Board of Directors

AGENDA SILOAM SPRINGS BOARD OF DIRECTORS NOVEMBER 16, 2021 BOARD MEETING / 6:30 PM BUDGET OVERVIEW WORKSHOP #4–– 5:30 PM Regular Board of Directors Meeting: Opening of Regularly Scheduled Meeting Call to Order Roll Call Prayer Pledge of Allegiance I. Presentations: Introduction of new Firefighter/EMTs / Zachery Bailey – Dalton Sharp – Caleb Lloyd – Josiah Sewell Jerry Cavness / Proposed Flag Design II. Public Input The public may address the Board of Directors regarding any item on the consent agenda or any city business NOT listed on the Board’s regular agenda. III. Consent Agenda A. Workshop Minutes / November 2, 2021 B. Regular Meeting Minutes / November 2, 2021 C. Appointment / City of Siloam Springs, AR Public Education Facilities Board (John Brown University) / David Glass D. Benton County 2021 Certificate of Assessment / Millage Rollback E. Contract Simon Sager Avenue Phase IV Storm Pipe / Scurlock Industries / $188,394 F. Dedication of Utility Easements and Right-of-Way / 1299 Brashears Rd. Regularly Scheduled Items Ordinances G. Ordinance 21-23 / 2nd Reading / Amending Municipal Code Sections 82-41, 98-62, 98-173, and 98-331 / Adjusting Scheduled Annual Utility Rate Increases for Years 2022-2027 H. Ordinance 21-24 / 1st Reading / Ward Reapportionment Plan Staff Reports I. Purchasing Regulations Review J. Zoning Presentation K. Administrator’s Report IV. Directors Reports V. Adjournment Dear City Board of Directors, Back on July 14, I sent a letter to Mayor Nation indicating that I have lived in Siloam Springs since 1978 and my pleasure to have served or represented the city in different capacities over the years. As a citizen, I take great pride in our town and the many accomplishments of the past 40 years. The message our city shows to all who live here, or comes to visit, is having that small town feel, with a view to the future. However, I noticed our city flag pales in comparison. So in my letter to the mayor, I suggested the city flag should be reviewed and updated. After consulting with the City Administrator, the Mayor asked me to I reach out to interested citizens and determine if this was something that needed to be looked into. Personally, I felt the city flag needed updated to reflect more community pride and unity of our citizens. After contacting a few citizens I found that they too wanted to be a part of this flag review committee. Listed below are the committee members that have been working on this project the last few months: Kathy Turner Randy Torres Dan Siemans Lindsey Taylor Bob Coleman Patti Eiland Consultants: Jon Boles Stanley Church Kristen Bowyer The committee met three different times, with the thought in mind of producing a city flag that represented what citizens and visitors think of when they think of Siloam Springs: THE CREEK, THE GAZABOS, AND THE DOGWOODS. We came up with four different designs, and of those, choose two. In addition to the creek, gazabos and dogwoods we added a tag line: WHERE NEIGHBORS BECOME FAMILY. Now we are asking for your time to allow us to show you our due diligence by presenting the updated versions of our city flag we feel captures the essence of Siloam Springs as an inclusive community that is holding on to our strengths but with a progressive view to the future. Best regards, Jerry Cavness Committee Chair _  MINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF SILOAM SPRINGS, BENTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS HELD NOVEMBER 2, 2020 The Board of Directors held a Workshop at 5:30 pm on November 2, 2021, on the 2022 Budget, at the Siloam Springs Administration Building. The workshop was called to order by Mayor Nation. She turned the floor over to Christina Petriches, Finance Director. She had previously provided copies of the proposed budget to all directors. She reviewed the 2022 general funds for Parks & Rec; Court; Library; Infrastructure; Maintenance; Finance and Water, and took questions after each fund summary. Following questions and comments from the Board, the workshop was adjourned. APPROVED: ATTEST: ___________________________________ Judy Nation, Mayor Renea Ellis, City Clerk, CAMC/CMC {seal}  STAFF REPORT TO: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator FROM: Renea Ellis, City Clerk DATE: November 9, 2021 RE: City of Siloam Springs, Arkansas Public Education Facilities Board (John Brown University) / David Glass Recommendation: Confirm the re-appointment of David Glass to the Public Education Facilities Board. Background: The City of Siloam Springs, Arkansas Public Education Facilities Board (John Brown University) is restricted by ordinance to the financing and support of facilities for the post-secondary education operated by John Brown University. To accomplish these purposes, the Board has the authority to issue revenue bonds. There are five (5) Board members, appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City's Board of Directors, serving staggered, five-year terms. The term of David Glass expires December 31, 2021. Per State law, the Facilities Board is to submit three (3) successor nominees for each pending vacancy. The Facilities Board has submitted three nominees: Tammy Engle Michael Houston David Glass. The Facilities Board has included a recommendation for reappointment of David Glass to fill the vacancy for the five-year term. Fiscal Impact: None Attachments: Public Facilities Board's letter dated November 9, 2021  STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor and Board of Directors FROM: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator DATE: November 9, 2021 RE: Benton County 2021 Certificate of Assessment / Millage Rollback Recommendation: Approve the Base Year Millage Rollback Computation and Certification as provided by Benton County. Background: In August of this year, Benton County completed its countywide reappraisal of property values. Arkansas counties are required by state law to complete a reappraisal every five (5) years. Per Arkansas Code Annotated § 26-26-402(a) whenever a countywide reappraisal results in an increase in the aggregate value of taxable property in any taxing unit of ten percent 10% or more over the previous year, the rate of a city’s property taxes shall be adjusted or rolled back by the governing body of the taxing unit for the year for which levied. This statute further states that the rollback of tax rates or millage for the base year shall be designed to assure that the taxing unit will receive an amount of tax revenue no greater than 10% above the revenue received during the previous year, subject to certain adjustments. According to the Benton County Clerk’s office, the property tax rollback for Siloam Springs will change the millage from 5.5 mils to 5.45 mils. Also, the attached memo from the county clerk’s office states that the City is to return the approval from no later than Monday, November 15th, however, the clerk’s office has agreed to extend the date to Wednesday, November 17th. Fiscal Impact: Based on the change in the property tax millage, there will be less revenue received from property taxes, however, staff estimates this difference to be just over $11,000. This change will not impact the 2022 budget. The budgeted 2022 property tax revenue is 12% over the 2021 budgeted amount but is actually only seven percent (7%) greater than the most current projected 2021 actual revenue. Attachments Memo from Benton County Clerk with attachments  STAFF REPORT To: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator Cc: Don Clark, Community Development Director From: Justin Bland, City Engineer Date: October 25, 2021 Subject: Contract / Simon Sager Avenue Phase IV Storm Pipe / Scurlock Industries / $188,394.75 Recommendation: Approve purchase for the Simon Sager Avenue Phase IV storm pipe with Scurlock Industries in the amount of $188,394.75 Background: The 2021 Budget includes the completion of the fourth and final phase of the Simon Sager Avenue project. This phase will extend the roadway an additional 620’ north and tie into Tahlequah St. This bid is for the procurement and delivery of the storm sewer pipe that will be installed by city staff for this phase of the project. This bid includes 210’ of 10’x4’ box culvert and two storm inlet lids. All pipe listed is made with reinforced concrete. Staff bid the Simon Sager Avenue Ph. IV Storm Pipe and received one bid as shown below: Bidder Total Amount with Sales Tax Scurlock Industries $188,394.75 This bid is higher than expected (the engineer’s estimate was $155,897.34). This can be attributed to supply chain shortages, staffing issues, etc. It is difficult to know for sure, but it doesn’t appear that these conditions will be getting better anytime soon. Due to this staff recommends awarding the contract to Scurlock Industries. Fiscal Impact: This project is included in the 2021 Street Department capital budget under account #02-20-599999-836 Simon Sager Ph. IV with $525,000 budgeted for the total project. Staff recommends awarding the project to Scurlock Industries in the amount of $188,394.75.  STAFF REPORT TO: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator FROM: Justin Bland, PE, City Engineer Ben Rhoads, AICP, Senior Planner Cc: Don Clark, Community Development Director DATE: November 4, 2021 RE: Dedication of Utility Easements and Right-of-Way / 1299 Brashears Rd. Recommendation: Approve the dedication of utility easements and right-of-way at 1299 Brashears Rd. Background: The applicants, Cliff and Rachel Hickman, request a lot split permit to split their property into two lots. Following City policy, the proposed easements and right-of-way for dedication are presented to the Board for approval. The easements will primarily be used for City and franchise utilities per the dedication language shown on the attached plat. The right-of-way on this plat has been negotiated to extend across the fully depth of the property for a future widening of Brashears Rd. City staff has approved the plat subject to authorization from the Board to accept the easements and right-of- way as shown. Fiscal Impact: Staff is not aware of any fiscal impact associated with accepting the dedication of the shown right-of-way or utility easements. Attachments: Lot Split Plat LS21-15 (Hickman) 3rd Submittal  STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor and Board of Directors FROM: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator DATE: October 25, 2021 RE: Ordinance 21-23 / Amending Municipal Code Sections 81-41, 98-62, 98-173, and 98-331 / Adjusting Scheduled Utility Rate Increases for the Years 2022-2027 Recommendation: Place Ordinance No. 21-23 on its ______ (1st, 2nd or 3rd) reading, suspending the rules and reading by title only. Background: In late 2020 the City contracted with 1898 & Company to conduct a formal study of the current and future rates charged to citizens and customers for the City’s electric, water, sanitary sewer, and solid waste services. The City Board was provided progress briefings on the rate study analysis at workshops held on May 4, 2021, and on June 15, 2021. The final rate study report was provided to the Board on September 7, 2021. The results of the study determined that the annual rate increases required by City Code {Sections 98- 62; 98-173(e); and 98-331(b)} for electric, water, and sanitary sewer could be lowered while still ensuring that there would be sufficient revenue to maintain current levels of service. The study also found that the annual rate increase required by City Code {Section 82-41(n)} needed to be increased in order to ensure sufficient revenue to maintain current levels of service. Specifically, the study recommended the following modifications to the rate increased required by City Code: Annual Electric Rate Increase Reduce by 50% Annual Water Rate Increase Reduce by 70% Annual Sanitary Sewer Rate Increase Reduce by 20% Annual Solid Waste Rate Increase Increase by 60% A copy of the executive summary of rate study report is attached, and a copy of the full report can be found on the City’s website at this address: 2021 Utility Rate Study The attached ordinance will enact the recommended modifications to the annual rate increases for years 2022 through 2027. At that time a new rate study will likely be required in order to comply with state law, which was amended in 2021 to require public water providers to conduct rate studies every five (5) years, and to implement the rates recommended by the rate study. Fiscal Impact: The current annual rate increases required by City Code are based on the annual Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) for the electric rate and CPI-U plus 1% for water, sanitary sewer, and solid waste. In order for the study to be able to provide a comparison between the current annual rate increases and those based on the results of the study a CPI-U of 1.5% was assumed, which has been the average CPI-U of the five (5) years prior to the study. The following graphic represents a comparison of an average monthly residential utility bill (based only on rates) between the current required rate increases and those proposed by the rate study. As shown in the example above, the proposed adjustments to the annual rate increases would reduce the overall increase by 0.7%, or $1.47. Attachments: Proposed Code Amendments Redacted Executive Summary, 2021 Rate Study Ordinance No. 21-23  PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS Chapter 82 – Solid Waste Sec. 82-41. - Rates. (n) Annual CPI adjustment. Unless otherwise provided by the board of directors, beginning January 1, 2017, and each January 1 thereafter, rates shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the "All Items Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), South Region," for the preceding 12 months plus an additional one percent (CPI-U +1%). The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be one hundred sixty percent (160%) of CPI-U + 1%, or {(CPI-U + 1%) x 1.60}. Chapter 98 – Utilities Article II - Electric Sec. 98-62. - Annual CPI adjustment. Unless otherwise provided by the board of directors, beginning April 1, 2014, and each April 1 thereafter, energy charges shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the All Items Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), South Region, for the preceding calendar year. For purposes of this section, energy charges shall include kilowatt hour energy charges, the customer charge and area lighting and security lighting rates. The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be fifty percent (50%) of CPI-U, or (CPI-U x 0.50). Article III – Water Sec. 98-173. - Schedule of charges. (e) Annual CPI adjustment. Unless otherwise provided by the board of directors, beginning January 1, 2017, and each January 1 thereafter, rates shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the "All Items Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), South Region," for the preceding 12 months plus an additional one percent (CPI-U +1%). The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be thirty percent (30%) of CPI-U + 1%, or {(CPI-U + 1%) x 0.30}. Article IV – Sewers Sec. 98-331. - Annual rate review (b) Annual CPI adjustment. Unless otherwise provided by the board of directors, beginning January 1, 2017, and each January 1 thereafter, rates shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the "All Items Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), South Region," for the preceding 12 months plus one percent (CPI-U + 1%). The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be eighty percent (80%) of CPI-U + 1%, or {(CPI-U + 1%) x 0.80}. Line CPI-Based Revenue Adjustment No. Year Electric [1] Water [2] Wastewater [2] Sanitation [2] 1 2022 1.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2 2023 1.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3 2024 1.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 4 2025 1.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 5 2026 1.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% Additional Increase/ Decrease 6 2022 -0.75% -1.75% -0.50% 1.50% 7 2023 -0.75% -1.75% -0.50% 1.50% 8 2024 -0.75% -1.75% -0.50% 1.50% 9 2025 -0.75% -1.75% -0.50% 1.50% 10 2026 -0.75% -1.75% -0.50% 1.50% Effective Increase/ Decrease 11 2022 0.75% 0.75% 2.00% 4.00% 12 2023 0.75% 0.75% 2.00% 4.00% 13 2024 0.75% 0.75% 2.00% 4.00% 14 2025 0.75% 0.75% 2.00% 4.00% 15 2026 0.75% 0.75% 2.00% 4.00% Proposed Increase as a Percent of CPI-Based Ordinance 16 2022-2026 [3] 50.0% 30.0% 80.0% 160.0% [1] Assumes 1.5% for CPI, the current ordinance would adjust rates 1.5% [2] Assumes 1.5% CPI, the current ordinance would adjust rates 2.5% [3] Rates are the same percentage for all five years Line Existing Proposed No. Description 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Inside City Rate Code 1301 1 First 1,000 Gal. $ 15.259 $ 15.373 $ 15.489 $ 15.605 $ 15.722 $ 15.840 2 Next 23,000 Gal. $ 4.521 $ 4.555 $ 4.589 $ 4.623 $ 4.658 $ 4.693 3 Next 201,000 Gal. $ 4.521 $ 4.555 $ 4.589 $ 4.623 $ 4.658 $ 4.693 4 Next 125,000 Gal. $ 4.069 $ 4.100 $ 4.130 $ 4.161 $ 4.192 $ 4.224 5 Next 50,000 Gal. $ 3.391 $ 3.416 $ 3.442 $ 3.468 $ 3.494 $ 3.520 6 Over 400,000 Gal. $ 2.374 $ 2.392 $ 2.410 $ 2.428 $ 2.446 $ 2.464 Outside City Rate Code 1311 7 First 1,000 Gal. $ 29.387 $ 29.607 $ 29.829 $ 30.053 $ 30.279 $ 30.506 8 Next 23,000 Gal. $ 4.521 $ 4.555 $ 4.589 $ 4.623 $ 4.658 $ 4.693 9 Next 201,000 Gal. $ 4.521 $ 4.555 $ 4.589 $ 4.623 $ 4.658 $ 4.693 10 Next 125,000 Gal. $ 4.069 $ 4.100 $ 4.130 $ 4.161 $ 4.192 $ 4.224 11 Next 50,000 Gal. $ 3.391 $ 3.416 $ 3.442 $ 3.468 $ 3.494 $ 3.520 12 Over 400,000 Gal. $ 2.543 $ 2.562 $ 2.581 $ 2.601 $ 2.620 $ 2.640 [1] Rates are per 1,000 gallons Line Existing Proposed No. Description 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Inside City Rate Code 1801 1 1st 1,000 Gal $ 21.475 $ 22.025 $ 22.465 $ 22.914 $ 23.373 $ 23.840 2 next 19,000 gal. $ 4.521 $ 4.731 $ 4.826 $ 4.923 $ 5.021 $ 5.121 3 next 480,000 gal. $ 4.239 $ 4.444 $ 4.533 $ 4.623 $ 4.716 $ 4.810 4 next 500,000 gal. $ 3.956 $ 4.155 $ 4.238 $ 4.323 $ 4.409 $ 4.498 5 Over 1,000,000 gal. $ 2.543 $ 2.714 $ 2.768 $ 2.823 $ 2.880 $ 2.938 Outside City Rate Code 1811 6 1st 1,000 Gal $ 31.648 $ 32.977 $ 33.636 $ 34.309 $ 34.995 $ 35.695 7 next 19,000 gal. $ 4.521 $ 4.731 $ 4.826 $ 4.923 $ 5.021 $ 5.121 8 next 480,000 gal. $ 4.239 $ 4.444 $ 4.533 $ 4.623 $ 4.716 $ 4.810 9 next 500,000 gal. $ 3.956 $ 4.155 $ 4.238 $ 4.323 $ 4.409 $ 4.498 10 Over 1,000,000 gal. $ 2.543 $ 2.714 $ 2.768 $ 2.823 $ 2.880 $ 2.938 11 Sludge Surcharge per 1,000 Gal. $ 0.115 - - - - - [1] Rates are per 1,000 gallons  Existing Rates Proposed Rates Line (2021) (2022) No. Residential 1 All kWh per kWh $ 0.10136 $ 0.10212 2 Customer Charge $ 13.24 $ 13.34 Residential All Electric 3 All kWh per kWh (May - October) $ 0.10136 $ 0.10212 4 All kWh per kWh (October - May) $ 0.06039 $ 0.06085 5 Customer Charge $ 13.24 $ 13.34 Commercial 6 All kWh per kWh $ 0.11611 $ 0.11698 7 Customer Charge $ 16.56 $ 16.69 Commercial All Electric 8 All kWh per kWh (May - October) $ 0.11611 $ 0.11698 9 All kWh per kWh (October - May) $ 0.10507 $ 0.10586 10 Customer Charge $ 16.56 $ 16.69 Small Power 11 All kWh per kWh (1st 10,000) $ 0.07260 $ 0.06062 12 All kWh per kWh (Over 10,000) $ 0.06561 $ 0.06062 13 Demand Chg (per kW) $ 8.45 $ 9.63 Large Power 14 All kWh per kWh $ 0.0587 $ 0.0606 15 Demand Chg (per kW) $ 9.90 $ 9.63 [1] 10% outside city adder [2] Existing rates as of May 2021 [3] Proposed rates would increase 0.75%/yr from 2023 to 2026  Existing 2021 CPI-Based 2022 (1) Proposed 2022 (2) Usage Monthly Bill Monthly Bill Increase Monthly Bill Increase Electric 804 kWh $ 94.72 $ 96.14 $ 1.42 $ 95.43 $ 0.71 Water 6 K-gal $ 37.86 $ 38.81 $ 0.95 $ 38.15 $ 0.28 Wastewater 6 K-gal $ 44.77 $ 45.89 $ 1.12 $ 45.68 $ 0.91 Sanitation 96-gal $ 22.02 $ 22.57 $ 0.55 $ 22.68 $ 0.66 Total $ 199.37 $ 203.41 $ 4.04 $ 201.94 $ 2.57 % Increase over 2021 2.0% 1.3% (1) Assumes CPI = 1.5% (Electric 1.5%, All Others 2.5%) (2) Assumes Electric & Water = 0.75%, Wastewater = 2.00%, Sanitation = 4.00%  ORDINANCE NO. 21-23 AN ORDINANCE ADJUSTING SCHEDULED UTILITY RATE INCREASES FOR THE YEARS 2022-2027 WHEREAS, the City of Siloam Springs has recently conducted a utility rate study; and WHEREAS, having reviewed said study and considering estimated revenue needs due to growth, infrastructure replacement, energy and material costs and other factors, staff recommends adjusting the annual CPI-based rate increases that are currently required by City Code and scheduled to take effect over the next five years; and WHEREAS, said adjustments will benefit the citizens of Siloam Springs by lowering the rate increases for electric, water and wastewater services, and by ensuring sufficient revenue to maintain timely, efficient, and environmentally sound solid waste services for City customers; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF SILOAM SPRINGS, ARKANSAS; SECTION I: That Section 98-62 of the Siloam Springs City Code with respect to Electric rates is hereby amended by the addition of the following language: The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be fifty percent (50%) of CPI-U, or (CPI-U x 0.50). SECTION II: That Section 98-173(e) of the Siloam Springs City Code with respect to Water rates is hereby amended by the addition of the following language: The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be thirty percent (30%) of CPI-U + 1%, or {(CPI-U + 1%) x 0.30}. SECTION III: That Section 98-331(b) of the Siloam Springs City Code with respect to Sanitary Sewer rates is hereby amended by the addition of the following language: The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be eighty percent (80%) of CPI-U + 1%, or {(CPI-U + 1%) x 0.80}. SECTION IV: That Section 82-41(n) of the Siloam Springs City Code with respect to Solid Waste rates is hereby amended by the addition of the following language: The above notwithstanding, the annual adjustment for the years 2022-2027 shall be one hundred sixty percent (160%) of CPI-U + 1%, or {(CPI-U + 1%) x 1.60}. SECTION V: Administrative corrections. The city attorney is hereby authorized to make grammatical and stylistic corrections to this ordinance that do not affect the substance thereof. Ordinance 21-23 Page 1 of 2  SECTION VI: Repealer and severability. Prior Ordinances in conflict with the provisions enacted herein are repealed to the extent of the conflict as of the effective date of this Ordinance. If any provision of a section of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect the other provisions or applications of the section or related sections which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions are severable. Done and Ordained this ________ day of __________________________, 2021. APPROVED: ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ Renea Ellis, City Clerk CAMC/CMC Judy Nation, Mayor (SEAL) Ordinance 21-23 Page 2 of 2  STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor and Board of Directors FROM: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator DATE: November 9, 2021 RE: Ordinance 21-24 / Ward Reapportionment Plan Recommendation: Place Ordinance No. 21-24 on its ______ (1st, 2nd or 3rd) reading, suspending the rules, and reading by title only. Background: Section 14-48-107(c) of the Arkansas Code Annotated states that the Board of Directors under the city administrator form of government shall review the apportionment among the wards after each federal census, and that the Board may reapportion the wards to maintain substantially equal population. Based on the 2020 census data, there is a population deviation of 14.2% between Wards 1 and 3 (Ward 1 =4,670 and Ward 3 = 4088), which is the reason the wards need to be reapportioned. As a general rule of thumb, the Courts have held that deviations greater than 10% in election districts are likely to found not in compliance with the equal protection clause, and that municipalities should strive for a lower overall deviation to ensure compliance while also striving to maintain communities of interest and geographic compactness. The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission has previously drafted reapportionment plans for the City. NWRCP has prepared two (2) reapportionment plans for consideration by the Board, which are attached along with the current ward map. Both plans have less than a 10% population deviation between wards. The difference between the two (2) plans is between Wards 2 and 3. Wards 1 and 4 are drawn the same in both plans. Plan 1 has a population deviation of 7.2% between Wards 1 and 3 (4,520 vs 4,216), and Plan 2 has a deviation of 9.0% between Wards 1 and 2 (4,520 vs 4,146). Geographically, the major difference is the area bounded by Jefferson Street to the south, Main Street to the north, and S. Mt. Olive Street to the west. This area is included in Ward 2 in Plan 1, and in Ward 3 in Plan 2. It should be noted that NWARPC included an additional population of 81 persons based on annexations that were not included in the 2020 census, and that all directors elected by-wards will remain within their respective wards in both plans. Staff has reviewed both plans and is recommending Plan 1. This plan has the least population deviation, appears to be slightly better at maintaining communities of interest and geographic compactness, and better defines the corners of Wards 2 and 3 which will make it easier for the public to determine which ward they are in. Fiscal Impact: Staff is not aware of any fiscal impacts associated with the adoption of the reapportionment map. Attachments: Letter from NWARPC with Ward Maps Ordinance No. 21-24 EXISTING WARD MAP 2021 WARD REAPPORTIONMENT – PLAN 1 2021 WARD REAPPORTIONMENT – PLAN 2  ORDINANCE NO. 21-24 AN ORDINANCE REAPPORTIONING CITY WARDS WHEREAS, Arkansas municipalities have a legal obligation and responsibility to establish and maintain wards of substantially equal population; and WHEREAS, a population analysis of City wards utilizing 2020 Census block data indicates the need for ward reapportionment; and WHEREAS, Arkansas law vests the Board of Directors with the authority to reapportion wards; and WHEREAS, a reapportionment plan has been prepared that equalizes ward populations and ensures compliance with state statutes and equal protection requirements; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board of Directors that a new ward apportionment plan be approved. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF SILOAM SPRINGS, ARKANSAS: SECTION I. That the ward apportionment plan as shown on the map which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof, be and is hereby adopted, with said map to serve hereafter as the Official Ward Map for the City of Siloam Springs, Arkansas. SECTION II. That all previous ward maps and boundary descriptions are hereby repealed. SECTION III. That a duly certified copy of said Map shall be filed with the Benton County Election Commission and filed in the Office of the Benton County Clerk. SECTION V: Administrative corrections. The city attorney is hereby authorized to make grammatical and stylistic corrections to this ordinance that do not affect the substance thereof. SECTION VI: Repealer and severability. Prior Ordinances in conflict with the provisions enacted herein are repealed to the extent of the conflict as of the effective date of this Ordinance. If any provision of a section of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect the other provisions or applications of the section or related sections which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions are severable. Done and Ordained this ________ day of __________________________, 2021. APPROVED: ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ Renea Ellis, City Clerk CAMC/CMC Judy Nation, Mayor (SEAL) Ordinance 21-24 Page 1 of 2  EXHIBIT A Ordinance 21-24 Proposed Wards Based on 2020 Census Population Ordinance 21-24 Page 2 of 2  STAFF REPORT TO: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator FROM: Christina Petriches, Finance Director DATE: November 3, 2021 SUBJECT: Purchasing Regulations Review The City is not violating any State or local laws related to purchasing. The resolution introduced at the last meeting, Resolution 61-21, was to ensure that the City does not violate any such laws. The City has maintained a clean, unmodified audit opinion for the past 7 years. Part of the audit process is to ensure that the City is following all purchasing requirements. City staff does not separate or divide purchases in an effort to circumvent the bid requirements. If a certain amount of material is needed for a particular project, and a bid is required due to the potential cost of the material, then staff will issue a request for bids. Staff does not divide the purchase into multiple purchases, and even if staff tried to do so, as Finance Director, I would not sign off on the purchase. Any finding by the auditor that we are in violation of our purchasing requirements would be included in the audit and/or letter to management accompanying the audit report. No such findings have been reported. In years past, the City’s purchasing policies mirrored the State requirements for mayoral forms of government. However, A.C.A § 14-48-129 states that for City Administrator form of government competitive bidding is required when a “transaction exceeds the maximum amount established by the board of directors.” On October 2, 2012, the City Board adopted Ordinance No. 12-12, which raised the competitive bid requirement from $20,000, which was the previous limit for mayoral forms of government, to $30,000. On August 19, 2014, the City Board adopted Ordinance No. 14-19 which raised the competitive bid requirement from $30,000 to $50,000 and included an annual adjustment in accordance with the All Items Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), South Region. Based on current city code, the 2021 competitive bid requirement is $54,000 or greater. A copy of the current city code regarding purchasing is attached as Exhibit A. Please note that the requirements were changed for mayoral forms of government in 2021. Per A.C.A. § 14-58-303(b) the bidding limit for mayoral forms of government was raised to $35,000 and includes a provision for raising the bid limit every five (5) years based on CPI-U for the previous five (5) years. Attachments: Municipal Code Article VI – Purchasing and Sales  EXHIBIT A Municipal Code, Article VI – Purchasing and Sales Sec. 2-221. - Routine expenditures. The city administrator shall have authority and responsibility for making expenditures required for public purposes, wherein the total is equal to or less than the current competitive bid requirement. The competitive bid requirement from the effective date of this ordinance through 2014 shall be $50,000.00, and thereafter shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the All Items Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), South Region, for the preceding 12 months, rounded to the nearest $1,000.00. The administrator shall issue written instructions outlining procedures for compliance with this chapter in accordance with the following minimum requirements: (1) Small expenditure limitation. Expenditures for day-to-day supplies and operational needs, will be effected through utilization of prudent and practical selectivity of best price sources, according to procedures provided by written administrative policy. The limitation for such expenditures from the effective date of this ordinance through 2014 shall be $10,000.00, and thereafter shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the All Items Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), South Region, for the preceding 12 months, rounded to the nearest $1,000.00. Exemptions from the small expenditure limitation are listed below: a. For goods and services in an amount less than or equal to ten percent of the small expenditure limitation may be purchased in the manner determined to be in the best interest of the city, at the discretion of the department director. It is recommended and expected that a price comparison will be made in most circumstances. If, however, the department director determines that such comparison is not feasible, or that the public interest would be served by selection based on factors other than price, multiple quotes shall not be required. All such purchases are subject to review by the city administrator. Upon request, it shall be the responsibility of the department director to provide justification for invoking this section b. For goods and services less than or equal to the small expenditure limitation, the following purchases are exempt from comparative price requirements, subject to review by the city administrator: b. 1. Advertising in newspapers, periodicals, and related publications; 2. Commodities procured for resale in cafeterias, commissaries, bookstores, gift shops, canteens, and other similar establishments; 3. Contracts with students; 4. Licenses (does not include software licenses); 5. Maintenance on office machines or technical equipment; 6. Membership in professional, trade, and other similar associations; 7. Postage; 8. Published books, manuals, maps, periodicals, films, technical pamphlets, and copyrighted educational aids for use in libraries and for other informational or instructional purposes in instances in which other applicable law does not provide a restrictive means for the acquisition of same; 9. Services of visiting speakers, lecturers, and performing artists; 10. Taxes; 11. Travel expense items, such as room, board and transportation charges; 12. Works of art for museum and public display; Page 2 of 4  13. Repair services for hidden or unknown damages to machinery already purchased; 14. Services related to workforce development, incumbent workforce training, or specialized business or industry training; 15. The following commodities and services relating to proprietary software after the initial procurement: (i) technical support; (ii) renewals; (iii) additional copies; and (iv) license upgrades; and 16. Professional services listed in A.C.A. §§ 19-11-801 and 19-11-802, and services declared as professional services by the Siloam Springs Board of Directors. (2) Intermediate expenditure limitation. All expenditures by the city for public purposes, wherein the expenditure therefor is between the small expenditure limitation and the competitive bid requirement shall be made only after solicitation of comparable written price quotations from at least three separate suppliers. Expenditures of less than the competitive bid requirement from state bid sources shall be exempt from this provision. (3) Expenditures in excess of $30,000.00. Each expenditure exceeding $30,000.00, shall be specifically listed in the city administrator's written report presented at the next regular meeting of the board of directors. (4) Lowest price quote. For all expenditures not specifically exempted or requiring board of director's approval, the city administrator shall select the lowest price quotation except for reasons specifically listed in the administrator's written report presented at the next regular meeting of the board of directors. Sec. 2-222. - Large expenditures. Where the amount of expenditure exceeds the bid limitation as established by section 2-221 the city administrator shall invite competitive sealed bids thereon by (optional) advertisement in any newspaper of general circulation in an area of resource which will supply the need, and by (mandatory) advertisement in any locally-published newspaper, at least once 30 or more days prior to an established date on which no further bids shall be accepted. Other prospective bidders which may not have access to local newspapers may be advised by mail of the specifications and solicitation for bids. Bids received pursuant to such solicitations shall be opened and read at the date and time established for such opening in the presence of the appropriate departmental director or their designee. The city administrator shall have exclusive power to award the bid to the lowest responsible bidder, after approval of the city board of directors. The expenditure shall be awarded on the basis of lowest responsible bidder, provided, however, that the city administrator may reject any and all such bids or waive non-prejudicial irregularities. Except for emergencies as provided in subsection 2-223(b), and change orders within the limits as provided in subsection 2-223(c), no bid contract expenditure approved by the board of directors shall be increased without further approval of the board; provided, however, that the estimated total cost of unit-price contracts may be exceeded without prior board approval unless the scope of the work, or the price per unit, is increased. By written report presented at the next regular meeting of the board of directors, the administrator shall report the amount by which any unit-price contract has exceeded the bid estimate. Sec. 2-223. - Bid process exemption. (a) [Generally.] In exceptional situations when the requirements of competitive bidding are deemed not feasible the city administrator shall by writing certify such conditions as effect such "sole source" supply, Page 3 of 4 and competitive bidding requirements may be waived or modified by further resolution of the board of directors. (b) Emergency expenditures. Upon a failure of existing facilities, the immediate repair or replacement of which must be accomplished to avoid threat to the health, peace or safety of citizens of the city, the city administrator is authorized and responsible to effect emergency repairs by the most expeditious available means. Such instances will be exempt from the competitive bid process. The city administrator will submit a full written report of such emergency procedures to the city board of directors and certify the need for effecting such procedure, justifying both method and cost in effecting emergency repair, at the next regular meeting of the board. (c) Change orders. Change orders that do not exceed five percent of the approved project amount and are within the spending authority of the city administrator shall not require board of directors' approval. However, all change orders over and above the amount specified by subsection 2-221(3) of this Code shall be reported in the administrator's written report presented at the next regular meeting of the board of directors. Page 4 of 4  STAFF REPORT TO: Phillip Patterson, City Administrator FROM: Ben Rhoads, AICP, Senior Planner Cc: Don Clark, Community Development Director DATE: November 1, 2021 RE: Zoning Presentation Background: City staff was asked to put together a zoning presentation of key commercial areas of the City. The purpose of this presentation is to display areas where there are potential zoning inconsistencies between the existing operating land use and the base zone. This is referred to as a “mis-zoning” and can occur for a variety of reasons, the most common of which is due to a land use that has been established prior to the establishment of the zone or had occurred at some undisclosed period in the past when zoning rules may have been different. Staff works to correct mis-zonings whenever an impacted property owner seeks a planning permit or business license; the most recent commercial example being the rezoning of 125 E. Kenwood St. to C-2, it was previously zoned R-2. Staff will make the zoning presentation to the Board at the November 16, 2021 Board meeting. Attachments: Various Zoning Map Examples Zoning Presentation All Commercial Zones with PD HWY 412 1 Zoning Presentation Downtown and East Main St. H1-DT 2 Zoning Presentation East Main St. and Lincoln St. 3 Zoning Presentation Tulsa St. and Mt. Olive St. 4 Zoning Presentation Hwy. 412 E. and Progress Ave. 5