next Monday. The city feels that this contract, as written, is a good and beneficial one for the people outside the City Limits but within the Metropolitan Planning Area. This County Commission has apparently been mislead as to what this contract will do for the people in this area and perhaps we can straighten out.some of their misconceptions, "Of many important points let me mention just a few, for perhaps some of you living outside the City Limits, but within the Metropolitan Planning area may care to speak to your County Commissioners before next week. "There is one important thing this contract will not do. It will not permit the city to unilaterally impose building codes in any area outside the City Limits. Such action was never intended by the City Commission, past or present. "Perhaps the best thing this Metropolitan contract does, is to allow the land surrounding the City Limits to remain outside the City, therefore taxable at the County rate. At the same time, it gives the city the right to control zoning. The City has competent professional plans and personnel to guide orderly development in this area. The County does not now have a professional person working in this field. If we do not reach a satisfactory agreement with the County and decide not to force compliance, but let this contract be abridged, the City will have no alternative but to initiate annexation procedures on those parcels of land deemed important to the city's future. Our present agreement with the County was designed to prevent the necessity of annexation and was one of the principal considerations of the former County Commission. "Perhaps another great advantage to the person outside the city lies in the availability of Flood Insurance. We cannot make a definite statement because there are some questions still in doubt. It appears, however, that if the Metropolitan Plan stays in effect the City can bring not only the City, but also the entire Planning Area into the insurance program. Our understanding from the Corps of Engineers is that the County cannot apply for Flood Plain Insurance to benefit the 3 mile area without including the entire county (exclusive of the incorporated cities). We further understand that a county wide plan would require the development of a county Land Use Plan and a variety of control measures, such as Sub -division Regulations, zoning, building permits, etc. "There are many more things I could and perhaps should say, but this is getting too long. Let me mention just one. The County Commission suggested through the news media that the Metropolitan Planning Commission should have 50% County members. Let me hasten to say that all members of our present Metropolitan Commission are County residents, and hopefully their considerations have never and will never be to the disadvantage of the rural residents. Of the present nine member board, 2 members are selected from the rural area and a third member is the Executive Secretary of the County Planning Commission. Of 57 zoning requests considered by the Metropolitan Planning Commission during 1973, only two were outside of the City Limits. Over 95% of the Commissioners' work has to do with zoning of land already within the City or land having a companion annexation request. "To conclude, we are going to meet with the County. We are going to try, in every way we can, to find a satisfactory meeting ground that will serve the best interests of all the people in this area." Commissioner Usher commented, "I'm concerned that if the County can make such an arbitrary decision on Metropolitan Planning, what assurance is there they won't do the same thing to: City -County Health Department City -County Building Civil Preparedness Ambulance Service or the Proposed Juvenile facility to name a few? "It seems to me that a City -County Intergovernmental Cooperation has suffered a serious blow by the County's unilateral action towards Metropolitan Planning. We have had one of the best City -County Intergovernmental relationship in the State. There are many in Kansas who are envious of our situation and the progress made in this area, at least up until now. Because of present statutes and decisions of clear thinking people, Salina is entitled to decide and plan for its future and that's what Metropolitan Planning is about. To destroy the concept is to take a big step backward. "The 1973 tangible tax base for Saline County was $105,784,000, of which $69,426,000 consisted of Salina - 66%. Every $1.00 raised for the County - 66d came from Salinans. "It seems to me that it is time to abandon provincial government and for the City and County to continue on a progressive road of intergovernmental relationship." PTA P s Commissioner Losik said, "There is only one thing that I have to say is you covered a lot of it in your letter, Bill has covered some of it, and I mentioned this to you before, I would have wished that we had not aired this thing until after the meeting, because now we are saying things the same as they have said things, and I am wondering if we are not backing each other into a corner here. I would hope not. I don't think this was the intent of it; but I wish we would have withheld any comments on this until after the 4th meeting. I don't feel that we are serving as useful a purpose as we intended to be here. It may backfire and we might be accused of doing the very same things we are saying that they did. I would hope not, but I am just hoping this won't come about and that we can resolve this, and I think that in due course and in due time we would." Mayor Weisgerber commented, "I think we are going to try every way we can to find a common meeting ground; at the same time I think we do have a right to be somewhat angry at the way they proceeded and I also feel that we ought to get some correct information out to people in this area and in the City before we have this meeting, so that people, who may be involved or who may have an interest in this, understand it. Certainly we don't mean to close the door to open negotiations with the County. I think that the County has more to lose by losing this than the City has." PUBLIC AGENDA PETITION NUMBER 3399 was filed by Max McClintock Realty for water tap at the following location; The South 100 feet of the North 300 feet of Lot 8, Block 2, Wallerius Addition, located in the North 2 of the Southeast Quarter of Section 26, Township 14 South, Range 3 West. A motion was made by Commissione Usher, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell to refer the petition to the City Engineer. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. PETITION NUMBER 3400 was filed by B. R. Becker for the rezoning of Lot 6, Block 1, Woodland Addition from District "B" (Two -Family Dwelling House District) to District "FF" (Restricted Industrial District). A motion was made by Commissioner Caldwell, seconded by Commissioner Usher to refer the petition to the Metropolitan Planning Commission. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. PETITION NUMBER 3401 was filed by John E. Davis for the denial of Petition Number 3383, submitted by Ashton Brothers, Inc., requesting rezoning of Lots 6, 7, 8, Block 4, and Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, Block 5, Southern Heights Addition from District "A" to District "D". A motion was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell to accept the petition for filing, since it has already been considered with the adoption of rezoning Ordinance Number 8335. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. A SURETY ON BAIL BOND LICENSE Application was filed by Ralph Bennett, d/b/a B & K Bonding, 651 South Ohio Street. The City Clerk reported the applicant has paid the required fee, and has filed the proper papers as.required by ordinance, and the application has been approved by the Police Department. A motion was made by Commissioner Caldwell, seconded by Commissioner Losik to approve the license application and authorize the City Clerk to issue the license Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. A SURETY ON BAIL BOND LICENSE Application was filed by Jack Kindlesparg r, Agent for B & K Bonding, 651 South Ohio Street. The City Clerk reported the applicant has paid the required fee and the application has been approved by the Police Department. A motion was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Losik to approve the license application and authorize the City Clerk to issue the license. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. A SURETY ON BAIL BOND LICENSE Application was filed by Eric Kindlesparg r, agent for B & K Bonding, 651 South Ohio Street. The City Clerk reported the applicant has paid the required fee and the application has been approved by the Police Department. A motion was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell to approve the license applications and authorize the City Clerk to issue the license. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. A SURETY ON BAIL BOND LICENSE Application was filed by Steve M. Klingzel1, Agent for B & K Bonding, 651 South Ohio Street. The City Clerk reported the applicant has paid the required fee, and the application has been approved by the Police Department. A motion was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Losik to approve the license application and authorize the City Clerk to issue the license. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. A REQUEST was received from Robert M. Muir to bring a matter of wrongful trespass and claim for damages for the same. Mr. Muir said, "I am here speaking for myself and my neighbors about something that is a concern to us. After the 1951 flood, Salina had been quite a few years planning a flood control system. Along in 1956 they finally received a plan from the Army Corps of Engineers which was acceptable. I am reading here from Paul Barber, Chief of Engineering Division, 'The Salina, Kansas Flood Protection Project was constructed by the Corps of Engineers as a local cooperation project with the City of Salina, Kansas, as the local sponsor. The assurances, required by law in order to construct such a project, were furnished by the City of Salina in accordance with Resolution Number 1687, which was adopted by the City on May 8th, 1956. Now the three main provisions of that Resolution I have here: Flood Protection Project furnished assurances of local cooperation as a part of these assurances the City agrees #1 to provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements and rights-of-way necessary for the construction of the project; hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction works and maintain and operate all the works after completion in accordance with the Corps of Engineers." "Now one of the main features of this flood control project, I think maybe the main, was the transfer of about 45 square miles of watershed water from the Dry Creek over to the Smoky Hill River. This was done by a diversion channel that enters the Smoky Hill east of Mentor; and in the original plan that was accepted by Salina according to this Resolution the Corps of Engineers had outlined an area around the juncture of this diversion channel at the Smoky Hill where the City of Salina was to acquire flow easements, and it was thought at the time that this would be surely done. I had been living out there at the time and was very much interested in it, and they had even gone so far as to appoint an appraisal committee to go out to appraise this flow easement, that the City was supposed to purchase. All of a sudden it was dropped. They said they weren't going to buy any flow easements. At that time there was given no reason. One attorney that was working with the City at that time said you don't have to worry any time you get flood damage the City will be responsible for that flood damage as long as they do not own those flow easements. Just recently I find out that the reason they did not buy those flow easements at that time was there was some sort of a resolution that was passed by the State Legislature which said you could not force a city to buy flow easements, so they dropped it. I am curious about why that was passed by the Legislature. It didn't say you weren't responsible for those damages, but it said you couldn't force them to buy the flow easements. I rather think that it was done just simply to get the city around the fact that they should have bought those flow easements according to the Corps of Engineers plan at that time. Senator Simpson, at the present time, is going to find out for me just why that sort of resolution was passed, because to my knowledge there is no other city in the State who was in the process of buying flow easements; so it looks very pointed that it was passed purely for the benefi of relieving the city of that obligation at that time. I don't know whether they intended, the City Commission at that time, I am sure no members here were there, intended to forego these rights, these flow easements forever or just simply postpone them. I know at the time, that the flood control project had cost more than they had estimated, as those projects always do, and I think they thought perhaps if we can get rid of this expense we will take care of it later. That is neither here nor there; we have had niggling little damage claims that we haven't presented because they weren't very serious, but in this last October flood we had some very serious things. The Forstbergs south of Mentor lost quite a section of road, had to hire heavy machinery to go in and rebuild this road. They run a dairy and have to have a good road to come in and out at all times. Dale Hammond who operates a feed farm right there, lost his irrigation pump foundations and is going to have to rebuild that before he starts irrigating. I myself lost all the top soil off of about 20 acres of ground which includes fertilizer which had already been applied for the crop. It is all gone, top soil, 8 inches of it, along with about an acre and a half of river bank and many trees which added to the appearance of my place and has been destroyed now. Peter McDonald north of me, who's land is farmed by Ivan Nichols lost about 80 acres of growing wheat, which was up just beautiful, but it took the top soil and all down, and cut the bank seriously. Right now we out there are interested in finding out if the City is willing to accept these responsibilities of these damages or whether they wish to go ahead and carry out their purchase of flow easements as the Corps of Engineers directed them to in 1956. 1 would like to see the City Commission establish an appraisal committee to go out there and look over this damage, find out what should be done and take care of it. Thank you." Commissioner Losik said, "This is going to take quite a bit of research. We are all in the dark on this thing. I would recommend, without acknowledging that the City is liable for anything, that the City Attorney look into it as a legal matter and see what he finds out, but I want to stress that in asking him to do this we are acknowledging nothing." The motion was seconded by Commissioner Caldwell. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. A LETTER was received from Tom Hampton, Attorney for The Lee Company, requesting an ordinance be introduced for first reading for the issuance of $800,000 of Industrial Revenue Bonds. The City Attorney reported he has checked the proposed ordinance, and his recommended changes have been incorporated therein. He said this is a standard Industrial Revenue Bond Ordinance whereby you agree to issue these bonds for the purpose of the construction, acquisition of land and construction of The Lee facility, and it would be in order to put it on first reading. A MOTION was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by Commissioner Usher to introduce an ordinance for first reading for the issuance of $800,000 Industrial Revenue Bonds for The Lee Company. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. Ordinance Passed: Number: A MOTION was made by Commissioner Usher, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell that the Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners be adjourned. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried. D. L. Harrison, City Clerk J