09-18-01i
K
MINUTES
Board of Directors Room
City Hall - 500 W. Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas
September 18, 2001
6:00 P.M.
The Board of Directors of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas met in regular session
with Vice Mayor Brad Cazort presiding. The roll was called by City Clerk Nancy Wood,
with the following Directors present: Directors Hinton, Stewart, Graves, Kumpuris,
Adcock, Keck, Wyrick, Director Lichty, Vice Mayor Cazort, Mayor Dailey. Director
Pugh was absent.
With a quorum present, Vice Mayor Cazort declared the Board of Directors in
session and the proceedings of the meeting are recorded as follows.
The Invocation was given by Director Wyrick, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
ADDITIONS
Presentation and Proclamtion: Arkansas Prostrate Cancer Foundation — Becky
Kossover
M -1. ORDINANCE NO. 18,570 - Dispensing with the requirement of competitive
bidding and authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with the University of
Arkansas at Little Rock for $10,000 to prepare an empowerment zone application and a
renewable community program application to include North Little Rock and Pulaski
County, Arkansas, each entity bearing one -third of the cost for a total of $30,000; and for
other purposes.
Revisions:
3. ORDINANCE NO. 18,560 - To amend the 2001 Budget Ordinance to create a
Special Project Account for ADA Curb Ramp Construction; to authorize the transfer of
funds into the account; to declare an emergency; and for other purposes. Note: Item was
listed as Approval on the agenda, but should be an Ordinance.
4. Advertising and Promotion Commission to enter into a lease agreement with BG
Excelsior Limited Partnership for parking spaces in the Robinson Center Parking Deck;
and for other purposes. (Title change.) A motion was made by Director Adcock to add
M -1 and Item 3 to the grouped items, and Item 4 on consent, as listed. By unanimous
voice vote of the board members present, the modifications were made.
An ordinance was added at the request of Mr. Tom Carpenter. Director Keck made the
motion to add this item to the agenda. Vice mayor Cazort seconded the motion, and by
unanimous voice vote of the board members present, the item was added to the agenda.
M -2. ORDINANCE NO. 18,569 — To amend and repeal provisions of the Little Rock
Code of Ordinances, which govern use of City streets and rights of way for various
purposes including parades, and residential picketing; to declare an emergency and for
other purposes.
Mayor Dailey invited Mr. Christian Nelson, with Lights Out Productions to begin his
presentation. Mr. Nelson stated he was here to commend the board on choosing Butch
Stone over the Riverfront Amphitheatre. He said he had helped him tremendously with
the "dos and don'ts" and his experience. The next Presentation and Proclamation: was
made by Ms. Becky Kossover, Arkansas Prostrate Cancer Foundation. The proclamation
was read by Mayor Dailey, proclaiming September 2001, as Prostate Cancer Awareness
Month. Ms. Kossover stated her presentation was just to say "thank you ", to mayors
across the country in proclaiming September as Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. She
i
said this helps fulfill their Mission, which was to raise the awareness to Arkansas of this
deadly disease.
1. RESOLUTION NO. 11,124 - Authorizing and directing the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute a 30 year renewal beginning in 2019 to a lease agreement dated June 11, 1959
between the City of Little Rock and the East Roosevelt Shopping Center LLC,
assignees of prior lessee East 26th Street Development Corporation; making certain
amendments thereto; consenting to the latest lease assignments; and for other purposes.
2. RESOLUTION NO. 11,125 - Authorizing an annual contract with various vendors
for the purchase of mineral aggregate for the Public Works Operations Street
Department.
4. RESOLUTION NO. 11,126 - To accept the recommendation of the Little Rock
Advertising and Promotion Commission to enter into a lease agreement with BG
Excelsior Limited Partnership for parking spaces in the Robinson Center Parking Deck;
and for other purposes.
The consent agenda was read. (Items 1,2,4) Director Hinton made a motion to adopt the
consent agenda. Director Stewart seconded the motion, and by unanimous voice vote of
the members present, the consent agenda was adopted.
The next consideration was Grouped Items: Items 5 -9 and Item M -1
5. ORDINANCE NO. 18,561 - LU01 -19 -05 - To amend the Land Use Plan (16,222) in
the Chenal Planning District from Commercial, Low Density Residential, Public
Institutional, and Single Family to Single Family, Neighborhood Commercial and Office;
and for other purposes. (Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent.) Staff
recommends approval.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 18,562 - MSPO1 -01 - To amend the Master Street Plan (15,519)
in the Chenal Planning District from Commercial, Low Density Residential, Public
Institutional, and Single Family to Single Family, Neighborhood Commercial and Office;
and for other purposes. (Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent.) Staff
recommends approval.
7. ORDINANCE NO. 18,563 - Z- 4807 -E — To reclassify property located in the City of
Little Rock, Arkansas, ( Chenal Valley) amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of
Little Rock, Arkansas; and for other purposes. (Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1
absent.) Staff recommends approval.
8. ORDINANCE NO. 18,564 - Z- 4454 -A — Approving a Planned Zoning Development
and establishing a Planned Commercial District titled Miller — Short Form POD located
at 15122 Cantrell Road in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, amending the Official
Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock; and for other purposes. (Planning Commission:
10 yes, Ono, 1 absent.) Staff recommends approval.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 18,565 - To award a contract for a Domestic Violence Public
Awareness Campaign to Cranford Johnson Robinson Woods; to authorize the City
Manager to enter a contract for that campaign in the amount of $75,000; and for other
purposes.
M -1. ORDINANCE NO. 18,570 - Dispensing with the requirement of competitive
bidding and authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with the University of --
Arkansas at Little Rock for $10,000 to prepare an empowerment zone application and a
renewable community program application to include North Little Rock and Pulaski
County, Arkansas, each entity bearing one -third of the cost for a total of $30,000; and for
other purposes.
The ordinances were read the first time, the rules were suspended to provide for the
second and third readings by unanimous voice vote of the board members present. By
2
unanimous voice vote of the board members present the ordinances were adopted.
(Items 5 -11 and Item M -1.)
10. ORDINANCE NO. 18,566 - 2-6787 - Amending Chapter 31 of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, providing for a waiver of Master Street
Plan Sidewalk Construction for Delta Bank and Trust located at 11700 Cantrell Road.
Staff recommends denial. The ordinance was read the first time. Mr. Bob Turner, Public
Works Director gave a brief staff presentation. Mr. Turner said they were opposed to a
waiver (1) staff feels strongly there should be sidewalks on Cantrell on both sides, (2)
Southridge is the only access to about a seven hundred home neighborhood. (3) There
was some conflict regarding the neighborhood sign. Mr. Dickson Flake spoke on behalf
of SR Plaza, LLC, who was the developer of this property. He said this isn't a hardship
request, and have the sidewalk in the approved plans, and are familiar with the City
requirements and try to always follow them. He said at the zoning hearing where the
zoning classification was approved for this property, they committed to work closely with
the neighborhood association. The neighborhood association has requested this and are
filing the application at their request. He said he thought their principal concern, was the
corner itself, where there is the landscaped area in front of their sign. Mr. Paul
Caldwell, representing the Walton Heights, Candlewood Property Owners Association
spoke in favor of the waiver saying that they had been working with Mr. Flake , and were
here to concur with his opinion. He said the little triangle of land that is being discussed,
would be a sidewalk to nowhere, it starts nowhere and ends nowhere. He said their
concern is if the sidewalk goes in, it will dig up the grass that is there, and they would
tear up the irrigation system that has been there for twenty -six years, and basically did not
see a need for the sidewalk. Vice Mayor Cazort motioned for the rules to be suspended
and to place the ordinance on second reading, Director Keck seconded the motion, and
the rules were suspended by unanimous voice vote of the board members present and the
ordinance was read the second time. Director Adcock moved to suspend the rules and
place the ordinance on third and final reading. Vice mayor Cazort seconded the motion,
and by unanimous voice vote the rules were suspended and the ordinance was read the
third and final time. By unanimous voice vote of the board members present, the
ordinance was adopted.
3. ORDINANCE NO. 18,560 - To amend the 2001 Budget Ordinance to create a
Special project Account for ADA Curb Ramp Construction; to authorize the transfer of
funds into the account; to declare an emergency; and for other purposes.
11. ORDINANCE NO. 18,567 - Amending Chapter 31 of the Code of Ordinances of the
City of Little Rock, Arkansas, providing for deferral of Master Street Plan Sidewalk
Construction for Baseline and Doyle Springs Road. (2 "d Reading.) The ordinance was
read the second time. Director Adcock stated that Doyle Springs Road is one of the roads
that were in the 1987 -1988 Bond issues and was finally completed with sidewalks on one
side. It has a number of school children that walk up this side of the road. She asked the
board to vote against the deferral so the children would have the sidewalks, so the
children in her opinion could get to school much safer. Mr. Bob Turner, Public Works
Director stated that Doyle Springs Road has a sidewalk currently on the west side of the
road. He said the road goes north off of Baseline. On the east side of Doyle springs
Road there is no sidewalk through out its entire length at any point. On the west side the
sidewalk goes all the way, almost to the frontage road of I -30. On the east side of the
location where the Baseline Mini Storage is, its basically one property located off of
Baseline and there is a car wash between it and Baseline, and on the other side of it is a
barbershop. He said staff felt like that due to the rather low volume of traffic on Doyle
Springs, it was reasonable that the sidewalk on the west side of the street could carry the
pedestrian traffic and deliver them safely to baseline at which point they could cross. He
stated if a sidewalk were constructed on this location it would be relatively short, "start
nowhere and end nowhere." Mr. Turner said they were not in favor of a waiver, but
would be in favor of a deferral until something else on that side, in the general vicinity
took place. The applicant, Mr. Monroe Mills spoke to the board asking for the deferral.
He mentioned that some utilities may have to be relocated if sidewalks were put in, and
there are no other sidewalks on the side of the Mini Storage and this would be a financial
hardship on him to build the side walk. Director Wyrick stated that according to the
information the board received the cost is approximately $3200 to place the sidewalk
132
across the front of the property She asked Mr. Mills if he were suggesting that all the
utilities he had mentioned would have to be moved back to put in the sidewalk? Mr.
Mills stated "either that or the sidewalk would have to be on top of them ". He offered the
board some pictures of the property that were passed to the board. Mr. Turner stated that
he felt there was adequate space to put a sidewalk without having to relocate utilities, and
that was one reason he supported a deferral but not a waiver. The ordinance was read the
third time. A voice vote was taken. Director Adcock, Director Stewart and Director
Hinton voted no. Directors Lichty, Cazort, Keck, Wyrick, Kumpuris, Graves, and Mayor
Dailey voted yes. Director Pugh was absent. The ordinance was adopted, 7 yes and 3
no.
12. ORDINANCE NO. 18,568 - To adopt the Floodplain Management Plan for the
City of Little Rock, and for other matters. (Planning Commission: (Planning
Commission to vote 9- 6 -01.) Staff recommends approval. Director Adcock asked for an
explanation of how this would affect the Cloverdale Food Study. Mr. Turner stated that
the Public Works budget was amended, which required that Flood Study take place last
year. He said they are in the process now. He said they had just had some very
preliminary meetings on some of the results, but it was still in the air what the effect is.
He said the Floodplain Management plan would not help, hurt or hamper that study in
any way. He said what the Floodplain Management Plan basically does is to set out
policy, as much as anything else, in how to contra the building in the floodway, the
floodplain and encourages the city to use whatever means necessary to take properties out
of the floodway and floodplain. It is something that has been required of the City by
FEMA and the reason they have done this is that the City is a repetitive claim
community, and as a result they want a more formal floodplain management plan, which
has been developed with the assistance of the community and have had public hearings, it
has gone to the Planning Commission, and have received their support, and requests the
boards support of this. He said this will allow the City to apply for some non - disaster
emergency funds, or grants related to either acquisition of properties within the floodway
or to have a grant for construction that would reduce or mitigate flood damage on
existing property. Director Wyrick asked about some southwest communities that pay
flood insurance, such as Otter Creek, Stagecoach, West Baseline, and Cloverdale which
has been addressed, the Town and Country and Yorkwood Neighborhood associations
and asked if it covered those areas. Mr. Turner said the plan would cover those, they are
historically in the floodway and some in the floodplain. He said the Flood Insurance
rates would go up if the city does not pass a management plan, and hopefully if it were
passed the rates would go down. He said this program brings no money with it only the
ability to apply for grants. Director Adcock asked Mr. Turner to speak with her at a later
time on the Yorkwood study and what is going on with it. Mr. Don Darnell, stated he
attended one of the public hearings, and found it very informative and thought what was
interesting about this plan was one of the goals was natural resource protection. He said
the plan itself leads to better things in that federal grants could be applied for, and after
reviewing, thought it was positive for Little Rock, and asked the board to approve it.
The ordinance was read the first time, rules were suspended to provide for the seconded
and third readings of the ordinance by a unanimous voice vote of the board members
present. By unanimous voice vote of the board members present, the ordinance was
adopted.
The next item for consideration was Item M -2:
M -2. ORDINANCE NO. 18,569 — To amend and repeal provisions of the Little Rock
Code of Ordinances, which govern use of City streets and rights of way for various
purposes including parades, and residential picketing; to declare an emergency and for
other purposes. The ordinance was read the first time, rules were suspended to provide
for the second and third readings of the ordinance by a unanimous voice vote of the board
members present. Director Lichty asked for a brief explanation from the City Attorney,
Mr. Tom Carpenter as to what this ordinance achieves. Mr. Carpenter stated that a
couple of weeks ago the City Attorney's Office received a strange phone call from a
person claiming to be a fortune teller and that he was having troubles with the local
police department, he thought, and was about to be arrested. Mr. Carpenter stated he
started checking the law, and there were ordinances that are no longer constitutional. He
said while checking that they also found there is an ordinance that requires people who
pass out handbills in the park to be responsible for picking them up if people throw them
4
133
down, and that is not constitutional. He said he then looked at the City's parade permit
ordinance and questions about residential picketing, and found the parade permit
ordinance which has not been a problem to date, has some provision in it that are not
constitutional and essentially what they did was take a couple of model ordinances that
have been drafted by the International Municipal Lawyers Association, reviewed a
myriad of cases to see what could be done, and have simply adopted most of the model
language with some exceptions to deal with these two particular provisions. He stated
that on the parade ordinance itself, there were provisions, for example, in the Little Rock
Code that would require an entity that came in and did a parade that required extra police
protection to pay for the cost of that police protection. The U.S. Supreme Court has said
that could not be done. Mr. Carpenter said that was taken care of in a single provision,
an administrative fee to deal with that, and clarified that the City Manager would be
responsible for the issuance of the permit, and the change clarified as to certain things
that can and cannot be carried in parades. He said the law is very involved and until you
get as specific as not being able to take a stick with a sign on it that is no more than a
quarter of an inch in width and two inches wide, a quarter of an inch in thickness with
rounded ends, until you get that specific then you are deemed to somehow infringed upon
somebody's constitutional right, and said they have had tried to place that in this
ordinance. He said they have created an appeal procedure should there be a denial of a
permit for a parade or public assembly, they have exempted out funerals, certain school
processions, and organized events in reaction to recent news as long as it is not more than
three days old, provided a verification procedure and thought that had been brought into
compliance. The targeted picketing ordinances deal mainly with residential areas to
assure that people cnnot target the homes of individual persons and thereby disrupt their
lives, and thought a balance had been struck in the ability to protest particular issues and
the ability for people to be secure in their homes. The time restrictions are nine to noon,
one to four and seven to nine, Monday through Friday, those times were picked so that it
can be assured that residential picketing does not interfere with people going to work,
coming home for lunch and people coming home for supper and then the nine o'clock
time period since the curfew doesn't take effect until ten, that giving everyone plenty of
time to get out of the way. Nine to Five on Saturday and One to Five is the time frame on
Sunday. None would be arrested for this until they have been given a warning to cease
unproper use of the picketing and if they refuse to do so that is when the arrest would
occur. The ordinance has an emergency clause to assure it takes effect immediately, and
in doing so because there are certain time frames in there for applying for the permits,
there is a provision that directs the City Manager to make necessary accommodations for
a forty five day period after tonight should the board pass the ordinance. By unanimous
voice vote of the board members present, the ordinance and emergency clause was
adopted.
There were two citizens to speak during citizen's communications. Ms. Jan Taylor
addressed the board on Conditional Use Permits. She requested the board put in place a
revocation process for Special Use Permits. She stated there are five cities in Arkansas
that have regulations, ordinances etc., to protect residents and residential favor of
neighborhoods, the cities are Cabot, Jacksonville, North Little Rock, Pine Bluff, and
Fayetteville. Ms. Taylor gave the board a copy of the process in place for the cities
mentioned. Mr. Gregory Ferguson, 204 Beechwood, asked the board to save the
Choctaw Freight Depot that he discovered within the old May Supply Building. He said
it is an Italianate structure with arched windows, hand hewed stone sills, stone banding
and other architectural accents and has a number of unique architectural details. It turns
out that this was built in conjunction with the Choctaw Passenger Depot and the railroad
bridge across the Arkansas River and was completed prior to 1899. For half its life it has
been protected from the elements, it's been preserved. He said it was his understanding it
is eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Buildings. He said he
believed the Choctaw Freight Depot has been overlooked in the planning of the Clinton
Library Park and needs to be considered for inclusion as part of that facility. He said
there is a bid outstanding for the demolition of the entire May Supply Building including
the Choctaw Freight Depot. He said it was his understanding that the contract could be
modified and will not proceed until the Arkansas Supreme Court has decided the status of
the property. He asked the board to tour the Choctaw Freight Depot. He asked the board
to allow a formal presentation at the next scheduled meeting, of October 2, 2001,
regarding the historical significance and architectural importance of the building to the
134
City, to the Presidential Park and the Clinton Library Complex, and there would be
representatives from the Historical Preservation Community, Architectural Historians, as
well as railroad enthusiasts. Mayor Dailey stated he had had visits with representatives
from the foundation and it may be to far down the road for this to be changed, but they
have agreed to look at it and see if it would fit within the plan. Mayor Dailey stated to
their credit, they have reached out far to ensure the integrity of and preservation of the
Choctaw Station itself is retained there.
13. DISCUSSION: Tax Increment Financing. Director Wyrick stated she owned
property in one of the proposed TIF Districts, and thought some other board members
might have property in some of the proposed districts as well and wanted to know how to
proceed. Mayor Dailey stated he had a piece of property in the proposed downtown —
location and asked Mr. Tom Carpenter, City Attorney to advise if there were disclosure
or any ethical requirements that would preclude any of the board from participating in
discussion or vote of any of the districts. Mr. Carpenter stated that generally the rules in
conflict of interest deal with not taking action in a matter that would directly or indirectly
benefit the member of the board or certain relatives of board members within a certain
degree of consanguinity. The concept of discussing Tax Increment Financing in districts
in general and general outlines for that, and did not think it was something that was going
to require any type of recusal. He stated the board may want to disclose if they owned
property as a particular district is discussed, but anything in terms of bond issues and
property tax bond issues, effect the board in that sense also, and you could not have
elected officials that didn't have some interest in property within a city. If the board talks
about specified projects were carried out, and particularly if the district the projects are
carried out in are so small that your property would be obviously benefit or
extraordinarily benefited, then at that point there would be a potential conflict and you
would have to look at the specific facts. Director Adcock presented information of what
the board has done in the past few years in support of the school districts, handing copies
to the board and to the press. Mr. Cy Carney, City Manager briefly outlined the
proposals and gave an overview of Tax Increment Financing. Mr. Carney stated what is
about to be discussed is related to a statute that was adopted, passed and signed by the
governor at the last legislative session this year by the Arkansas General Assembly. That
followed in November with a statewide public referendum where all Arkansans voted and
approved the initiative which allowed this statute to be developed. As a result the statute
became effective on August 13th of this year and during this time, the City Board of
Directors, the Arkansas Municipal League, and a number of other public entities were
discussing this new statute as it now has become available, what has happened is the
City Board directed the City Manager's staff to put together specific ideas related to this
Tax Increment Financing Statute. He explained that it might be certain geographic areas
in the city limits by the City Board, there could be created what is called a tax increment
district, and that district would affect the distribution of certain property taxes collected in
the district based on growth and property values within that district over time. The City
Board would act to form a district and then from that point on the property evaluation of
all the real estate in that district might grow and the growth of the property tax value,
which generates growth in the property tax, that portion of the tax that is the growth from
the day the district is formed would be in large part, set aside in a tax increment special
fund and the City Board of Directors could direct those funds, to do certain
improvements, certain economic development, other service improvements to be
exclusively done in that specific geographic area. Mr. Carney stated the concern in Little
Rock has been based primarily by the Little Rock School District, also concerns by the
Library, by the County government to some degree. He stated there have been public
meetings and some private meetings with representatives from the school district to
discuss tax increment financing. There was a lengthy discussion lasting approximately
two and a half hours discussing how a Tax Increment District works, explaining that
property values are frozen, as development occurs, property values increase, and the
additional taxes or incremental taxes can be used to pay for eligible redevelopment costs,
the benefits of TIF, which included an increase in the tax base (real estate, sales and
income taxes) it encourages private investment, removes blight conditions from the area,
creates jobs and returns property to productive uses. The process for creating a TIF
District was also discussed which included identifying need for improvement, eligibility
studies, determining the TIF District Boundaries, conferring with other taxing districts,
determining the policy for incentives, negotiating redevelopment agreements, and
2
135
monitoring performance and reporting, disbanding districts when development plans has
been completed and all obligations have been met, the conditions precedent to creating a
TIF District which included buildings with blight, deterioration, dilapidation, code
violations, buildings with vacancies, obsolete planning or platting, overcrowding, or non-
conforming uses, tax delinquencies, inadequate infrastructure, roadways, utilities,
drainage, transportation, environmental liabilities, diversity of ownership, and an
unskilled workforce. Timelines were discussed as well as residential preservation,
proposed ways to work with the school district, such as a partnership and agreements that
would benefit the schools as well as the city, revenue sharing, interest by various
communities in the City, establishing parameters to determine the most benefit short
term, and where the first districts should come from. Mayor Dailey endorsed, rather than
the larger number of districts originally proposed, that the City should start with one
district now, after discussions with the school next week, that one district be created, that
being the downtown district, and then define study areas for Mid -town and South
University and direct the Planning Commission to work with the Planning Department to
facilitate planning process for these two areas, and then once a plan is developed a TIF
District might be formed. Ms. Doris Wright, representing the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association, wholeheartedly endorsed the concept, and had been the first
to present a proposal to be considered as a district. Ms. Diane Charles spoke in
opposition of the formulation of TIF Districts, as they have been presented to the citizens
of Little Rock. She stated the districts proposed do not meet the definition as outlined in
Act 1197, 2001 House Bill 2415, in reference to blighted areas. Mr. Gary Barket,
representing the Little Rock Port Authority wanted the board to be aware of some things
that might assist in planning. He stated the Port in their opinion would be a primary
candidate for a TIF District. It is the only publicly owned property in the City and the
board might be overlooking the value of having some of its own property in a TIF
District, for matching funds. Dr. George Blevins, Jr. asked to read a letter in to the
record, as follows: Dear Mayor Dailey, and Little Rock Board of Directors, . We affected
property owners and business owners of the Centennial Neighborhoods are submitting
this letter to request that our area be designated a tax increment finance district. This
request is made in accordance with State of Arkansas Eighty Third General Assembly Act
1197 Section 6 Our area has unique characteristics that unarguably make it the most
appropriate area in the City of Little Rock for use of this redevelopment tool. Some of
these characteristics include (1) a portion of our area has been designated as the Central
High School Historic District and contains the largest stock of historic housing in need of
rehabilitation in the City, potential historic tax credits can also be used (2) A historic
commercial district in need of revitalization (3) Very active neighborhood organizations.
The Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association, Inc., Central High Neighborhood, Inc.,
Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association, and the Central Little Rock Community
Development Corporation (4) A dramatic need for infill housing as suggested by Vision
Little Rock's Housing Workgroup (5) A neighborhood plan already developed that is the
result of hundreds of Centennial Neighborhood residents, probably the most
comprehensive in the state (6) Revitalization projects already underway such as the
Street Scope Project on Martin Luther King, Seven Local Initiative Support Corporations
has agreed to bring in TIF experts to facilitate further our redevelopment planning and to
invest up front housing development and redevelopment funds (8) we are within walking
distance of the State Capitol, downtown, River Market, Arkansas Children's Hospital,
UAMS and Central High School (9) A considerable amount of housing rehabilitation is
presently underway (10) An ample supply of housing start to accommodate the large
number of international tourists expected to visit this area. Based Upon experiences of
others we believe that there are issues that must be addressed when designating an area
as a TIF district, one which is quite ominous is handing off the power of eminent domain
to private developers, ie, the power to force homeowners to sell their property.
Traditionally eminent domain was used to acquire land for school sites, libraries,
highways and the like. Some cities have been using it for commercial projects and giving
developers free reign to obtain individual parcels usually as part of the city subsidized
tax increment financing deal. The city must not give the developer condemnation power.
Additionally a clear definition of blight must be put forward, we must not define blight in
such a way it is so broad that it encompasses everything such that if a project is
profitable to the city, the area will become blighted even if it is not. Finally we must
remember that neighborhoods are predictable support systems which allow people to get
their bearings in cities. We must not allow redevelopment to physically destroy
7
136
neighborhoods, merely picking people up and moving them to new houses does not make
their lives or opportunities better. We do not wish for ambitious developers or city
officials to dismantle working class and low- income city neighborhoods. We want our
neighborhoods truly redeveloped. The proposed boundaries are Interstate 630 on the
north, Roosevelt on the south, Rev. Dr. martin Luther King Jr. Drive on the east and
Woodrow on the west. Sincerely, John Lewellen. Mr. Lewellen was listed as the
primary contact person, and there was presented an attached list of affected property
owners and business owners of the Centennial neighborhoods. Director Keck, on the
issue of TIF Districts empowering private developers to use the power of eminent
domain. He stated that the previous night was the first time he had heard that argument
used against a TIF District, and asked Mr. Carney, and/or the City Attorney if that was
accurate. Mr. Blevins stated that what can happen is the City Board can take property by
power of eminent domain and either give or sell it to a developer. Mr. James Schimmer,
817 North Street, Apt. 37, stated that on August 28"' the Downtown Partnership voted to
approve a proposed TIF boundary and TIF as an economic development tool in
downtown. Mr. Schimmer stated that he was previously in Columbus, Ohio and they
have successfully used TIF in a number of different ways. He stated he had personally
been involved in several projects used to help developers get projects done in
neighborhoods as well as down towns. He said the establishment of a downtown TIF
District is an important tool to allow downtown to compete in a very competitive
environment. TIF dollars raised from the district will help that district and these districts
are structured in such a way as not to raise personal property taxes. The money is
generated from the. district, goes back into the district and helps the district improve
itself. He stated on behalf of the Downtown Partnership, it's board and members, urged
the Board of Directors to create the downtown district and offered assistance in
developing the downtown TIF district plan which will guide it's expenditures, and finally
they offered their appreciation to Mr. Carney in launching this effort and helping explore
some innovative ways to explore development in the community. Ms. Ruth Bell, 7611
Briarwood, representing the League of Women voters, and said they were pleased that
the board was establishing criteria and evaluating prospective TIF Districts, and
involving the public and hoped this continued. Ms. Janet Berry, President of Southwest
Little Rock United for Progress, urged the board to keep the Southwest TIF District on
the plate. She said this was probably the largest concentration of raw land in the City of _
Little Rock, and there need to be something done with the water district in that area in the
next year or two, or people would lose property in the next year or two. She said there is
an area that was site cleared a few years ago and has the potential for development to
help pay for some of the needed improvements. She said part of this is an unsewered
area. She said there is land for many potential uses. Director Adcock asked Ms.Charles,
who had spoken in opposition earlier in the evening, in regard to her earlier statements
about not allowing any TIFs in Little Rock, if her opposition was on a temporary basis, or
what was her opinion in why Little Rock should not have TIFs, and was surprised at her
opposition, because she knew she had been very interested in revitalization. Ms. Charles
stated that community development was close to her heart and feel there is opportunity in
the City of Little Rock for us to the kinds of things we are talking about using the other
means that are available that will allow communities to thrive as they really want to. He
said there are community block grant funds that are not being adequately utilized for the
furtherment of community and or economic development. She said she was concerned
over the fact that of the six districts that have been outlined, there is a majority of land
and sites that are tax exempt, and does not feel these lands fit the meaning of the tax
increment district because you have to have a tax base to begin with. She said there are a
lot of government buildings in the downtown district that is being proposed, a city
municipality and others that would not meet that TIF district. She stated if we had certain
areas to begin with that fit the blighted area, she may have been more at ease with it, but
since the majority of these areas do not fit the blight definition according to TIF
guidelines, she was opposed until the community has had an opportunity to come
together and educate themselves on the implications. She recommended tabling the issue
until we are sure we are working to the best interest of the citizens of Little Rock. The
general consensus of the board was support for the TIF's but that there was need for more
education for themselves and the public, the need to meet with the school board, and the
need to meet in a work session to further discuss the issues such as the legal issues,
priorities, goals, planning, the dynamics, and opportunities of proposed areas, proposals
to gather information from other cities where TIF Districts are in place.
E:3
14. REPORT: City Manager's Activity Report. Cy Carney, City Manager announced
that the Sister City delegation is in Taiwan. They were to have returned last week but
didn't make it due to the air shutdown, and plane connection difficulties they have been
delayed in returning. Mr. Carney announced the award of twenty -two urban forestry
grants to twenty -two separate neighborhood groups and organizations that have submitted
applications, and the City's new Urban Forester began work two days ago. Mr. Carney
also announced that on the next agenda would be an item on the performance based
energy efficiency program. The contract calls for doing energy improvements across all
the city buildings and the energy savings would pay for the improvements over time.
Director Hinton made a motion to draft a proclamation or letter to send to the cities
involved in the terrorist incidents, Director Stewart seconded the motion, and by
unanimous voice vote the motion was approved. Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Carpenter to
assist in drafting the proclamation or letter to the cities.
Vice Mayor Cazort asked for an update on speed humps. Director Stewart asked when
the stoplights would be activated on Asher. Mr. Carney stated a ceremony had been
planned, but was not sure of the exact date.
A motion was made by Vice Mayor Cazort to adjourn the meeting. Director Adcock
seconded the motion, and by unanimous voice vote the meeting adjourned at 9:20 P.M.
ATTEST:
Na icy Wo d, City Clerk
9
APPROVED:
m Dailey, Mayor
137