This is the agenda session for next week's city council meeting.

Um the first thing we will have next week is a sales tax and monthly financial report from our CFO, Stephen Dotson.

That cart is still on for next week.

Okay.

Um, and then connected communities workshop presentation, which I believe is moved to September.

So if we can make a note on our um uh and then hopefully that was not a surprise for you to hear that it was moved to September, but it looks perhaps like it was.

So let's we'll connect after, but if we um um Courtney, if you mind to remove that, we'll have that presentation okay at a later date.

And then the consent agenda next week will start with A1.

Um, it'll be approval of the minutes.

A two, a resolution to approve an agreement with waste management for the hauling and disposal of solid waste in the city of Fayetteville for a period of two years with automatic renewals for two additional two-year terms.

And I believe this is oh no, this is not the one.

Never mind.

Um Peter is here if you have questions about any of these.

Um I'm gonna go through consent fairly quickly, but if you've got if you want to hear more about it, please just say so and we'll go more in depth.

A three is a resolution to approve an agreement with Hogbox for the hauling and disposal of solid, not just oh no, this is just very similar.

Solid waste in this city of payment though for a period of two years with automatic renewals for two additional two-year terms.

A four is a resolution to approve a budget adjustment in the amount of 30,296 recognizing 2025 community development block grant program income received from a housing lien payoff.

Item A5 is a resolution to approve the 2025 community development block grant action plan to authorize Mayor Rowan to execute the CDEG and home investment partnerships grant agreement for 2025 when received in the total amount of 1,270, 869 and 67 cents, and to approve a budget agenda.

Kelly, do you mind if I'm up and talk more about this one?

This is a good one we could see.

So we've always care with us, but my questions in particular too.

We're just trying to understand um why our history trying to go back in my memory bank.

What's the 25ers versus like what our previous years have been, like what's changed?

Um, so both of the grants saw a slight increase.

Um, our CDBG allocation this year is $39,643 more than last year.

And the home award is $22,151.78 cents more.

So not a huge increase in either one, but an increase is an increase.

Never a bad thing.

And my uh other question about these is um I know there's a lot of discussion about the different factors.

A lot of times that'll go into these and get weighted in the formulas about how the disbursements happened.

Are there any potential letters that will be visible?

Potentially maximizing or might be available to us that are opportunities of potential um fund dollars that we might.

That is not that's not very forthcoming about what those levers are.

We know they we know they exist and we know it's things like the percentage of your population that is LMI and things like that.

You know, in broad terms, some of the things they look at, but they're pretty secretive about what that actual formula is.

Okay, thank you.

Sure.

Um the next item, and Bob, we're on A6 with consent is a resolution to Mayor Ron to convey a 1,930 square foot ride of way and beasement to SWIPCO for utility relocations associated with the Buddy Hayes Park Improvement Project.

I think we just have a question about the line on the buddy for the problem.

Is that way to Adam?

Wait.

Sorry, I didn't move on to see you in a minute.

So we can sort of talk about it.

Yeah, no, it has been your own.

So the uh YRCC expansion itself, we've uh we've done a push list last Friday.

So we expect the building to be substantially complete in a week.

So in a couple weeks, we'll be ready to move in.

Uh Buddy Hayes Parks stream restoration is completed.

And so now they're gonna be working on the other features.

Uh the seating, boulder seating, retaining wall, sidewalks, curb, scutter.

That should probably take about three months.

Is that an impact of the streets down there so tight down there now that you have connected to the center might be completed?

Like, what's the roadway gonna be like down here?

So you might notice there's a crosswalk across there now that to kind of do a little traffic calming.

It's also uh ADA pathway across the street.

So the side of the street is just as wide as it was.

Uh, but we've added some handicapped spaces in front of the facility.

But with the word that'll happen in the park, then do we anticipate any road closure in that area or uh perhaps some lane closures do the there's gonna be parking along mill.

So with that will be curbs and gutters and sidewalks of no need to close the entire road, but perhaps the lane.

Thank you, Lisa.

You're welcome.

And so um the next item is a resolution to approve a one-year contract with Kutac Rock LLP pursuant to RFQ 25 Def 06 for bond council services as needed with four one-year renewal options.

A eight is a resolution to authorize the grant agreement with the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission for funding in the amount of 203,317.25 cents to support transit stock improvements and to approve a budget adjustment recognizing grant funds and the matching funds from Ozark Regional Transit and Razorback Transit.

Item A9 is a resolution to approve.

I am going to read this, but I know that councilperson Turk has emailed and requested that we need this.

That is up to you all, but um the record stating that it's a resolution to approve the purchase of six Peterville recycling tracks from Arkansas Municipal Equipment and a total amount of $2,510,052 plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, and delivery is pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract and to approve a budget adjustment.

Council Member Turk has her hand raised.

Oh got it.

Okay.

Teresa.

Can you all hear me?

Can you hear me?

No.

We can now, yes.

Okay, great.

Uh yes, I'd like to remove this from consent and put it on new business.

Okay.

Thank you.

Item 810 is a resolution to authorize an agreement with Crafton Toll and Associates for design phase services for the Gregg Avenue safe streets and roads for all project in an amount not to exceed 227,860 and to approve a budget adjustment.

So that moves us to um new business and also council person, council person staff.

One of the things we did when we got here is um the presentation on connected communities workshop presentation two is that's gonna be moved to September meeting.

So just say you're everything else is stayed the same.

Um finished business.

The first item B1 is an ordinance to establish the city of Faithville's the City of Faithville Renters Council representing the interests of renters located within the city of Faithville to advise and make recommendations to the mayor and city council on public policy matters of importance to renters citywide in chapter 33 of the Fable City Code.

And do you mind to fill us in?

I think something out related to this.

I I did.

I uh drafted up after listening to the council saying we felt like you should have some landlords on this uh committee, and I drafted this up.

I've submitted it to council member uh uh Jones and he approved.

And so uh this is probably what's going to be uh presented by council member Jones as an amendment to the current ordinance, and I should note that even though the agenda shows the old old ordinance that was amended by the council at the last meeting to a different ordinance, but anyway, this is another one that that has a change that has three landlords that would also be on this nine member committee, so you get better balance, I guess.

And that was what we heard from the council, and council member Jones has agreed that he will submit this as an amendment.

Do we foresee any other amendments come?

I know sometimes when the packet, and this isn't the clerk's office, does a great job, but sometimes when they're we have like a version one, a version two, and then three, and we have like three B.

Sometimes it gets confusing, I know to figure out what we're voting on.

But do we go ahead and pop?

Uh I was just gonna say, uh, I I thought from our discussions and and it could be my uh the uh I thought we were looking at two members uh as renters.

Um you mean as landlords, as landlords, sorry, yeah.

Um I mean that would be my preference, but it it's it sounds like I can bring that up at the well, I'd like you to read this too so you can read the whole thing and not just look at the numbers.

Okay.

Maybe I guess me something.

Um, so what the normal procedure is after city council makes an amendment is the next day, we work with the city attorney's office in order to make those amendments.

So that legislation text document should always be the most recent one.

However, it's not in this circumstance.

And I think the reason why from what I've been able to gather is you were waiting on information on what amendments were going to continue to be put forward.

So it was just a matter of time and being able to have that information back to us by the time we had to publish the agenda.

Got it.

So by like so by the end of the week, if somebody were to go online and look at the agenda, it will reflect to this.

Absolutely.

Also, reflect the amendment before this one.

Absolutely.

Well, document on that.

Thank you.

Perfect.

Okay.

I have some clarifying uh questions and a couple of comments.

Um first I wanted to double check.

So is this everything that's possibly an amendment that's sitting with us the attorney's office right now that you know today?

I guess just to clarify.

Oh, I I think this is going to be the amendment.

We had one prior amendment, which was adopted by the council, and then at that point we had some comments about landlords.

So then I drafted this up and DeAndre approved it, but it doesn't mean it's a council.

You can't make a further amendments if you want to.

Well, and I want to um my comments is that you know our full council wasn't at the discussion, and so I know I was absent, unfortunately out of migraine.

I apologize, I couldn't depend um, so wasn't a part of that.

I've been talking to residents for a number of months um who uh have expressed that they would like to put us to say fully a renters um council.

So that's something I'm continuing to have conversations.

I want to put that out there.

Um I understand sitting on nominating committee um as I kind of unofficially audited what the committees look like.

I think that they do somewhat reflect, you know, homeowners across many of our uh committees that exist today.

Um recognize that we have 60 percent um uh residents that are renting, and so it's something um that's been brought up of concern from residents who were um of this committee.

Um the additional thing that was discussed additional thing that was discussed during the council meeting um was how the process would be for putting these individuals on the committee, and so um you know I do feel very strongly that it should go through the nominating committee process.

Um, and then also would like to look at and bring forward um the frequency of the meetings as well as um creating uh what the pathway is for establishing a chair or um you know how within the city um this has kind of staffing and resourcing because I think we have some learnings of our conversations and and what interacted with the housing crisis task force that you know, um without it being kind of resourced a certain way or um setting up what the chair, you know, how we're gonna establish the chair it makes those continues sometimes go a dress to some degree.

Um so those were things that I wanted to break up so that they're out there in the public, they're here with our colleagues, so I'll work with the city attorney's office.

I didn't know what the language was because I knew it was in flux, and so until I would see it, didn't want to muddy the situation any further, uh, but was not able to be a part of that conversation.

So those are the areas that I'm gonna uh speak to amend city attorney to bring forth.

Um keep Dr.

Jones has his hand raised.

Okay.

Uh thank you so much.

Um I understand that if there are amendments that need to be made, uh as always, we can make them at the council meeting.

Uh, I didn't want to go into detail at tonight's meeting, uh, because um we uh I just wanted to make sure that I responded to Kit and that Kit was able to present what uh what I responded that Kit was able to have what he needed from me to respond uh to present at today's uh agenda session.

So as Kit mentioned, uh at any time uh prior to the meeting, we can always make amendments like we've always done.

So I just didn't want to, I didn't want to do that right now because I know that we've always, if there were amendments as it relates to hearing from other members in the community that that there is time even at the meeting to make those uh amendments.

I just kind of want to say uh uh council member Jones just said that I think if council member wants to bring names, that's fine to bring to the next meeting.

Um, I think that this is possible, Jones's submitted document, and that's what I would like to consider at the beginning of the next meeting.

And if you'd like to bring amendments to the table at that time, then we all have ready to do that.

I was just the city attorney presented that that's what the councils wishes and then just some of this work, cousin.

So I was trying to clarify.

If I may, my question would be do we not have standardized language for committees to select the chair at their first meeting.

Oftentimes you don't even need to have that in there, it just committees elect a chair, chair serves one year and it's re-elected again.

So we don't uh, you know, the code when this when you have a uh a committee like this, which is an advisory committee, right?

It's not a final action committee.

We don't need to be uh bogged down in too much procedure.

We just want to let them meet and and decide that kind of stuff for themselves rather than dictating to them.

If it was a planning commission or city council, we have very strict procedural rules for all that, so long state required.

But on most of these volunteer city committees, it's really not necessary to say an elect a chairperson because you know that that is just understood in this.

But if it's also not long to put it in there if that's what you want to.

One of the things that I would ask on behalf of staff, um, that the council keep in mind, we really try when the city council wants to start a committee to resource that as much as we can.

When we start getting really, really prescriptive about who on staff will staff that and how many times they will meet, that begins to make it hard for us to do our jobs and allocate resources.

That to me starts to feel like an overreach because I can starting a committee with a goal is one thing, but it's really hard to have an ordinance say stating that you know a specific staff person is gonna carry out this meeting, meeting many meetings, because then for that to change a year from now, if we have personnel changes or if we have schedule changes, we're in violation of the law and we have to go get an ordinance change to have a simple meeting.

And so it can be I get that people want to drive an outcome, but it can when you put so much specificity around it, it makes it hard on staff.

And that's what I've heard and I'm trying to reflect from hearing from my team.

So just something to consider as we balance.

I might be that if if we don't have some type of structure, then we're not um allowing them the um the structure needed in order to move towards goals and objectives because if you're meeting just to be and nobody gives you any structure, it could it could take a long time to form because teams forming is hard.

It's really hard unless you give structure, and that's just from an HR perspective, because there's some storming that goes into forming until you give some types of rules, and then there's no report forming because you're still storming because nobody's representing rules.

And if we don't define those that structure, then you're you're right.

Teams can sit in storm for a long time before they get to those.

Uh I think that one thing that we have to be careful not to lose sight of.

We will have a housing officer there that's there to help guide a lot of this.

And so um, Mayor Ron, I really do appreciate uh your comments as it relates to details, uh, because that's very important, especially in this stage.

And again, I'm really excited because we do have someone who's going to help navigate and guide this ship, and that's the housing officer.

I agree that that person is new too, correct?

Okay, so then we're gonna give a new person guidance for a new team without any guidance.

Right.

No, I mean, I I think that there's an absolutely we want to give them guidance.

I think I was just speaking to there's a difference between saying here's your goal, you need to run this, and you must meet two Tuesdays a month at six o'clock.

I mean, I it was about trying to balance not being so overly specific that they can't be nimble and do what they need to do, is my only.

So what they see are the issues that we try to legislate everything they do.

I mean, it's not what we're successful.

You've got to give them some freedom to work.

And that's what I hope that we end up doing is give them some parameters, but let them go to work.

If we're your really want an outcome, we need to get out of the way and let them talk.

I think you said it though.

What are the general parameters for our advisory committees?

We don't have any.

Do we have any um looking purpose and duties 33.454?

That's where the city council is saying, this is what we'd like you to do.

This is your guidance.

You know, my sense is that we have had, you know, I like the phrase jail plan.

Just let people kind of do their thing, but kind of keep them in the lane that we've got and hopefully that will help them give us the best outcome that we would like to get.

Because we have had manies that have been filled before, didn't really just you know, just floundered for you know, years because they didn't really get cohesive and get focused stuff.

So, you know, I do think I do see both sides of this, I think maybe just a little frame one, but but we don't want to be but I agree with Scott.

We don't want to be too specific that they can't.

They don't feel like they have the freedom.

I think we might all be saying the same thing at possible.

B2 is a resolution to express the city council's intent to provide $70,000 in matching funds to the Salivation Army for an emergency solutions grant from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development.

There was some can um I take responsibility, there was some confusion for it at the last meeting.

I had made the request um that you all consider tabling this, and I thought I was asking for it to be tabled for two meetings, and it got tabled for two weeks, which is my fault because I did not clarify.

And so what I am asking, because there are I'm in conversations with the city attorney and the chief finance officer over what type of funds can be used to fund this due to the nature of the activities.

And so I would like for you all, I would be deeply appreciative if um, I mean, I know we have to take that action at the meeting, but I'm just preparing you all.

I will be asking at the meeting that it be tabled to the next meeting, which I believe is September 2nd.

Is that right?

That's correct.

And that brings us to new business item C one, is it ordinance to establish the city of Fayetteville firefighters bill of rights that provides basic protections for firefighters regarding personnel, disciplinary, and promotional actions.

Um would you well, we'll talk more about it, but if um the would you like to chief good to talk about this at all?

I mean, this is something that a state law has now a new state law has enabled us to do.

It does not require us to do it by any means, but we have the opportunity to be the first in the state to pass such an ordinance, which I think is really exciting.

And Chief Harden isn't here, he's actually at a fire conference in Orlando, otherwise he would be talking to you all about it.

But he will be back next week.

And I apologize, I've been off for two weeks, so I haven't been involved in a whole lot of this conversation.

But yes, this uh was recently passed at the state level.

It basically adopting this solidifies current policies and procedures that we have in place in Fayetteville.

Um basically to cement against any changes in the administration that may come on down the road.

Uh basically we're already doing everything.

We're already doing everything in here.

And this is the preliminary talking about preliminary hearing.

It's not the civil service commission hearing, they still can have that if they disagree with this one that's been handed out.

Correct.

I believe in my discussion with Chief Hurden said there might be just like one little thing that would have to be a yes, and then that's pretty much it.

And it's a completely an internal policy, yes, in relation to a predisciplinary meeting after the initial investigation with the individual being investigated to discuss potential outcomes.

And relation to a predisciplinary meeting after the initial investigation with the individual being investigated to discuss potential outcomes.

So I think what you see now is really what is being presented with no further changes.

While you're up here, I just want to take a quick second to thank your department for the work last night uh at the E fired next to the veteran cemetery.

And I'm very grateful that we took the action we did because that could have been a cost of life.

It was a best outcome that we could vote for.

Thank you also.

Thank you.

Item C2 is an ordinance to approve vacation 25-15 for property located at East Martin Luther King Jr.

Boulevard and South College Avenue in Ward 1 to vacate approximately 0.04 acres of ride away.

Item C3 is an ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2025-25 for approximately 180.84 acres of city park properties located in all four wards from various zoning districts to P1 institutional.

This is just kind of a cleanup, right?

Absolutely nothing, not the major just clean up rust.

And you're not having deja vu.

We did go through this last year as well.

These are some additional properties, including those long trail four doors and some some additional remnant pieces, mostly.

For approximately 66.78 acres located southeast of Springs Road and West Tipton Road in Ward 4.

Item C five.

I don't breathe from journey on.

Oh, yes.

Do you want to do yes, Jonathan?

You want to come up and do anything?

Yeah.

Council discretion.

Yeah, coming up.

Yes.

And Council John Link development services.

This particular property, as mayor noted, is uh located southeast of Double Springs and Dot Tipton.

It includes uh just shy of 67 acres of land.

It has been before council many, many times since it was annexed in 2006.

It originally got a PZD designation in 2008.

Uh no development ever occurred.

If you're looking at the aerial map, you see that it is effectively open pasture.

And in 2015, it was uh rezoned after the PCD's expiration.

Uh, we have seen three rezoning requests in the last five years, one to RSF4, uh resident single family four units breaker that staff recommended denial of the planning commission.

Uh denied it was not appealed, so you all may not be as familiar with that one.

Uh the year after that, there was a request to rezone it to RSF two.

Uh staff recommended denial of that.

The planning commission denied that as well.

That one was appealed, uh, and the the city council ultimately upheld the denial, so was not rezoned.

Uh, and then very recently, uh earlier this year, there was a request to rezone it to NC neighborhood conservation that was also denied.

Um, that was uh and it was not appealed.

So what's before council tonight is uh something a little bit more nuanced than any of those what I would call straight rezonings.

Uh it's a PZD with four components or planning areas, if you will.

Uh the first, which is just shy of 18 acres, is intended to be developed with attached townhomes.

Uh, the second, which is uh about 28 acres is meant to be small lot single family houses.

The third of which uh is about uh four acres, just shy of four acres is intended to be developed with large lot single family, and that leaves the balance of the property, which is about uh 16, 17 acres and representing about 25 percent of the overall site uh is intended to be left as open space.

Uh staff is recommending denial of the request uh when the planning commission heard it, they forwarded it to city council.

Obviously, it's before you not on appeal.

That was by a vote of seven to two.

Uh staff's main concerns revolved around the lack of potential for services uh within the PCD.

It's it's an a purely residential request.

Uh, this is a portion of the city that we already have concerns about the adequacy of the infrastructure and and growth and congestion and not having even the potential to uh offer these services nearby and give people an alternative to driving, uh, gave us pause.

Additionally, if you're familiar with this area, particularly dot tipton, it is an extremely narrow, uh effectively a country road, it's never been developed uh further beyond uh when the property was annexed.

Yes, Councilmember Berna.

It runs between uh sorry I've had a hard time describing it myself.

It runs between double springs in the west to I believe it's now I'm doubting myself, I'm sorry.

It's 54th, I think in the east.

Yes, thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh it if you don't have a reason to drive down it, most people don't.

Uh it has an odd jog about halfway along it that helps you visualize it.

Uh it's largely developed with pastures and and large estate properties still.

Uh this the majority of the property in question here sits roughly in the middle of of 54th and double springs, but there is a leg of the property that extends up to double springs and dot tipton.

Um when the I think among the planning commissioners in an effort to characterize their their comments, uh some uh shared many of the concerns that staff had as well.

Uh there's also a perception that development at this point has exceeded this area, that a lot of the conversations that occurred previously that this was sprawl have been superseded by development that's happening in Farmington to the west.

Uh, if you look at an aerial image here, you will see a not insignificant subdivision in Farmington immediately west of this.

Uh and then of course there's development in Fayville to the north of it.

Um we have received uh a couple uh pieces of public comment in opposition to this request.

Uh those concerns uh largely resolved or revolved around uh what does the perception to be high density development and a lack of infrastructure in the area?

Any questions?

We have an uh exact uh address or close address.

Uh seeing it in fact no, and it doesn't comment right.

It's uh Google Maps and put in double springs road and dot tipton road in it, but it popped up at that corner.

It looks like it's directly between uh Farmington to the south and uh highway 16 uh Weddington uh three or four blocks to the north, maybe it's many more blocks than that, actually.

If you put in 6187 dot tipton, that should get you pretty close.

Pretty close.

Yes, although I don't believe that's not part of the request, but that will get you in the vicinity.

Right.

Yeah.

I do notice uh you know, directly to the north, uh and and on a smaller scale to the west, uh that they're in and even to the southeast that there are other uh similar type developments um already there.

Um and so it is staff think that this is just oversaturation of that type of development or or maybe just for further enough away services or or I I don't think it's one single thing.

I I think certainly that is a piece of it that a lot of the development that has occurred in the area is outside our jurisdiction.

So we didn't have any oversight over it, or it occurred in areas that already were entitled for that development.

So it was we didn't have that discretion to uh make an evaluation of whether we thought it was appropriate.

Um, and then that coupled primarily with the infrastructure or the lack thereof in the area, I think is what uh gives us concern.

Yeah, and is this an area where we're running up against the wall on uh water and sewer services?

Well, that is that is an odd component of this.

There were a series of lift stations developed in this uh uh through the middle of the property during the the earlier effort to develop it.

Uh those have been sitting largely dormant as I understand it.

So in that sense, I don't believe there's a sewer concern there.

Uh a component or one thing we evaluate or consider as a part of rezoning requests is if the infrastructure is so deficient and staff's eyes and the size of the development is not adequate to be uh responsible for making those upgrades.

We feel like we're being we're putting the city in a worse position and the future residents in a worse position uh by not having whether it's adequate primarily here, adequate streets or or access to services.

Okay.

And then they're pioneering reasons.

Certainly, I think uh again, one of the big pieces of that was um that the many of the assertions that this was sprawl and and irresponsible development may have been superseded by the fact that development in this area has actually surpassed it uh out in the Farmington, and it's it's hard to make a straight faced argument that this is sprawl development at that point.

Um I think that's the the prominent comment that I recall hearing from it, but I'll I'll go back and make sure I give a more detailed update at the council meeting.

Do we have any further questions about this one?

Okay, um so that takes us to item C5, a resolution to grant the appeal of council members more, Turk, and we to deny and deny conditional use permit C UP 2025-25 for a type two short-term rental at 421 West Island Street and Ward 2.

I have just a certain individual city hall, yeah.

Uh is sponsoring this appeal has said in the past that people that sponsor short-term remote appeals have to say in the city council chambers after us.

Kind of remembered maybe we can go back one of the minutes it's a long statement.

Okay, well, we'll be ready.

Um Keith, can you make sure Byron is prepared when the meeting closes on Tuesday?

Byron and Quinn to help escort Mr.

Lydaker will just start on the bottom floor restrooms and work their way up.

Well, the appropriate equipment and gear ready for answering.

Yes.

Um we'll discuss it.

If no more comments about that, that'll remain on in in place on the agenda next week.

And then item C6 is a resolution to grant the appeal of council members much more Turk and Wheaker and deny conditional use permits CUP 2025-26 for a type two short-term rental at 463 West Isla Street, also in Ward 2.

The procedural um question is that um, and I'm assuming we all have the same conversation with Mr.

Kenyon.

Um, is that uh these items both are in a similar area?

So maybe present it and talked about one presentation, and then how should we they both need to be voted on separately, though?

I know they're on Island Street real close to each other, and I think owned by the same person, I think, maybe, but they still need language.

They'll be decided individually that what we can do when Mr.

Kurt presents is he can speak to the first presentation can be longer, and then when we get to C6, he can say, do you need any additional information or do you get the gist of it?

And then shouldn't be an issue then as well when I understand the um extension was to defer to the sinister canyon or one of the neighbors that have phones versus that your understanding as well.

I'll be busy cleaning, so you didn't know.

Is that do we and what is the process for that instead of so I think what become wrong with council personnel is saying is that instead of the sponsors of it are presenting, they're having the neighbor present the appeal.

Is that oftentimes that council members who are the only ones that can do an appeal will do an appeal but yield their time to uh a neighbor or someone else that they're doing the appeal for, it's still their appeal, feel the city council's appeal, but they can yield their time else if they want to.

So just check in.

Um is on your agenda that there will be an energy report from our environmental director.

We will not be doing that on Tuesday.

Um, we will instead be doing that.

Do we have a date yet or is it September 9th?

We will be doing that September 9.

I think Councilmember Turk has a resolution she wants to watch.

Yes, forgive me.

So I um is she on soon?

Yes, she is she is a so before what I just said.

I mean, the energy report is going away, but back up after C6.

Uh Tracer.

Thank you, Mayron.

Um, yes, before you should be um the proposed walk-on a resolution to request um a master plan and uh for recycling and trash.

And so if we could put that um before um item A9 that I took off uh of consent, I think that would be most productive.

So what you're saying is that you want that then you want the first two items on new business to be the recycling track purchase and then the this new resolution that you're bringing.

Um I I guess what I would I I don't care where they go on new business.

Does that make sense?

It does, yes.

But anywhere y'all want to put it, we could at the end there.

That'd be fine.

That'd be fine if you want to put it at the end.

It might be nice because then the people doing the rezoning and the appeal, and then they're all able to okay.

Um, just bring in you on council night.

So um council numbers are you able to help us to kind of understand um timeline or I don't know if that's been talked about with staff how this would impact timeline or you know how long this would work in regard to um what we already kind of had in process.

Does that make sense?

Is that a question to me?

I'm I'm having a hard time hearing I just I I didn't want to ask just the night of the council meeting, but I was hopeful to understand how this impacts timeline and how long you know this timeline would be to do this master plan um and then how it would impact then the decision making and the timeline for any changes we would make.

So I I mean my best guess would be probably um have probably at least nine months or two a year because um master plans typically you know have a lot of analysis, a lot of review, a lot of details that we're kind of lacking right now, and um, and so that's that would be my best guess.

Um, but you know, we'd have to um put out an RFP and uh it would just depend on how quickly we could get um a suitable uh appropriate um company to go in and assist with the master plan creation.

And then my other question that I just I don't want to drop on that night of um because I know that could probably be difficult, is I know that we struggled with the current workers during the and so this extending the timeline.

I'm curious to if we then what plan we have in place for both you know how we um mitigate additional injuries and harm to our workers as well as we have available to key hose ambitions filled as um carrying about with the HR payment for that as well.

Well, I I think uh maybe a meeting with HR and staff would be appropriate to try and address that and and uh identify uh ways that uh injuries could be reduced because the safety issues seem to be largely driven by 2024 and um and and keep increasing.

So I think that would be a conversation with um with those staff folks for clarification uh and Peter as our environmental director and the one that is oversees this program.

Have you when did you receive this?

This the have you had a chance to review or look at the resolution being walked on?

I just got a text copy of it from Keith, so no, I haven't had okay during this meeting.

Yes, got it.

Okay, and I saw it at 428.

So just to let you know why we're not answering any of those questions.

I just want to be denied of either.

Oh, yeah, no, sure.

Yeah, so we've not had the opportunity to know about this.

So Teresa, are you asking us in essence to set aside the decision that was made two weeks ago uh for to look at this master plan?

Is that what you're asking?

That is what I'm asking uh because I don't think there are enough details um that were provided or documentation about some of the estimates as I demonstrated last week.

Um so the master plan is kind of the typical way we go about making significant changes.

Um that uh would be under your consideration, yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um do we have any announcements?

Yeah, other than there's a water and sewer committee directly after this.

Okay, just a reminder that words committees and commissions uh applications have to be submitted by August 22nd at 5 VM.

I happen to have five Washington County Historical Society ice cream special ticket, so which you're gonna want.

Good cake.

It is this Sunday.

No, this Saturday, three to five again.

Okay, C meeting if I continue.

Okay.