MINUTES

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

DECEMBER 7, 2010, AT 7:00 P.M.

The regular meeting of the Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, December 7, 2010, at 7:00 p.m., Board Chambers, City Hall, with Mayor Mike Bush presiding.

The invocation was given by Ms. Trish Tucker, and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Bush.

Mayor Bush called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

1 Roll Call

Roll call was as follows: Present: Directors Peggy Maruthur, Elaine Jones, Cynthia Keheley, Pat McCabe, Rick Ramick, Tom Daniel, and Mike Bush, total 7.

2 Approval of Agenda

A motion was made by Director Daniel, duly seconded by Director Ramick, that the agenda be approved; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried.

3 Approval of Minutes of November 23, 2010 Board Meeting

A motion was made by Director McCabe, duly seconded by Director Maruthur, that the minutes of the November 23, 2010 Board Meeting be approved; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried.

4 Recognition of Guests

No guests were present for recognition.

5 Board of Directors Announcements

Director Keheley extended an invitation to the citizens and surrounding area to the annual luminary display in Quapaw-Prospect Historic District Neighborhood and will include the area from the Levi Hospital to Summer and West Grand. She stated more than 250 homes will be lit with candle sacks on Saturday evening, and there is no charge.

Director Maruthur reminded everyone that 69 years ago today President Franklin Roosevelt said that this day will live in infamy; and also it is City Attorney Brian Albright’s birthday. She stressed that those who fought and died for this country should not be forgotten.

Director McCabe stated that the Christmas Parade was held last night and thanked Dan Bugg, Animal Services Director, for putting together the float for the City Directors to ride in and for the animal control officers who worked on the float.

6 Acknowledgment of Financial Statements Notice for October 2010

Mayor Bush acknowledged the Financial Statements Notice for October 2010, which are on file in the Finance Department for review by the Board and the public.

CONSENT AGENDA

The Consent Agenda consisted of the following:

7 Public Safety Committee Report (November 23, 2010).

8 Budget Transfers - Aviation Fuel for Remainder of 2010.

9 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-245 Awarding a Contract to Brown Engineers, LLC for Certain Engineering Services on an As-Needed Basis for Various Utility Improvement Projects.

Board of Directors Meeting 2 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. 10 Proposed Resolution No. R–10-246 Awarding a Contract to All Service Electric for Wastewater Grinder Lift Station-Radio Alarm Meter Installation. 11 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-247 Extending a Contract with Coulson Oil Company for the Purchase of On-Site Fuel for 2011.

12 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-248 Extending a Contract with FleetCor Technologies, Inc. for Off-Site Fueling and Fuel Management Services for 2011.

13 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-249 Extending a Contract with HealthScope Benefits/Cornerstone Benefits as Third-Party Administrator/Agent for the City’s Self-Funded Employee Group Health Insurance Program for 2011.

14 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-250 Extending a Contract with Voluntary Benefits Administrators, Inc. for Flexible Spending Insurance (Cafeteria Plan) for 2011.

15 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-251 Extending a Contract with Southwest Employee Assistance Program for the Provision of Employee Assistance Services for 2011.

16 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-252 Extending a Contract with MetLife Travelers for Group Life and AD&D Insurance for 2011.

17 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-253 Extending an Agreement with LexisNexis, a.k.a. Choicepoint Services, Inc. for the Provision of Drug and Alcohol Testing Services for 2011.

18 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-254 Extending an Agreement with Family Medicine Clinic for Physical Exams for Uniformed Police and Fire Employees and Applicants for 2011.

Board of Directors Meeting 3 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. 19 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-255 Extending an Agreement with IMWell Health for Wellness and Disease Management Services for 2011.

20 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-256 Extending a Contract with Delta Dental for the City’s Self-Insured Employee Dental Insurance for 2011.

21 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-257 Extending a Contract with Catalyst Rx for Pharmacy Benefit Management Services for 2011.

22 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-258 Extending an Agreement with Summit Bank for the Provision of Certain Banking Services for 2011.

23 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-259 Extending an Agreement with US Bank for Certain Credit Card Processing Services for 2011.

24 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-260 Extending an Agreement with Penn Credit Corporation for Collection Services for 2011.

25 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-261 Extending a Contract with Matrix Imaging Solutions for Printing and Mailing of Utility Bills and Providing Services Related to Electronic Bill Pay and Presentment (EBPP) for 2011.

26 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-262 Extending an Agreement with Jordan, Woosley, Crone and Keaton, Ltd. for 2010 Audit Services.

27 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-263 Extending an Agreement with First Transit for the Operation and Management of Hot Springs Intracity Transit for 2011.

A motion was made by Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Keheley, that the Consent Agenda be approved.

Board of Directors Meeting 4 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. Upon discussion, Mr. Bob Driggers, #3 Stonegate, spoke to Agenda Item No. 26 (Proposed Resolution No. R-10-262 Extending an Agreement with Jordan, Woosley, Crone and Keaton, Ltd. for 2010 Audit Services) and said he has read some of the audits in the past; and they appear to have become rather routine and getting complacent with their recommendations and findings. He recommended that this item be put out for bid. Also, he suggested the Board consider allowing the State to do the audit, which would result in a savings of $100,000.

Mr. George Pritchett, 210 Carl Drive, requested that the Board ask the State to consider an audit for the City in 2011/2012 timeframe. He said he has spoken to Finance Director Dorethea Yates and City Manager Lance Hudnell, and they point out some good reasons why this might not be the best idea. However, he would like to see the City ask the State and then give it some study.. He said Ms. Yates pointed out while there is the possibility of some savings, it could add more work to city staff that would cost more money. He added he would like to see the bid for audit services put at least once every three years. He also wished a speedy recover to Mr. Dan Bugg, Animal Services Director, who will have both knees replaced before Christmas.

Mr. Brian White, 360 Lakeland Drive, mentioned that Mr. Driggers and Mr. Pritchett have already covered his comments.

Director Maruthur made a motion that Item No. 26 (Proposed Resolution No. R-10-262 Extending an Agreement with Jordan, Woosley, Crone and Keaton, Ltd. for 2010 Audit Services) be removed from the agenda and for the City to consider what it is going to do for audit services at a later date.

Director Keheley pointed out this is for 2010, and Director Maruthur commented this resolution relates to extending the agreement, which she opposes. She noted this is a five-year agreement and suggested giving another firm a chance to possibly submit a better price or look to the State.

City Attorney Brian Albright asked if her motion is to table this item for consideration in January 2011. Director Maruthur said that is correct; and during that time, the City can be looking into what else is available.

Director Keheley asked if this is for the 2010 audit not going forward, and Director Maruthur said that is correct. She added she does not want to vote tonight to extend the agreement for another five years. City Manager Lance Hudnell advised that

Board of Directors Meeting 5 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. it is not extending it for another five years. He explained that the Board renews a five-year contract, and it is each year; and this is renewing for the 2010 audit. Director Maruthur said that she does not want to extend the contract.

There being no second to table the resolution, Mayor Bush declared the motion died for lack of a second.

Mayor Bush then called for a vote on the motion to approve the Consent Agenda; and upon roll call, the following voted “aye”: Directors Jones, Keheley, McCabe, Ramick, Daniel, and Bush, total 6. Voting “no”: Director Maruthur; motion carried.

Director McCabe pointed out this is an extension for only one year, and it will be for 2010 audit. He pointed out for the City to get bids, which would be for one year, would be difficult getting the audit done with a new firm; and that is why he approved the current CPA to do the 2010 audit. He pointed out if the City later has a reason to change, it can do that within a more appropriate time frame.

Director Keheley asked for clarification from City Manager Lance Hudnell, who explained that the City currently has an agreement with Jordan, Woosley, Crone and Keaton that was bid in 2007 to perform the 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 audits; but the Board has to extend that each year. He commented while it is a five-year contract, it still has to be renewed each year; therefore, this is the renewal for the 2010 audit. He noted should the Board desire to go to some other method of audit for the 2011 year, that could be considered in the first of the year. However, he did not believe the City would be able to get anyone at this late date to do the 2010 audit because they like to start working on that in January of this year. He said if the Board wanted to move in a different direction for 2011, that should be discussed early next year in order to get the bid out and be ready to go by this time next year.

Director Maruthur commented this has been brought to the public’s attention, and the City had changed firms in the past. City Manager Lance Hudnell explained that the Board can change firms, but it is in the middle of this current cycle. He said if nothing happens, the City will rebid after the 2011 audit. However, if the Board chooses to do something in mid-term, it has that right and can do that as well.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

28 Proposed Ordinance No. O-10-45

Board of Directors Meeting 6 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m.

An ordinance entitled, “AN ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE ELECTRONIC RECORD KEEPING BY OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF PAWN SHOPS, PAWN BROKERS, AND DEALERS IN SECONDHAND GOODS DOING BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF HOT SPRINGS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES,” was taken from the agenda for consideration.

A motion was made by Director Keheley, duly seconded by Director Ramick, that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be read for the first time by title only; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. The ordinance was then read for the first time by title only; and upon the question “Shall the ordinance be passed as read?” and upon motion of Director Keheley, duly seconded by Director Ramick, that the ordinance be passed as read.

Upon discussion, Acting Police Chief Mike McCormick, explained this ordinance is broken down into two parts; and the first part deals directly with pawn shops. He said under state law, pawn shops are already regulated on which information they must supply to local law enforcement agency, and the only thing the City is requesting from the local pawn shops is that they submit their information electronically versus the way they do it now with actual pawn tickets. The second part of this ordinance refers to the secondhand good dealers, and there is no state law that requires secondhand good dealers to report anything to the Police Department. However, there has been an ordinance in effect for 103 years where it requires them to submit the same tickets that the pawn dealers submit which they purchase used items. Regarding secondhand goods stores, this ordinance limits what they actually have to report electronically to the Police Department to electronic goods, hand tools, firearms, precious metals and precious stones and only if the value is $50 or more. He added the major changes on the pawn dealers and the dealers in secondhand goods would be submission of the information electronically to a company called LeadsOnline. He said it excludes regularly schedule auctions and religious institutions where focus is not toward nonprofits.

Director Daniel said there are a few of the pawn shop dealers who do not own a computer, and he said at a recent meeting that he or the police officers would work with them. Acting Police Chief Mike McCormick advised there is a legitimate case where an individual does not have the ability or the right equipment to enter the information into the computer and send it to LeadsOnline; and he and his officers would be willing to work with any organization in town that cannot do that. He said they would require

Board of Directors Meeting 7 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. them to fill out something similar to the current pawn shop ticket and deliver it to the Police Department. At the present time, they have been picking them up from the shops; but in the future, they would have to bring it to the Police Department. Then the officers would enter it into the system on their behalf. He stressed that is not something he would encourage, but that is something the police are willing to do to get the information into the system.

Mr. Tim Collier, 1145 Marion Anderson Road, president of the Arkansas Pawnbrokers Association and serves on the National Pawnbrokers Association Board of Directors, commended the Board, the Police Department, and City Attorney Brian Albright for including gold buyers, secondhand dealers, and antique dealers in this ordinance. He said the major issue he has with electronic reporting of pawns and purchases is the protection of customer data. He mentioned there are federal laws that protect a person’s privacy. He stated there is no way of knowing what is being done with that data once it leaves their shop. However, as long as the system that is being put in place is used as it is designed, it is a tremendous asset in assisting law enforcement in solving property crimes. He mentioned there are actually over 80 law enforcement agencies in the State that are doing electronic data transfers or searching electronic data to solve property crimes through LeadsOnline system. He stated as far as secondhand dealers and gold buyers being included in the ordinance, it levels the playing field and takes away another avenue for criminals to have an opportunity to dispose of stolen property. He noted secondhand dealers and antique dealers are already included in state reporting requirements in a number of states across the country, not just in Arkansas. He said it is logical to include all of these types of businesses in an ordinance such as this in order to keep merchandise, especially if merchandise comes in directly off the street. Regarding the gold-buying business and their reporting, he mentioned there is conversation about drafting a statewide reporting requirement that would include gold buyers at the General Assembly in January. He encouraged the Board to stay in contact with Representative Vines and Senator Sample as the session begins because there could be a statewide law passed that would override whatever the Board might do.

Mr. Morse Gist, attorney, 225 Woodbine, said he has been asked by several local pawnbrokers to speak on this issue. He noted that pawnbrokers are already regulated under state law, and the ordinance refers to A.C.A. §12-12-103. He pointed out in Subsection 3, it states that “pawn shops, pawnbrokers, and customers shall not be required to incur any costs or increased fees as a result of the city or county collecting and processing records required by this section electronically.” He stated in

Board of Directors Meeting 8 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. this statute, the Board has already run afoul of the Arkansas Statute that prohibits the City from passing an ordinance that would cause the pawnbrokers or dealers to incur any costs. He commented that might not affect the gold buyers and the secondhand shops, but it will definitely affect the pawnbrokers because any who do not have a computer or any kind of electronic processing system in their business are going to have to incur costs to abide by this ordinance. He said he believes the Chief’s assertion that he is going to try to work with the pawnbrokers who do not have computerized record keeping is going to cause them to incur costs. He commented that the ordinance, as it is written, violates, in his opinion, State Statute §12-12-103. He said he believes the ordinance is also over-broad by just saying secondhand shops and does not specifically say flea markets, gold buyers, jewelry stores, itinerant businesses that come through town and put a full-page ad in the newspaper, or auction houses. He stated that the ordinance needs to be reworked to a point that abides by the state statute and properly identifies and covers all of the businesses that the City wants to cover by having this computerized system.

Director Maruthur said that she agreed; and the way the ordinance is written, it says one thing in the title but varies in the ordinance. She pointed out it does not cover yard sales. She mentioned she has received several calls today from antique dealers, and they were not necessarily opposed to what the City is trying to do, but they were opposed to the way this is written; and there is not clarity to this ordinance. She stressed that it does not define enough things, and the ordinance needs to be written properly should it ever be challenged in court.

Mr. George Pritchett, 210 Carl Drive, encouraged the Board to adopt this ordinance, pointing out that LeadsOnline does not prevent people from breaking into a person’s home; but it might be a deterrent and will hopefully help citizens get back their property. He stated it is just one more tool for the Police Department and is going to add a very nominal amount of work to anybody who is in business. He said there are very few people in business today who do not have a computerized system, but they can buy a program where they can scan business cards; and it will sort them. Also, they can take a pawn ticket, which can be in a format that can be scanned; and this information would be readily available with virtually no cost. He encouraged the Board to do this and stated that in the future, it is going to be for the betterment of the community and will add a nominal amount of work to the pawnbrokers and pawn shops. However, it is a tool for the police and will protect the City and citizens from losing some of their property. He mentioned it only works if citizens record their serial numbers, descriptions, and have pictures.

Board of Directors Meeting 9 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m.

Ms. Barbara Spindler, 640 Quapaw, said she is part of the Hot Springs Antique Dealers Association, and she agrees with Mr. Pritchett.

Mr. Dragan Vicintic, 3617 Central, voiced his opposition to the ordinance due to economic hardship and stated implementing this ordinance would incur several expenditures. He said the current computer system does not have the hardware capability nor the software to implement the LeadsOnLine Reporting Program; and they would have to purchase hardware, software, and monthly Internet services to be in compliance. He said the State Statute on pawnshop records A.C.A.§12-12-103, Section E, Subsection 3, clearly states that pawn shops, pawnbrokers and pawn customers shall not be required to incur any costs or incur fees as a result of the city or county collecting and processing records required by this section electronically. He also opposed it because of discrimination of pawnbrokers and fairness and stated the State Statute calls this section Pawn Shop Records, and LeadsOnline calls it Pawnbroker Database; the ordinance on the table defines it as pawnshop, pawnbroker or dealer of second-hand goods. He mentioned the proposal tonight does not list any of the secondary businesses that perform sideline business as do current pawnshops that have a parallel marketing plan but are presently not regulated in anyway. He added pawnshops are regulated with their current reporting systems in place; and if this ordinance does not individually list and enforce everyone involved, it will send customers to unregulated entities. He said the following entities should be mandatory listings: antique stores, auction, gaming exchange stores, gold and silver and platinum buyers, flea markets, jewelry stores, salvage yards, scrap metal recyclers, tire shops, and used appliance stores. He noted the ordinance being proposed provides investigative services for agencies beyond Hot Springs and does nothing for the underlying issue of crime reduction.

Ms. Dianne Silverman, 1404 Cedar Glades Road, chairman of the Garland County Tea Party, stated several members of the Garland County Tea Party attended a meeting where LeadsOnline representatives spoke and explained some misconceptions. She noted the Garland County Tea Party has four guidelines used to hold government accountable (1) is it constitutional? (2) does it appear to increase or decrease the size of government or government’s reach or government’s intrusion? (3) will it increase taxes or fees on anybody? and (4) does it conform to overall good management practices? She said she did not know how the City would know if this promotes good government practices unless there is some way of keeping a record of what it actually accomplishes if it is enacted. She noted there are about 200 people in Garland County who are responsible for 90 percent of the property crimes, and this kind

Board of Directors Meeting 10 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. of reporting is after the fact. Of the 200 people doing most of the property crimes, at least 80 percent of those crimes are related to drug and alcohol addiction. She said she is concerned that people might think this particular LeadsOnline proposition may be doing something to reduce crime, and she does not think there will be any way of proving that will happen because of this. She urged the Board not to take the focus off of funding the expansion of alternative treatment programs (private ones) that actually can rehab people.

Mr. Bob Driggers, #3 Stonegate, stated that irrespective of the fact that there have been people on the front page of the newspaper recently downplaying the crime problem in Hot Springs, there is a crime problem in Hot Springs. He recommended that the Board consider this as simply another tool given to the Police Department to fight crime. He said that most towns he is familiar with have a LeadsOnline; and if there is certain information in a database and someone gets something stolen, he could access a database and find the stolen property or that was pawned as opposed to stacks of pawn tickets from 20 or 30 pawn shops. He stressed it is a valuable tool and encouraged the Board to consider this as a tool to help fight crime.

Mr. Mark Bratton, 216 Stella, said he is opposed to the LeadsOnline and agrees with Mr. Gist and Mr. Vicentic. He stated he went into the pawn business 5½ years ago and bought his software, which was over $5,000 for CD disc and the cost of his computers. He commented everything went well for 4½ years and then lighting got his surveillance system and his computer but had his computer rebuilt. He said he has always complied with the Police but trying to force him to do something he does not believe in, he does not believe is right.

Mr. Brian White, 360 Lakeland Drive, said he supports this ordinance and believes this is an essential law enforcement tool. He noted a comment was made about the time spent recovering stolen property and not fighting crime but spoke of an incident in which some of his stolen property led to a drug and theft ring, which was broken up. He commented Mr. Gist mentioned the state statute not having any additional fees; and if that is the case, he questioned if the City could supply the pawnbrokers who do not have that through surplus equipment. He said it seems as though the cost would be minimal as opposed to not enacting this ordinance based on this legislation, and he is in favor of this ordinance.

Director Maruthur said that she received calls from antique dealers, who were concerned about Section 1, which sets out definitions that would specify secondhand goods, any person, yard sales, charitable institutions, internet versus going to

Board of Directors Meeting 11 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. secondhand dealers to buy, and they want it written in the ordinance. She mentioned that she attended the LeadsOnline presentation, and it is an invaluable because people do not just steal, but some are involved in other crimes. She said the Board needs to make sure the ordinance that is approved is written with no questions about vagueness. She stated it takes 90 days to go into effect, and there is no reason why this cannot be tabled and make sure everything is covered.

Director Keheley commended Acting Chief of Police Mike McCormick for his work on this ordinance and believes he has made an effort to reach consensus. She said he held a public meeting, met with the antique dealers, and has been very open in the process in answering questions. She pointed out the recent article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette highlighted the success in Saline County, and this leads her to believe Hot Springs can achieve some good results and fight crime. She stressed it is an important tool for public safety and believes the citizens want this and need it.

Director McCabe mentioned about 15 years ago, his home was burglarized. He noted the first line of defense is a person’s home and securing it; and the second line of defense is the pawn shop owner, even though it is not their responsibility. He pointed out the pawn shop owner is aware that things do not match up all the time. He said that he was appreciative of Monty from Monty’s Pawn Shop for his effort in helping retrieve some of his items. He commented that he is sensitive to store owners, such as Monty, and others who may not have the computer skills or interest into that level of technology. However, they do a great job with their awareness of what does not appear right. He said he believes this is a good program, but it is just one component of it. As far as the comments regarding the state statute, he asked City Attorney Brian Albright for clarification.

City Attorney Brian Albright explained it is important to understand what kind of information is required to be inputted, and it is not just the description of an item but is a description of who brought an item in. He said they are supposed to have a detailed record of each and every transaction, including the identification displayed by the person, from whom the property was received, the name, address, race, sex, height, weight, and date of birth of the person from whom the property was received, the drivers’ license number, personal identification number issued, a number from some other form of photographic identification of the person from whom the property was received, and a description of the item that was pawned, including but not limited to identification numbers or serial numbers. He added it is not just the description of the item but is a description of the person; therefore, it can be used as a deterrent for people who are trying to pawn stolen goods because they know their identity will be

Board of Directors Meeting 12 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. revealed and a photo will be taken. With respect to the cost associated with the electronic uploading, he stated the section of the statute that Mr. Gist was referring to begins in Subsection e, Paragraph 1, which states that “any city or county may require by ordinance that pawnshops and pawnbrokers (a) submit the records required by this section in a designated electronic format,” which is what is proposed tonight, “and to daily upload that data to a centralized secure tracking system to be chosen by the city or county.” He advised the Chief is identifying LeadsOnline as his mode of transporting that information. He stated the electronic records submitted under this subsection shall be used for the sole purpose of investigating crimes and involving property. With respect to the cost, it says under subsection e, paragraph 3, that “pawnshops, pawnbrokers, or pawn customers shall not be required to incur any costs or increased fees as a result of the city or county collecting and processing the records required by this section electronically.” He pointed out that issue is attempting to be addressed by Acting Chief of Police Mike McCormick’s agreeability to input this information manually at the Police Department, and it is better than what they have now. He added they now are having to go through the cards anyway. He stated 80 percent of the people are doing this electronically on their own because it is easier for them to do it at their place of business. He mentioned they have the computer sophistication in order to be able to do it, and that is helping out the police giving them the tool they need to fight this crime; if they are having to do 20 percent of it instead of 100 percent of it, that is lightening their load.

Director Maruthur said under Section 1, the antique dealers who called had concerns about the writing of the ordinance and fine tuning it. She stressed there is not a definition section of everything that it covers, and she is concerned with the way it is written.

City Attorney Brian Albright said he is trying to understand what they need to be clarified. He explained a dealer of secondhand goods shall mean “any person, partnership, firm or corporation whose business includes selling, buying or receiving electronic goods, firearms, hand tools, precious metals or precious stones.”

Director Maruthur questioned a yard sale, and City Attorney Brian Albright advised that is a person whose business includes selling, buying or receiving those types of items. Director Maruthur asked if a person doing a yard sale would be a dealer of secondhand goods, and City Attorney Brian Albright explained that selling one’s own personal property at a yard sale, garage sale, or estate sale is not dealing in a business transaction but is selling one’s own personal property.

Board of Directors Meeting 13 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. Director Maruthur said that is what they wanted to see in the ordinance and wanted to see things defined, but they are not in the ordinance.

Director McCabe said he believes it is clear because there are numerous words in the ordinance that define person, partnership, firm or corporation.

Director Keheley said she believes the Police Chief could clarify nonprofits, and Acting Chief of Police Mike McCormick said that their focus is not on nonprofit organizations doing charitable goods.

Director Maruthur said that “religion” needs to be taken out and add “charitable.” City Attorney Brian Albright said a question was asked regarding Habitat for Humanity Re-Stor, where people are able to donate goods and they sell it in an effort to help fund their projects. He questioned if that type of business would be targeted by this ordinance, and Acting Chief of Police Mike McCormick responded that it would not. He said he would not have an issue with changing religious institutions to nonprofit institutions.

Director Maruthur questioned yard sales and reported that the people who called her are in another state buying, and they are a high-end antique shop and fall into a different category than people who buy online. She pointed out there is no provision for what they bring back, and it is not electronics but is an antique shop; and they wanted to see that written in the ordinance.

Acting Chief of Police Mike McCormick said there is no way to cover every single issue. He said the ordinance has been narrowed down to where it addresses the issues and items that are stolen the most. As far as yard sales, he said he is not interested in yard sales; and this ordinance is not focused toward yard sales.

Director Maruthur pointed out that was discussed at the meeting in the training room that some people put some things in a yard sale that were legitimate and then other things were found. She said it is not in this ordinance, and that was brought up by people who have called her. She noted that people have been doing a lot of research on this; and they want to make sure if it is passed tonight, that it covers everything, such as yard sales, and antique shops.

City Attorney Brian Albright explained if an antique shop is also a business and includes selling, buying, or receiving electronic goods, firearms, hand tools, precious metals or precious stones, they are covered. If their business is lamps, chaise

Board of Directors Meeting 14 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. lounges, etc., then it would not be; but if they engage in the buying, selling, and receiving of electronic goods, firearms, hand tools, precious metals or precious stones, then they would be.

At this time, Director Ramick called for the question, which was seconded by Director Keheley.

Mayor Bush then called for a vote on the motion to adopt; and upon roll call, the following voted “aye:” Directors Jones, Keheley, McCabe, Ramick, Daniel, and Bush, total 6. Director Maruthur said that she is casting a “no” vote as written; motion carried. Whereupon the ordinance was declared passed.

NEW BUSINESS

29 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-264

A resolution entitled, “A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WAIVER OF A NEW SIDEWALK ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF CENTRAL AVENUE,” was taken from the agenda and read by title only. (Appeal)

A motion was made by Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Ramick, that the resolution be adopted as read.

Upon discussion, Ms. Kathy Sellman, Planning and Development Director, advised this is an appeal of a project that was approved by the Planning Commission sometime ago. She noted the notice has been provided as required by the Hot Springs Code. The site plan in question was approved with conditions by the Planning Commission on July 10, 2008, and demonstrates a sidewalk approximately 610 linear feet along Central Avenue. Mr. Greg Orr is the applicant and property owner, and he has made application to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals for a waiver from the Hot Springs Code requirement to amend the approved development plan by deleting the sidewalk along Central Avenue. She stated the Board of Adjustment and Appeals heard this item at their meeting on October 27, and on a motion to approve the request to waive the sidewalk, the vote was two in favor, one against, one abstained, and one member was absent. Three votes are required for approval so the motion failed, which

Board of Directors Meeting 15 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in effect was a denial. As a result of failure to get an approval, this is coming to the Board on appeal. She advised the Board of Adjustments and Appeals evaluated the relationship of the required improvement to the project, and the record of their decision does not demonstrate that a consensus was reached. Staff findings to the BAA are being brought forward to the Board tonight, and they are as follows: (1) the development of a new auto dealership does not create a significant need for a public, pedestrian sidewalk along Central Avenue above what need might currently exist; (2) a logical relationship has not been identified between the need for sidewalks along Central Avenue and the specific construction project proposed; and (3) requiring this commercial building permit to install sidewalks would be a public improvement unrelated to the project zone impact. She stated since there is no determined impact, there can be no requirement that the impact be mitigated and therefore, applying this code requirement to the development may not be appropriate. She advised the recommendation is that the Board grant this appeal by approving the proposed resolution amending the site plan SPA 08-01-06.

Director Ramick commented that around July 2008, the architects submitted a site plan and included sidewalks. Therefore, all parties agreed to it at that time; and the developer approved it. He said at some point, the Orr’s decided they did not want to build a sidewalk, but they agreed to it originally and then said they did not want to build a sidewalk and wanted to amend the plan. He pointed out the City helped them out on the Higdon Ferry side when that appeal was granted. He stated that every car dealer on Central has a sidewalk in front of it.

Mr. Matthew Breckenridge, with B&F Engineering, 928 Airport Road, said that he is present to answer any questions.

Director McCabe questioned the challenges; and Mr. Breckenridge advised that the challenges were when they originally developed the site, they had to also submit plans to the Highway Department. Under the original development plan that was sent to the Highway Department, the road was not supposed to be widened. However, when they re-did the asphalt, they widened the highway. He said a jog was made in the sidewalk to accommodate that. Also, he pointed out there is a very steep bank that has to be taken into account for providing a new sidewalk; however, the sidewalk will terminate in a slope that will not be conducive to continuing a sidewalk at a later date.

Director Ramick asked if the car wash was still planned on the north end, and Mr. Breckenridge said that it was.

Board of Directors Meeting 16 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. Director McCabe questioned if it is on the north side, and Mr. Breckenridge advised that it is on the north side, and that adjacent property is owned by the Highway Department up to the south Higdon Ferry Road, and the Highway Department has not issued any type of plans wanting to continue that sidewalk at this time.

Director Daniel questioned when they widened the road, and Mr. Breckenridge advised that they put up the existing barrier; but they actually moved it toward the site a little bit and extended out the asphalt. He mentioned that recently when they built the road, they came back and relayed the asphalt over on top of the highway; and when they did that, they actually made a wider shoulder, approximately two or three feet.

Director Maruthur pointed out the City has made a commitment for developers to do sidewalks, and she would like to see continuity in that. She stressed that people need places to walk, and she is aware that ADA is not an issue. However, there are people in wheelchairs on that highway, as well as on the streets in the City because of the lack of sidewalks. Regardless of what is happening here, she said it is the City’s duty to continue the progress that has been made; and she supports the sidewalk. She said there has been discussion regarding amendments to the Sidewalk Ordinance, but she is not in favor of it. She pointed out the City is trying to become a green city and promote good health and exercise; and the City needs to make provisions. She stressed if people develop, they should have a sidewalk. Mr. Breckenridge said that he agreed, and he believes having a way to exercise and continuity through the city looks cleaner, and it is better for pedestrian traffic. However, when they design, they take ADA into mind. He asked if the Board could picture walking on the sidewalk and on the left hand side is a steep bank going up to the highway; and looking down to the right is a steep bank going down to a retaining wall with a fence on top to protect people from falling over the wall. He stated when pedestrians get to the end of the sidewalk, it is a steep 2:1 slope, and the sidewalk terminates so the pedestrian will have to turn around and walk back 610 feet to get back up to the highway. He said that is the reason they are asking for the variance.

City Attorney Brian Albright asked if that is the way the site plan was laid out to the Planning Department when they initially approved it or have they changed it since it was initially approved. Mr. Breckenridge replied the only change they did was when the highway widened, they put a little jog in it.

Director Ramick asked if the engineers, architect and the owner all agreed to it as they proposed in 2008, and Mr. Breckenridge said that they did.

Board of Directors Meeting 17 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. Director McCabe commented there were comments at the agenda meeting, and it is in the findings that there are three issues that apparently would need to be addressed: (a) the development of a new auto dealership does not, in and of itself, create significant need for public pedestrian sidewalk along Central Avenue above what need might currently exist; (b) a logical relationship has not been identified between the need for sidewalks along Central Avenue and the specific construction project proposed; and (c) requiring this commercial building permit to install sidewalks would be a public improvement unrelated to the project’s own impact. He commented that his own personal experience was that a car dealership does create a significant need for a sidewalk for not only those individuals shopping for cars but also those having their cars serviced. He added customers are likely to walk to nearby businesses when their cars are being serviced

Director Daniel said that he is looking at the new Higdon Ferry Road project and has sidewalks on both sides and will have from Central Avenue to the racetrack when it is finished. If that is what the Highway Department is doing and who is doing that sidewalk, he believes when these plans were submitted, it was the intent; and the Highway Department probably knew and signed off on it. Mr. Breckenridge replied that they had to submit the plans to the Highway Department.

Director Keheley stated that the City owes it to the pedestrians and not everyone drives a car. She said she sees many people throughout the City walking on the sidewalks and believes they are an asset. She noted that the bus routes require a drop-off to a sidewalk, and she supports keeping the sidewalks. City Attorney Brian Albright explained that a “yes” vote grants the appeal for a variance not to build a sidewalk.

Mayor Bush then called for a vote on the motion to approve the resolution; and upon roll call, the following voted “no”: Directors Maruthur, Jones, Keheley, McCabe, Ramick, Daniel, and Bush, total 7; motion unanimously failed. Whereupon the resolution was declared failed.

30 Proposed Ordinance No. O-10-54

An ordinance entitled, “AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING SOUTHPARK PLACE WITHIN THE FOREST VIEW II, PHASE I SUBDIVISION, AS A PUBLIC STREET,” was taken from the agenda for consideration.

Board of Directors Meeting 18 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. A motion was made by Director Ramick, duly seconded by Director Maruthur, that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be read for the first time by title only; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. The ordinance was then read for the first time by title only; and upon the question “Shall the ordinance be passed as read?” and upon motion of Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Daniel, that the ordinance be passed as read

Upon discussion, Mr. Steve Mallett, Deputy City Manager for Public Works and Utilities, advised this is a request from the Forest View II, Phase I, Property Owners Association, regarding acceptance of Southpark Place. He explained they are in a situation where these streets are privately maintained by the Property Owners Association and would like to dedicate these to the City. He noted the City has put together a proposal that would accept a check in the amount of $1,650 from the POA for materials to patch some roadway. He noted this road is not in need of major repairs or resurfacing, but there are some minor repairs that would have to be made. He advised the proposal before the Board is for $1,650 to come from the POA for materials and about $2, 259 worth of labor and equipment according to the City’s current labor and equipment rates, which would be provided and furnished by the City. He stated this would then accept the street into perpetual maintenance and also the street lights, which is estimated to be about $50 a month addition to the current street light electrical bill. He explained this would bring this street into the City’s system once it is repaired, and those repairs will likely occur in 2011 but will not be done until that amount of money is placed with the City if the proposal as written is accepted.

Director Keheley questioned if the storm drainage is included, and Mr. Mallett replied that it is not. He added anything that falls within the right-of-way would be included; therefore, if there were any ditches or drain structures that fell within that right-of-way, they would be just as the City would do any other. However, anything that runs away from the street across private property would still remain the responsibility of the private property owner or the POA.

Director McCabe asked if the drainage was appropriate now within the area the City is going to accept, and Mr. Mallett said that it was. He added he did not see anything in the immediate vicinity of the roadway within the right-of-way that needed to be addressed.

Director Maruthur commented this does not mean the City is going to change the order of the paving, and Mr. Mallett stated that was correct. He noted this would be added to the database; and based on the condition that the street will be in, it will fall

Board of Directors Meeting 19 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. extremely low on the City’s priority plan. However, it will be considered along with all the other city streets for future paving but would be very low on the priority list. Director Maruthur pointed out as he stated at the agenda meeting, if there is a sink hole, the City would repair it at the City’s cost. Mr. Mallett replied that is correct.

Director McCabe said with the exception of the $1,650, the City is going to repair the street with that immediately once the money is received, and Mr. Mallett replied that is correct. He said he is assuming it will be sometime after the first of the year and would happen immediately upon receipt of the money.

City Manager Lance Hudnell clarified this is not a repaving but only repairing some minor problems that are there with the $1,650.

Mayor Bush then called for a vote on the motion to adopt; and upon roll call, the following voted “aye”: Directors Maruthur, Jones, Keheley, McCabe, Ramick, Daniel, and Bush, total 7; motion unanimously carried. Whereupon the ordinance was declared passed.

At this time, the Property Owners Association presented the City with a check for $1,650 for the street repairs.

31 Proposed Ordinance No. O-10-55

An ordinance entitled, “AN ORDINANCE WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR CERTAIN ITEMS RELATED TO WATER METER REPLACEMENT WITH UTILITY METERING SOLUTIONS,” was taken from the agenda for consideration.

A motion was made by Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Keheley, that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be read for the first time by title only; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. The ordinance was then read for the first time by title only; and upon the question “Shall the ordinance be passed as read?” and upon motion of Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Maruthur, that the ordinance be passed as read.

Upon discussion, Mr. Steve Mallett, Deputy City Manager for Public Works and Utilities, advised that on May 4, 2010, the Board waived competitive bidding for necessary work related to replacement of meter boxes and/or lids and other minor

Board of Directors Meeting 20 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. meter modifications that may be necessary in conjunction with the current effort to replace all water meters in the system. At that time, staff asked for a contract amount of $100,000 to be used for those itemized small repairs as needed in the system. It was also mentioned if additional money were needed to finish the project, staff would return to the Board and ask for an additional amount. He advised that the $400,000 has been spent, and staff is asking for an additional $100,000 to complete the project since there are some meters remaining. He noted that the majority of the meters that are left are ones that require a little more work than the others. He said he does not anticipate spending the entire $100,000; and any money that is not spent will stay in the fund.

Mayor Bush then called for a vote on the motion to adopt; and upon roll call, the following voted “aye”: Directors Maruthur, Jones, Keheley, McCabe, Ramick, Daniel, and Bush, total 7; motion unanimously carried. Whereupon the ordinance was declared passed.

32 Proposed Ordinance No. O-10-56

An ordinance entitled, “AN ORDINANCE LEVYING A SUPPLEMENTAL ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 3 OF THE CITY OF HOT SPRINGS, ARKANSAS, FOR 2011,” was taken from the agenda for consideration.

A motion was made by Director Daniel, duly seconded by Director McCabe, that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be read for the first time by title only; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. The ordinance was then read for the first time by title only; and upon the question “Shall the ordinance be passed as read?” and upon motion of Director Daniel, duly seconded by Director Ramick, that the ordinance be passed as read; and upon roll call, the following voted “aye”: Directors Maruthur, Jones, Keheley, McCabe, Ramick, Daniel, and Bush, total 7; motion unanimously carried. Whereupon the ordinance was declared passed.

OTHER BUSINESS

Board of Directors Meeting 21 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. 33 Board of Directors Items for Discussion

Director Jones said that she was very riding on the Board’s float in the Christmas Parade.

Director Daniel mentioned that the Oaklawn Rotary Club sponsors the Christmas Parade and spent many hours putting it together and did an outstanding job for about the fifth year.

34 City Manager’s Report

City Manager Lance Hudnell gave the following report:

1. He thanked those involved with the Christmas Parade and thanked Director Jones, Director Keheley, and Director McCabe, who rode on the Board’s float. He also commended Mr. Dan Bugg, Animal Services Director, and his staff for the development of the float.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

35 Consider the Annual Evaluation of the City Attorney.

36 Consider the Annual Evaluation of the City Manager.

A motion was made by Director Daniel, duly seconded by Director Ramick, to adjourn into executive session to consider the annual evaluations of the City Attorney and the City Manager; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. The Board adjourned into executive session at 8:25 p.m.

RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

37 Consider Any Action Required as a Result of the Executive Session.

The Board reconvened into open session at 9:20 p.m.

Board of Directors Meeting 22 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Bush reported that the Board evaluated the City Attorney and the City Manager, and they were both given a unanimous outstanding performance for 2010. However, there were no increases or added benefits.

38 ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 9:22 p.m., to meet again on Tuesday, December 21, 2010, at 7:00 p.m.

ATTEST: ______APPROVED:______Lance Spicer, City Clerk Mike Bush, Mayor

Board of Directors Meeting 23 December 7, 2010 at 7:00 p.m.