06-26-1972 MinutesA �tt;
City of Salina, Kansas
Commissioners' Meeting
June 26, 1972
The Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners met in the Commissioners' Room,
City -County Building, on Monday, June 26, 1972, 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 Leon L. Ashton
Commissioner Norma G. Cooper
Commissioner Mike Losik, Jr.
comprising a quorum of the Board, also:
L. 0. Bengtson, City Attorney
Norris D. Olson, City Manager
D. L. Harrison, City Clerk
Absent:
Commissioner Robert C. Caldwell
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 19, 1972, were approved as mailed.
THE MAYOR PROCLAIMED The Week of July 3 through July 9, 1972, "VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION WEEK." The proclamation was read by Mr. Harry Shimp, Administrator of the
Kansas Vocational Rehabilitation Center.
STAFF AGENDA
THE CITY ENGINEER reported on Petition Number 3246, which was filed by Donald E.
McConnell for the designation of Fourth Street on the east side of the tracks to be one-way
north from Crawford Avenue to Prescott Avenue. The City Engineer, in his written report,
proposed the City Commissioners authorize, by Resolution, the paving of one twelve foot
travel lane on the west side of the railroad tracks on Fourth Street, between Crawford
Avenue and Prescott Avenue, with certain revisions to the intersection of Prescott Avenue
and Fourth Street; and upon completion of this paving, Fourth Street east of the tracks
be designated as one-way north from Crawford Avenue to Prescott Avenue; and Fourth Street
west of the tracks to be designated as one-way south from Crawford Avenue to Prescott Avenue.
The City Engineer also recommended the City purchase an additional twenty foot right-of-way
on the west side of Fourth Street to provide room for present drainage, utilities and
future widening of the pavement.
Commissioner Cooper asked what revisions would be proposed for the intersection
of Prescott and Fourth.
The City Engineer replied that it would be necessary to take the kinks out.
The City Engineer spoke with the City Commissioners privately for 10 minutes and
briefed them on the layout of the street and the necessity of acquiring land on the west
side of the railroad tracks to provide a 12 foot lane and a 20 foot right-of-way for present
drainage, utilities and future widening of the pavement.
Commissioner Losik asked Mr. McConnell if he had overheard the conversation they
had amoung them?
Mr. McConnell replied, "Yes."
Commissioner Losik, speaking to Mr. McConnell said, "You have been working with
many of the people in that area, what is your feeling, or have you hit it as deep as we
have discussed this here? So far what have you and your neighbors and people you have talked
to down there ...?"
Mr. McConnell said he did talk to the people who live on the East side of Fourth
Street, and out of 14 property owners he got 9 signatures to make that one-way. He said,
"I can in no way speak for the people who live on Fifth Street, and I know that they are
going to balk if they have to buy any pavement. I know they are going to balk if they
have to sell any of their property, but they took property away from me when they paved the
east side of the tracks, we paid for the paving on',it and so what is good for me should be
just as good for them; and it would definitely alleviate some of the traffic hazzard that we
do have there on Fourth and Crawford, especially the southbound traffic."
Commissioner Cooper asked if the City acquired right-of-way when they paved
Fourth Street south of Crawford, in the west lane.
The City Engineer said the City did have right-of-way before paving.
Commissioner Cooper asked if it is really feasible to improve this street north
of Prescott also, if you are going to improve it from Crawford to Prescott?
The City Engineer replied, "Not at this time."
Commissioner Ashton moved to accept the City Engineer's recommendation and try and
find out whether we can get this right-of-way and try and find out how the people on Fifth
Street feel and report back through the Engineering Department.
Commissioner Cooper asked if the Engineer ordinarily notified the property owners
who are on Fifth Street?
The City Engineer replied, "Yes, the reason he suggested the Resolution is
because it allows for a protest period."
The City Attorney said if you want to proceed with the work, once you give notice
of it and certainly the people who are going to pay for it, they are going to have the
right to come in and protest it. What Mr. Ashton is saying is he would like to know the
cost of it before he authorizes going into this step. He wants some idea what we are
talking about in dollars and probably the people in the area do too.
The City Attorney suggested, in order to determine the cost of a right-of-way,
they get a real estate man to give a rough estimate as to what it would cost. He would
be an expert in the field.
Mayor Weisgerber said it could be very costly to acquire this right-of-way.
He wondered if the street would get sufficient use to warrant this expensive item.
Commissioner Ashton said,"Th-e amo,int of money we put in this is governed by what
our future plans are. If it is to be a main arterial street from there on out, then it has
more value than if we are just trying to solve this problem for one block, because it doesn't
get that much practical use unless we are going to tie it into one main street."
Mr. McConnell asked why they can't pave over the railroad tracks, like they did
north of Prescott.
The City Attorney said the street north of Prescott is our street, we own the
street, and we have the right-of-way and we authorized the railroad to run its track there.
Now, from Prescott on south, I think that is the railroad's own property.
Commissioner Cooper asked how we know Fourth Street would be this kind of a
thoroughfare, as opposed to Third Street or another street. She asked if Fourth Street
north of Crawford were improved in the same manner as it was improved south of Crawford,
wouldn't there have to be changes in the traffic patterns?
The City Engineer said there very likely would. He explained that this has
been in the long range traffic study for some time.
After a little more discussion, Commissioner Cooper seconded Commissioner Ashton's
motion. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
THE CITY ENGINEER filed Plans and Specifications for Lateral Sanitary Sewer
District Number 514. (Engineering Project 72-547 - as requested by John Ryberg in Petition
Number 3182). He also reported that Mr. Ryberg has deposited the amount of the improvement
as required by Resolution Number 3113. A motion was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded
by Commissioner Ashton to accept the plans and specifications of the City Engineer for the
project, and set the date of July 10, 1972, as the date to receive bids, and instruct the
City Clerk to advertise for bids. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
11
150
0
THE CITY ENGINEER filed a list of various streets for the 1972 resurfacing and
resealing project.
Commissioner Losik asked the City Engineer what criteria established whether a
machine laid 3/4" overlay is required, as opposed to slurry seal.
The City Engineer said basically 3/4" machine laid seal is put on streets which
are deterioriated structurally, or which were built to light standards, as was done in the
past. He said a prime example is, we have a number of streets in this town which were
constructed with a 6" rock base with a 2" hot mix asphalt overlay. These are starting to
break up and go down. He said they feel the 3/4" machine laid seal will add structurally
to the streets whereas the slurry seal is only a surface seal.
Commissioner Losik said, in that case, he thinks in addition to the criteria
used the amount of traffic carried on them should be instrumental'as to whether overlay should
be used as opposed to slurry seal.
The City Engineer explained if traffic has damaged the street enough to put good
sized scollops, the slurry seal does not take these out. The machine laid seal does resurface
it.
Commissioner Losik said out of the 14 streets listed, he made a tour of 7 of them.
He said before we approve this portion of the project, he would like to have these rechecked
to see if slurry seal couldn't be used in lieu of the overlay. He said he has them marked.
He said there are other areas where we are using slurry seal, that are in worse condition
than these areas here.
The City Engineer explained that the slurry seal will add nothing to them.
Commissioner Losik asked about the cost of slurry seal as opposed to overlay.
The City Engineer said the cost is 22 times, that is, overlay is about 802.
Commissioner Losik said, "and slurry seal is about 302. 1 would still like to
have these rechecked before we approve that portion."
The City Engineer said the streets you are talking about, we would rather not
do it yet, rather than put slurry seal on them.
Commissioner Losik said it is a matter of whether it needs it or not, and he
is asking to have it rechecked once. He said he'doesn't see anything wrong with that.
Mayor Weisgerber said they have been checked once.
The City Engineer said they were checked by Mr. Bassett within the last 2 weeks.
These are part of a program which will be completed next year.
Commissioner Cooper asked about the life expectancy of a concrete street before
they start doing anything with them.
The City Engineer said there are some very good ones that are 40 - 50 years old,
and some very bad ones that are only 20 years old. The maintenance on concrete streets is
mainly the seams.
Commissioner Losik said we have areas which sould have a higher priority for
this type of work, rather than just fall into a pattern, because we do need to get those
done where the traffic flow causes faster deterioration than the areas shown here.
Commissioner Cooper suggested they go with Engineering for the slurry seal and
have Commissioner Losik get together with Mr. Bassett so they could go over some of the
streets to be overlaid and maybe they could reach some kind of an understanding.
Commissioner Ashton said,"Engineering made this list up because these are the ones
they know are sub -standard. They are trying to bring them up to standard and I feel we
should go on their recommendations because they have made a study of this for the last
couple of weeks and this is continual all through the year. This is just a review of the
things they feel is the most needed at this time. I feel we should go along with their
recommendation."
•5 1
I
Commissioner Cooper asked how do you resolve the conflict, if you drive down the
street and it looks alright, how can they tell then, if it is not showing any signs of
breaking up?
The City Engineer said they know what these streets are.
Commissioner Losik moved to approve the slurry seal and review the machine laid
overlay, and set the date of July 17, 1972 as the date to receive bids, and instruct the
City Clerk to advertise for bids.
Commissioner Cooper seconded the motion, because she said they can always do
the overlay. Ayes: Cooper, Losik, Weisgerber (3). Nays: Ashton (1). Motion carried.
A LETTER was received from THE SALINA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Recommending the
approval of the revised Bennett Pontiac Site Plan in the Northeast Industrial Park urban
renewal project.
Commissioner Losik asked the City Planner if he could shed a little light on this.
He said it was to have been explained prior to this.
The City Planner said this site plan has been approved by Urban Renewal and the
Salina City Planning Commission.
Commissioner Losik moved to approve the Bennett Pontiac Site Plan. The motion
was seconded by Commissioner Ashton. Ayes:(4). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
THE CITY COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERED ARTICLE VIII, CHAPTER 23 of The Salina Code,
relating to inoperable vehicles.
The City Manager explained that the reason this is on the agenda is that
Commissioner Losik visited with him 2 weeks ago, and then again this last week. He said,
for the record, staff has had many meetings on this particular subject, and there have been
about as many different opinions as we have had meetings. He explained that the original
intent of the inoperable vehicle ordinance, as it is written in the ordinance book, was
one that was initiated by the Citizen's Advisory Committee in 1969 and finally passed
late 1970. He said, "The original intent of the ordinance in 1969, when we hired a student
to tour the City, was to try-arrd-'remove some of --the inoperable vehicles. We referred to the
ordinance at that time as the junk cars ordinance. It took into consideration more than the
unusable vehicles, refrigerators, things of this sort; so it was based primarily on
aesthetics. This is still a concern of the community through the blighting influence,
as it relates to health, flies, mosquities, rodents, etc, general welfare of the community
as it might relate to property value, the nuisance aspect and the like. We have a problem
also not only of race cars but that of antiques as it fits and works in this particular
ordinance. I would say this, that probably since 1969, when the subject first came up,
the City Commission, the Citizens' Advisory Committee, who were part of the input which
resulted in the inoperable vehicles ordinance, which we incidentally copied from Neodesha,
Kansas, or by an large from their ordinance. We have always looked at this subject of
being operable as far as being used on the streets and highways. I would also say that
there have been in the neighborhood of 1,000 violations cleared as it relates to either
inoperable vehicles or junk vehicles since this ordinance was passed in the Fall of 1970,
now there is some conflict in the interpretation of this ordinance, and where we have had
our major hangup has been in the interpretation of the area of "originally constructed".
We think in this area that it would help us substantually and maybe provide a solution to
this thing if you add an amendment saying "or modified" after where it says "originally
constructed. I might also relate that I asked Mr. Bengtson to visit with the Judge, which
he did, and according to Mr. Bengtson, Judge Henderson relates that he is not aware of any
problem, per say, existing with the present ordinance. I appreciate some of you gentlemen
in the audience will differ here because you have, or a couple of you have, received notices
on your vehicles. But by an large the people, according to Mr. Henderson, have been very
cooperative and very apologetic for the situations where they have been involved. I am
not speaking to the drag or race cars, but to the administration of the ordinance in its
entirety. He said that he could not recall anythang but real good cooperation from the
public, so I think this is very complementary to the community, and we would want and hope
this would continue to be the case.
"The other area of hangup, as I explained to Mr. Losik, is we don't want to
modify this ordinance so it might become unconstitutional, of course, preferential, anything
of this sort, because it is accomplishing a good; yet we don't want to have any group of
people feel as though this is the case. I can certainly see the value these people get
into their vehicles. I can see both sides of it."
Mr. Jerry Larson said he feels there are a lot of cars that have a lot of money
invested in them, about as much as a standard car, and most of the people do try to keep
their yard cleaned up. He said he can't see that it is any different than people who have
campers and boats in their yards,
Mr. Wilbur Riordan said he would rather have his boys working on their car in
the yard, than out running the streets.
Commissioner Losik added that these cars run almost every week. They are not
left for any long period of time like an abandoned vehicle.
Mayor Weisgerber read from the Code - Section 23-176: The presumptions that a
vehicle is inoperable:
(a) Absence of an effective registration plate upon such vehicle.
(b) Placement of the vehicle, or parts thereof, upon jacks, blocks,
chains or other supports.
(c) Absence of one or more parts of the vehicle necessary for the
lawful operation of the vehicle upon the streets and highways.
The City Attorney explained that, "by presumption, that in the absence of any
evidence to the contrary this would define an inoperable vehicle. We have presumptions
of law. We have presumptions of evidence, This is real common in courts of law. We
presume something to be correct if a certain condition exists.
"The Governing Body, in adopting this ordinance, said we can presume a vehicle
is inoperative if it is not registered, if it is placed up on jacks, doesn't have all its
parts. We can assume this and normally the inspector would be within his rights to issue
a violation notice. Now this doesn't mean this man is guilty, per say, of having an
inoperable vehicle, We presume it unless he can come in and give us evidence to the
contrary. The fact that he does not have a license tag on it, the Governing Body said
this is evidence that we will, in the absence of any other evidence, define it as
inoperable. If he said he is not going to use it this year, and I'm not going to tag it,
that in itself would not make this an inoperable vehicle.
"The Judge indicated to me today a lot of times someone will come in who got a
citation. He said that he knows it has been sitting out there. He has been working on it.
It hasn't been inoperative for 30 days, This ordinance exempts vehicles that are not
inoperative for more than 30 days. When they are working on them, if the problem is
alleviated before the 30 days, we will dismiss it and we have. This is just the same
indication, because of the presumption, doesn't automatically make it an inoperable
vehicle, this is merely evidence that it could be, that in the absence to the contrary
the court would find that it is inoperable."
The City Manager said he thinks if the Commission would include in the ordinance,
"or modified", this relates to vehicles with functions or purposes different than that
for which it was originally constructed. We will then, on staff, attempt to ascertain the
operability or inoperablity of the vehicle.
Commissioner Losik asked the City Attorney if they could come up with something
to give the Inspection Department more guidelines in applying the ordinance for
enforcement purposes, and moved that the City Attorney reword the ordinance along this line.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ashton. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
MAYOR WEISGERBER asked about something he thought was going to be on the agenda.
He said the letter from St. John's Military School, which was received last week, and asked if
that be referred to the Citizens' Advisory Committee?
The City Manager said as part of the official record, I intend to do it. He said
he hasn't dictated a note to the Citizens' Advisory Committee, but he said he will do it.
COMMISSION AGENDA
None
1
PUBLIC AGENDA
PETITION NUMBER 3260 was filed by H, W. Steele for the rezoning of Lots 12, 13,
14, 15, 23, 24, 25, 26, Block 15, Belmont Addition to the City of Salina, Kansas, from
District "A" (Second Dwelling House District) to District "D" (Local Business District)
A motion was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by Commissioner Cooper to refer the
petition to the Salina City Planning Commission. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
THE COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERED A REQUEST from Eloise French that Ordinance Number
8229 be reconsidered as the rates, as requested, were not included in the ordinance.
Mrs. French spoke privately with the City Commissioners for 15 minutes.
Mrs. French said she would prefer to close at midnight if she can't have the
rate increase, because there isn't that much business, and the drivers are paid on commission.
Mayor Weisgerber asked the City Manager what would happen if the cab company
did close at midnight.
The City Manager explained that we would probably get a lot of calls. He said he
would rather set a rate than let the business close.
Commissioner Cooper asked if Mrs. French would consider going for a trial
period to see how this is going to work out at the 502 rate until 12:01. She said there
is a rate increase because of the decrease in mileage,
Mrs. French explained that she cannot get drivers at that wage. The drivers are
paid less than the Federal Minimum Wage. She said she can't maintain the business at the
present rates.
The City Manager explained that the Commissioners determination should be based
on the safety, welfare, convenience, health, and morals of the Community. Here they
are talking about safety, welfare and convenience, He said to insure the safety, welfare
and convenience, they have an obligation to see that this cab company or cab companies do
operate safe vehicles, that they have safe, reasonable, prudent and conscientious drivers.
He added that these people are investigated before their license is issued. He said the
people will have to have a return on their investment, and they have a decision to make,
whether to run the cabs or park them.
Ed French said everybody wants a first class cab company, but this can only be
accomplished by a rate increase.
Commissioner Ashton moved to go along with the rate increase, to keep the cab
company from closing at midnight; that the rates be 50(t for the first 1/3 mile during the
day time, 65d from 6:01 P.M. to midnight, and 95d from 12:01 to 5 A.M., and omit the
$5.00 an hour charge. The motion died for the lack of a second.
Commissioner Losik moved that they leave the rates as the ordinance was approved
the other day, and that in September, they come back for a complete review of the rates
they requested, which would also justify the prerogative to charge an additional 15(t.
A discussion followed about the original intent of the Commissioners when the
ordinance was introduced for first reading on May 22, 1972.
Mayor Weisgerber said we approved what they requested, but did not go along
with giving them an automatic rate increase in the Fall.
Commissioner Losik asked for a second to his motion. The motion died for the
lack of a second.
The Commissioners, City Manager, and City Attorney privately discussed the
ordinance, and the minutes of the meeting of May 22, 1972, and the original request of
Mrs. French.
A motion was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by Commissioner Cooper to
instruct the City Attorney to rewrite the ordinance, with the original request written
into it, and delete the time clause, so it can be considered for first reading at the
meeting next week. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
THE COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERED A REQUEST from John C. Ryberg to discuss a
Resolution approving participation by local owners in the Federal Rent Supplement Program.
Mr. Ryberg requested the City Commissioners adopt the resolution to make it a
part of the Workable Program, for rent supplement of Housing Section 101. Sample copies
of the resolution were distributed to the Commissioners prior to the meeting.
Mr. Ryberg said he thinks FHA and HUD thought it was a part of our Workable
Program, but they discovered a couple of weeks ago that it is not. He explained that it
does not place any legal or financial responsibility on the City whatsoever. He explained
that these are payments that are made in behalf of the renter, or qualified tenant, within
the project, directly to the mortgage company.
Mayor Weisgerber said we have a couple of programs going, one for low -rent
housing and one for housing for the elderly. He asked if there is any tie between the
program he has going, which will influence the other programs?
Mr. Werth, said he could not see where there would be any conflict whatsoever.
The Commissioners discussed, at length, the resolution and the way it relates
to the community with a certified Workable Program,
Commissioner Losik asked Mr. Ryberg if another week would hurt him; that he
would like to have the City Attorney check this out.
Mr. Ryberg asked if it could be resolved in one meeting?
Commissioner Losik replied that it could.
Mr. Ryberg explained that HUD and FHA understand that we have a Workable Program,
but our Workable Program does not spell out in it that you are going to work within the
rent supplement program, and it has to be stated that you are going to do it. It is so
stated right there in the third paragraph of the Rent Supplement Program.
The City Manager explained that our Workable Program does not relate in any way
to private rent supplement, only to public rent supplement. He added that we have never
had any private requests to relate to.
Commissioner Cooper said, "Well when this Workable Program was being submitted,
aren't we supposed to anticipate these kinds of things? Like we knew Mr. Ryberg was going
into this program at the time that our workable program was submitted."
The City Manager said he did not know of this project, and he didn't think
anybody on staff did either,
Mr. Ryberg said he didn}t think it was even in the mill at that time.
After further discussion, the Commissioners asked if the City Attorney could
check with HUD.
The City Attorney said he would be glad to check with them, and get back as
soon as possible.
A motion was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by Commissioner Cooper to
have the City Attorney check this out. Ayes: Cooper, Losik, Weisgerber (3). Nays: Ashton (1)
Motion carried,
MERCHANT POLICE LICENSE APPLICATIONS for the year June 1, 1972 to May 31, 1972,
were filed by the following:
Clarence M. Smith, d/b/a Merchant Police Service, 1120 North Fourth Street.
Paul J. Gestl, Sr., d/b/a Merchant Special Police Service, P. 0. Box 761.
Willie Beard, 416 Washington Street.
Malcolm G. White, d/b/a White's Armored Car Service, 516 Beechwood Road.
The City Clerk reported each has paid the license fee, and each has been approved _
by the Police Department as to the requirements of the Merchant Police Code. A motion was
made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by Commissioner Ashton to approve the license
applications and authorize the City Clerk to issue the licenses. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0)
Motion carried.
i
Mr. R, E. Sprecker was present and asked to present a petition for rezoning
so it could be referred to the Salina City Planning Commission for consideration. Upon
questioning him, it was learned that the property is outside the City Limits, but within
three miles of the City. He was instructed to file the petition with the County.
1
11
1
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Ashton, seconded by Commissioner Losik that
the Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners adjourn. Ayes: (4). Nays: (0).
Motion carried,
(11'�
GLVvt---
D. L. Harrison, City Clerk