03-26-1973 MinutesCity of Salina, Kansas
Commissioners' Meeting
March 26, 1973
The Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners met in the Commissioners' Room,
City -County Building, on Monday, March 26, 1973, 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 Robert C. Caldwell
Commissioner Norma G. Cooper
Commissioner Mike Losik, Jr.
comprising a quorum of the Board, also:
Ron Barta, Assistant City Attorney
Norris D. Olson, City Manager
D. L. Harrison, City Clerk
Absent:
L. 0. Bengtson, City Attorney
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 19, 1973, were approved as mailed.
Mayor Weisgerber welcomed City Commissioner candidates Harold Fitzpatrick and
Bill Usher to the meeting.
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." (For the rezoning of Lots 2, 3, 4, Block 18,
Sunset Manor Addition, to District "EE" (Local Service District), as requested in Petition
Number 3298, which was filed by Harold Dickey). A motion was made by Commissioner Ashton,
seconded by Commissioner Losik to adopt the ordinance as read and the following vote was
had: Ayes: Ashton, Caldwell, Cooper, Losik, Weisgerber (5). Nays: (0). Carried. The
Mayor approved the ordinance and it is numbered 8280. The ordinance was introduced for
first reading March 12, 1973.
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." (For the rezoning of Blocks 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Lakewood
Addition to District "C" (Apartment District), and all of Blocks 7 and 8, Lakewood Addition
to District "EE" (Local Service District), which was requested in Petition Number 3277,
which was filed by John Ryberg) A motion was made by Commissioner Ashton, seconded by
Commissioner Losik to adopt the ordinance as read and the following vote was had: Ayes:
Ashton, Caldwell, Cooper, Losik, Weisgerber (5). Nays: (0). Carried. The Mayor approved
the ordinance and it is numbered 8281. The ordinance was introduced for first reading
October 16, 1972.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Cooper, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell to
introduce a Resolution for first reading determining the necessity of and directing that
the owner or owners of certain lots construct, in compliance with plans and specifications
of the City Engineer, a sidewalk, abutting said lots within 45 days of the adoption and
publication hereof and providing that in the event the owner or owners fail to do so, that
the City of Salina shall proceed to construct or cause to be constructed said sidewalk and
that the total cost thereof shall be assessed against such lot or lots on which such
sidewalk shall abut as other special assessments. (Sidewalk on the South side of Cloud
Street, between Norton and Roach Streets, as requested in Petition Number 3312). Ayes: (5).
Nays: (0). Motion carried,
Resolution Passed: 2 � 1q�3 Number: 3140
A LETTER was received from the Metropolitan Planning Commission recommending the
approval of the Final Plat of Interstate District Southwest of 1-70, subject to dedication
of additional footage to make a 60 foot right-of-way along the northerly edge of the plat,
which will include the entrance road owned by the Kansas Highway Commission.
1
1
1
'r?2�
A letter was received from the petitioner requesting the City Commission defer
any action on the recommendation of the Metropolitan Planning Commission, until April 9,
1973, until he has an opportunity to talk with the Metropolitan Planning Commission. A
motion was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by Commissioner Ashton to table the petition
until April 9, 1973, as requested by the petitioner. Ayes: (5). Nays: (0). Motion
carried.
A LETTER was received from the Metropolitan Planning Commission recommending the
approval of Petition Number 3299, which was filed by Richard Bergen, 2327 Meadow Lane for
the rezoning of the East 95 feet of Lot 6, Block 6, Oakdale Addition to District "C"
(Apartment District). A motion was made by Commissioner Cooper, seconded by Commissioner
Ashton to accept the recommendation of the Metropolitan Planning Commission to approve
the rezoning, and to introduce the ordinance for first reading. Ayes: (5). Nays: (0).
Motion carried.
Ordinance Passed: n, 4 r i g 7 3 Number: S2 S 5
A LETTER was received from the Metropolitan Planning Commission recommending the
approval of Petition Number 3306, which was filed by Lyle Melvin, Jr., requesting the
annexation of the Prairie Village Mobile Home Park, and adhering to the Special Class
Zoning, approved by the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals. The Metropolitan Planning
Commission further recommends amendment of the original petition to include annexation as
District "A" (Second Dwelling House District). A motion was made by Commissioner Caldwell,
seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to accept the recommendation of the Metropolitan Planning
Commission and approve the annexation, and to introduce the ordinance for first reading.
Ayes: (5). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
Ordinance Passed: Q 2 1 Number:
A LETTER was received from the Metropolitan Planning Commission recommending the
approval of Petition Number 3308, filed by Ronald Barta, Agent for the rezoning of Marydale
Addition to District "G" (Heavy Industrial District). A motion was made by Commissioner
Ashton, seconded by Commissioner Losik to accept the recommendation of the Metropolitan
Planning Commission to approve the rezoning, and to introduce the ordinance for first
reading. Ayes: (5). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
Ordinance Passed: ,s l 1473 Number: SLg-
A LETTER was received from R. L. Armstrong, County Clerk, certifying that the
Petition Number 3303, filed by Harriet Johnson and others, for the repeal of the Minimum
Housing Code, or be submitted to the electors of the City of Salina, for a referendum,
is a valid and sufficient petition with 2,098 proper signatures. As 7,427 persons voted
in the General City Election in 1971, 25% is 1,857.
Mayor Weisgerber commented, "We have been over the ground on this somewhat before.
We seem to be in agreement as to the fact that we want a Minimum Housing Ordinance, but
somewhat in disagreement as to exactly how we should handle this petition. There are several
options open to the City Commission in this regard."
Mr. Jerry Simpson, Chairman of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, stated, "On
behalf of the Steering Committee of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, as you know a week
ago at the Commission meeting, we made a statement from the Citizens' Advisory Committee
concerning the Minimum Housing Code. We would concur Salina needs a Minimum Housing Code
and with this fact in mind we would respectfully request that the Minimum Housing Code be
referred to the Citizens' Advisory Committee. A special task force could be appointed
from the members of our committee to make a thorough study of the code and any changes or
modifications or clarifications that need to be made. We would then present it back to
the City Commission. If this Minimum Housing Code should come to a vote, the public should
be well informed as to its content, as to the basis of the code."
Glorine Shelton, President of the League of Women Voters, said, "The Salina League
also supports Minimum Housing standards and we believe that the safety of our community is
so important that a committee should be appointed to work on this code and come up with a
meaningful code, a code that is a workable code, and it would appear that since the Citizens'
Advisory Committee is the committee which originally adopted this code, this committee should
be the committee to review it."
Mayor Weisgerber announced that the League of Women Voters, in connection with
the Citizens' Advisory Committee is going to have its first hearing, Wednesday Evening,
in the City -County Building, in Room 300.
Mr. Bill Scholl said, "I helped circulate the petition. If the petition is valid,
I don't know what there is to argue about. If the code is a good one, the people should
have the privilege of voting for it the same as they did in Hutchinson. If the code isn't
any good, they should have the privilege of voting against it, so what is there to argue
about?"
Mayor Weisgerber commented, "We are not saying that there isn't going to be a
right to vote on it. I think what Mr. Simpson is saying, and what the League of Women Voters
is saying is a great many people misunderstand this in the form it is written. It isn't
clear to some people."
Mr. Scholl replied, "I showed a copy of the code, but not everyone of the 400,
but the ones who signed, and I don't see how they can be confused when they read it."
Commissioner Ashton said, "The radio questionnaire asked five different people on
the street about the Minimum Housing Code, and not one of the five were even willing to
comment on it, because they didn't know enough about it to make a decision in their own
minds at that time, and I think there are a lot of people that are neither for nor against
it, they just haven't made up their minds because they haven't had enough facts brought to
their attention. I think these hearings are a route of getting together to bring out a lot
of the facts."
Rev. J. E. Jones, said, "I would just like to speak as it relates to delaying
putting it on the ballot until people can actually understand it. I think the Citizens'
Advisory Committee should be given the opportunity to change the language of it, which
brought about this misunderstanding. I would rather see it delayed as compared to putting
it on the ballot for the 3rd of April, and for the Citizens' Advisory Committee to work on
it and bring about these changes, and then educate the people for the purpose of it and
also the language of the code. I feel there is misunderstanding in that they are looking
at it that the guy is going to come to your house and kick your door down and walk in, when
there is a law protecting every citizen in the code now. I feel that Salina should have
this code, because after I viewed some of the films that Ron has taken over the City,
convinced me very readily that there are a lot of dwellings here that need to be torn
down. Somebody needs to spend some money to keep them up. Any person who is renting today,
ought to be in favor of a Minimum Housing Code that will require the landlord to keep that
place liveable."
— , „ca p V r CS— t!; T 1 VCi7II i 1U .
Mr. Donald McConnell asked Commissioner Caldwell if he understood the Minimum
Housing Code fully. Commissioner Caldwell replied he didn't. Mr. McConnell asked why it
was passed.
Commissioner Caldwell replied that it was passed for a purpose, He said, "The
Minimum Housing Code, as far as I am concerned, concerns about everyone in Salina.
Minorities basically, because most urban renewal programs are based on that. Secondly for
underprivileged people. It was based on that to be sure they did have a home to live in
that would come up to the code, and not live under any conditions that people put upon them.
Yes, it was a Minimum Housing Code for the urban renewal program to get that off the ground,
this is true, but that wasn't the basic purpose of the program. It was to assure you and
me, any minority or underprivileged person in the City of Salina a decent place to live in,
and that was the only reason it was passed."
Mr. McConnell commented that Urban Renewal is out the window.
Commissioner Caldwell commented, "I can't base anything on big politics. I can
only deal locally. I am a local Commissioner, and our Minimum Housing Code was based on a
local situation. Every City in the country doesn't have a Minimum Housing Code, but we
accepted one for more than one purpose."
Mr. McConnell stated, "I feel very strongly. I do not and I will not let anyone
in my home unless he is invited, or if he has more or less an official business, but he
will not be able to get in if he is just going to say I am a housing inspector. I will not
let him in, because what is he going to inspect?"
Commissioner Caldwell stated, "It is your home, you are entitled to let anyone in
there that you want to. I don't think the City has committed anyone to saying, I must
come into your home."
Mr. Solomon Oliver stated, "I think that several remarks made here tonight fully
demonstrate the reason the Citizens' Advisory Committee and the League of Women Voters feel
that is is necessary to have these meetings. The remarks this gentleman made will be fully
explained if he will attend the meeting, which will be held Wednesday. If we are able to
delay getting this put on the ballot for April 3rd, there will be several other meetings --
after that which these things will be fully explained. I am glad these remarks came up
because now I am able to make a remark I didn't want to make. A lot of people have been
misinformed about what is in that housing code. I have had people come up to me and make
such statements as if 11 don't have an air conditioner in my home, they are going to do
this and they are going to do that.' Nobody is going to do anything that isn't legal.
Nobody has the authority to come up and force their way into anyone's home under this code.
True, it does state that the public officer is the man who shall make the inspection, but
all you have to do is read a little farther in the paragraph and it tells you that if you
do not choose to let him in, then he has to get a court order. When you get a court order
that becomes the law of the land. You don't just arbitrarily defy the law just because we
don't like something. I think people should really attend these meetings that are coming
up because it really explains it in down to earth, layman's language, so that we can all
understand what the lawyers are talking about."
Commissioner Cooper said, "As a Commissioner, I approved the Minimum Housing Code
because, first I believe the City needs a Minimum Housing Code; and secondly I was decidedly
with the understanding that it was a federal requirement. I did not understand that it was
a local code needing federal approval," Commissioner Cooper asked the City Attorney to
explain the options that are open to the Commission in regard to the petition that has been
presented.
Mr. Ron Barta, first explained the procedure to obtain a court order, "The code
does provide that the public inspector or public officer may come upon the property to make
an inspection, It does go further to say that you can deny him this right to come upon the
property. He then may obtain a court order. At that point the Minimum Housing Code does
not say what is necessary to obtain the order of the court; however the State Statute, the
case law that has gone for years in the past, does set out certain requirements that the
public officer must meet in order to obtain that court order, and there is a matter of proof
which he must present to the court and in addition to that he must give the person who owns
the property or the person whose property he is trying to inspect, they must have sufficient
notice that they have a chance to present their side of the question to the same court. He
cannot just go up to the court and ask for an order and have the court rubber stamp an order
and them come back to your house and say here is an order of the court. It won't work that
way. There are other procedural statutes that cover this. They are not in the Minimum
Housing Code, but if I were to relate everything that covers it, it covers about a 10 volume
set, and these are the things you are protected by."
Mr. Barta then said, "At this point I will cover the different options that are
open to the Commission. First, this Commission may, on its own motion, repeal the existing
ordinance. They can, at this time, deny the petition. They can, at this time, pass an
ordinance setting a special election for the repeal of the Minimum Housing Code. They may
file, or authorize the legal department to file an action in District Court to determine
whether this is a legislative or administrative ordinance, and such an action is called
a Declaritory Judgement Action, They can refuse to take action on this particular action
for a period of 20 days, if they so desire,"
Commissioner Cooper said, "I think the general feeling was from the Citizens'
Advisory Committee members and the League of Women Voters who met with staff members Friday,
was that they would like to see this issue go on the ballot, but they would also like to
see language clarifications, and any kind of suggestions or proposals that might be made
as a result of the public hearing, and through communication through the news media and from
the people in the community to make these kinds of corrections, so that it would fit our
local needs maybe a little bit better than the present one does; however, Mr. Barta informed
us that the only options we actually have legally available to us are the four he just
mentioned. We cannot do anything other than the four things that have been suggested to us.
If we postpone decision for twenty days, it will not, in reality, change anything, because
the legal counsel has specifically stated that any corrections, revisions, language
clarification will not be acceptable. The Minimum Housing Code, as we know it as a local
ordinance, is the code that will have to appear on the ballot. Could we make amendments and
revisions to the code later? Even if the people of the city vote on this code as it is, may
we still, following the election, make amendments and revisions to the code?"
Mr. Barta explained, "According to the Statute, if this matter comes to a special
election and the proposal, as it is stated in the petition, which would be to vote for the
repeal or against the repeal of the present Minimum Housing Code. If it were to be repealed
by that vote, this Commission would be barred from doing anything on its own motion for a
period of ten years. It would take another public referendum in order to get a Minimum
Housing Code of any type enacted. If the City Commission were to repeal the existing
ordinance, as of this time, or within twenty days, the same would be true. You would be
barred for a period of ten years."
Commissioner Cooper asked if the Minimum Housing Code were retained by the
referendum, could it be amended.
Mr. Barta explained that it could be amended if it remains a city ordinance.
Commissioner Losik asked, "If the Commission were to take no action for twenty
days, which is the legal time limit, during this twenty days, is it possible for this petition
to be changed due to withdrawal of signatures, or addition of signatures, so that it would
become invalid due to the lack of authorized signatures."
Mr. Barta explained that it could be changed, by such additions or subtractions.
44?
Commissioner Caldwell moved to refer the matter back to the Citizens' Advisory
Commission for further study, and for clarification to the public within the twenty day
period. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ashton.
A lengthy discussion followed concerning the possibility of the different
actions open to the Commission during the next twenty days.
Mr. McConnell commented, "I am personally not against the Minimum Housing Code.
I firmly believe we need one, but I am personally against some sections of it. Is it
possible for the Commission to make a motion or an amendment to these specific sections
that people, like myself, are objecting to? This, I think, would clarify a lot of things.
My main objection to it is the right of the City, regardless of whether they do or do not,
have the right to come into my home. I think you will find a big percent of the signers
have that same feeling. Is it possible for you, as a body, to amend it tonight or the
next Commission meeting? I think then you would clarify a lot of this."
Commissioner Losik asked Jerry Simpson if the Citizens' Advisory Commission
would be able to hold the public hearings and get the recommendation back to the Commission
in sufficient time so they could amend the ordinance."
Mr. Simpson said, "I would certainly think we could appoint a task force and get
to work on it. I believe we could hold a hearing and get a good feeling of the cross
section in the twenty day period."
Commissioner Losik commented, "My feelings on it is very much like many of the
people who signed the petition. I think now that it has come to light, and I am sure it is
the feeling of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, we do need, and I support a Minimum
Housing Code, Now, as was brought out here, I think there are just portions of that code,
if amended, it would be acceptable and we would have this problem solved, so this is what we
are looking at. I can't speak for the rest, but I as one would like to feel that this is
showing good faith, to amend the portions that are offensive to the people, but still
maintain a Minimum Housing Code, which I feel we need; but we need to have an opportunity,
legally, to be able to do this within the time period that is open, that is given to us by
I aw."
Commissioner Cooper commented, "I will go with the additional twenty days, if that
is the most we can get. I don't think it is an adequate amount of time, but if it is all
we have that is simply all that is available to us, so I will go with this; however I am
going to have to qualify this in this manner. I think we have received, as a Governing
Body, a certified petition asking for a vote on this Minimum Housing Code, now until this
Commission makes its decision, and it is my understanding that they may add or remove
names from this petition, so in other words, what we are saying is for the next twenty
days, names may be added or removed from this petition. I do not like to do anything that
will run any risk to the petition, when you find that many people who are asking you to do
something, there is a basic reason for it. I do believe it happens to be misunderstanding
and I think the City Commission will accept the recommendations of the advisory group and
make the language clarifications and the changes in the code; however I do believe the
people in the community are entitled to vote on the Minimum Housing Code, and trust us to
make the revisions in the new code, so I will go with the twenty day extension, but if there
is any indication to me that it will invalidate the petition, I will ask the Commission to
shorten the time."
Commissioner Losik added, "I would hope that during this twenty day period, we
make every effort to clarify what we intend to do and what we intend to correct and I hope
that we don't spend our effort in trying to get names removed, rather than try to get the
spirit and intent of what these people are asking us to do, is give this community a good
Minimum Housing Code. I would hope this is what we would accomplish in the next twenty
days."
Commissioner Caldwell commented, "I am almost sure that with all the effort they
have put in behind this petition, I rather doubt, at this state, if many of those people
withdraw their names. I feel that they were concerned enough that they put their names in
there, and hopefully so. Because they have done that much, I would hate to think that
now that they have put there names on it, they withdraw it. It would be defeating their
purpose."
Mr. Solomon Oliver made one last comment, "We definitely want this thing on a
ballot, we just don't want it on there on April 3rd. We want that twenty days to try to
contact people and breakdown this code and to tell them just exactly what is in it and
what will be changed. This is our whole purpose. We have no purpose in trying to get
anybody to remove or add their names to the petition."
Mayor Weisgerber called for a vote on the motion to refer the matter to the
Citizens' Advisory Committee for further study, and for clarification to the public within
a twenty day period, Ayes: (5). Nays: (0). Motion carried.
11
1
None
COMMISSION AGENDA
PUBLIC AGENDA
PETITION NUMBER 3317 was filed by E. P. Nichols, West State Street Road, for the
rezoning of the North 2'of Lot 1, Plat 9, part of the SE4 of 10-14-3, to District "D" (Local
Business District). A motion was made by Commissioner Cooper, seconded by Commissioner
Losik to refer the petition to the Metropolitan Planning Commission. Ayes: (5). Nays: (0).
Motion carried.
A CEREAL MALT BEVERAGE LICENSE APPLICATION was filed by Dennis Sperling, d/b/a
The Pub, 649 South Broadway. (New). The City Clerk reported the applicant has paid the
proper fee, and the application has been approved by the Zoning Officer and the Police
Department, and the applicant has asked approval of the license, subject to the final
approval of the Health Department. A motion was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by
Commissioner Ashton to approve the license, subject to the final approval of the Health
Department, and authorize the City Clerk to issue the license at that time. Ayes: (5).
Nays: (0). Motion carried.
A CEREAL MALT BEVERAGE LICENSE APPLICATION was filed by James A. Newby, Sr.,
d/b/a Truckers Inn, 10121 North Broadway, The City Clerk reported the application has been
approved by the Health Department, the Zoning Officer and the Police Department. A motion
was made by Commissioner Losik, seconded by Commissioner Ashton to approve the license
application and authorize the City Clerk to issue the license, Ayes: (5). Nays: (0).
Motion carried,
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Ashton, seconded by Commissioner Losik that
the Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners be adjourned. Ayes: (5). Nays: (0).
Motion carried.
D. L. Harrison, City Clerk