Um well I'm going to call our meeting to order here.

Get my agenda pull back up.

This is the um December 30th, City of Fayetteville agenda session for the city council.

And it's been a while since I've done one of these, so I'll try and wing it here.

Um so first we're going to have our call to order, our roll call, pledge of allegiance, any announcements the mayor may have.

Uh we'll have a review of presentations.

Do we go to the sales tax?

Uh do we do that sales tax now or at the end of the agenda?

That's at the council meeting.

That's the council meeting.

Okay.

All right.

On our consent agenda, we have um approval of December 16th, 2025 city council meeting minutes.

We have uh A2, which is a purchase of truck hauling services, a resolution to award bid 20 uh 2613 and authorize the purchase of truck hauling services from NEC Incorporated as primary supplier and to authorize use of other bidders based on price and availability through the end of 2026.

Next item is purchase of emerald ashboard treatment services.

A resolution to award bid.

I had a question.

Okay, go ahead.

Um, it's only because um she said this was based on other bidders, and I thought I spoke with Steve briefly, and these were all um RFPs that have already been bid and and the bids have been awarded.

Is that not correct?

No, that's that's correct.

Uh bid 26-13.

Um, and that information is in the uh the item itself.

So basically, what we do is oftentimes what we'll do is we'll award to one bidder, but we have authorization to use other bidders as well as needed.

And this is it on an as needed purpose.

That's correct.

And what was the cost on that?

I'm sorry, I'm not looking at my agenda yet either.

Uh, if you give me a second, I can pull that one out.

Thank you.

This is on the first one, Chris.

Yeah, this is the first one.

I'm trying to get my agenda up.

I'm sorry, what'd you say?

Hold on one second, we're pulling the memo up.

Sure, thank you.

Yeah, so this uh as Keith said, this is variable unit pricing as needed.

Um as outlined in uh the bid tab, bid 26-13 for truck hauling services.

It's on uh page four of the agenda item.

So it's as needed.

We don't have a set dollar amount, it's just as we need it.

Well, and what's the total?

I guess my question is we just have an open bid that we approve as a city council to spend on an elaborate amount of money as needed.

I'm just trying to be very clear on what's the what's I I understand, Keith.

I see how you're looking at me.

But I guess my question is what what is the total amount for this bid?

I think we have Terry Gully online.

He could answer that.

Thank you.

Yes, uh, what this is is for truck calling services when we use lease trucks to help us in our asphalt program.

And um we may have a if we're doing a larger project, we may release 10 trucks on a on a one-day project.

And uh if uh we're needing extra vehicles, we'll use this to supplement that so that we can have our uh employees running the paving and paving equipment and the rollers and all that.

So it says uh as needed basis.

If we're doing a small job the next day that maybe we only need the number of trucks that we have in the department, then we won't lease trucks.

So the $95 per hour is the rate, and uh we'll use the first bidder if they can supply the trucks.

If they're not able to supply them on that particular day, then we go to the other bidders until we find enough vehicles to uh provide our needs to get that project accomplished.

But it's open-ended, it's a guess on the total amount of how much we'll use.

It's just uh we can't estimate that till we actually get on each specific project and see how many vehicles we need to use to get the projects done.

can supply the trucks if they're not able to supply them on that particular day then we go to the other bidders until we find enough vehicles to uh provide our needs to get that project accomplished but it's open ended it's a guess on the total amount of how much we'll use it's just uh we can't estimate that till we actually get on each specific project and see how many vehicles we need used to get the projects done thank you and Steve I didn't understand that any of the bids were all are you are I'm just asking you just to be clear so we can move forward on this agenda are they any other bids that are similar that are all open ended that does not have a total amount up to to me what I would see a bid is $95 an hour up to $25,000 up to 100,000 what is budgeted for the bid answer what's that okay I think that what's confusing to this it's a unit cost so it's based upon specific projects so a lot of these projects are coming to you with a specific dollar amount.

So there may this may be encompassed 20 different projects and each one of those projects uh you know you may see those throughout the year it says that uh the material cost is X.

Right.

I and I did have this discussion with Steve earlier.

I understand that Keith I'm trying to figure out up to it so as a city council member you're telling me we can approve an open bid without a full amount up to any particular amount is that correct that's my clarification.

It's constrained by what you've approved in the street fund for the budget for the year for the operating budget for that year.

And so currently I mean I mean that's an 11 million dollar budget now for instance this item as well this also gives us the ability to use these services for other departments as well.

And one of the things I think that's important to keep in mind here is uh you know the city will have uh emergencies where we need to react quickly and that's another key reason for these type of bids it allows us to handle the problem immediately rather than waiting to bring it forward to council to resolve an emergency that's happening right now.

I agree I'm not that's not that's not where my open my question my just closing the question this is up to what amount like like I said are you saying 11 million?

It's three three thousand quantity of three thousand is what we're estimating the max it be and that's where that 285000 comes from based on this 95 per hour so that's our best guess on the most we would have to use it for thank you exactly what I was asking for I appreciate it.

That's is that answer your question Monique it does because I just did one I don't want to approve something that does not have and we're really clear to say this is what this is approved up to I can I mean I just don't I didn't feel comfortable saying this is an open-ended bid with no amount.

Right that it's open ended okay yes once again this is constrained by what you've approved for the overall budget in those funds um so anything that exceeds budgeted amounts for land item we come back to council so okay do we have any more questions on this item okay so I think I'm on number three is that correct so which is a resolution I'm gonna read it anyway a resolution to award bid 2619 and authorize the purchase of emerald ash borer treatment services from Ace of Blades lawn care as needed through the end of 2026.

I have a I have a question on that before you move forward.

Okay.

So it's similar to Monique's I I'm looking at the spreadsheet now and it looks like um this is authorized up to 48,999.

So is that is that correct I see that you know the unit price is different per DBH but is that is that the most that's allocated uh under this current budget that we passed for this work.

So I'll speak to that um a handful of these are what we call both bids and we do them every fall um the quantities that are bid with the units are an estimate uh because it varies year by year uh but to echo and see with saying that's all been approved in the budget um we bid these out because multiple departments throughout the city use these um and so the 4899 is the estimated amount for the year so I I think what would be helpful um and maybe more efficient at least for me and and possibly uh Monique is that if we had included in there up to a certain amount so if it if you know if through the budget process that we approved um there was uh a maximum being able to be possible used for the year of a hundred thousand so that would be helpful to kind of understand and and recall and know remind us exactly where the where the limit is um if that makes sense yeah that thank you that's what would be helpful for me at least with any any new sort of blanket um agreements like this

So if it if you know, if through the budget process that we approved, um there was uh a maximum being able to be possible used for the year of 100,000.

So that would be helpful to kind of understand and and recall and know, remind us exactly where the where the limit is, um, if that makes sense.

Yeah.

That thank you.

That's what would be helpful for me at least with any any new sort of blanket um agreements like this.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Next item is um let's see, ash borers.

Um a resolution to award bid number 26-01 and approve the purchase of pavement marking illustration services from Everline Coding and Services and AFNG LLC as needed through the end of 2026.

Anybody want to ask any questions about that before I move on?

Okay.

A5, a resolution to award bid 26-02 and approve the purchase of concrete services as needed from sweets or construction company incorporated through the end of 2026.

A six, a resolution to award bid 2603 and authorize the purchase of tree planting services from custom lawn care, LLC as needed through the end of 2026.

A7, a resolution to award bid 26-04 and approve the purchase of asphalt paving services as needed from Emory SAP and Sons Incorporated through the end of 2026.

A8, a resolution to award bid 2605 and authorize uh the purchase of concrete materials from Toon Concrete as a primary supplier, and to authorize the use of other bidders based on a on price and availability as needed through the end of 2026.

A9, a resolution to award bid 2606 and authorize the purchase of aggregate materials from Hunt Rogers Materials LLC as primary supplier and to authorize the use of other bidders based on price and availability as needed through the end of 2026.

A10, a resolution to authorize a resolution to authorize the purchase of asphalt materials for use by the transportation division on an as needed basis through the end of 2026.

A11 A11, a resolution to award bid 26-09 and approve the purchase of high performance cold mix as needed from Atlas Asphalt Incorporated and Emory Sapp and Sons Incorporated through the end of 2026.

Hey, Councilmember Moore.

Oh, sorry, sorry.

Just go ahead and speak up because I'm reading off of this.

Yeah, it's hard with them too.

It kind of glitches.

So just back on uh the tree planning services.

I just had a question.

I didn't see it in the packet, and I'm sorry if I missed it.

When we do the tree planning services, um I know for the uh trees that get planted for developments, there's a certain bond on those, I think of three years.

Is that similarly written with that planting service?

Terry, can you answer that?

Oh yeah, I was waiting to say if John Scott was going to jump in on that.

I know this is more for him.

Are you there, John?

I am it's usually a one-year maintenance agreement for the trees.

That's um what's standard, and that's what's in this bid.

Okay, thank you, John.

Oh, I have a question, follow-up question.

So, John, why is it not three years to be consistent with some of our other requirements?

We wouldn't get anybody who would bid on that.

Um, they simply don't bid on three-year um maintenance agreements.

Have you tried that in the past and nobody bid on it?

That's correct.

Okay, thank you.

And I'm assuming that if we tried it in the past, we tried it more than once.

Is that correct?

And no one bid on it.

Correct.

Okay.

I believe I'm on number 11.

A resolution to award bid.

No, no, I'm on 12, I think.

Um, a resolution to this is A12, a resolution to award bid 26-08 and approve the purchase of HDPE drainage pipe as needed from Northwest Arkansas wind water through the end of 2026.

And A13 purchase resolution toward bid 26-12 and authorize the purchase of lighting from Premier Lighting Group as a primary supplier and to authorize the use of other bidders based on the price and availability as needed through the end of 2026.

I think I have some I have some questions on this one.

And Keith, I don't know if that was you.

Keith, I don't know if you're able to find answers, but I was concerned.

Um I want to make sure that you know the suppliers uh able to supply uh products that meet our night sky uh ordinances uh and that that was looked at and and that we're we're sure about that.

Um I I am concerned that some of the lighting we've been putting in the last few years uh hasn't uh met those requirements.

Um but uh Keith, were you able to uh find that out or is there anybody else can answer that question if not?

Chris Brown and Terry Gully are both prepared to answer those questions.

Yeah, I I can start with that.

Um so all of our new lights that are being installed are our dark sky compliant, both on trails and uh streets.

Um all of our trail lights, uh even the older ones are um some of the uh some of the existing lights, like on Spring Street, College Avenue, and downtown are not.

And so we've got a bid here to replace um those in kind.

Essentially the the acorn lights that you see, uh the ones that have lenses uh don't meet the dark sky compliant just because the lens refracts a little bit of light.

Uh the ones that don't have lenses, like on Mission Boulevard and on Dean Street that we've recently installed, they do meet that requirement.

Um so we do have some some fixtures in here that that don't uh fully meet that uh because we want to replace those in kind and and have uniformity uh on some of those older lights.

Um but everything new as we installed new ones, um, those are those are all meet all meet that requirement.

Okay, and then um Chris uh it just a fellow it and is is color temperature uh part of uh uh those requirements.

Yes, uh our standard is a 4,000 uh K.

So 4,000 K meets night sky requirements.

Yeah, the the color of the light is is not really what the uh when we talk about full cutoff or um you know refraction or um bug ratings or I mean there are a lot of different standards, but uh the the color of the light um is not really factored into that.

We're talking about um up light or light that is refracted upward uh when we talk about dark sky.

I I guess my concern is a lot of you know 4000 K does have an effect on uh animal night like nocturnal animals uh not necessarily helpful for our circadian rhythms as well.

Um is there a reason we don't use warmer lighting?

Uh you know, I I would love if everything was 2700K, but I I know but yeah, we tried it.

Um we we did have some 3,000 out there, and it's been really difficult to um we have to to put the lights a lot closer together.

It's just been kind of an unacceptable lighting level.

Um is what we found.

So most of the solar lights that we've been we've been doing a lot of research recently on solar lighting, and they pretty much are all 4,000 as well, uh, just to be able to get the lighting coverage that's needed.

Okay.

Okay, thank you for answering those questions.

Sure.

Um, I have a question for Chris.

So um on the purchase of lighting, this A13 item.

Is that uh is that two do the replacement or or is that a separate project than that?

It's both.

So if you look at the detail in the bid tabulation, we have several different fixtures specified.

Um and if you look at the look at that detail, there's the new orleans fixture, which is the which is the um acorn light.

They that's uh model number N2F.

Um we have two different types of those.

Um the NL at the at the end of that is no lens, and that means we don't have a globe or any kind of lens on it, and then we want to have ones that do have lenses on them.

Uh the ones with lenses are items two and three, uh, four and five are the no lens items, and then the first line is the the bell type fixture for trails.

We have several different fixtures there.

Thank you, Chris, for clarifying that.

I I can't, the screen is so small that I have right here.

So I appreciate the those details.

Okay.

Okay.

Our next item.

I'm sorry.

I was trying to wait till there's a pause.

Sorry, Councilmember Bunch.

No, I appreciate this conversation.

And I was I had wanted to ask about the mission ones because I was curious if those were dark sky and if those were like our newer.

Um I don't actually drive a ton after Dartbit with it being because I'm usually home with kids or in a meeting, it seems like, but um, with a time changing, and I was headed to go look at some of the lights on Mount Sequoia.

We went down mission.

And what I noticed was that I was really blinded as a driver by the lamp post going down mission.

And so that's what I was curious to about the intensity of those.

And you said that those are like the 4,000 K.

Yes.

They they are, and those are the ones without the lenses.

Um, so that's the newest style that we have uh we've got to do that.

I don't know if I'm the only person that like gives feedback on that, but going going down on mission.

I mean, you know, and those come at a great frequency.

I mean, I struggle to be able to see as an automobile going down the street because the way that that came into my vehicle, the way that it's situated at that roadway.

Um, it was very distracting trying to get through that patch going around route school.

And so I I don't know if I'm the only person that's run into that, but I just I'm sure we picked those for a reason.

And thinking about the pedestrian side of it, I just you also obviously you want your automobiles to be able to see okay.

And I know I struggled going through that section.

Yeah, and I'll say uh on that particular project that's on the state highway, and so that was a requirement.

Um, that the no lens fixture was required.

We do go for a lighting level, uh minimum lighting level along trails and things like that.

So some of that may just be roadway um configuration, roadway geometry.

Um, but it's it's a good comment, it's worth considering as we look at future projects.

Well, I just I didn't know if I mean everything else that's gonna have connectivity like going further east, if it was going to be in a similar vein, I guess.

And I just thought about that.

Is some of our area that probably is gonna have more interaction too with automobiles to the trail, and I just I am a little bit light sensitive too.

So that's also I wanted to keep that in mind as well.

Like I may take on the light differently than someone else, but I know as we've talked with nominee and committee, some of the folks that's really come to my attention too about you know, people's different uh visibilities um as they're navigating through the city.

And so as it hit me, I just thought it might be something we want to be thinking about for those those areas that were lighting there with all those interactions.

Sure.

Thank you.

That's a good question.

I I personally have never had a problem with it, but maybe the you know the light sensitivity is different for me or something like that.

So just just a good good question there.

Thank you.

So on to our next item, which is A14.

Whoops.

Uh a resolution to award bid 2620 and authorize the purchase of SOD from 36 North Network Solutions as needed through the end of 2026.

Okay.

A15.

Okay.

A15 is a resolution to award bid 2614 and authorize the purchase of topsoil from Grant Garrett Excavating Incorporated as primary supplier and authorize the use of other bidders based on price and availability as needed through the end of 2026.

Okay.

A16, a resolution to accept the quote from Comfort Systems and authorized plumbing repairs in the development services building in the amount in an amount not to exceed 123,058.

I just had a question on this one that it says it's coming out of the CIP budget, and I didn't know if that had already been budgeted in there as a possible expense.

That's pretty substantial, or if there was something else we're having to forego to take care of that now.

Yeah, that's part of our building improvements, CIP project.

Okay, so it was expected in that okay.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thanks.

Um, let me see here.

A 17, a resolution to approve an extension of the city's sewage system beyond the city limits to property located at 3292 East Skillern Road.

A 18.

Okay.

A resolution to approve a budget adjustment in the amount of 400,000 to move funds to the construction materials account within the water and sewer fund.

Okay.

A19, a resolution to approve and certify the participation of packaging specialist incorporated in the Arkansas Tax Back program to agree to authorize the Arkansas Department of Finance Administration to refund city sales tax back to packaging specialties incorporated for qualified purchases.

A20 resolution.

Okay.

Did someone have a question?

Yeah, I did.

And is that under a grant or something that we're doing that?

Um can anybody speak to that?

On the packaging specialties item.

Yeah.

Yes.

I think Devin Howland can speak on that.

Absolutely.

Um, Minister Jones, I've prepared some comments.

Happy to give the council some more rounded update on this one.

The item before you for your consideration, as um was mentioned, is a resolution authorizing packaging specialties to participate in the Arkansas Economic Development Commission's taxback program.

Tax back is a program that is performance based.

This is a state incentive designed to reduce the upfront cost associated with business expansions and new facilities.

It provides a refund of state and local taxes paid on eligible building materials and qualifying machinery and equipment only during the period of construction and only those purchased within the participating municipality.

In doing so, this program encourages companies to keep their investment dollars local while reinvesting directly back into the community.

To qualify to participate in this program, businesses must first commit and execute a commitment with the Arkansas Economic Development Commission for new job creation and meaningful capital investment.

In the case of packaging specialties, the plant is planning in a 24 million dollar expansion that will hire 101 new jobs over the next five years at over 25 an hour.

Packaging specialties is a longtime legacy Fayetteville employer.

Having invested in our community for more than 50 years since the company was founded here in 1974.

The company specializes in creating food processing and specializes in design and production of food grade packaging specialties and supports more than 250 jobs here in Fayetteville today.

Soon to be 350.

We are grateful for packaging specialties expansion and for their long-standing commitment to growing our workforce.

Happy to answer any additional questions if you may have them.

That answered my question.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Thank you very much, Dev, and I appreciate that.

Oh, so A20 is a resolution to award bid 2553 and authorize a contract with Southern Brothers Construction LLC in the amount of 233,068 and 18 cents for transfer station improvements and to approve a budget contingency in the amount of 23,306.

I have a question.

So I think we just also did some transfer station improvements in 2025.

What more improvements are needed?

What is this uh address?

Yeah, I'll be happy to take that question, Councilmember Turk.

Um, so these improvements um are uh all concrete related.

Uh we've got some concrete failures around the pit in our um recycling processing facility where the recyclables are uh go into the uh the bailer and are moved up uh before they're bailed, and so that concrete needs to be repaired.

Um we've got some um kind of a makeshift situation going on there so we can continue to operate uh before we get these repairs completed.

And then um the other concrete repairs are on our compost pad out back where the public comes in and drops off uh branches and brush and where we do our grinding.

Um we've got a subgrade failure underneath that concrete um that that pad is about 20 years old, and during um any kind of wet weather, that failure area holds water and it's sunken.

And so we're gonna be cutting out a rather large section of concrete and um doing some subgrade repair and some um structural work and then putting new concrete back.

Um so that's what the repair work is associated with.

Okay, thank you so much.

Okay, okay.

A21 is a resolution to approve amendment four to the memorandum of agreement with Genesis Church for Fayetteville of Fayetteville for continuation of a litter abatement program through 2026 in the amount in an amount not to exceed 170,500.

Okay.

I had sent some questions into Peter that I was just hoping uh he would give us an update.

Um I was happ happily provided, but I'd like to be able the public to know how many folks have been employed through the program, kind of what the results have been so far.

And then I have a secondary question for the last several years, um, with previous administration and the current, I had kind of asked because other nonprofits had had brought up, you know, uh what are the entry points for nonprofits to kind of participate in these types of programs?

And so um just want us to kind of be thinking about I don't have uh you know any thought that this is not a good provider of this service, but just thinking about who we partner outside of the city whenever we're uh looking for certain services to think about the possibility um of RFPing, these types of uh projects of that are the substantial nature.

This is a pretty big chunk for most nonprofits to get 170,000, but really just recognizing our city has really grown and changed over time.

You know, we have over a hundred thousand residents, and we don't always necessarily know you know all of the possible interests without vetting something and putting it out to the public of who might uh potentially want to participate, um, as well as um you know, trying to get um the best possible uh partnership and price um for those services as well with um the possible partnerships that are out there.

So again, I'm not saying we shouldn't partner with these folks, just want to at least put that as consideration as I think about you know, we have a handful or more of different um individual kind of contracts with outside entities, different nonprofits, um, and there are a substantial number in Northwest Arkansas that provide these different services and probably additional ones growing, you know, every single month that we may or may not be aware of.

I can help answer one of those questions.

One of it is is we can look at that um the next time we go for the 27 budget year to see about doing an RFP for this to see if we have any other interest.

And then Peter, I think you have some comments just on some of the reporting.

Yeah, we're happy to report that um last year the uh or this year, I guess the participants picked up over over 220,000 pounds uh of trash and um litter, um, primarily in South Fayetteville from creeks, parks, and streams, and that's about double uh what was picked up in 2024.

Um the program um was able to uh offer work to 228 um uh workday uh individual work days, and that was uh made uh those were filled by 99 um uh different individuals um in our community.

And um the partnership with Genesis allows uh the folks that are in the pick me up program to be connected with a number of services across our community, um, including you know, if they don't have a uh a driver's license or ID that can help them get that.

They've got mental health services, they've got substance abuse services, um, they've got meals, they've got other employment, um, access to employment opportunities, uh resume building, um, a number of different uh opportunities and services that the program connects um participants with.

And if council members are interested, um Genesis uh certainly um is is really proud, as are we in terms of the um the partnership and the work and um all of the the great um successes that the program has six has seen.

So if there's interest in a um a genocession presentation sometime in the new year uh from Genesis on the program, then um they're more than uh happy to come do that, and we'd be glad to uh try to get that um on your schedule.

And just one final comment.

This is not to exceed contract, so they're kind of the bill their services as they uh as they work.

Yeah, that's absolutely correct.

I have a question about the the dollar amount of this and the the request that maybe we uh look into an RFP in the future.

What is the the standard cutoff for the dollar amount that we usually say, you know what, we can make this decision internally and where we need to be considering an RFP or it maybe with maybe it's something that maybe we look at every couple of years or something, and not I don't want to get into a situation where we're expecting RFPs on every little tiny thing because I feel like that doesn't allow us the flexibility to handle things very quickly.

So somebody fill me in on what what dollar amount do we usually look for an RFP on.

Um so as far as RFPs go, that's gonna be strictly for services, and that's gonna be 40,000.

Okay.

That's the year we limit on that.

Before ASCO out for a public RP and then go.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

So Sarah, before Sarah Bunch, before you move on, I just wanted to respond to Sarah Moore's comments about the pick me up program.

You know, um, Heather gave the EAC a presentation uh about the pick me up program at the at the December EAC meeting.

So that might be available if you want to take a look at that.

Um, and uh I think uh you know, she always does such a great presentation and and really identifies a lot of the pros and and also how the program is changing a little bit and adapting and being able to um expand and and some of the uh the items that uh the pick me up program um helps with.

So thank you.

Uh let's see.

This is A22, a research.

A22, a resolution to approve the purchase of trash and recycling carts, roll off containers, dumpsters, compactors, and related products and services as needed with the approved budget from waste quip LLC pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract.

A23, a resolution to waive competitive bidding, and authorize the purchase of granite net asset inspection and decision support software for stormwater management from Qs Incorporated in an amount not to exceed $75,000 per year on an as-needed basis through December 31st, 2030.

A24, a resolution.

Did you have something?

I just was gonna ask if um with this being for the stormwater utility.

I know we were prioritizing and managing the project list and talked about potentially that uh there was a desire for that to be able to be public-facing, as we are getting like those requests and having ongoing conversations with different residents.

Does this fulfill that to be able to do the public facing as well?

Is this only internal?

Can you just help me to understand the scope of what it covers?

Chris, can you answer that?

And I could fill you in a little bit on the status, but yeah.

So what this software does, um one of the things that we um are committed to is inspection of our entire system.

Uh so this is part of the camera system.

We'll be able to um run cameras up into all of our pipes, uh, check out their uh condition, um, and you know, do an assessment of any any work that needs to be done on them.

Uh, this software assists with that and helping um uh take that camera data and and condense it down.

It also uh will do some automated um condition assessment and prioritization for us.

So uh it it really helps with that prioritization process.

Um maybe just to add on what where you're talking about, we were talking about capital projects.

We are working still on that um that public facing map and um really are within days, I think, of being able to um get that out, at least for some initial review.

It may not be ready for prime time just yet, but uh it's it's really close.

Okay, so basically those will kind of integrate the stuff that you already kind of identify that you have projects, and then this will identify things, and then like those lists will kind of be put together.

Yeah, this typically well, some some of the some of the inspections will result maybe in a capital project, but this will really assist our operations group more to see whether they need to go out and replace a section of pipe or just clean it out or um you know, whatever may need to be done.

It will then assign um uh it could it can.

We're still working on on all of the the features, but it can then assign another inspection, like if it uh if it looks brand new, it can say this inspection is not needed for a long period of time, or if it looks like it might be failing, um, then it can assign a shorter period of time before the next inspection.

So it really kind of helps automate, yeah, it helps automate our inspection process.

Okay, all right, thank you.

There's a lot of interest around stormwater, so I appreciate you sharing that.

Sure.

This is a this is very simple to our payment management system that we go out and do a payment, but instead we're doing it inside a pipe.

Okay, thank you.

Uh so A24 is a resolution to award bid 2618 and authorize the purchase of vacuum truck services from Carl Hawley Plumbing Incorporated as needed through the end of 2026.

A25, a resolution to approve the purchase of three commercial front load refuse trucks in the total amount of 1,133,500 from Arkansas municipal equipment pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract, plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, and delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price and to approve a budget adjustment.

Okay.

A26, a resolution to authorize the mayor and staff to acquire remaining easement easements and rights of way for the Appleby Plainview Rolling Hills Connection project and make payments to property owners that will be based on fair market value as determined by appraisals or existing value data.

Can we do an update on this one, Sarah?

And I know we'll cover this in transportation committee.

So maybe it'll abbreviate what we do there.

Okay.

Um I when I looked at the map on this, I was under the impression I'm having to go back in my recall and didn't have time to go find the meetings, Chris.

But um I I was thinking Transportation Committee had also given authorization to look at that additional section that ran um what would that be south through the parking lot that would go to Appleby.

And so I think in the drawing I didn't see that.

So I was just hoping you could explain to us kind of what the thoughts were on this person if there was like another phase potentially.

Oh, you're muted, Chris.

Sorry.

Uh the original design was um we included that at that southern leg.

Um and as you may recall, the appraisal for that uh property acquisition there was about eight million dollars.

So since then we've been trying to work with the property owner, uh, come up with a with a plan that um we could all work with and and afford um that southern leg right now, and and we will talk further about this in transportation committee, but um what we've been talking to them about is just using striping and um you know essentially they'll they'll have a still have their parking lot, uh, but rather than build that complete leg to the south, uh, we'll do a uh kind of a modified connection to the to the roundabout from the south.

Um so that's that's where we're at with the project.

And uh as we've been making progress with the property owner and trying to work through that, um, we wanted to begin acquiring property uh further to the north, and so that's part of what this is about as well.

Um we've got some some segments up to the north, and we want to get as much of that acquired as we can as we finalize this design through the uh through the uh Fiesta Square shopping center.

And just to comment on that, Chris and his team and myself have been very involved with that property owner, trying to have the best possible design with the most cost effective design also, and there's also some some redevelopment that's going on in that area.

So we've been actually working with people that have some proposed projects just to the northeast of that to make sure that this is kind of tying in with that.

So I think the current design is the most cost effective.

Uh and you know, so far the property owners are uh excited about it, and I think we have a good path forward.

We've been working on this project for quite a while, so we're excited that this is kind of getting this uh closer to the finish line.

No, and I I appreciate all the efforts, and I think this was a project that had begun before I came on council and I've been there three years.

So, yes, I I know there's been a lot of staff time.

I do just want to at least, you know, I appreciate the efforts that have been done as a person who frequents this area, and I'm sure others do as well.

Um, that particular jog right there, though, is particularly parry, and it's been striped different ways, but people just do kind of whatever, and there's a lot of interaction with foot traffic in that area too.

So I just I'm in I'm concerned about the increase um that there's going to be something you know occur that could be you know fatal or maiming to someone in that area.

So I understand that we've got some cost uh or a lot, I mean a lot of cost headwind to this to figure out, but I'm hoping we can come up with something that's a little safer through there.

There's I want to say that the resolution that came out in my office originally and what you have in the packet really was not detailed enough.

So I have submitted to the council a much more detailed uh resolution uh that details the initial cost for uh that night is in an email that went out too late, but anyway, don't have to do something tonight, but uh to look at it uh before the city council meeting, but it entails the cost of the uh part of the right-of-way that we have a pretty good agreement on, and also talks about the other right-of-way that we've been working on and how the fact that that's been reduced so substantially uh by Chris's redesign, which I think makes a lot of sense and makes it financially feasible for us to do it.

So uh I would suggest that you look at the resolution the replacement resolution that I have proposed here or the amended resolution.

Yeah, I think that probably uh that should be removed from the consent agenda when you either now or at the uh council meeting so that you'll be able to substitute the resolution that's got enough details in it.

I thought that the other one really probably didn't have enough details for what we needed to do.

Is that a requirement for us to move it from the consent or is that just kind of a well if you're gonna amend anything you have to consent?

We can't we can't amend it here.

So what what what do you want to do?

You want to remove it from consent?

We can I'm we move it from consent.

Okay.

So when we where does this go on our agenda then?

Anywhere new business.

Well, let's just put it in the beginning.

It seems pretty straightforward.

Okay.

Let's put it at the first of new business then.

All right, let me see here.

So A27, a resolution to award RFP 25-18 and approve a service contract with Bell for USA group incorporated to provide fire remediation services for one year with an automatic renewal for up to four additional one year terms.

A28 resolution to approve a services agreement with Washington Regional Regional Medical Center in the amount of 500 585 dollars per person for one year with a maximum two percent annual increase and automatic renewals for up to one four additional years to provide medical exam and testing services for the Fayetteville Fire Department.

A29, a resolution to change the assigned police pension fund number in the 2026 budget to authorize a cash loan from the general fund to the police pension fund for a monthly benefit payment for monthly benefits payment payments and authorize the mayor or the mayor's designee to reimburse the general fund when police pension taxes are received.

Can we just walk through this one?

I'm sorry, Bob.

Oh no, go ahead, Sarah.

I was just gonna see if we could walk through it.

I tried to kind of go through it.

Just looks like maybe we weren't anticipating when we did pass that that we only get those funds from the county twice a year.

So we're gonna um have to loan ourselves from the general fund, and then when we get those payments, make that pay that back.

But I just didn't know if that means every single year going forward.

So that's gonna be how we'll have to handle that.

Yes, every year going forward.

That's uh that's how Lope requires us to pay.

And if you'll recall back in July of 2025, uh City Council approved that request to consolidate the old police pension plan with LAPE.

And so Lofie's requiring us to provide monthly payments, but the funding that we get to pay for the old police pension plan is uh based on income from property taxes, and we received that in April and September.

So we have a timing issue here.

We're required to make monthly payments, but we only receive our funding in April and September.

So, in other in other words, to resolve this, so we need to loan money from the general fund uh to make these payments monthly and then reimburse uh the general fund when we receive those payments in April and September.

Um and this is uh the same process that we used for the old fire pension plan that we uh that we consolidated back in 2023.

Um this is just the way LOP requires us to fund the plan.

Okay, thank you, Stephen.

Okay, I think question and my question, thank you.

Okay, a 30 make sure a 30 a resolution to approve approve the purchase of 15 Ford Police Interceptor Hybrid Utility Hybrid Vehicles in the amount of 656,910 from Superior Ford of Silome Springs pursuant to the Arkansas State Vehicle contract, plus an any applicable surcharges, freight charges and delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price, and to approve a budget adjustment.

Okay.

I just had one question on those.

I see Ross's on since we don't do equipment anymore.

Um I do so is that the all-in with those being a hybrid, do they have any other equipment or other costs that are associated with those as they change over?

No, there is no electrification infrastructure needed for charging their essentially their own battery charger and gasoline engine within the vehicle.

Okay.

Are these going to be the first ones that we're going to have in that fleet then of this type?

So we do currently have one Ford PIU.

It's a 2020.

Um, but this is going to be the first purchase to kind of put into the frontline police fleet.

Okay.

Well, those have a similar look to like what the Tahoe's look like.

They will be badged and colored exactly the same.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, Ross.

Welcome.

Um, I have a follow-up question.

And this just has to do with using a Sylum Springs vendor instead of a pay-aville vendor.

Um, is it just basically come down to cost or is it more uh availability or ability to uh uh fulfill the contract?

Uh so kind of going back to last year uh when we make purchases, sometimes especially through Fayetteville.

Uh last year we had what was promised to be an April-May delivery of our expansion vehicles, and that be in September.

That's not entirely Fayetteville's fault.

Uh it's more an OEM issue.

But there's actually two items on this agenda that kind of go with each other, this one, and then the upcoming superior upfit uh should be item A 33.

Um basically we're gonna be buying all 15 of these vehicles from superior.

They also have an upfit facility at the same location, I believe.

And once we have delivery of those vehicles to the dealer, they're also going to be upfitting and installing the police equipment for us as well.

Uh, all the pricing is locked in through the Arkansas uh state contract, so it's the same pricing effectively locked in through the bid process that the Office of State Procurement uses annually.

Okay, thank you, Russ.

Roy, I have a question.

Um, so we've used superior and silome springs before, correct?

Yes, uh, since I've been here in prior to me, a majority of our police purchases have been through Silo.

Okay.

So when we put in uh when we go through this uh the uh Arkansas State Vehicle Contra process, are there only certain dealerships that are that that applies to?

So, you know, Ed Smith Ford over in whatever town can't just uh get us vehicles.

Are there certain ones that we can you know that that can apply that have gone through the the structure that the do you know what I'm trying to say here?

Yes, uh so dealerships do bid on this process and are awarded that, and as long as other dealerships will honor the same pricing, we can buy from them as well.

Okay, okay, thank you very much.

I appreciate it.

Welcome.

Okay, so A31, a resolution to approve the purchase of one Chevy Tahoe police.

I believe this is where I'm at.

Yep.

Uh police vehicle in the amount of $55,160 from Superior Chevrolet of Silome Springs pursuant to the Arkansas State Vehicle Contract, plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, and delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price.

A resolution uh A32, a resolution to approve the purchase of one Ford transit cargo van in the amount of eighty-three thousand five hundred and eleven dollars from Olafi, Olafe, Olaf.

Olafa.

Olathe Olatha Ford uh sales incorporated pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract, plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, and delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price, and to approve a budget adjustment.

A 33 purchase uh uh resolution to approve the purchase of police vehicle uplifting supplies, installation and labor services in the amount of 182,316.30 cents from Chevrolet Superior Chevrolet of Siloem Springs, pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, and delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price.

A 34, a resolution to authorize acceptance of project safe neighborhood of a project safe neighborhood grant in the amount of $33,629 and 76 cents from the Fayetteville Police Department and to approve a budget adjustment.

A 35.

A resolution to approve the per capita jail fee agreement with the Washington County Jail with Washington County for jail services in 2026 in the amount of 76,750, excuse me, 75.87.

So no, we have no unfinished business.

And we're moving on to new sorry, council member a bunch.

But one of the things I know we've talked about is that you know the city is not outlaying from our general fund additional monies versus what we've been in the past before the per capita.

But over time, what's happened is that our taxpayers and the city of Fayetteville are Washington County taxpayers, and there's a quarter cent sales tax that our 38% of the population pays to the tune of almost $7 million a year right now for the jail.

And so while every single year, uh the last several years, we've been paying this overage about $80,000.

Our total taxpayer base is paying a lot more for the local jail.

And I have an ongoing concerns that we continue to make strides and policies to arrest less individuals, for instance.

Um the jail for year to date 2025, they had 10,487 bookings.

Um the city of Fayetteville, we reduced our arrest to 2,357.

That is only 22% of the bookings that went into the jail facility, but yet we pay the 38% of our per capita.

Additionally, I have concerns that when we do arrest Fayable residents and visitors and we put them in this facility.

Um the policies that happen in Washington County today that we say sell federal beds and currently have policies that have this facility in an overcrowded situation mean that our residents also sleep on the floor.

And so my question is, you know, how do we at some point with this contract and our collaboration with the county um work together or structure our agreement in a way that we're able to get some kind of credit for the efforts that they have making, one, you know, to arrest less individuals and put them in the facility.

There's no um financial um incentive that we get there, even though we're making those strides, we're still paying at the per capita rate, although we're not we're not gelling and arresting at the per capita rate.

Um, as well as I have concerns about um just the the way that our residents are held, you know, whenever um there's a state statute that says that municipal prisoners are supposed to be given um preference and accommodation in the facility.

I don't know that that's happening when they are selling beds to other entities, which causing our residents to sleep on the floor, and just trying to figure out what the avenues are uh for us to make some inroads on those those particular areas.

Um can you hear me?

Yes.

Yeah, I'm sorry, I apologize.

I'm having some computer issues, so I had to switch over to my phone.

Um, so first of all, good afternoon, council and and vice mayor bunch.

Um as uh as you mentioned, this is the resolution for the 2026 uh annual jail contract that uh we have between the city of Fayetteville and Washington County.

And if you would just please indulge me and I'll probably try to give a little historical context behind this and going back all the way to uh 2004 when we closed our uh city jail, uh raised and removed that, and then built uh our district court facility.

And so at that time, uh the city of Fayetteville entered into an annual interlocal agreement with Washington County to house all of our individuals uh that we arrest here at the Fayetteville Police Department.

Um so from 2004 to about 2019, what we did was we paid a one-time uh booking fee for all prisoners or all persons that we incarcerated there at Washington County.

It started off as a 40 dollar uh fee in 2004, and then it increased to a 62 uh dollar uh fee in in 2019.

And so over that 15-year period, uh we paid approximately uh 220,000 annually on top of that uh tax that council member more talked about.

So then in October of 2019, uh the Washington County Quorum Court decided to pass an ordinance that decided that they were deciding to charge a daily jail fee instead of a one-time booking fee.

And that daily jail fee was going to be $63.12 per prisoner per day.

And so when we looked at that and we estimated what that daily rate would cost as opposed to the one-time uh booking fee, it was looking uh uh appeared like we would go from about 220,000 annually uh to about 1.2 to about 1.5 million annually.

So a pretty substantial increase that uh we were facing at that time, and that's based upon about 12,000 billable booking days that we have for both misdemeanor and felony individuals that are charged.

Uh luckily um you know, following the passage of that ordinance at that time, the Washington County judge Joseph Wood, he had proposed an alternative uh per capita jail fee that was based upon uh Washington County's uh estimated jail budget shortfall and uh municipalities population.

So in 2020, uh the jail shortfall was approximately six hundred and nine thousand dollars, and our cost, the city of Fayetteville's portion of that was two hundred and twenty-three thousand dollars.

And once again, that was based upon our population in our city compared to the other populations.

I believe in the other 13 municipalities across uh Washington County, and then in 2021, the jail shortfall was predicted to be only uh 250,000 as opposed to that 609,000 the previous year.

Uh the city of Fayetteville's cost went down to 91,553.

And then over the past five years, the shortfall has been estimated at uh 200,000 annually.

That has not changed uh up until uh this year.

Uh what's in front of you today is uh for 2026.

Uh so as I mentioned, uh Fayetteville's portion uh of the $76,715 and 87 cents uh that we're being asked to pay for this year's per capita jail fee is based on our population, which represents approximately 38% of Washington County residents.

So about $94,311 of the 245,000 residents in Washington County is how they arrive at that figure.

Uh the remaining 62% of that jail shortfall or $123,000, $280, $123,284 is billed proportionately, as I mentioned, over those 13 jurisdictions in Washington County.

And Washington County actually pays an additional uh fee on that as well.

Um you've already approved, council's already approved the $76,715 and 87 cents uh for this annual contract in our 2026 operating budget.

Um the council choose to decline the per capita jail fee agreement, the county ordinance uh does require that the city pay the daily uh jail rate, which is I mentioned a significantly higher cost.

And when I did those estimates based upon our bookings uh over this past year, I estimate that that would be somewhere in the neighborhood of approximately $800,000.

Uh so a significant increase over that $76,000.

It's a good deal.

Um, you know, and I guess that's all relative and subjective.

I understand that, but in comparison, I look at other municipalities throughout the state of Arkansas, and you know, if you look at what uh North Little Rock and Pulaski County were paying in 2024, they were at like $1.19 million uh for their jail contract, which was like $73.21 a day, a daily booking fee.

Uh Fort Smith paid about $626,000 in addition uh to their sales tax.

Uh and then Jonesboro, Craig Head County, uh they paid $2.9 million uh flat fee, and then that went up uh in 2024.

Uh in 2025, it went to a flat fee of three million.

And then Little Rock and Pulaski County, they pay $3.6 million uh in 2024.

And I know we talk about the the tax that's already uh being imposed on our citizens.

Um, you know, I I think it was the city of Blytheville and certainly Kit he can probably expound on this a little bit more, uh, but they challenged that uh with Mississippi County, and they lost that through the Arkansas Supreme Court, who basically rejected Blyeville's attempt to offset those costs based upon the sales tax collected by the city.

And uh basically they said that this was not double taxation and that really uh we are at uh uh you know basically we uh are at the mercy uh of the counties uh when we rely on them to uh house our individuals that we arrest.

And so I won't go over the arrest numbers again.

We've tried to do our due diligence in lowering those.

Um I think council member Damore did a good job of that.

We talked early uh this past year in January on what could be done, and I think that we've we've tried to do our very best to be diligent about not taking individuals down to the county jail that they're simply going to book in and book out.

It creates uh more work for officers, it creates more work for the jail staff, and certainly uh it uh certainly uh causes individuals that are arrested uh time and money uh in order to do that.

So we try to cite uh where possible, and um certainly uh trying to do a good job of that.

Um, but with that, uh I would be certainly uh happy to try to answer any additional questions that any council members have.

Do we have any additional questions on that?

My follow-up was just I didn't say um that uh I was asking uh to pull this or even to not approve.

Um, as I had stated earlier, and just want to put that back in discussion.

Is that um I do think that uh we hold the purse strings and one of the biggest things we do is try to be the best fiscal manager for our taxpayers, and um this facility is costing 26 million dollars.

It has been escalating over time.

Benton County uh operates there is at a fraction of what we do.

Um, but also it's a human toll, and that I know that we care about each other and we take care of all Fayetteville residents, and so there has to be at some point we can't just do this continual over and over the same thing at some point either at when we're doing the yearly.

Um, we need to address um the humanity, the conditions of individuals that we are placing there, even though we're reducing and not putting as many.

Oftentimes these are individuals who are unhoused, who are mentally unwell, um, who have you know multiple health conditions, um, who you know aren't necessarily getting the care um and the treatment that they need in this facility in its current state with the policies being made um with the county um and those need to be pursued in many avenues, but um that is something I think we do owe for our community and also um while it's you know in quote unquote, you know, it's lower, it's a it's a um a reduction um coming from the city of Fayetteville with this agreement.

I think we have to recognize too, like we do have finite financial resources, and they are being um constantly um challenged at where we need to put those with all of our uh challenges in the city, and so just really want us to try to uh consider when we are reducing um our burden on the jail to try to figure out how there could be a mechanism for us to get something back in regard to that because uh we are at significantly lower uh who we're putting in versus our population.

22% in bookings with 38% of the population in the county.

Thank you for hearing me out on that.

I'd just like to jump in there one more time, uh, Vice Mayor, if I could.

Keith, you might be able to expand on this as well.

And so I think it was back at the first part of November, uh, the Washington County Quorum Court did discuss abolishing this per capita jail contract um and then just going to start charging municipalities a daily rate.

And I think what was what was proposed in that brief discussion was eighty dollars and fifty-two cents a day, if I remember correctly, which would certainly be a significant cost increase of you know, like I anticipated or or estimated, I guess is what I should say is the eight hundred thousand dollars.

Well, if that went to eighty dollars and fifty-two cents a day, that would bring us well over a million dollars annually.

Um I know that that uh topic was was was tabled.

Uh a lot of mayors uh spoke out against that uh proposed uh ordinance change.

I know Keith, you were there and you spoke out against that for on behalf of of Mayor Ron and the city of Fayetteville.

Um, but I know that there was some interest, at least uh what I recall, uh there was some interest with the JPs of having uh further discussions uh on this topic.

So that might be an avenue, council member more uh to open up those discussions, not only uh with our council members, but between our council members and and the JPs.

But I don't know, Keith, if you had anything else to add to that.

Yeah, thanks, Chief.

They definitely uh they brought out a lot of mayors in the community and while from Washington County to talk about that topic with that significant impact on uh their budget if that was approved.

And they did agree to kind of table that indefinitely that discussion at that time, just due to the amount of feedback.

I know Springdale spoke.

Uh I spoke for Fayville, Tony Town, uh believe Elkins.

There was quite a few other mayors there that spoke on the items.

So they weren't they have a shorter period of uh public speaking there.

So uh there was a lot of people that just raised their hand in support of uh tabling that item.

Oh you're muted.

I've been waiting all day long on a plumber, and the guy just showed up.

Like I got to take care of this just a minute.

Let me pull my uh agenda back up here.

Sorry.

So I must have a quick comment to say uh I've had several people reach out to me that I talked to Kidd, do the length of our consent agenda.

We have 35.

Well, now we have 34 items on the consent.

Uh there was a question on whether we can uh suspend the rules at our regular council meeting next week and not read out all of these.

So actually, in your rules, it states in section 7C that consent items uh shall be read by the mayor and voter onto the group.

So you would have the opportunity to suspend the rules next week and and basically make a statement that uh these items were presented at agenda session, and we're asking to suspend the rules and vote on the items as presented in the packet.

So I don't know, kid, if you have any more comments on that.

If the if the council wishes, we could do that to kind of shorten next week's meeting.

Yeah, you can do that.

Uh I think that a lot of these are just uh annual purchases that uh we do every year.

And so certainly if you're gonna suspend the rules on one consent agenda, this would be the one to do it on.

Okay.

All right.

Um that sounds like a good idea.

So we we have no unfinished business.

Yay.

So uh on to new business.

We have our first item of new business is um an ordinance to readopt the city's non-residential parking ratios in uh sub, I think this is subsection uh 70 172.05 standards for the number of spaces by use.

Um does uh staff have anything they'd like to add to that, or does anyone have any questions before we go on to the next item?

Okay.

That's all I think what it was is that they the codifier that codifies all of our orders for us, did not understand uh our ordinance correctly.

We wanted to change a small part of table three, the residential park, but unfortunately they did that, but then they decided to delete and clear our non-residential parking.

We don't need that.

We need to have that non-residential parking uh table readopted.

So that's what this uh ordinance would do.

Okay.

Any other questions on that item?

Yeah, I I have a question, and I and excuse me, I I just went from the car to to the phone, and and so I missed some of that.

Uh and um I just wanted to make sure we're not we're not bringing back commercial minimums.

No, we're not.

It's um the part that was removed was uh all the non-residential and those are maximums.

So you're not allowed to uh and in fact, there's a new, I'm changing out the uh exhibit A to make that crystal clear.

I added a um a little bit of fun of uh what it was so that it is clear that the uh non-residential are maximums, not minimums.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

All right, on to our next item, uh, which is C2, an ordinance to approve an amendment to the streamside protection zone mapping for property located at West Center Street and Greg Avenue.

Uh who on staff has this item and do they have anything else they would like to add to this?

Jonathan has the next four items.

So I think I have the next seven or eight items.

Um if the council would like me to do a brief background on this one, I'm happy to do so.

Otherwise, uh I'll be sharing the presentation time on uh Tuesday with Justin Bland, our city engineer.

Why why don't we go ahead and do a brief, uh just a real brief thumbnail.

I see people nodding here.

So just uh give us a um, you know, your your five-second spiel, maybe.

Not five, but I'll try to keep it brief.

Uh thank you.

This uh this particular property is in downtown Fayeville.

It is at the southwest corner of Greg and Center.

Uh some of you may know it previously as the site of uh some apartments uh that were demoed after a fire in 2021.

Uh and you may know it more uh recently as the location of the proposed valet parking lot for the hotel plan for the south end of the upper ramble.

And you may best know it today because it is the one of the laydown areas for the uh large apartment building being uh built on the north side of center there.

Uh perhaps most important for this request though is that there's a portion of the Tanglewood branch stream uh that runs along the outside of the property along its western and southern edges, uh, which brings us to the request specifically, uh and that is to amend the streamside protection map to remove approximately 289 feet of the Tanglewood branch uh from the streamside protection map uh in order to facilitate construction of a mixed-use building uh associated parking and the valet parking facilities uh associated with uh the hotel I previously described.

Uh staff is not recommending in favor of this request.

Uh, we do not find it to be meeting the intents uh of meaning the intent and spirit of the streamside protection ordinance.

Uh when the planning commission heard it, uh they ultimately recommended it uh go forward to council uh with a recommendation of approval by a vote of six to one.

Uh there are two recommendations or two recommended conditions that staff included with this.

Uh one is that this uh change would not take effect until a building permit is issued uh for the associated mixed use building.

Uh and the second, that is uh is if this is approved that the the development will be subject to including uh low impact development elements, LID elements uh beyond what our our minimum standards are.

Uh we did hear some public comment in opposition to this.

Uh and again, uh Justin Bland, the city's engineer, and I will be sharing the presentation time on Tuesday, and we're both available for any questions tonight.

I realize this is a very uncommon request that the council hears.

Okay.

I see that as a hand who is speaking right now.

Keith.

Okay, sorry.

Sorry, Keith.

I just saw two hands up.

So I was like, I wanted to try to I think Mike was first.

If you want to jump in, Mike.

Yeah.

Yeah, thank you.

I'll go ahead and go.

And Jonathan, this is if an apartment building was there before.

I'm guessing that the applicant didn't have any grandfathered status because of the length of time that the building has been removed.

Um so the apartment probably predated our streamside protection plans before it burned down.

That that's correct.

Uh and uh I I encourage Justin to jump in here if I if I'm failing in describing this in any way.

That the crux of why this amendment is being asked is not just because the development wants to encroach into the streamside protection zone, but they're wanting to fundamentally change the stream area itself.

Uh it'll it would effectively uh be uh I don't know, I'm not sure if channelizing is the correct word here, but they're they're there usually when when streamside protection zone variances go to the planning commissions because a a parking lot or a building footprint encroaches into those zones associated with streams uh and and but not necessarily be impacting the stream bed itself.

Is that uh accurate, Mr.

Bland?

Uh yes, yeah.

I would just like to clarify that uh it it it does go to the next level of uh encroachment because they're actually planning to culvert underneath this building.

So in essence, they would have a concrete bottom, concrete size and concrete top.

So it would actually be a culvert underneath this proposed building.

There would be no national stream bed left in this scenario.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh, do you have any more questions?

Okay.

Um, so I you know, I was trying to read this and I thought, well, this is pretty complicated.

And I'm wondering, um, I'd like to have a tour uh of this so we can actually walk along here and see exactly uh what's going on.

And of course, we could schedule the tour at the end of the meeting, but I just wanted to put that out there that um at least for me, I'd like to be able to walk with staff and talk about what they're proposing and how that deviates.

So understood.

Thank you.

If if in the meantime, if the council start thinking about if uh Friday or Monday would be the best uh fit for you all, I'll circle back at the end of the meeting to plan that out.

Sure.

I'll make a note of that.

Um I I hate to ask this, but could someone possibly shepherd this meeting for the next couple of items so I can deal with the plumber issue that I have to deal with?

I I know it's it's supposed to be the vice mayor, but Kit, how how do we do this?

Well, in the absence of the vice mayor, uh they can uh also appoint you at just a present part cam for just a short period of time so you can get back.

So I just say one of the council members that are here who just uh suggest that go forward.

I would anyone would anyone like to volunteer?

I can do it for you if you would like.

Thank thank you, Teresa.

I appreciate that.

And I will be back shortly, hopefully.

Pray for me.

So are there any other comments on item C2?

Yes.

One other question.

Is that in my is my uh directional map off?

Is that the parcel that's directly across where they're building the I believe it's Trinitas proposal?

Uh well, the reason I asked that is I drove by there yesterday, and I think that lot is pretty well full of construction items, is it not?

So it might be hard for a uh uh tour.

That is correct.

It is being used as a lay down yard for that project.

We will we can work to coordinate it to the extent possible.

It may be that a tour is limited to uh viewing that portion of the stream from the adjacent rights of way.

Uh so it'd be center on the north side and Greg on the east side.

I don't know how uh I'm not sure that we can ensure safe entrance to the property uh if there's construction activity on it.

If you could just let us know, Jonathan, if it's if it's possible, that that would be great.

And if there's a safety concern or limitation restriction, I would understand that too.

Okay.

We'll do thank you.

Okay, any other comments on C2 before we move to C3.

Okay, hearing none, C3 is the vacation uh 2025-0028, West Cato Springs Road and South Emma Avenue.

An ordinance to approve vacation 2528 for property located southwest of West Cato Springs Road and South Emma Avenue in Ward 1 to vacate 0.01 acres of right-away.

Okay, hearing no questions.

One thing to add, just I should have mentioned this earlier.

Um the mayor was having a little issue.

She is logged in as an attendee, so she is on the call listening.

So okay.

Does she want does she want to um go ahead and proceed?

I just wanted to make sure people need that too.

Okay.

Item C4, vacation 2025-0031, South Hollywood Avenue.

An ordinance to approve vacation 25-31 per property located at 907 South Hollywood Avenue and Ward 1 to vacate 0.1 acres of general utility easement.

Okay.

Item C5, rezoning 2025-0050 West Michael Cole Drive.

An ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2025-0050 for approximately 7.67 acres, located at 5901 West Michael Cole Drive in Ward 4 from RA, residential agriculture, to RI-12, residential intermediate 12 units per acre, and CCR, conservation, cultural, and recreation, subject to a conservation easement.

Any any comments or questions?

Go ahead, thank you, um, Teresa.

Is this the one that came back to us where we voted to reconsider this one?

Or is this an entirely new application?

I believe this is a new application.

I I think the reconsideration one is on Penelope Drive.

Okay.

And it's not in our packet this week.

That's correct, Councilmember Turk.

That's scheduled for the 20th, I believe.

So I this one, I looked at the map and I thought, wow, that is really interesting how they're sort of carving up the CCR.

And I I wanted a tour of this one as well because it's so complicated.

Um, so that would be my request.

Um the corners are not very squared up.

Um, I don't know if it matches the topography or not, but it it looked very uh um unique.

Do you do you have anything that you want to talk about on that one, Jonathan?

I I think the main thing to note is what what you highlighted in the the project title.

This is the first request that the council will have seen with the a request to that cultural, I'm sorry, conservation, cultural and recreation zoning district.

Uh so of note in your packet, the the final item that is in there, it's the very last attachment is the conservation easement.

Uh if the council will recall, that is a requirement of rezoning property to this designation, is that it does have to come with the execution of a conservation easement.

So that that is in your packet if the council would like to review it.

That's not something that you typically uh see in a rezoning request.

Uh, but to your question or comment more directly.

Um the properties, uh, the way the property is being uh split zones the way it's proposed.

Uh part of that is uh a result of them wanting to keep the existing single family house on the property and some of the outbuildings on a separate piece of land that will remain zoned RA.

So if you all are looking at the map, you'll you'll notice there's a house and and and several buildings.

That is proposed to remain RA.

Uh and then that would leave that odd-shaped southern boundary is the actual boundary of this property that they're proposing to uh zone into the conservat, excuse me, conservation cultural recreation zoning designation.

Uh and then the remainder of it, I believe was to in an effort to try to mirror the floodplain, but also some of the developable property near Michael Cole, which is the street that runs along the northern boundary.

Okay.

Um, and then you could you note that for a tour that we can talk about at the end.

Looks like Council Vice Mayor Bunch is back if she wants to resume her role.

Now she's leaving again.

Okay.

All right.

Maybe she's running the other way.

I don't know.

No, I'm back.

Which item are we on item five, a C5?

Is that right?

We're we're just finishing that up.

Oh, C5.

We're just finishing Michael Cole, West Michael Cole Drive.

Correct.

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

Thank you, Teresa.

I really appreciate that.

Um, our next item is C6.

It is an ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2025 60 for approximately 2.90 acres, 2.9 acres, located at uh 3816 West Mount Comfort Road in Ward 4 from RSF1, residential single family unit uh one unit per acre to P1 institutional.

Does anyone have any member of staff like to add anything to that?

Or does anyone have any questions on that item?

Okay.

Next item is C7, an ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 24 2025 58 for approximately 9.2 9.02 acres, excuse me, located at South Futural Drive and South Route Avenue in Ward 1 from RSF 4, residential single family, four units per acre, to NSG neighborhood services general.

Anyone have anything to add to that?

Okay, thank you very much.

C eight, an ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2025-59 for approximately 1.37 acres located at South Futural Drive in Ward 1 from RSF 4, residential single family four units per acre to NSG neighborhood services general.

Any questions?

Any answers?

Okay.

Thank you.

Is this the one that previously was proposed for storage units, and now they're coming back with a different idea of how to use the land?

That it that is a good question.

There are three properties along Futural that either are or were uh associated with the Barnes Family Trust.

The northernmost one was rezoned to NSG uh recently, I forget what year, but the southern two.

So the the previous item and this item uh had their rezoning requests turned down.

I believe it was the southern one, which is on your agenda, I think right now is C7 was the one intended to be developed for mini storage.

Both all three had requests in 2021 uh to zone the UT, and all of those were denied.

Um that I think that UT request was intended because under the UT zoning district, you can request a conditional use permit for mini storage.

That's a very circuitous answer.

I'm sorry, I hope that helps.

Okay.

Good good eye, Mike.

We we went and toured that site, didn't we?

Yes.

Okay.

Uh let's see.

I think I'm on uh C9, an ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2025 57 for approximately 0.26 acres located at 4550 West Ozark Trail in Ward 1 from RA residential agricultural to RI 12 residential intermediate 12 units per acre anybody have any questions on this particular item okay that is the end of our agenda for uh for the most part do we have any additions that we'd like to put on or anything else not that I'm aware of the only thing that I know is we have a transportation uh committee uh immediately after this on a separate zoom link okay and we also have a request for two uh to tour two properties the the uh one at Greg and center and South Hollywood Avenue is that correct Teresa did I get that right yes you did thank you okay um when do we want to try to schedule that and um you know whatever's most convenient for everybody I could do Monday or Friday and I I don't know who else interested besides myself I cannot do Friday I'll be out of town yeah I can't do Friday either so okay how about Monday then does does Monday work for everyone I usually Jonathan you usually take care of this is that correct and yes I do I'll coordinate with the the applicants and the property owners I think the one hiccup that we sometimes hit this time of year is the early sunsets and so if the council is available uh I will be looking to set these probably close to three o'clock if if that's an option also they're very far apart from each other with one in downtown and one in West Fayeville so if that's a cause for concern um I would appreciate if the council could offer feedback on if they know they can only attend one we could potentially prioritize doing uh one of those earlier or later depending on your availability please thank you Jonathan yeah three o'clock's fine with me Jonathan um and I guess if I had to choose one it would be the Michael Cole one probably since the other area is pretty accessible that and we could you know drive by there and in um down there by the ramble why not hurry one go ahead sir yeah I just want to know I'm I'm out of town till next week so I didn't I was hoping not be counter to Teresa but I I just because of the culvert you were talking about my priority was going to the center street just to understand better about how they were going to be changing that stream trying to understand that on site and I probably only have time to go to one so I was going to ask if we could go to that one first if that's possible.

I was just gonna say that that again that is in driving by yesterday that was full of equipment it was you know pipes uh heavy equipment box uh equipment boxes uh because I drove by there and and was thinking that's where it was I went ooh that's that's got a lot of activity right now so I I would say we're gonna be very limited access to that I may be wrong but I I don't think I will be I think it'll be very limited.

I I'm I'm gonna leave that up to staff to let it let us know whether we can actually safely tour this site I mean I don't want to be walking through a bunch of construction you know and and causing a problem there.

So um the I'll just I'll just leave that up to staff to see what they can resolve on that I'm gonna drop back and punt here so we'll work to confirm that tomorrow uh worst case scenario we will we'll identify maybe the best vantage points and try to offer try to put together an exhibit so that you can stand there and look at those particular points and see what is proposed.

Okay do we have oh I see the mayor is with us now do you um do we have any other announcements or anything else that we need to include in the meeting or the agenda I'm not um I do have council person bunch I don't know if you hear me I'm I'm gonna stay muted because my Wi-Fi is so limited here but you did a tremendous job thank you Sarah thank you it was touch and go there for a while but uh so I I as I guessing that we have nothing else then to to add to our meeting um the only thing that was on January 1st uh due to New Year's Eve or to New Year's Day and then trash service will be delayed by one day uh due to the new year's uh holiday so trash service late by one day everybody host on your Facebook or alert your ward about that all right well I guess we'll see you in the new year then we're happy new year everyone happy new year everyone thank you all thank you

So trash service late by one day, everybody post on your Facebook or alert your ward about that.

All right.

Well, I guess we'll see you in the new year then.

We're happy new year, everyone.

Happy New Year, everyone.

Thank you all.

Thank you, Mary.