Okay, good evening, everyone, and I would like to call the uh to order the um January 20th meeting of the Fayetteville City Council.

Clerk Pikston, will you please call the roll?

Mr.

Berna.

Here.

Ms.

Bunch.

Here.

Ms.

Turk.

Here.

Minister Jones.

President.

Mr.

Stafford.

Here.

Dr.

Jones.

Here.

Is Moore?

Here.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Here.

Mayor Ron.

Here.

Please join me as we recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Okay.

And on our first item of business this evening, we have a special proclamation and recognition.

You all may have noticed that we have several guests in the audience with us today.

We have the Fayetteville High School Varsity Cheerleading Squad.

They have done tremendous work over the past year and are headed to a competition soon, I believe, in Orlando.

Is that correct?

Yes, so I want to thank you all for all that you do for the school and for getting involved.

And I know not all of you are able to be here.

I know that Anna Jones, uh daughter of Minister Monique Jones wasn't able to be with us this evening, but she's very much, I know, an integral part of your team as well.

And uh we are just so excited to have you here, and so now I'm going to read the proclamation.

Whereas Fayetteville High School is home to students who demonstrate excellence, discipline, and school pride through academics, athletics, and extracurricular achievement.

And whereas the Fayetteville High School Cheerleading Squad has distinguished itself through dedication, teamwork, and outstanding performance in competitive cheerleading.

And whereas Fayetteville High School maintains an active FBLA chapter with members who regularly compete in regional and state competitions, and whereas the Fayetteville High School Cheerleading Squad earned first place in the 6A All Girls Division at the Arkansas High School Cheerleading Competition, achieving the highest level of recognition in their classification.

And whereas this championship reflects countless hours of practice, commitment to excellence, and the support of coaches, families, and the Fayetteville school community.

And whereas achievements such as this bring pride not only to Fayetteville High School, but to the entire city of Fayetteville, inspiring younger students and strengthening our sense of community.

Now, therefore, I, Molly Ron, Mayor of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, do hereby honor the Fayetteville High School Cheerleading Squad for their outstanding achievements in the City of Fayetteville and congratulate them on their championship achievement, wishing them continued success both on and off the mat.

In witness thereof, I have hereinto set my hand and cause the seal of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas to be affixed on the 20th day of January 2026.

And if the if the coaches would like to come up for a photo with the proclamation, that would be great.

Okay, we're going to go.

We're just going to make it together.

We'll just squeeze.

There you go.

Perfect.

Okay.

Thank you, ladies.

Yes, thank you.

Y'all are welcome to stay.

Okay.

Okay, so as the chair squad is filtering out, the next item that we have on our agenda is an annual tradition and honor bestowed upon a worthy individual from our city attorney Kit Williams, and it's the presentation of the Dr.

Martin Luther King Jr.

Brotherhood Award.

Thank you, Mayor.

At the start of every City of Fayetteville City Council meeting after Dr.

Martin Luther King Day, since I became Fayetteville City Attorney on March 4, 2001.

It has been my honor and privilege to recognize a worthy recipient of the City of Fayetteville Dr.

Martin Luther King Jr.

Brotherhood Award.

This award has been given annually in recognition of that city employee whose service to our city best exemplifies Dr.

Martin Luther King's dream of equality, justice, brotherhood, and service.

This year's honoree joins a distinguished list of city employees who have embodied Dr.

King's dream and have helped fulfill his legacy of service.

Although a single person is being honored here tonight, there are many, many city employees and officials who work hard every day to make Fayetteville such a great place to live and work and raise a family.

City of Fayetteville employees strive to be responsive to citizen needs and input and do their jobs diligently and efficiently.

They serve our citizens and community with fairness, courtesy, and competency.

As city attorney, I count myself lucky, very lucky to be able to work alongside these dedicated city employees to ensure that Fayetteville remains a welcoming community in which all are treated with respect and dignity.

Tonight I am happy to recognize and honor an employee with over 37 years of service to virtually every city of Fayetteville employee.

Her position in human resources has given her the opportunity to work in support of equal opportunity and access.

She has promoted and applied consistently fair policies and practices in our workplace.

She has long helped orientate and educate new employees about the city's benefit plans so they could make the right decisions for their own individual needs.

Thank you all so much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, and thank you, Kit, for that award.

And that uh brings me to the next item on tonight's agenda, and that is a progress report from the Fayetteville Youth Advisory Council.

Um, specifically, we have Miss Lythimer and Mr.

Jay Hong, who are here from the Youth Advisory Council, and um Chauncey also is here from the City Clerk's office who can um speak a little bit about the great work that our youth have been doing on the youth council.

Please go ahead.

All right, good evening, council members.

Tonight's Fayetteville Youth Advisory Progress Report will be delivered, as Mayor said, by two remarkable leaders in our community, Blythe Heimer and Jay Hong, both seniors at their respective high schools.

They stand here on behalf of the eight member council, each one a founding force behind the creation and direction of the Fayetteville Youth Advisory Council.

Over the past two years, this council has not only built a new institution from the ground up, they've shaped it with purpose, conviction, and a clear vision for Fayetteville's future.

I've had the privilege of watching them grow into confident advocates who understand the power of their voices and the responsibility of their roles.

You'll hear about the initiatives they've launched, the issues that drive them and the goals they're pursuing.

Their work has already made a measurable impact.

I've seen firsthand how meaningful it is when Mayor Ron sits with them at their meetings, listening firsthand to their questions, taking their concerns seriously, and engaging with them as partners in civic leadership.

That kind of access and respect matters and it shows in their momentum.

I encourage each one of you to come and attend a meeting.

Come listen to them directly and collaborate.

Help strengthen the work that they're already doing.

They've achieved an impressive amount without a room of adults behind them, but imagine what they could do when the community stands among them.

With that, it's my honor to turn things over to Blythe and Jay.

Hello, my name is Blythe Heimer, and I'm the chair of the Youth Advisory Council.

And I'm Jay Hong, and I'm the vice chair.

So if it's been a while since you've heard about the Youth Advisory Council, let me refresh you.

We are formed of eight high school students attending Hawsail Academy in Fayetteville High School with the goal to advocate for youth voices within our city.

Now, if you have never helped start a city council, it is a pretty wild ride, especially when you're a teenager.

My fellow council members and I got to decide our bylaws, roles within our council, and learn about new concepts such as the Freedom of Information Act and Robert's Rules of Order.

Pretty interesting way to spend your Thursday evenings as a 17-year-old.

It's been challenging at times, but the most rewarding thing has been getting involved within our city through organizing and participating in many successful events that Jay is going to tell you about.

What we have done with the City Youth Advisory Council can be broken up into three main categories.

City planning projects and community service projects and resolution passage.

First, our council contributed youth perspective to city planning projects by sharing how teen experience and move through the city.

This included input on sidewalk accessibility done with the collaboration of Washington Elementary School, as well as feedback related to the environmental impact of Raimi and Woodlands their building, the downtown master plan, and giving support to the city's adaptation of stormwater utility fee plan and the disclosure of rental fee and costs.

The Fayetteville Youth Council has also been involved in community service projects and outreach efforts.

In March of 2025, we hosted our first event, a cleanup at Mud Creek.

Even though it was a fridge at 30 degrees outside, we we still had over 25 volunteers show up and fill over 40 bags of trash.

We also have another cleanup schedule for March.

We hope to see you all there.

It should be more warm.

The Youth Council also contributed to the community events such as Fall Tober, collaborating with local organizations such as the White, the White Elephant 5K and volunteering organizing and mental health awareness initiatives.

Now we're finalizing a list of volunteer opportunities for high schoolers so they can more easily achieve the state-regulated 75 hours of community service before graduation.

One of the most significant accomplishments of the Fayetteville Youth Council was the safe storage resolution.

The passage of this resolution directly exemplifies the purpose of the Youth Council, demonstrating the council's ability to work with students, organized groups like the work organized with work with organized student groups like Student Demand Action, shining a spotlight on student concerns and turning initiatives into real impact.

All of these successes and many war were made possible because of the unique views of the youth in our city working to fill in the gap.

So clearly we've done a lot of things, but there is so much more to accomplish.

Well, this is my final semester on the youth council.

I have no doubt that these teenagers will compete will continue to enact change within our community.

When discussing with other council members, we brainstormed goals and hopes for the upcoming years.

Councilmember Mia Alansari said she hopes that the council will have continued passion for sustainability and environment, keeping Fayetteville safe and clean.

Councilmember Ani Ruth Satish works to advocate for mental health awareness and resources within our community.

In fact, for mental health awareness this May, the youth council is hosting a mental health art wall at the community art wall of a popular street and the Razorback Greenway.

We're inviting a muralist to come paint on one of the walls and the other three walls or for community members to put mental health affirmations or art inspired by their own stories.

So be sure to stop by and help decorate during May.

This is only a fraction of our hopes for the council, but our ultimate goal is to continue advocating for all members of our community youth or not.

So this is my invitation to join us for a meeting some Thursday.

Y'all or anyone in the audience you've got an idea or a need within Fayetteville.

We want to support excuse me, we want to support you and make sure that you feel heard.

To finish, I'm remarkably proud of the Youth Advisory Council and the members within it.

We will continue to work hard for Fayetteville and for all youths in Northwest Arkansas.

We appreciate your time and support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, uh Blythe, and thank you, Jay, and thank you so much for your service.

Um I've had the pleasure of attending several of your meetings, and I always leave inspired by the depth of um sophistication that you bring to the meetings and that your thought process and and the goals that you have.

It's impressive, and you should be proud.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, that brings us to our consent agenda.

Mr.

Burnout.

Mayor, make a motion to suspend the rules and pass the consent agenda as presented at the uh agenda section last Tuesday and presented on our agenda.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to suspend the rules.

Um let's uh clerk Paxton can we please call the roll.

Mr.

Burnout?

Yes, Ms.

Bunch, yes, Ms.

Turk?

Yes, Minister Jones, no Mr.

Stafford, yes, Dr.

Jones, yes, Ms.

Moore, yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker, yes.

Okay, now you need a motion to pass the consent.

Okay, got it.

I didn't know if the rule motion to suspend needed to be unanimous, and so I was checking.

Okay, so um I will uh council member Stafford.

I'll make a motion to uh pass the consent agenda.

I'll second it.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Mr.

Berna, yes, Ms.

Bunch, yes, Ms.

Turk, yes, Minister Jones, yes, Mr.

Stafford, yes, Dr.

Jones, yes, Ms.

Moore, yes, Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

Okay, so that passes, and that brings us to Section B of the agenda, unfinished business.

The first item of unfinished business is on North Penelope Lane, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2025-46 for approximately 2.58 acres located at 2097 North Penelope Lane in Ward 4 from RA Residential Agricultural and RMF 24 residential multifamily, 24 units per acre, rezoning two RIU intermediate urban.

Um this was one that had a motion to reconsider, and I believe that this handout, which is in front of you, um is pertaining to this property.

Ums uh Butch.

Um I believe that on a motion to reconsider that we are at the point where we either uh suspend the rules and go through you know with public comment and allow the uh applicant to speak, or we vote.

Is that correct?

Okay.

That is my understanding.

I would I would like to suspend the rules and allow the applicant to speak if he has anything to add or public if I have anything.

So it's been a while.

Yeah.

May I ask a point of uh clarification that we haven't yet had kit read the full ordinance?

Does that not have to happen on this since it's a motion to reconsider?

Well, uh I think what I would ask, do you mean the public, the applicant, staff, and yourselves all to have a chance or not?

I I think so because it has been one, it's been a hot moment since we've talked about this last time.

And I unfortunately I'd like to.

I just wondered if that was included in your motion to spend the rules.

I suppose so.

And public comment.

Yes.

Okay.

But we can proceed with that without you typically you read it.

You don't have to do that.

Okay.

It's uh the right now the uh ordinance is right before us after everybody's talked.

Great, it's gone through three meetings, so I don't need a reader.

So we have a motion and a second.

I have a question.

Okay.

So are we voting on suspending the rule?

What processes are we voting?

You're just voting to allow.

I'm sorry, go ahead.

No, you go ahead, Kit.

Uh you're just voting to allow comment by the applicant and the public and yourselves.

That's all you're voting for.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um Clerk Paxon, will you please call the roll on the motion to suspend the rules?

Mr.

Burno.

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wiedaker.

Yes.

Great.

Thank you.

Um, Mr.

Kurt, I will um turn it over to you and then the applicant uh before we go to public comment.

Mayor, I have no updates on this item.

I'm happy to answer any questions that the council may have, whether it's reminders of uh where we are or what staff's recommendation was with the planning commissions.

Uh otherwise I do have a visual uh to pull up for the applicant when he's prepared to speak.

I think since it's been a moment, if you could just give us a brief recap of what your initial recommendation was and a little bit of a brief summary before we move on to the applicant would be helpful.

Certainly, I'm happy to.

Uh this item went to the planning commission in October.

Uh staff is was recommending and continues to recommend uh against it.

We're recommending denial of this proposal.

Uh the predominant reason for that rationale is a concern about the amount of floodplain on the property and some of the history that went into the rezoning of this property initially, uh, which included downzoning it at the time from RSF4 to RA to account for upzoning the northern portion of this property to build a subdivision uh to offset that this portion was down zone to RA in order to account for the amount of floodplain there.

Um what the applicant is proposing to do is to uh further downzone a portion of the property in the floodway of the property and as a balancing point to that uh upzone uh an area immediately north of that from RA to RIU, residential agricultural to residential intermediate urban.

Uh when the planning commission heard that request, uh they felt that our floodplain regulations were adequate and forwarded it to city council uh by a vote of eight to one.

Uh city council denied the request.

Uh their subsequent meeting, it was brought back for consideration and immediately tabled to afford the general public uh time to be aware that the item was back at that following meeting.

The applicant requested it be tabled for two meetings, uh, given the volume of uh of work and then uh interest in that particular agenda and other items on that agenda, uh which brings us to today, uh January 20th, uh, where you all are seeing it for the third time if I have my math correct.

Um happy to answer any other questions or getting any more specifics if it's helpful.

Thank you.

Okay, um I would have said that I would like to speak about this, please.

Good evening, council.

My name's Tracy Hoskins, and I'm the would-be developer of this property, I think.

Um I uh asked uh ownerman Bunch if she would uh uh uh consider uh asking for kind of another bid as the apple of of this project or whatever, and she was gracious enough to to uh allow me that and uh request that on my behalf.

Um what I'd like to do is kind of go back a little bit um prior to uh when the council uh saw this project at that time.

Uh it was when uh there was a lot going on with the council and the the school system and everything, and everybody was kind of worn out, including myself or what have you.

And um, and so I uh um I kind of wanted to give you a little bit of history of this property and um uh and how we got where we are today.

So way back when in the middle of uh 2015, 16, I think it was, or what have you, uh a project came through by another developer.

Uh I think it's West Westview Meadows, I believe is the name of the of the project.

And at that time, um, unbeknownst to the property owners at that time, uh apparently the developer made some promises and made some stipulations with the balance of their property that that they didn't know he was making, and that property that he would never own and never control.

um uh and how we got where we are today so way back when in middle of uh 2015 16 I think it was or what have you uh a project came through by another developer uh I think it's West Westview Meadows I believe is the name of the of the project and at that time um unbeknownst to the property owners at that time uh apparently the developer made some promises and made some stipulations with the balance of their property that that they didn't know he was making and that property that he would never own and never control okay and so um and so they've been left with this property since then part of that was the downzoning of RSF Florida RA in the northern section of the remaining part porch portion of this property um one of the things that uh I need to apologize for is I did a really poor job the first time through on on representing this project and and what it entailed or what have you and so I'm hoping to correct that tonight or what have you and um and so basically this property currently is comprised of about eight to nine acres I believe it is and the South five acres is currently zoned RMF 24 that's uh use by right 24 units per acre which basically is five story apartment complex or what have you and um uh and that is everything that's slightly north of uh the creek to the south property line and then everything north of there to uh and I hope the graphics that I left left for you kind of explains this uh everything north of just north of the creek to uh Westview Meadows I believe it is um is it's currently zone RA and as we know things change over time or whatever but uh uh uh how much property we have to develop you know now we're down into the to the uh uh we have very limited amount of property in Fayetteville to build to develop we're now down into the low areas and we're down up to the higher high areas the tops and sides of hills and then the the uh the low uh valleys or what have you and so uh so times change and uh and so uh and and the need for housing or whatever also changes and so um uh just for just as the same as as for new roads or or anything else um our plan with this project and we've visited with neighbors to the south visited with neighbors to the north or what have you our plan with to for this project was take the entire eight acres the entire thing which the vast majority of is our MF24 and we're not we're not apartment developers that's not what we want to do.

Okay we want to do patio homes and townhomes and and that type of of uh uh development uh if you're familiar with our Oak Brook project uh in the west side of town or whatever it that would be very similar to what we want to do on this property uh along with um our own uh uh park in the low areas that that uh staff was or Jonathan was uh referring to earlier flood area or whatever um you know flood area we need to be very careful when we talk about that because just because it's an area that will flood in the 500 year event doesn't mean it's a sensitive area and we have no intention of developing in the sensitive areas which would be the flood way along the creek neither the north side or the south side of the creek or or anywhere near the creek of course uh other than a uh reutilizing the crossing that already exists so we believe that our plan and we gave you a graphic presented with a graphic of um of what that plan is better than than what could happen now what can happen now is there's all kinds of uses that could happen with the RA property of course I don't even know what those are or whatever but even in RA property it's not that it can't be developed it can be developed because it's just very extremely low density that can be developed by but on the flip side of that the south half of the property can be very very high density which I've talked to the neighbors to the south and neighbors to the north nobody wants apartments out there.

And if we do our overall zoning of this project if we if we're able to develop the project as we want to then we will not build uh RMF 24 property there.

That's it's not what we do anyway.

We would end up selling that off to a different developer or whatever.

Another thing I wanted to mention was um my first time through uh I'm being on the commission for years and being in front of this council for 30 years from time to time uh I've never seen uh I've never been involved in uh uh rezoning that got uh voted on the first night and so I was actually that night I was actually looking to have some dialogue with the council back and forth and I knew there was lots of stuff going on at the time or whatever and I was hoping to get feedback from the council and uh and that didn't happen that night and uh and so I'm hoping to do that now I'm not asking for an approval tonight what I would like to do is uh uh stable the table the uh um the proposition again and get with the ward four uh uh and and all the councils as for that matter of fact on site and kind of show you guys what we're uh what we're interested in doing and uh what we're committed to doing and one of the things that got brought up at the last at the city council meeting where this was voted on was density okay uh a uh um which which had never been actually been brought up before uh that it was basically unfettered density with RIU zoning and that was that's never ever ever been our intent with this property and that was the first time it was ever brought up whether it was planning commission or even staff or what have you nobody ever brought that up as a concern and I'm sure the reason they didn't is because there's plenty of of of uh uh uh restrictions about the property itself that prevents any unfettered density and I'm here to tell you tonight

approval tonight what I would like to do is uh uh stable the table the uh um the proposition again and get with the ward four uh uh and and all the councils as for that matter of fact on site and kind of show you guys what we're uh what we're interested in doing and uh what we're committed to doing and one of the things that got brought up at the last at the city council meeting where this was voted on was density okay uh a uh um which which had never been actually been brought up before uh that it was basically unfettered density with RIU zoning and that was that's never ever ever been our intent with this property and that was the first time it was ever brought up whether it was planning commission or even staff or what have you nobody ever brought that up as a concern and I'm sure the reason they didn't is because there's plenty of of uh uh uh restrictions about the property itself that prevents any unfettered density and I'm here to tell you tonight and we will do it by a bill of assurance if we need to that's not what we're about the reason we asked for the RIU zoning is because it is the only zoning that we have in our system with all the zonings we have it's the only one that we had that will allow for 18 foot wide lots to allow us to do town homes and that's the only reason we we ask for RIU zoning and we are willing to cap that with a with a density cap if that's one of the concerns of the council um but what we're really looking for now is uh hopefully uh dialogue with the council uh to uh uh look at everything as a whole what do we need to do to get the council support and have a good project something very much like our oak brook project um we're hoping to do uh uh something very similar to that we uh we have our own neighborhood park also in oak brook that we retained and didn't dedicate to the city and we put walking trails through it and benches and working on lighting and gazebos and everything else or whatever so that's what we'd also like to do with this project even though it's you know considerably smaller scale and uh so anyway uh that's where we are tonight is basically overall this is a significant significant down zoning and allows us with the RIU zoning it allows us to uh uh to build the type of structure that we would like to build uh something which I I hate to throw out buzzwords or whatever but something yes more affordable smaller more affordable or what have you that was that's always been the intent and uh um and so uh and we'd like to just basically get the the dialogue going uh uh to get the support of the council that we had at the planning commission and I'm and I do much better answering questions than I do speaking off the cuff so I'm I'm here and I'll answer anything you need me to okay thank you um okay now um we have questions from the council uh minister jones thank you mayor what was the in field score on this jump then I couldn't find it sorry allow me a moment I didn't have that in front of me on this property it was a three to five depending where on the property you're looking uh that was for a fire response time access to water and sewer uh proximity to park and trail for the five factors one more question what was what was the access point for this the access point today and if I may I'll I'll pull up the the applicant's diagram uh that may help that may help describe that sorry I'm practicing speaking into my mic better um there is a the subdivision to the north westview meadows uh has an access easement and private driveway uh that connects from the subdivision to about 12 houses that are off screen in the upper right hand corner this uh the applicant's exhibit proposes to connect to that uh on the north side and on the south side of the creek uh to the lower left hand side of the exhibit you see here is a street stub out for Macy Drive and the subdivision there that they propose to connect to and I believe the developer has plans to uh attempt to connect to the lower right hand corner at a different point in the subdivision uh Mr.

Stafford thank you mayor um Jonathan do we have the uh you the the maps you brought up at the first presentation with the showing where the flood plain and floodway are in relation to the project yes I believe I have that if you give me just a moment please taking the zoning question first uh what you see here is kind of this uh layer cake of zoning districts uh Mount Comfort is just off screen to the north which is adjacent to that dark green neighborhood which is Westview Meadows uh the light green is the RA portion of the property and the uh thinner piece reflects the flood way through the property which you can see more clearly oops sorry uh overlaid here so if you're we're at the area where you see the hatching is proposed to be downzoned to RA residential agriculture and generally the area north of that uh to the back fence line of those houses along solder lane was proposed to be rezoned to RIU residential intermediate urban okay thank you Dr.

So if you were at the area where you see the hatching is proposed to be down zone to RA residential agriculture and generally the area north of that uh to the back fence line of those houses along Solder Lane was proposed to be rezoned to RIU residential intermediate urban.

Okay, thank you.

Dr.

Jones.

Uh what did you say the city staff it was did did they did they support this or did they staff does not support this request?

Okay, and what about the planning commission?

The planning commission forwarded it to city council by vote of uh I'm sorry, it's either six to one or seven to one.

Eight to one, thank you.

I think someone in the audience said let me confirm that real quick.

Yes, it's eight to one.

Thank you.

And you're not wanting us to vote on this tonight, correct?

Yeah.

Is that a um is that a question for the applicant or for Jonathan?

You can you can answer, Mr.

Oscus.

Any developer that was standing here and tell you that he wouldn't want to positive vote tonight, it's a is a lion more.

Right, right, right, right.

But my intention tonight, and that's not what my intention.

I met with Jonathan for an hour today, and we kind of walked through everything, talked through everything or whatever, and and I believe that the best route to go is to be able to have dialogue with the city council, show them what we're planning to do, how we're planning to do it, or what have you.

Uh, and because I I honestly believe if I can just get that opportunity that you'll be supportive of the plan, and we'll have a uh we won't have a no vote in the bunch.

I I I would I would say I would hope or whatever because it's the plan that you all ask for.

This is this is the stuff that you guys ask for whenever you're uh creating zoning uh ordinances or what have you.

This this is the infill uh somebody that's that's conscious of and has worked in wetlands environments and low country and high country or whatever, there's nobody that knows more about it as a developer than I do.

Uh Park West, where Sam's is out there and the old folks home or whatever, et cetera, that was all mine.

I did all that and all the wetland wetlands burn off and all that stuff, and what working out the Woolsey Prairie thing or whatever you so I'm I know about all this stuff.

I'm sensitive to all of it, or whoever.

And so, and one of the things I wanted to mention about about the RIs, the downzoning the area from RMF 24 that's in the creek, because I want to be full disclosure, okay.

We can't build in the creek anyway, so it doesn't matter what the zoning is anyway, or that's what everybody's thinking.

That's actually not true.

Okay, we can't build in the creek and we won't build in the creek, no matter what the zoning is.

However, though, where it does come into play is it does allow for more units up on top of the hill where there is no floodplain or no no flood zone.

As a matter of fact, I think that by rezoning, I'm not positive about this, but by rezoning that area that's within the floodway from RMF 24, I think it downzoned the apartments, the RMF 24 by about 30 to 35 units.

Um I'm pretty sure.

So that's where it's important.

That's where it comes in as far as downzoning what's in the floodway, just for the mere count of the number of units you could put back up on top of the hill.

Now, can we put 120 units up there?

Probably not.

Okay, just like an RI-18 or whatever, can we do that down low?

No, probably not.

There's too many restrictions, too many other things.

Terrain, connection, etc.

etc.

And one of the things I didn't mention before as well, is we already visited with the fire department at length about all this and what we needed to do, whether we got our zoning or rezoning or didn't get our rezoning or whatever, and develop it either direction.

And they seem to be very supportive of the project.

Um I know that you had asked about uh the score or whatever, and um apologize.

I am not familiar with infill scores or what have you.

Is that a good score?

Five, four or five or whatever.

Mayor, would you like me to dialogue with the um I I don't know that that is yeah worth going down the rabbit hole on if that's a good score or not?

I think did that answer your question, Dr.

Jones?

And answer my question.

Do we have other questions?

Yes, Mr.

Burner.

Yeah, I just wanted have you taken the time to meet with the neighbors and address any of their concerns?

We have not yet, because uh we have we have met with some of the neighbors to the south.

We've not met with any of the neighbors to the north yet, and it's mostly due to the holidays and and getting through through all that or whatever, which is why we're asking about tabling tonight, uh, so that we can get that opportunity to meet with the neighbors and with the ward four, uh at least at least the ward four uh council members.

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Uh yes, I have a question for you, Tracy.

Is there any particular reason you did not choose to do a PCD?

Okay.

Bunch uh yes I have a question for you Tracy is there any particular reason you did not choose to do a PCD okay it's there is there is there some reason because this is we just got this just now yep and hadn't had any update or anything before just now I think Mr.

Kurt can actually answer that question we actually discussed that today and um if if we were required to do a PZD or whatever we could probably figure out how to muddle through it but the honest answer to that is is that two years ago this coming April my help my staff architect 20 years pass away with cancer and so I don't have too many more on staff to do all the graphics and the all that sort of we can get it done if that's what it takes we'll we'll get it done somewhere in other we'll get it done but honestly okay that's just the honest truth of it.

Okay all right thank you uh Mr.

Thank you mayor um Mr.

Hoskins if you watched the agenda session meeting last Tuesday we really wanted to see this well in advance not at the last minute that was one of our requests and so that makes it hard on us you know and also I think you've had plenty of opportunity to talk with the neighbors you know I've had many of them reach out to me and and had a lot of concerns and so um I would just I'm just a little disappointed that you haven't done that kind of outreach we have we have to have to the north yeah our engineering company actually called several of these people or whatever we have got absolutely no feedback from those folks whatsoever none as a matter of fact uh a couple of them actually called back to the engineering firm or whatever and they called them back immediately and have not heard from them since so while I understand what you're saying it's that's really not a hundred percent accurate well Mr.

Bernard just asked you if you'd reached out to the neighbors in the north and I thought your response was no meetings.

No meetings I was talking about an in-person meeting with with the neighbors and the city council which is the way we used to do it all the time.

Okay thanks for clarifying yeah I'm sorry about that okay if we don't have any oh Miss Martin I just I'm sorry I've made you go away I just wanted to a clarifying question I haven't been in this portion of the property I thought it was spoken to I know this is where there's been a lot of sense you you said you wanted feedback and I just know and in the council conversations I think there's been a lot of sensitivity you know to how much of this is is floodway area and so you spoke I thought I heard you say and I didn't know if I misheard so that's why I'm asking did you state that there already is a crossing area that you're not going to be going and adding additional that there's already some kind of that's correct roadway or structure that crosses today and we'll be accessing that with this project yeah there's an existing uh crossing there we've already spoken with Alan Pugh uh the floodway administrator about that and about reusing that crossing or uh if we have to adjust a little bit or whatever they seem very supportive of that again if you saw it on site you would believe that you're in that in this area you would believe that you're just standing in the middle of a hayfield a cow field or whatever and so um so uh uh and I've actually got another meeting with Alan uh tomorrow at 4 30 uh as well and so yeah we're we're gonna go through all these all these things that we need to go through and make sure that we're developing property the right way thank you for clarifying thank you okay I'm gonna open it up for public comment do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on this item okay do we have anyone that's called in Keith?

Yes we have several uh Todd Hayes go ahead and speak Mr.

Hayes Mr.

Hayes are you able to hear us can you hear me now we can yes go ahead okay sorry about that I was on mute um thank you very much for the opportunity um I know that uh I had emailed everyone last week of my concerns that I have um my wife and I are one of the original uh residents of Westview Meadows uh so we've been here since this subdivision was built um and listening to the previous speaker my first concern is he doesn't even know what our subdivision's name is he referred to that I think it's Westview Meadows at least two or three times very concerning to hear I have never had anyone reach out to me and my home is probably a thousand feet away from where the entrance of this new development would be so I have uh some serious concerns about what I'm hearing from the developer uh in front of the council but let me let me just read the the email that I sent to everyone um it was very in depth showed pictures of some of the concerns that I have but you know since the completion of Westview Meadows the majority of the homes in our subdivision unfortunately are rental homes my wife and I live right next door to a home that is being used for as an Airbnb.

But you know, since the completion of Westview Meadows, the majority of the homes in our subdivision, unfortunately, are rental homes.

My wife and I live right next door to a home that is being used for as an Airbnb.

So we have transient people coming in almost weekly.

Several houses around us are being rented by college students where you have five or six college kids renting a home that might be a four bedroom home.

We have all kinds of traffic issues, congestion.

It's very difficult at times to even get down our street, and rezoning the property directly behind our subdivision will do nothing but increase our traffic, increase issues with safety, and I'm very concerned about what you know what is going to be built back there.

Um if you look at the traffic on Mount Comfort Road, it's incredibly congested.

I I urge all of you to drive by our subdivision between 4 30 p.m.

and 7 p.m.

And you'll see what I'm talking about.

There's been multiple traffic accidents.

Um I was involved in a traffic accident November 8th, where I was rear-ended, I was stopped trying to turn into Westview Meadows and rear ended by uh a person that was going between 50 and 60 miles an hour.

So I mean, it's we've also had a fatality two years ago, right in front of our subdivision.

So, you know, the increased traffic is very much a concern.

The way that you explained how this new community that is being planned, they have to go right through our subdivision to get there.

We only have two entrances and two ways to get into the western.

Mr.

Hayes, that's your your time's up.

Thank you.

We have a Chesley Whiteside.

Miss Whiteside, go ahead when you're ready.

Yes, I appreciate it.

So my name is Chesley Whiteside, and I live at 2959 Souter.

So it would be billed.

The rezoning proposed backs up right to my home.

Um, and so I'm part of that north community and a neighbor of Todd, and I I want to reiterate as well that the applicant stated he visited to the net with the neighbors at first.

He said he visited with us north and south, then he wants to have meetings, and then it got a bit convoluted.

I will tell you, I have never been visited with, I've never been taught to.

Um I just want that to be on the record, and that you know, this rezoning request was denied by the city staff.

Um, it was denied by this council, short of what you all acknowledged in terms of that new diagram showing up tonight.

Nothing has changed, right?

And there's still continued environmental concerns, safety concerns, um, traffic concerns, and it it has been months for these things to be submitted and to come up, and it's disappointing to hear some of the things that are I believe are misstatements put to the council, put specifically about the neighbors and our feedback or lack thereof.

And I just want to say that these concerns they remain, right?

Um, the rezoning doesn't solve these concerns, and they're not gonna go away, and there is no factual basis that I can see right now of why we would reverse this council's prior decision.

Um so I'm I'm just speaking as the concerned citizen, you know, to please deny um this rezoning for the for the reasons you did months ago um and for the reasons you know that have been stated tonight.

Thank you.

We have a Stephen Spaulding.

Mr.

Spaulding.

Hello, um Yes, can you hear me?

Yes.

Awesome.

I actually presented a few slides.

Um if that can be shared.

Just a few pictures.

Awesome.

Um, I want to start by saying like three concerns that I've emailed a few of you regarding this issue.

And the flood zone is really a flood zone.

Um, this is from behind my house, and this isn't like some flash flood warning or once every fifth year kind of flood.

Um, this is when it rains back to back days, the retention pond, about 10 yards to the west of where this RIU land is being proposed.

This is very common to happen.

When it does flash flood, sometimes it creeps into our yard.

So if you um elevate land to the west of that, uh to the east of that, sorry, um, by at least two feet because you have to get to the flood zone plus two feet to my knowledge.

Correct me if I'm wrong there.

But that will just make the water go even more in this area and more in the east as well.

So I want to first call out that the flood zoning is a real issue, and it happens every fall and spring, and once again, big issue.

All right, next slide, please.

The access point.

So I want you to look at the diagram that was handed in front of you, and then look at this Google map.

There are a hundred like a hundred yards of forest that are that the developer is proposing that can um connect the neighborhood.

And at best, it's very uneconomical.

I don't think it's possible to cut down that many trees, build a bridge over the creek onto a newly constructed constructed road that's two feet above a floodplain.

So that brings us to the previous points I've already been mentioned, the Mount Comfort access points, and how dangerous that left hand turnout of Mount Comfort is and getting out of the neighborhood as well.

Next slide, please.

And here's Penelope Lane itself.

It doesn't it doesn't have the width to support two cars in general, and there will be 50 plus cars going up and down this road that doesn't even have the infrastructure to do so.

The rental homes are already called out because uh me and my daughter, when we walk down the street, we have to actually go on the street because the crosswalk is um as you can see blocked off there, so that happens quite often.

But also, you can see the POA lane on the Penelope Lane Street.

That sidewalk actually connects us to a dog park where we play in, and I will also be flooded with with the elevation as well.

But I just want to call that out that that's our access point to the POA lane that we have maintained for the last four to five years since I've been here.

So I just want to call out those concerns and recommend that y'all can like take the staff's recommendation to not rezign this land.

Thank you.

We have a Heather Swoke.

Miss Swoke, go ahead.

Thank you for taking the time to hear um my concerns.

I have several, one of which that um a few of my neighbors have already addressed.

I have not received any type of communication, um, any requests for opinion, voice concerns, anything from the developer.

Um, and I have been pretty vocal or have emailed you guys, and I know he's um made comments on some of our letters that we have submitted to the council, so I feel like he could have reached out to us, but he has not reached out to me.

Um, another concern I have is the flood floodplains, just like my neighbor had stated.

We do have I do have standing water in my backyard when it rains for multiple days, and that's gonna do nothing but get worse.

Also, I have a concern about the infrastructure from a traffic perspective.

Um, there have been 147 accidents, including one fatality that Todd spoke of on Mount Comfort between I-49 in Rupert Road between January 2020 and September of 25.

33 of those were during the school morning commute between seven and eight o'clock in the morning, where there is a bus stop right outside of our neighborhood, and there's standing traffic at that bus stop.

22 accidents during the school release time, 30 during the evening commutes.

That's two accidents a month.

And this is from September, and it doesn't include the three accidents that I've witnessed since then, and also one of our neighbors getting re-rended.

Um, and suffered a concussion from that.

Um what the else?

Oh, and also the traffic and I'm sorry, I'm not public speaker.

Um, also the traffic and these accidents don't account for the additional capacity from the apartment complex of hundreds of units at rope Ruple and Mount Comfort.

So I I just wish you would um please consider the safety of our little community.

We have small kids that ride bikes, and it's it's we're just not set up for any additional any additional traffic.

We just we just can't handle it.

But um thank you for taking the time to listen to all of our concerns, and um we I would appreciate the consideration of voting this down.

Thank you.

We have a Heather Jackson.

Uh this is actually Derek Jackson.

Uh I'm on my last computer, but I look, you know, I'm Heather's neighbor and Chesley's neighbor and Todd's right across the street.

And what I just heard Mr.

Hotkin admit is he did a really poor job presenting this the first time.

He's asking you to table this again for more dialogue.

This is already the second bite at the apple.

His words.

Your staff recommended denial, and the council has already voted it down.

At what point do we stop, you know, repeating this process?

Your planning director recommended denial and the reasons environmental insensitivity, flood plan constraints, no direct street frontage and inconsistency with the natural area in City Plan 2040.

None of that has effectively changed.

He brought up the flood map.

And if you look at that flood map, zone AE covers nearly the entire subject property.

Then he said something about it being a 500 year flood area, which is not true.

You can look at that map, and zone A is a hundred year floodplay.

That's a hundred one percent chance of flooding every single year.

And then we saw the pictures already.

He says he's visited with us, with my neighbors to the north and south.

He's not visible with anybody I know in the north.

He definitely hasn't visited me or contacted me in any way or my family or neighbors.

And uh, you know, is that meaningful outreach?

It just hasn't happened.

Uh then anecdotally, right?

He's like, the fire department supports this project, but there's no letter, no formal recommendation.

There's just nothing to this.

You have to have documented stuff to make this right.

Uh then he keeps offering to walk you guys, the council members through the property, but you don't need a personal tour to make decisions.

You have the flood map, you have the staff report, the city plan.

And then what he actually should have done, which the council won't want to mention was planning his own district PZD, where he would actually bind his promises to that land, but instead he's asking you to just approve it with verbal insurances and taking you down there to make it cool.

You know, the access to the property is like so constrained that I can't even get out of my house to go to work toward the left, and it's so bad on the right that I have to wait and wait and wait and wait.

Um I have small children, my neighbors have small children the space storm water and traffic, they're not abstract to us.

I can't turn left, like I said, and then you know, the property is still developable.

He has options, but the corridor and the whole line has to like build from a neighborhood to our neighborhood doesn't make any sense.

Uh and then, you know, we have this 22,000 square feet of retail space and 9,000 square feet of uh office space, like two blocks away being built right now, and it's just gonna make traffic even worse.

So a smaller version of this bad idea is still a bad idea, and tabling it a second time just rewards persistence over planning, in my opinion.

Uh you know, I'm here to protect the families of my family, and uh I appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Julie Rem Remington.

Hello.

Um, I want to say that I agree with my neighbors' comments and really appreciate them.

Um, I also live in the Westview Meadows development, and I also have not been contacted by Mr.

Hoskins or any representative of his work.

Um I have a young child as well, and living in this neighborhood, I um definitely have problems with traffic.

Uh I live across from one of the houses that's the Airbnb, and there's frequently cars parked on both sides of the road.

Um, this has also been an issue for the male person that we have uh is unable to even deliver mail because there's so many cars already parked on this road.

There's barely room for one car to get through back to the area that you're proposing to develop.

Um that's not really going to handle additional traffic volume from I counted real quick from the uh slide that was displayed about 50 units that Mr.

Hoskins is proposing.

Uh we just can't handle that traffic here.

Uh when I walk in the streets and the sidewalks with my daughter, uh, it's already not very safe.

Again, that little turn off onto Penelope is very narrow.

The sidewalk doesn't even have a curb.

It doesn't look like it's prepared at all for any further development.

Um I have environmental concerns with this project.

Uh again, yes, it is a floodplain and flood wave, and there are a lot of negative environmental impacts that can be um a result of any kind of development there.

Some of them I'm reading from the FEMA website here.

When you develop in a floodplain, include reduced habitat complexity, reduced prey availability, modified hydrology, reduced bank stability, increased erosion, increased pollution, increased water temperature, and downstream wildlife displacement among others.

I've been able to notice all kinds of wildlife walking around, and um they would definitely have a huge impact.

This is a wildlife corridor all along the creek there.

And I think if there's any kind of development, it ought to be a trail.

Let's connect it to the greenway.

That would be amazing.

Um, Mr.

Hoskins said tonight that times change.

There are some things that don't change.

These are the traffic problems, the environmental impact, the safety issues with um pedestrians in the neighborhood.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Okay.

I believe that's everybody that called in, so I will bring it back to the council.

Mr.

Burns.

Thank you, Mayer.

Uh Jonathan, I just want to clarify as we sit here today, the property is zoned.

RA the overall property is split zoned, RMF 24 south, including the the floodway is south, and the north of that is zoned RA residential agriculture.

So the that would allow how many uh structures per acre.

RMF 24 allows 24 units.

Correct.

Requested zoning is what the applicant is characterizing it.

Is it a down zone?

The that's difficult to say with complete certainty.

Uh to the applicant's point, the proposal to downzone the floodway from RMF 24 to RA maybe a moot point.

There's not a lot of development opportunity there.

Um but then upzoning RA, which allows units per acre to RIU has the potential to have more development.

But again, to the applicant's point to which I agree, there are a number of development constraints to how much you really could develop on that portion of the property, such as you hear me talk about it a lot.

There's parking standards, street preservation standards, flood flare uh detention drainage standards.

Uh so I can't say for certain um what the ultimate unit count would be necessarily, but uh for the portion proposed to be rezoned to RIU.

And he also mentioned that he uh met with you at 11 o'clock today.

Was there anybody mentioned a night uh willingness to do a bill of assurance?

Was any of that discussed today on what we discussed the different strategies, of course.

So the the applicant could come back to council with what's on the table today.

Um, if they wanted to modify this request, a bill of assurance is something that an applicant can offer.

It's not something that the city council can require.

You've heard that enough, I'm sorry.

Uh ultimately my recommendation on behalf of staff was presuming a planned zoning district at PZD, as I could I was unable to identify a zoning district that fit his needs, and that staff was able to support you.

Okay, um Mr.

Wheediger.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'm not sure at this point of evolution that this is the same project that the planning commission saw, to be perfectly honest with you.

I think my hesitation on this is um I really don't want to continue a dance and have things evolve and come back to us over and over again.

I would prefer that we not table this tonight.

The applicant has the opportunity, if they're going to do a PZD, which be a completely different design to come back to the planning commission and to staff.

And so that would be my preference if they're really going to make that big of a change.

So my personal preference is that we would go ahead and vote up or down tonight.

Thank you.

Ms.

Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I don't disagree.

I think this has a evolved like my council um member beside me.

Um, I had a question for for staff in regard to PZD, because it sounds like the applicant might be agreeable.

Um, one of the hesitations when I talk to developers with the PCD is there's a lot of upfront costs that sunk into the project, and then some unknowns to say, you know, uh go down the road and might have to make adjustments.

And so um, with the way that we have our code in place today for a PCD, um, are there ways that that can be an economical process where I mean we were provided today?

I mean, I I don't know if you'd call this rudimentary, but has some detail but doesn't have level detail.

I think usually we see in a PCD.

And so I'm just curious what the range is of acceptability in the event that was something that we were asking for him to go back.

Um I don't know if that's always through a certain level of different you know, professional standards that this has to be a certain detail, um, or if there is a kind of a lower type level or a range of of how they could do a layout.

So to the neighbors' concerns, and you know, I know we've definitely you have expressed on council um concerns about uh the water uh in that particular area, and I think you've probably discussed that length with the applicant.

And so understanding a PCD could potentially um address some of that, but trying to understand, I know that's been something that I've gotten feedback from developers that their hesitation is then they get in and there's some unknowns and they need to make adjustments and they got sunk costs, then they have additional cost, and that does get passed on to the end um user, right?

And and makes our housing prices more expensive.

So just trying to be mindful of all those factors.

Certainly, and and Councilman Ward, tell me if I got the question.

The crux of it is do all PCDs have to have a lot of detail is that are they all have a high level of involvement and drafting them?

Uh I think the short answer is no.

Uh, we have seen PCDs that are effectively, if you're familiar with how our development code looks, every zoning district has its own chapter, it's got uses, it's got setbacks, it's got land lot area, things like that at its base.

Somebody can come in, copy and paste that and substitute in different numbers.

Um however, it is worth noting that most people do bring PCDs before the planning commission and staff and ultimately the city council, because you're dealing with a complex property or complex context, and the desire is to offer more detail.

So most of what you see does have a high degree of detail.

It often has uh engineered drawings that are scaled and much more to a higher degree of detail.

That is not a requirement, however, uh, but that is most commonly uh what what the council sees because uh nothing is there's no version of a PCD that's easier than just asking for a straight rezoning to come in and request the rezoning of a property in Fayetteville, you need a zoning district that you want the rezone to, a legal description of the property, a request letter, and consent of the current owner.

That's effectively it.

So PCD immediately requires a little bit of additional work uh that can expand significantly depending what the expectations are of staff, the planning commission or council ultimately.

Okay.

And then just one follow-up is so it sounds like I think I heard and want to make sure that staff's recommendation then would be put a PCD given some of the um complexities of this piece of property to work through some of those things because we didn't have an ideal zoning uh to pick for this particular property.

Yes, I think that if the ultimate goal is to move forward with a request that staff is able to support and that meets the applicant's needs, the only avenue that I'm able to envision for that is a planned zoning district because of many of the nuances on this property uh that you've heard about tonight, whether it's about access, whether it's about the number of units, whether it's the ultimate the the developer's ultimate goal for how to disperse or sell these properties.

And then I don't know, do we have someone from engineering here tonight at all?

Um city engineer Justin Bland is present.

Um sorry, there's more more bodies out there tonight.

I wasn't quite sure.

Um so we've talked a lot too about um the roadway coming through there, and then that most of this um it takes on either hundred or five hundred year flood.

Um when you've looked at this project, can you give us feedback on do you express the same concerns as planning staff around this project and looking at leaning towards needing a PCD for this project?

Um can you can you clarify when you say that the roadways is that the what's been drawn?

I'm sorry, it's what's I it's what's on here.

Oh, I see, yes, yes.

Yeah, and just for the record, um the city engineer might not have had a chance to see that because it was placed on our desks right before the meeting.

So just didn't realize that.

I apologize.

I can pass it if that's helpful.

Sorry.

Okay.

Um and I just I know that we completely put you on the spot and rescue to look at something that you haven't even seen before.

Are you clear what the I do you can you kind of restate kind of uh Miss Moore what the question is?

Yes.

Well, I just given uh when we looked at the exhibit A that looks just at the whole extent of the property that either has a hundred or five hundred year uh floodplain for the most part on the property um in the split zoning.

I just was wondering if from an engineering perspective, if you um share concerns that a PCD might be a better avenue to manage the water on this um property and really show in more specific detail where the elements would be versus using this split of RIU RMF 24.

Is that yes, yeah?

Thank you for clarifying and yes, I think the answer is I think the PCD would give us a better uh, I guess if nothing else more detail and a little bit more control over where those elements are.

So I would agree with that.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I just kind of want to when this was brought back to us for reconsideration.

I I think there was uh the developer was concerned about that we made this vote on uh the density and steps.

I just want to uh clarify where I stand on this project before I vote.

And that is uh I like a lot of Mr.

Hoskins developments.

I think they're great.

Um a lot of them have a great sense of space, uh great uh porch forward street facing places.

I think they have a lot of character.

Uh I would love to uh live next to one of his neighborhoods or maybe even in one.

Uh for me it it's I like density.

We need density.

If you're worried about traffic, you're gonna have to keep continuing to be worried about traffic the way the city is growing.

But for me, this is this comes down to it to one and only one thing, and that's this amount of building and a floodplain.

And if you look at the way you vote, you know that I'm pretty much I I am very averse to projects in floodplains.

And so my vote uh whether it's tonight or whether this could tabled, I I don't see my vote changing.

Um if this came back, is it is a PCD or more uh something, then I'd be willing to look at that, but but as it stands now, um I won't be supporting this.

Ms.

Turk.

Oh, I'm sorry, it was on earlier, so I thank you, Mayor.

I just went offline just to respond to Mr.

Burner for a second.

But thank you so much.

Um, I have to say that council member Stafford pretty much stole everything I was gonna say.

So um my biggest concern is always about the floodplain.

Um, and this um uh I think almost all of this development is in a floodplain.

Um I don't know if Mr.

Kurth needs to bring that slide back up to uh really show how how vast that floodplain is right there.

I also think that the citizens illustration, the photograph that showed all of that water was very informative uh for us.

And we will have to, if I understand the drainage uh manual, we will have to build that up at least two feet to meet our current uh standards, and that water's got to go somewhere.

It's already a problem, it'll have to go somewhere and it might go into the existing uh neighbors.

The residents have been extremely vocal.

They have uh reached out to me um several times, and I guess um for me, this has been very frustrating because we uh denied it, then we had a reconsideration, then we had a tabling, and now the developer wants even more time, and I think there's been adequate time, sufficient time to reach out to the neighbors to offer a council tour if he chose to do so.

And so we have a lot of items, a lot of issues, and so bringing this back again and again and the evolution of this project, I think is um asking too much.

Now, if he came back later on with a PCD that was significantly different than what we've seen before, uh, I think that is a valid uh process, and um, and I would be willing to consider that.

But right now, um my issue uh is the floodplain that probably won't really change with the PCD, but I certainly would be open to seeing what the applicant might be willing to share.

Mr.

Burn, oh, you turned yourself.

Miss Bunch.

Uh yes, thank you, Madam Mayor.

Uh Jonathan, could you kind of go over if you wouldn't mind pulling up looking at the uh graphic that we were given, the conceptual drawings here, uh, and and kind of looking at what is it is currently zoned and what uh uh the areas that are highlighted as the high ground, I suppose, in this picture.

What could be built on these areas now?

I'm not sure if Councilmember Bunch, if the zoning map or the floodplain map would be most helpful for you to compare that to well this is the zoning map I have readily available, and this is the floodplain map.

Yeah, show me the flood do the floodplain map.

Okay.

I will do my best to describe it.

Um as it relates to the exhibit you see here, you can see the the the stream bisecting the property from the left-hand side to the right hand side, it kind of follows that dashed line.

That today is roughly the the zoning split between the property, everything roughly at the creek and south is zoned RMF 24 residential multifamily 24 units per acre, and everything north of that that's not in that area that says existing detention where you see the proposed building footprints, that's zoned RA residential agricultural.

Okay so looking at this this is the flood zone one of the one of the uh neighbors had mentioned cutting down a lot of trees in so this area that we're looking at that butts up next to these houses would be the highest point in this thank you for clarifying the second piece the yes to the the northernmost edge so if to walk you through the floodplain map that the hatch there is the floodway where the water certainly goes in a flood situation the light blue is uh what is generally known as 100 year floodplain so every year there's a one percent chance that it will flood that orange thin line you see is the 500 year floodplain so every year there's a 0.2% chance that it will flood so that area just north of that orange line that is the highest point of the property uh that's being considered for rezoning tonight if you were to square this off going southward to the subdivision that you can barely see off screen there that is all zoned RMF 24 today and is the highest point of the overall property and I believe that may be where the tree canopy is that the resident was was describing and that would uh correspond with maybe the right hand two thirds of those uh single family houses that you see in the exhibit that the applicant provided okay thank you very much certainly okay Mr.

Berna I just had a point of clarification since we had the reconsideration and and we tabled are we on the first reading we on the second reading third reading you're on the third and final reading I'll uh uh okay do we need we don't need to make a motion to take not unless you're tabling it we're going to the vote okay oh miss uh I would I would say you know looking at this and thinking about it in detail you know I would have much preferred to have had an actual PCD if we were going to to look at you know the the real drill down detail on this but we don't have that um but um the the issue for me it it gets down to eventually always gets down to the floodplain that that's that's a a very problematic for me um and I don't know if I can support this tonight but but I also Mr.

Hoskins brought up one good point and that is we are down to the we either have the hillsides or the lowland to build on because all of the easy land has already been developed so we are probably going to see more and more issues like this where people are coming forward with proposals on land that is maybe a little sus I guess you know for lack of a better thing to call it but a little dubious and and we're probably going to see a lot more of this because we are in a position where we need housing yet we do not have um high hilltops that are just flat to build on anymore so thank you Mr.

Bernard one last comment is um I agree that we should have had some more clarification and it it would have been nice to have a PZD.

Uh so I I'm not gonna be able to support this but I am a little concerned uh of without this with without this down down zoning what potentially could go there so you know everybody needs to be aware if we deny that this rezoning uh you know they have a buy right construction ability so just just know that that that potentially could be a problem so that could come back to us later clerk paxon will you please call the roll mr burner no Ms.

Bunch no Ms.

Turk no Mr.

Jones no Mr.

Stafford no yes Ms.

Moore no Mr.

Wheedaker no thank you that brings us to our next item of old business V2 RZN 2025-50 on West Michael Cold Drive an ordinance to rezone the property described in 2025-50 for approximately 7.67 acres located at 5901 West Michael Cold Drive in ward four from RA residential agricultural to RI 12 residential intermediate 12 units per acre and CCR conservation cultural and recreation subject to a conservation easement and an updated conservation easement which is distributed to you all via email by Blake Pennington earlier today a hard copy of which you find um in front of you kit I wonder if they want to expand the rules go to the third and final reading before I read it make a motion okay mayor if it would be helpful I can present the differences between the uh conservation easement that was in the packet before and what was sent out before the meeting I I think first we are having a motion I mean I think what there's a a motion that was just made so but

Kit.

I wonder if they want to expand the rules to go to the third and final reading before I read it.

Make a motion.

Okay.

Mayor, if it would be helpful, I can present the differences between the uh conservation easement that was in the packet before and what was sent out before the meeting.

I I think first we are having a motion.

I mean, I think what there's a motion that was just made.

So but I didn't hear what you said, Mr.

Stafford.

Oh, what did I say?

Oh, I I'm not for a motion to suspend, but I'll just vote no.

Okay.

Well, and I was just making the motion, so I didn't get it through get through it.

Um, but yes, a motion to go to the third reading.

Okay, second.

Yep.

Okay.

Okay, so we have a motion and a second to suspend the rules and go to the five a third and final reading.

Clerk Paxon, will you please call the roll?

Mr.

Bernard.

Yes.

I'm just confused.

I'm just confused because you're you're gonna clarify the difference between what was presented before and what we're voting on tonight.

And if we're going to the third and final reading, is it on this?

And then what changes were made?

Uh either I'm gonna read the ordinance and we'll be on the second reading, or else this motion will pass, we'll be on the third reading, and at that point, amendments can be made to what is being presented, including this new uh conservation.

Okay.

Either way, we're going to have a presentation from Mr.

Kurth.

I think he maybe jumped in a little eager before we realized what reading we were on, but either way, he's going to have the opportunity to present.

This is just whether you want to be on the second or the third.

Thank you.

Right.

Okay.

So if you could vote for the rule, if you could call the role for the suspension of the rules to be on the third and final reading, Clark Baxon.

Yes.

No.

Minister Jones?

No.

Mr.

Stafford, no.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

I think we have a vote of five to three.

Mayor, do you care to vote?

If if not everybody is comfortable going to the third, I think that it should be read and we should remain on the second.

So the mayor declines to vote.

Declining to vote.

Be it ordained by the city council, the city of Favorite, Arkansas, Section 1, that the City Council of the City of Favoral Arkansas here by changes the zone classification of the class of the property shown on the map, exhibit A, and a legal description, exhibit B, both attached to the planning department's agenda memo from RA, residential agriculture, to RI-12, residential intermediate, 12 units per acre, and CCR, conservation, cultural, and recreation, subject to the attached conservation easement.

Section two, that's the city council, city of Fable, Arkansas here by men's official zoning map of the city of FAA to reflect zoning change provided in section one.

Okay, Mr.

Kirth.

Thank you, Mary.

And uh apologies for the interruption a moment ago.

Uh, did want to go over real briefly the exhibit that was shared with you at the agenda session and went out with the packet uh as that was a request from the council, and then I will go into the revised conservation easement that was provided to the council uh by the legal department immediately before the meeting, and as I handed out uh a few minutes before the meeting.

Uh taking the more straightforward one first.

Um the there was a request at the last council meeting for greater clarity on how the proposed rezoning request relates to the underlying floodplain on the property.

Uh this exhibit generally probably looks very familiar to the council from the last meeting.

Uh it's a three-part rezoning request.

Uh the first part is to maintain the RA residential agricultural zoning for a portion of the property.

Uh rezone the northernmost portion, uh, which abuts West Michael Cole Drive to the north to RIU RI-12, excuse me, residential intermediate 12 units per acre, and then propose to rezone the balance of the property to CCR conservation or conservation culture and recreation or our newer or new conservation zoning district.

How that appears as it relates to the floodplain, uh, the portion within the dotted line uh is the uh is uh that designation.

So uh what it did is just add colors basically to the exhibit that was attached to your packet uh by the clerk following the agenda session.

Uh hopefully that helps clarify what the council is considering.

Uh moving to the second piece of what I want to touch on as an update uh is the revised easement, which is in front of you.

Uh there are four main components to this that I want to touch on, and uh the council is welcome to validate this on their own.

Uh the first uh and perhaps most foremost is that the acreage was corrected under section A.

Uh, if you're looking at if you have both copies in front of you by any chance.

Uh the previous one noted it was 4.64 acres when the correct amount being proposed for a conservation easement is 3.53.

So what you have in front of you is that 3.53 amount.

That's consistent with the zoning that you considered and that the planning commission forwarded recommending in favor to you all.

Uh the second piece, which is a bit more complicated, uh, but I did get a crash course in from our legal department, is that the uh the easement that's with the ordinance today has both an extinguishment and an imminent domain clause.

Uh Mr.

Williams can explain this far better than I possibly could.

Uh, but the crux of this is we as a city are the recipient of this easement.

And as a result, there is uh not as much of a or not as much of a need for an extinguishment clause in the easement because we are likely the body that will be performing eminent domain on this property if we ever need to use it.

Basically, extinguishment clauses are there for somebody with an interest in a property to capture some of its value if it's taken by imminent domain.

But again, because we are a governmental authority and because of this location, not near any R.

Right-of-way or other state properties that may see state eminent domain.

Uh, it was our legal department's recommendation and the applicant legal applicant's legal advisors of concurrence that that be uh removed.

So the eminent domain section is still in there.

The extinguishing extinguishment portion, which was 16, is now gone.

Uh the third item, uh, staff and legal department did confirm that the applicant is listed as the grantor and the city is the grantee.

So we will be the recipient of this.

And finally, uh there was a question about trail construction on the property.

Uh, and there is a portion in this uh which is not being proposed to be changed in what's in front of you, but under section 3.3 that allows the construction of soft surface trails and pathways in the area.

Uh, there is a long-range goal that the city has to have a multi-use trail in this area at some point.

That alignment is very broad at this point, and there's concern incorporating it into the easement at this point because that alignment may move, including entirely off of this property.

And the applicant has expressed a willingness to bring the easement back to city council to amend it if and when there's a time when we have that uh that multi-use trail alignment figured out and it passes through this property.

Uh so if the council is amenable, uh, I do recommend that the uh the first action be to amend the ordinance to um include this new conservation easement uh in lieu of what was uh previously in the packet.

And I'm happy to take questions, although Mr.

Williams may be more able to answer uh those of legal nature than I am.

Thank you.

Ms.

Turk.

I move that we amend the ordinance to um reflect the addition of the new uh or the replacement with this new conservation easement presented tonight.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to amend the ordinance.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll on the amendment?

Mr.

Barnett?

Yes.

Ms.

Bench, yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Mr.

Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Weaker.

Yes.

Okay, so it's been amended.

Um, do we have quite does the council have questions either for um Mr.

Kurth or any follow-ups for Mr.

Williams?

Or do we have a presentation from the applicant?

I don't.

Uh I believe Mr.

Dirk Kibidot is here representing the applicant, but I don't believe that's a formal uh presentation.

He's available for questions.

Okay.

So if we don't have questions for any of the above, we will go to public comment.

Um, would any members of the public like to comment on this item?

Keith, do we have anybody that's called in?

We do not.

Okay.

I will bring it back to the council, reminding you that we are on the second reading still.

Uh Ms.

Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, Jonathan, could you uh pull the map back up again with the overlay of um where the floodplain is, the flood zone, and um the different zoning uh request.

Thank you so much for providing this graphic.

Because I was um, and thank you for the tour a couple of weeks ago.

I appreciated that.

It was very helpful for me to kind of get out there and and um view the lay of the land.

Um I want to commend the applicant um about going forward in trying to draft a conservation easement using our new CCR uh zoning designation.

However, I'm still just similarly to the last um item that we had before us.

I'm concerned about the floodplain uh up there in the sort of the northern um northeast corner of this property and and how um how that might impact um the remainder of the property and downstream.

So I I don't know if there have were conversations that you had with the applicant about um the RA 12 within that portion of the floodplain or not.

Is there any way to uh maybe enlighten us on that?

I I don't have any specifics uh as far as conversations that may have been had with the developer, and I think it does bear talking through what may appear an issue like an inconsistency in staff recommendations.

We didn't support the last one, we are supporting this one.

Uh if you as a council consider the range of rezoning requests that you all have seen uh come before you uh some have included floodplains over the past, and staff has been most at ease supporting these when there's a significant amount of area outside of the floodplain that has uh development potential, having the ability to more flexibly use a space uh can acknowledge several of our floodplain development standards, including those that do allow fill, but needing to accommodate uh where that fill uh needs to be uh accounted for in other pieces of the property.

Uh so ultimately this alignment allowed them to potentially build within the floodplain, but also have areas of cut and fill where they remove dirt and potentially relocate dirt uh with some degree of flexibility while also acknowledging the most sensitive part of the area.

Thank you.

I have a follow-up question on that.

That um we talked about a couple of weeks ago.

The retention um ponds were have those been identified.

Would that be in the CCR or would that be required to be in the RI-12?

The we have seen conceptual site plans to date.

I don't believe they had the detention ponds in that area, the CCR.

That may be a better question for the applicant.

Um trying to, I believe the conservation easement precludes anything from being developed in there.

Uh there's prohibitions on construction, excavation, cutting, uh, biocides pollution, things of that nature.

Uh, but mayor, the app again, the applicant may be better positioned to answer that if you're amenable.

Would you like to answer that one?

I would like to try.

Yes.

Good evening.

I'm Dirk Thibodeau representing um or with swap consultant representing the owner.

Uh the the question on the detention pond, I can't clearly answer because we are not the engineered designing the detention ponds.

That's being done by an outside firm.

But everything that we've seen preliminary shows that the detention ponds will be in the conservation easement or the majority of them will be in the easement.

And so where I was looking at I see at the majority, it's I say the majority, but some of it will be in the RI-12 as I see where the low spot is.

The probable location of a pond, and I'm not the one designing it, would be almost where you've seen the CCR on the map itself.

That's probably that and a little bit to the north would be the logical low spot where the pond would be placed.

If the pond is in the CCR, I've looked at it.

Now we would be on the side where we would be designing the aspects of the pond.

And so I've looked into what we would be doing to make the pond more desirable for wildlife, native grasses, native trees, those types of things.

Primarily what you have right now is an open field.

So if we do develop it where we're putting a pond, we can turn it into a situation that is more desirable, I think, for what you would be looking for within a conservation easement.

Including the pond.

Mayor, if I may add a clarification of that as well, uh I did not read into the full section of that no excavation clause of the conservation easement until just now.

I mean I read it previously, but reminding myself now there is a clause at the end of it that says no excavation describes that there shouldn't be any of that except as necessary to meet any stormwater management and drainage requirements in connection with the grantor's development of the parcel.

So that is a portion of the that allows them that ability.

That thank you that cleared that up.

Uh, I'm really glad we talked about that.

That kind of goes against the spirit.

I would, at least in my mind of the CCR, that you would use that area for detention uh pond and not maybe some of the other area up there that's in the floodplain.

So thank you for clarifying that.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

And uh for me, I I again I share a lot of the concerns with with the last uh item that was before us and and council members uh Turk's concerns that a third of the RI-12 when you look at it is in the floodplain.

And you know, when we talk about hundred-year floods and 500 year floods, that those aren't that's not real anymore.

The 500-year flood isn't a 500-year flood anymore.

A hundred-year flood is just about every other year now.

Um the the amount of water that comes down so fast now is just uh I mean you've seen it.

You know, we have neighborhoods, streets turning into rivers, uh water rushing through houses.

Uh, I see that more one all the time now.

And and so I still have this concern that yes, you can engineer a house to be built in a floodplain or a neighborhood.

And those houses will stay nice and dry.

You just build up around them.

But but that water doesn't disappear, it's displaced.

It still exists, it still goes somewhere.

I I also agree with council members Turk's concerns that being able to put a detention pond in the CCR seems uh kind of against the spirit of having the CTR.

Uh to me.

So again, I'm glad we kept this on the second reading because I'm uh definitely uh not prepared to vote on this.

Um based on those those concerns um about the amount of RI-12 uh in the floodplain.

Okay, thank you.

I'm not seeing any more comments, so thank you.

So that one will remain on the second reading, which brings us to the third item of new business, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2025-58 for approximately 9.02 acres located at South Futural Drive and South Root Avenue in Ward 1 from RSF4, residential single family four units per acre, to NSG, neighborhood services general.

Okay, be it ordained by the city council, the city of Favorite Arkansas Section One that the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas here by changes of own classification of the property shown on the map exhibit A and the legal description exhibit B, both attached to planning department's agenda memo from RSF4 residential single family four units per acre to NSG neighborhood services general.

Section two that the city council of the city of Favorite Arks are here by a man's official zoning map of the city of Fayetteville reflects a zoning change provided in section one.

Thank you.

Mr.

Kurth, do you have any updates on this one?

I do, Mayor, and as a matter of expediency, I'm uh the updates are pretty limited, so I'm presenting the next two items worth of the updates together.

Uh, as a reminder for the council, you have two items that are almost immediately adjacent to each other on your agenda tonight.

Item B3, which is what's being considered now, is the larger of the two, uh, which you can see here.

We're uh just off of uh I-49 and futural.

This is on the south and southwestern slopes of Markham Hill, and the following and the subsequent item, the last one of old business is B4, which is just to the northwest of that.

Uh there was a question uh that was brought up previously about uh topography on the two properties, uh, and it does vary.

Um, this is the southern of the two properties, the larger one that's uh on the agenda immediately before you right now.

Uh and it does have varied uh topography on the property.

Uh the roughly this where you can kind of uh see the bulging coming down from the north where the lines extend southward.

That's effectively that that southern slope of Markham Hill where you see the steepest parts of the site, which vary from about 12 to 16 percent, uh, where the property is flatter, is along the southeastern, southern, and southwestern property lines where it is uh closer to five to seven percent slopes.

Uh taking the smaller of the two properties, uh the slopes are also similarly varied, uh, but generally uh less steep.

Uh, while there are uh are some areas of steeper slopes towards the northern extent of it, uh upwards of about 14%.

Uh the site overall is uh 10% or less across the property.

Uh some other updates on the property.

There was a question about easements.

Um note, these two properties, as I said, do not touch each other.

Uh diagram it there where you can see the the red line coming from the north is the uh smaller of the two, and the red line to the uh lower right-hand side, the southeast is the bigger of the two, and there is a gap between those two properties.

Uh that is land uh that is this portion is within uh two easements.

One is a conservation easement uh associated with the Markham Hill development that has uh significant limitations on its development.

Uh the second easement is a water and sewer easement, which uh generally reflects the uh gravel road uh that goes up the hill and allowed uh sewer access for the development going on there.

Um so that neither of those generally allow access to either of these properties.

That was a question with uh how these properties can or cannot access futural.

Uh so this uh in evaluating those two easements.

This does not necessarily this does not appear to be a method for them to be evaluated but going through that intervening property.

Um and as I noted, the properties are not contiguous.

And other than that, uh just the reminder of stuff is recommending in favor of both the requests, uh which are to NSG neighborhood services general, uh, the one that's before you right now, the planning commission forwarded to city council recommending in favor of by a vote of seven to zero.

The smaller piece, which is for the north along futural, uh came also with a planning commission uh recommendation of approval, although by a vote of six to one.

Uh with that, I'm happy to take any questions, and mayor uh Rob Wells is here as the applicant for the item, and I don't know if he has any prepared comments or not.

Thank you.

Great.

Do we have any questions for Mr.

Wells or Mr.

Kurth before we go to public comment about and I think questions while you presented both questions for clarity will stick to B3?

Does that make sense?

Okay, or ultimately they will have to be voted on.

Voted on separate.

Okay.

Okay, I'm not seeing any questions, so we'll open it up to public comment.

Do we have any members of the public here tonight that would like to speak on this issue?

We do not none on Zoom.

So back to the council, and I believe this is on the second reading now.

I've moved that we suspend the rules and go to the third reading.

Second.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading.

Clerk Paxson, we please call the roll.

Mr.

Burnet?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheataker.

Yes.

In order to rezone the property described in rezoning petition, RZN 2025-58 for approximately 9.02 acres, located at the South Futural Drive and South Route Avenue in Ward 1, from RSF 4 Residential Single Family 4 units per acre to NSG Neighborhood Services General.

Okay.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll for the final vote?

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheataker.

Yes.

Okay.

So that passes and brings us to item B4, our final item of old business, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2025-59 for approximately 1.37 acres located at South Futural Drive in Ward 1 from RSF 4 Residential Single Family 4 units per acre to NSG Neighborhood Services General.

And unless we suspend the rules and go to the third, Mr.

Williams will read it again for the second reading.

I motion we suspend the rules and move to the third and final reading.

Second.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll on the vote to suspend the rules?

Mr.

Burnout?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

And in order to rezone the property described and rezoning petition RZN 2025-59 for approximately 1.37 acres located at South Neutral Drive in Ward 1 from RSF4 Residential Single Family 4 units per acre to NSG Neighborhood Services General.

Okay.

And once again, I'll ask if since we're on the final reading, if we have any public comment.

And since we do not, then Clerk Paxton, if you would please call the roll for the final vote.

Mr.

Burner?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheataker.

Yes.

Okay.

So that pass.

Oh, yes, ma'am.

Ms.

Moore.

Uh, thank you, Mayor.

Um, before we go on to C1, I'd like to make a motion to uh suspend the rules and see item C2 uh first.

I see in the audience we have quite a few folks for that.

And I know it's already been a long night for them, so if we could see that item, I'd appreciate that.

So motion to suspend rules and do C2 first and then C2, C3, and then do uh can we do C1 last?

If that's okay with my colleagues.

Second.

Okay.

So Clerk Paxson, if this is a motion to change the order of new business to where we would go in the following order C2, C3, followed and ended followed by an ending with C1.

So we have a motion and a second.

If you could please call the roll on the vote to suspend to reorder.

Mr.

Burnet?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheataker.

Yes.

I think that was a great call.

Thank you all.

Um item C2, an ordinance to establish the Oak Grove Historic District and codify the White Hangar at Drakefield Historic District in section 33.321, historic districts of the Fayetteville City Code.

Kit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Whereas on September 4, 2025, residents submitted a petition to the city clerk's treasurer's office to propose a local historic district called Oak Grove near Wilson Park.

And whereas the City Clerk Treasurer's Office verified 34 signatures out of a total of 47 property owners within the proposed boundary.

And since the petition was verified, three additional signatures of support were submitted to staff, bringing the total percentage of property owners in support of the district to 78.7%.

And whereas the proposed Oak Grove Historic District has been evaluated following the procedures outlined in the Arkansas Historic District Act, including review and recommendations of approval by the Historic District Commission, Planning Commission, and State Historic Preservation Office.

And whereas the proposed district is highly significant for its craftsman architecture and prominent uses of locally sourced field stone associated with the neighborhood builder NOAA Fields Drake.

And whereas this subset of the larger Wilson Park National Register Historic District represents the highest concentration of homes associated with Drake and the most architecturally intact homes in the neighborhood.

And whereas in 2008, the City Council established a White Hangar at Drake Field Historic District by ordinance, but the district was never codified.

Now therefore it be ordained by the City Council, the City of Federal Arkansas Section 1, that the City Council, the City of Fayetteville, or Arkansas, hereby repeal section 33.321 historic districts and enact a replacement as follows.

Section 33321 historic districts, subsection A.

The City Council may establish historic districts pursuant to the revisions of Arkansas Code annotated 14-172-201 at sec as amended.

Subsection one, district characteristics.

The City Council and the Historic District Commission should consider the following characteristics when establishing an historic district to reserve areas of exemplary architecture, archaeological, cultural, or historic value.

Subsection A, significance in history, architecture, archaeological, or cultural.

Subsection B, association with certain events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local, regional, state, or national history.

Subsection C, association with the lives of significant persons in our past.

D embodying the distinctive characteristic of an architectural or engineering type, period, or method of construction.

Subsection E represents the work of a master designer, builder, or craftsman.

And or section four represents an established and familiar visual feature of the community.

Subsection two, relationship to zoning districts, overlay zone.

This historic district regulations are intended to preserve and protect the historically or architecturally worthy buildings, structures, sites, monuments, and neighborhoods of the historic area.

And all zoning districts lying within the boundaries of the historic district, the regulation for both the zoning district and the historic district shall be applied.

Whenever there is a conflict between the regulations of the zoning district and the regulations of the historic district overlay zone, the more restrictive shall apply.

Subsection B.

The City Council hereby establish the following historic districts.

Number one, Oak Grove Historic District shall consist of that area of the city as shown and legally described on exhibit A attached here to, consisting of 40 parcels of land.

Section two, that the White Hangar at Drake Field Historic District shall consist of that area of the city as shown on exhibit B attached here to and more particularly described as the hangar located at 4290 South School Avenue within the city limits of Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Okay, and we have Kylie Cole from our city's long range planning department to present this item for us.

Please go ahead, Kylie.

Thank you, Mayor.

Give me just one second to get my screen shared with you all.

So here we go.

So I'm very excited to be in front of you all tonight, and hopefully we can make history.

This is the first proposal for a residential historic district in the city of Fayetteville.

So this is a really big deal.

And because this is the first time that we're all doing this together, I wanted to take a little bit of time to remind you or fill you in if you're not familiar, the process for creating a local historic district, what they do, the specifics of this proposal for Oak Grove, and then the process we've gone through so far, and then your role tonight.

So this is all established by the Arkansas Historic Districts Act, which is very long and it does a lot of things.

It essentially establishes the procedure for reviewing historic district proposals.

And there are two ways that you can do that.

The first is by a petition of property owners, where they have to essentially collect 51% or more of property owner signatures in a designated boundary, or you can copy a national register of historic places, historic district boundary.

The act goes on to speak to what public notice has to look like, what bodies have to review and comment on a proposal, very specific timeline for each of those steps, and then the role of the final decision maker, which is you all.

It also essentially lays out a stratification of roles that everybody from the state to the historic district commission will play.

So the Historic Districts Act establishes how those districts are made, and it also establishes what the historic district commission membership should look like.

Our historic district commission ordinance establishes how proposed districts are evaluated and what types of projects are reviewed.

And then the historic district commission themselves can lay out their own guidelines and procedures and manage those on their own.

But what a local historic district does at its core is provides protection of local properties, predictability for property owners, and a transparent public process to evaluate changes to those properties.

Importantly, a historic district does not change the underlying zoning.

So I'm not before you this evening requesting a rezoning for any of these properties.

It doesn't regulate uses or change what's allowed in the area.

And it also doesn't regulate certain features like paint colors or whether or not a property owner can do ordinary maintenance and repair.

And very importantly for you all and for property owners, there is no regulation that requires property owners to make improvements.

So you could keep your house exactly as it is, and that's just fine.

I'm not gonna call you and say, hey, I need you to repaint and replace your roof and blah blah blah.

The Oak Grove Historic District was brought before you via the petition process.

So it was circulated by neighbors.

They did the bulk of this work entirely on their own and decided where this boundary should be placed, and it's outlined in red on your screen.

As I mentioned, the Historic Districts Act requires 51% of property owners to sign on to initiate this process.

And these property owners initially were able to get 72% of property owners to sign.

And then after the clerk's office did their portion, three additional signatures came in.

So that brings us to almost 79% of property owners in support of this.

And it's very rare that we ever get to say this, but there's been no stated opposition to this proposal.

So a little bit more information about this boundary.

If you see the hatched area, that is the Wilson Park National Historic District.

So that doesn't come with any protections.

It is honorary.

And then the area that we're proposing for the Oak Grove Local Historic District consists of 31 historic age properties, which are 50 years old or older, one non-historic property, and then seven vacant parcels.

This is the vision that was established by the neighborhood themselves to speak to their goal with creating this historic district.

And they say that the intent is to preserve this unique neighborhood, a cohesive and intact example of vernacular residential architecture and neighborhood design for the future.

So the historic significance of this I think is quite fun, and it's related to Noah Fields Drake.

He was born in Northwest Arkansas.

He went to the U of A before relocating for his more advanced degrees in California at Stanford.

And he went on to have a pretty illustrious career in geology, working for the states of Arkansas and Texas before he eventually went on to work in China and held some very prominent positions in China.

He eventually came back to Arkansas and became a professor of geology at the U of A and went on to serve as the state geologist and museum curator.

After he came back, he actually moved to this neighborhood.

So the house at 513 Highland, he didn't build this house, but this was the first home he lived in when he moved back in 1922.

And then he started developing his own neighborhood in this area.

It was pretty undeveloped when he first moved, and he ended up constructing 11 homes in the neighborhood, and 10 of those still remain.

The house at 501 North Forest was the first house he constructed in 1922, and that was his family home that is still owned by the family today.

The distinctive style that he created, it might not surprise you.

It was uh made of Field Stone being a geologist.

I'm sure that had special interest to him.

So we have several notable examples of rock houses in this neighborhood.

Um there are two other houses that have been attributed to Drake, although they're not distinctive of his style, and I wasn't able to confirm with 100% certainty that he constructed them.

And then the other houses in the neighborhood are primarily craftsmen, um, and they date to the early 20th century as well.

So far, we have been traveling this very crazy road established by the Arkansas Historic Districts Act.

Um, the neighborhood filed the petition with the clerk and her office validated the signatures.

Um, the historic district commission and I worked together to create a report that was presented to you all.

Um, and then it was also presented to the historic preservation program, the planning commission went back to HDC.

They revised it, and then here I am tonight with some updates.

So the State Historic Preservation Office sent us a letter back in October saying that they uh wanted to endorse this proposal.

Um they applauded the neighborhood support, the distinctive and cohesive historic fabric of this neighborhood, and the interesting ties to Noah Fieldstrake, who was a prominent Fayetteville citizen.

Similarly, the Planning Commission issued their full support to this proposal, and also expressed interest in carefully considering any variants requests that may come before their body in the future to further support the historic character of this neighborhood.

And then just a final summary of public comment that we've received so far.

Again, 78.7% of property owners have signed this petition support, which is amazing.

Um we've received 13 letters in support, three inquiries, and two of those were actually expressing interest in joining the district.

They were properties that were just outside that boundary, and again, no stated opposition.

So this is just the um draft of the language that Kit read to you.

The big change is that it is creating language for the Oak Grove Historic District, and it's also codifying the Drake, the White Hangar at Drake Field.

So here are those two.

Um the Historic District Commission looked at um the report from my office.

They looked at the proposed ordinance and those maps, and they unanimously recommended creating this district and forwarded the draft ordinance to you all with a recommendation of approval.

And then staff is also very excited to recommend approval of the Oak Grove Local Historic District and that draft ordinance.

And I would be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much.

Do we have questions from the council for Ms.

Cole?

Okay, that's an excellent job.

Thank you for your work on this.

It's um been wonderful to see it all take shape.

Do we have any members of the public who would like to make a comment before we vote?

Do we have any on Zoom?

We do not.

Oh, we have LC.

Okay, if you would come on up and state your name and address, and please be mindful of the three-minute timeline.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh my name is John Blakinger, and I live at uh 515 North Forest Avenue, which is within the proposed district.

And my husband, Martin Shapiro and I worked with our neighbors in a collaborative grassroots effort to form this district and propose it to the city through a petition process, which you've now heard about.

We are excited it has been unanimously supported by the city's planning commission and historic district commission.

I also want to thank Kylie Cole and Britton Bostick for their time and support in this community effort.

We are proud that our petition to establish the Oak Grove Local Historic District garnered support from more than 78% of property owners, and we feel strongly that the modest guidelines put forward here reflect the overwhelming consensus of homeowners.

I also want to thank the city council and Mayor Ron for considering this proposal.

We appreciate that the city of Fayetteville has created a process for neighbors to proactively propose local historic districts such as ours.

I want to encourage the council to vote yes and pass this first residential historic district in our city.

You have a chance to make history tonight by voting to support the preservation of our city's history.

Thank you.

Thank you, and well said.

Thank you, Mayor and Council, for allowing us to speak tonight.

I my name is Mary Madden.

I and my husband Gary Thompson reside at 503 North Forest, which is also in this district.

Or I should say proposed district.

And I wanted to highlight one item that Kylie mentioned, and that we will hope to work with the planning staff, long range and development services and planning commission, which is uh we've recognized in this process that there are several characteristics of the district do not meet current development standards.

And if an owner wants to do something like replace a historic garage that sits directly on the property line, they have to go through a variance process that can be denied and doesn't really match the existing context.

So we are aware it's not part of this overlay, but that people will come back to you hopefully in the not too distant future, which will give us a variance process to make sure necessary changes or future development match the existing context rather than current standards that don't fit with our neighborhood.

Um that's all I have this evening.

I ask you for your support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Wade Calwell, 600, no, never mind.

605 Parks where I grew up.

Baba One Forest is where I live now.

Um I just want to thank everybody for their hard work on this.

It's um it's really brought the neighbors together in a great way, and it's a great one neighborhood.

And uh I know my great grandfather Noah Drake would be very proud.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, I'm gonna bring it back to members of the council, Mr.

Wheedaker.

I would move to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to go to the third and final reading.

Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Mr.

Burnham.

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

And you wanted to establish the Oak Grove Historic District and codify the White Hangar at Drake Field Historic District in Section 33.321 historic districts of the Fayetteville City Code.

Okay.

Looks like we have several people wanting to come.

Oh.

Um we'll start.

I saw you first, Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I just want to say how excited I am.

Um, especially I hope this is the start of many Fayetteville Historic Districts to come.

And uh only question is do they get a plat for any sort of uh sign any signage anywhere?

Well we'll take that up at our next staff meeting.

That sounds great.

So thank you so much.

Again, very excited to be voting for this.

Ms.

Moore, thank you, uh Mayor.

Uh I got to talk to some of the neighbors from this process, and this is in the heart of work too.

I'm in this area frequently by Washington Elementary.

I love this portion of Fayetteville.

Um, and I just really want to applaud how this process played out.

I think I was just so impressed talking to, I could not believe honestly that there was not anyone that had anything negative to say.

I mean, you know, there's always some great critical thing that comes up, and so I just found this to be such a delightful thoughtful process that to me is so quintessentially Fayetteville, which so often we talk about lament, feeling like we stray from that.

So I think that as a demonstration project of our first historic district, I just really want to applaud um our staff and I know worked really hard on this, and also the neighbors who uh were so neighborly uh to one another through this process to make sure that um also too, you know, it's a thoughtful district.

Um, it's not overly prescriptive or restrictive, and so uh that's how you went through some detailed um dialogue to get to that, and so um we it showed and demonstrated that these historic districts in Fayetteville can be unique to the context of those portions of town as well, and so thank you for being a good demonstration project on that as well.

I look forward to supporting this and enjoying this neighborhood for many more years to come.

Ms.

Bench.

I think Teresa was first.

Okay.

Ms.

Turk?

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, this has been a really long time coming, so I want to applaud everybody.

I think there's been several attempts in the in the recent past to try and pass this and get to the fruition and to have the support, the unanimous support, and no opposition is is really amazing.

So everybody's really done their homework.

They've reached out to their neighbors.

And I just really want to say uh this is wonderful.

I think it's clear now that Fayetteville residents really value their history and want to preserve it.

And uh like my other colleagues, I hope this is the first of many more historic districts uh before us.

Thank you.

Ms.

Bunch, thank you.

Um I just I want to uh kind of second some of the other opinions we've had tonight, but I do want to thank staff also.

I'm very, very grateful for their efforts on this and their thoughtful approach to everything and the detail that they put into this.

I also you know, no opposition.

That's just fantastic to hear.

We we don't hear that very often, honestly.

Um, and so I'm I'm very grateful for that because this to me exemplifies kind of what we we love to think of Fayetteville, that neighbors can work together and they can come up with decisions that are good for their neighborhood and maybe protect our community.

I I do regret that I did not get to hear from my favorite Shakespeare professor, Dr.

Candido.

Good to see you.

But um, I I'm in full support of this, and thank you to everyone in the neighborhood and all the staff members that were active in this.

Good job.

Dr.

Jones.

Um I echo the sentiments of my peers, and I want to ask staff is there a blueprint that we can borrow for the future because uh this it's almost it seems as if the process was perfect.

So if there's a way that we can when other groups want to do this, uh, especially with the with no opposition, uh we would love to borrow this, but thank you so much, and I hope that we can uh do have the same energy in the future with other projects as well.

So I look forward, I definitely look forward to supporting this.

Thank you.

And um to sort of answer your question.

Um, you know, the uh all of the credit goes to um the property owners, the neighbors who work together to do this, they collaborated um beautifully, and um staff we were just lucky to be along for the ride and help them.

Um I think a few things that worked um really well with this specific proposal that we can keep in mind in the future is the size.

It was relatively small.

Okay, um, and it was very um cohesive as to the types of historic properties that were in it.

So I think that reduced um potential points of conflict or um potential points of opposition for property owners.

Um I also think as staff we learned a lot about um ways that neighbors um communicate and prefer to get information and again just the power of having one or two um neighborhood leaders that really kind of step up to the plate and lead the charge.

Um, because you know, staff we're outsiders, we don't live in this neighborhood, so there's always an element of um not necessarily distrust, but just you know, we're not we're not of that place.

So having people that are of the place kind of um lead is very important and um prove to be very successful here.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Ms.

Cole.

Um Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Mr.

Berna.

Yes, Ms.

Bench.

Yes, Ms.

Turk?

Yes, Minister Jones.

Yes, Mr.

Stafford.

Yes, probably Dr.

Jones.

Yes, Ms.

Moore, yes, Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

Okay, wonderful.

And that passes, congratulations to all of you who worked hard to make that happen.

Yes, and thank you, Britain and team as well.

That uh we are now moving to item C3, um, which is amending our UDC, several UDC chapters.

Uh Mr.

Williams, will you go ahead and read the ordinance?

Uh well, if you don't you can read the title or okay.

I just know it repeats.

And so it's um it's 2025-5.1.

It's amending UDC chapters 150.04, 151.01, 153.08, 161.35, 166.01, 166.04, and 166.05.

Oh, thank you, Mayor.

And and the actual ordinance title is shorter than that.

In order to appeal regulations on development in the city's planning area for summoned to Act 314 of 2025 by amending various sections of the unified development code.

Whereas Act 314 of 2025 repealed the authority of the city to regulate development outside the city's corporate limits.

And whereas various sections of the unified development code should be amended to comply with the act.

Now therefore it be ordained by the city council, the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Section 1, that the City Council, the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeal section 150.04 jurisdiction of the unified development code and enacts a replacement as follows.

Quote Section 150.04 jurisdiction.

Definitions by striking, quote, planning area from the definition of plan master street, and by repealing the definitions of rural street and suburban.

Section three.

Section six, that the city council, the city of Fayetteville Arkansas are here by amends section 16604, required infrastructure improvements dash development in the city limits by repealing subsection A2 and enacting a replacement as follows.

Subsection D2 standards applicable.

Any required on or off-site improvement in the city shall be installed according to the city standards.

The developer shall be required to bear that portion of the cost of off-site improvements, which bears a rational nexus to the needs created by the development, unquote.

Section six, that the city council, the city of Favilla, Arkansas, hereby amends section 166.04 required infrastructure improvements dash development in the city limits by striking quote, provided that the portion of the cost of off-site improvements to roads located outside the city's corporate limits, but within the city's planning area shall be determined by the county, unquote, in subsection A4.

And finally, Section 7, that the City Council or the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals Section 166.05, required infrastructure improvements and subdivision regulations-development in planning area.

Thank you.

Mr.

Kurth.

Thank you, Mayor.

I do not plan on going into the very specifics of all these ordinance changes, but I'm happy to do so.

I think what I would more value using this time for is to talk about the uh underlying issues that are at play with this ordinance request.

Uh it may not be readily apparent to the city council, but the state of Arkansas is by many measures uh one of the highest states in terms of ranks of preempting their local government, uh, meaning they they take the opportunities uh in many instances to pass laws that prevent locals from having uh standards on specific issues uh as we straddle the area between the 2025 and 2027 legislative sessions.

I think it's something for the city council to keep in mind as as we uh engage with different issues and as we engage with legislators individually or as a whole entity.

Uh with that in mind, um what is a planning area?

What is it that we're talking about specifically?

Uh this is unincorporated land, or it was unincorporated land that was within two miles of the city's uh boundaries.

Um until recently, Arkansas state law enabled cities to create standards for this area, uh, assuming that one, they would one day be annexed, and we wanted to make sure that they were developed in an orderly fashion, or even in the event that they were not annexed, that we would not have uh significant amount of adverse impacts, whether it's in terms of uh uh adversely impacting our water system in terms of water consumption, impacting our our street system in terms of excessive traffic, things of that nature.

These areas are not within our city, but inherently their traffic does come into our city.

A lot of that is offset with tax dollars, and I do not want to dimin diminish that, uh, but those things are not often uh one to one on a one-to-one basis.

Uh it was, however, uh in the legislative session of 2025, uh that House Bill 1510 uh was passed that abolished our planning area authority in entirety.

Uh it is completely gone.

Uh, for us, that meant we lost any subdivision regulation authority.

So when you think of a neighborhood that's being platted out with streets, uh sidewalks, things of that nature.

Uh, we previously had the authority to dictate how they were set up to have future connections into other subdivisions to avoid uh all traffic being funneled to singular points.

Uh we have the opportunity to incorporate sidewalks where they might not otherwise be established uh standards of that nature.

Um so what is before you other than what Mr.

Williams read verbatim is the goal is to align our local standards with state statute.

Uh that's what it comes down to.

Uh this means we are eliminating the sections of our development code that state that we have jurisdiction over a planning area.

We're removing reference to planning area and our definitions, we're removing how projects in the planning area come through the city from a process and standards standpoint.

Uh so in that sense, this is uh one of the most uh simple uh ordinances that I've ever brought before you uh and accordingly we are recommending in favor of the request or of the proposal, and I'm happy to take any questions from the council.

Thank you.

Do we have any questions?

It looks like yes, Ms.

Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um Jonathan, so um, if I read correctly or understand this um state law correctly, um, like a a town that neighbors us, like Farmington, they're not required to consult with uh the city of Fayville with you all, but if they chose to get your opinion on an area that converges, um is that kind of thing going on?

Is that courtesy happening or is that uh been abolished now?

The I'm not certain specifically what you're referring to.

So this speaks to the planning year, so that's unincorporated lands that would normally reside between municipalities.

Yes, that's what I meant between.

Sorry, thank you so much for clarifying.

Yes, Mr.

Williams may correct me if I'm wrong.

There is a state statute that requires rezonings that are on municipal boundaries to receive approval or reciprocating approval.

I do not believe that was touched.

I don't believe that was uh repeal.

So there's still some collaboration that can take place uh in in unique situations.

That's correct, and and if it wasn't uh if I wasn't too cryptic alluding to it earlier, I think one of the strongest points of those collaborations is many of our neighboring communities receive water from the city of Fayville, and I think that affords an opportunity to encourage those communities uh to develop or work with the city of Fayel's utility department in ways that serve both interests.

Okay, thank you so much.

Mr.

Stafford, do you have a motion to suspend the rules?

Not yet.

Uh but basically this just brings us into compliance uh with state laws that pertains to Act 314.

That's correct.

We the law enacted before today, staff ceased enforcing the standards, understanding that we would formally uh amend our ordinances though.

And I believe the uh Act 314 was brought by Jet uh Chab Purrier after we uh refused to remove a road from uh our planning district.

So again, yeah, there's a punitive uh legislation um unfortunately, but we gotta do what we got to do.

Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on this?

Keith, do we have anybody that is called in?

We do not.

Okay, I'll bring it back to the council.

All right, I'm a motion to suspend the rules and go to the third final reading.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Mr.

Burnett?

Yes.

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford, yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Is Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

In order to repeal regulations on development in the city's planning area pursuant to Act 314 of 2025 by amending various sections of the unified development code.

Okay.

Ms.

Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, and thank you, Jonathan, for um giving us the history on how we arrived here.

It's unfortunate um that we've had this preemption happen, especially in a city like Fayetteville and so many across our state that have uh so much growth happening and that collaboration needing to take place.

So just because the state law doesn't exist, I mean that regulates it occurring.

I just really want to encourage development in our unincorporated areas when folks are developing to be mindful that those folks are gonna be the neighbors there.

Um their long-term vision is to be a cohesive part of that community.

Um, they're gonna get their services, their quality of life with those roadways and the way stormwater is managed, um, and how they can move through that um area they purchase in.

Um, and so you know, I hope you'll be mindful, especially because you know, when those decisions come before this body to determine whether or not we annex those properties and those will be considerations this body will take um not very lightly into consideration.

And so I really want to encourage that collaboration to take place proactively, um, even though the regulation's not in place.

Thank you.

Clerk Pexan, we please call the role for the final vote.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch, yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford, yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

Okay, that brings us to our final item of new business, C1, 2026 City Council Rules of Order and Procedure.

A resolution to adopt amended rules of order and procedure of the Fayetteville City Council for 202.

Minister Jones.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I wanted to look at subsection section seven, subsection A3 and D2.

And I actually took some time because I didn't sit well when this came up during agenda session, so I just took out the time to write my response.

So may I want to thank you for the proposal of changing this and adding that 15 minutes in there and for the work the staff put into these recommended rules and um changes, but I want to be clear, I do not support changing this rule.

And I'm concerned about what it will mean for transparency and the public's ability to see their elected representatives fully engaged in this process.

Under this proposal, after staff and the applicant present, the city council will collectively have 15 minutes total to ask clarifying questions.

With eight members, the average is roughly about one and a half minute per member, and that is assuming every question is short and every answer is immediate.

That is not a meaningful opportunity for due diligence, especially when we're dealing with complex items that can impact neighbors, safety, budgets, and long-term planning.

My concern is not procedural, it's principled.

When we reduce the ability of council members to ask questions in public, we reduce the ability of residents to hear their concerns, voiced and addressed in real time.

That is the work the public elected us to do.

Limiting questions limits accountability.

Dr.

Martin Luther King Jr.

himself warned that systems can be designed in ways that appear orderly and efficient, but in practice, it silences voices and restricts participation, especially voices representing communities that already feel unheard.

To be respectful, I understand the intent may be to keep means moving, but the solution to loan meetings should not be constrained democratic engagement.

The council's questions are not a disruption to the process, they are part of the process.

They are the public's window into how decisions are being evaluated or facts are missing and what consequences need to be weighted.

If we're experiencing issues with this repair and repetitive questions of the time management, I believe there are better approaches that protect the public interest, such as setting expectations, allowing structured rounds, requiring clear staff summaries, or providing time guidelines per council member rather than an overall cap.

But as written, I cannot support a rule that efficient effectively compresses the council's oversight role into a 15-minute window.

For that reason, I strongly recommend we keep the current rule in place and not adopt this change.

Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Jones.

Are you proposing an amendment?

I do propose the amendment that we remove the 15 minutes.

Great.

Okay.

Second.

Thank you.

And we're going to continue to have comment or we can't.

Yeah, uh, sorry, I jumped in and seconded, but I just had a point of information for the city attorney.

Sure.

I just for what our item is considered.

I one of the things I believe that you sent a memo with some clarification that maybe there's a version that needs to be amended that's connected to a memo that you sent out.

I think the version we have currently on the agenda is one that you've now potentially made some cleanups and some corrections.

I just want to make sure that I'm housekeeping appropriately on where we're at.

Yes, when uh the mayor uh sent our office her proposed rules, we just did a resolution to pass them rather than reviewing the rules.

But as if time went on and uh we had a chance to review them.

I saw there were some changes just from format that needs to be done.

For example, the 15-minute rule appeared in three different places in the code and did not need to be in three different places, whether you're for it or against it.

And so I uh then drafted some a modified uh proposal and hope that uh the city council would uh initially amend to that, and then if they want further amendments, like to remove that rule, they still can uh or or other amendments, but that's uh where I would hope the uh first amendment would be is to go to these more concise rules that I drafted out and sent to you all last week.

Thank you, Kit.

And so just as a friendly if it's okay with my other council colleagues, would you be okay if we started first to amend to the version that Kit cleaned up?

So then we can make amendments to that.

So I'd like to make a motion to the version from Kit's office.

Um that made some uh slight um changes to the I think mayor's version.

Second.

Okay, does that replace the motion in the second that's on the floor for and minister Jones?

That's okay with you to replace my second.

So um Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll or make sure I get it correctly on the motion to amend the rules as presented by um miss the modification of the administration's proposed rules as amended by um Mr.

Williams?

Does that also include the removal of the 15-minute time period?

No.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes, Ms.

Bunch?

Yes, Ms.

Turk?

Yes, Minister Jones, yes, Mr.

Stafford, yes, Dr.

Jones?

Yes, Ms.

Moore, yes, Mr.

Wheedeker.

Yes.

Okay, so now those have been amended, and I believe uh Mr.

Stafford, I believe I saw you next.

So go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor.

And uh I want to thank uh councilmember Jones uh for for bringing forward uh that amendment.

I was gonna do a similar uh motion.

Um I'm glad we're doing it in the correct order.

Um I believe it's our due diligence to ask questions and get those questions answered.

If we're not fully informed, we can't make informed decisions.

I mean, it's just that's our job.

And I I think that I understand that people are concerned about long meetings.

I think there's other ways to shorten meetings, not by not doing our job.

I think that's the wrong way to go about it.

Uh we need to have our questions uh answered, we need to have our constituents' questions answered.

I I think it's vitally important as a democratic body uh that we're allowed the the proper time to do that.

Um I I think one thing I would ask of my council members is that when you are asking questions, make sure you're just asking questions.

I know that sometimes uh I do it as well.

That sometimes we start to make our statements during the question period, and and if we could refrain from that, I think that'll go a long way uh to shortening our our questions.

Um and to make sure we're not asking rhetorical questions or or or or such, you know.

I I think there's a lot we could do just in our own uh modern of our own behavior that that will help shorten that, but um I do not think putting a arbitrary limit on the amount of time we have to get our questions answered is a great route, and um I would gladly second uh council member Jones's uh amendment again.

I think she has to make it again, actually, just to keep it moving to make an amendment to the two sections.

I don't know if you remove the third section in your I read back through it again in all time to the new one uh where I moved everything to is subsection two on third on the third page uh under unfinished business and new business.

The first subsection is overview period, the second is council member discussion and question period.

So that would be the one that would be needed to be done.

That city council members discussion and question period is what limits it to 15 minutes.

And my my motion is to remove both of those minutes in the in the in the redacted and updated that's the only place that appears in the modified one.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Verner.

My question, I mean, are we going to go item by item in every option that that we've talked about?

We're gonna have to go to a motion, or do we want to clean the document up and do one motion after the documents agreed upon?

I I I mean it seems confusing to Yeah, um, and before I second uh councilmember Jones' motion, I think that's a good question.

I know that uh uh the city clerk had also a proposed amendment.

Um so just and then in kit in what we just passed, does that include our right to vote present?

I mean it seems confusing the yeah um and before our second uh council member jones' motion I think that's a good question I know that uh uh the city clerk had also a proposed amendment um so just and then and what we just passed does that include our right to vote present or okay so that's already in there and so then the only two other amendments I would know of is this amendment and uh the amendment brought forward by uh our city clerk and it doesn't matter which order we do those in I think you ought to do them one at a time and just knock them off as you go so that because otherwise you're probably gonna get you off to be in favor of some and not in favor of others and how you how you gonna figure that out so I think one at a time is the best way.

I'll second council member Jones's motion but I'd like to hear other public comment virtually but any other mics to clarify you mean council comment I'm just making sure because you said public comment for oh uh council yeah okay yes uh Dr.

Jones thank you um are we I'm I'm confused so we're we're talking about 15 minutes asking questions where does and I think I know the answer but I want clarification where does this fall in at the agenda session because I feel like if we're asking questions at the council meeting and we're asking questions at the agenda session what I it's isn't it redundant I mean wait what's what's happening because I don't think we're limiting anyone I think that we we still what's what's the purpose of the agenda session if we can ask questions at the agenda session and then come back to the council meeting and ask the same question am I are yep I'm I'm a little I mean I'm I'm I'm needing some clarification because the purpose of the agenda session it is to ask questions and then I'm thinking that once we come to the council meeting we should be able to move things should be easier but I feel like it's it's double work and am I wrong I mean if this is my interpretation DeAndre may I answer you or no um if if that was a question for me what I would say is just to clarify the rules you're voting on do not limit your time the 15 minutes does it it does not speak to agenda sessions it is not limiting your time at agenda sessions.

Okay I think the rest is whether you're wrong or not I think that's your opinion it sounds like maybe there are different opinions okay okay because if I'm asking that if there if if we're going through the agenda and there are some questions some some things that that we want to know then I'm thinking that we can use that time to ask questions of staff members or just whatever it may be.

I mean those concerns are addressed and so when we have the council meeting why would we have to ask those questions again thanks for comments uh Mr Wiedaker thank you I appreciate council member Jones's questions because uh it's good for us to be reminded I appreciate the administration bringing this forward because it is an issue and I agree that it's an issue this is uh a business meeting versus a political meeting and it's good for us to be reminded I think including myself that a question should be very concise and to the point and at the end with the answers we get it'd be nice to know if you're for or against something I do think that on occasion we have dabbled into making statements in our questions we have ask questions that were peripheral to the issue and not germane to helping us vote yes or no they almost kind of dabble in the political commentary stage and so I would ask if we're going to rely upon self editing we may need some courteous means by which we let one another know following a meeting that boy you know I think you did a great job your questions were laser focused I really appreciated them versus wow you know that was an agenda meeting that was an email to the staff person that could have been handled you took two minutes for the question and it was a 15 second answer we need some permission to give one another feedback on that so that we don't wait a whole year and I I would look forward to anyone else think that that's a terrible idea or no we should give one another some means for doing that but I I do appreciate people saying that you know I I don't like the idea of being constrained I just want us to be responsible to ask questions before we get to the meeting thank you.

Thank you.

Um Miss Bunch and then Miss Turk, I think is the way, and then Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um I I really how do I say this?

I I I feel that there are times that I'm just gonna be blunt.

The the council, we're our own worst enemy sometimes.

I don't know what else to say.

I I'm all for making meetings more efficient because that's that's a fair use of staff's time, our time, but in particular, it is a a a good use of the public's time.

If they're efficient and straightforward, then that that helps our citizens, you know, that helps them stay on top of what's going on and be a part of the process.

But I don't like you know, like Minister Jones said, I do not like the restraint there on all of us, but I feel like there are members of the council that sometimes could use a little more restraint when they make comments and they pontificate on items that go on and on and on, and um it's unfortunate because some of us, you know, try to be more judicious with our time.

Um but I do uh I do like the idea of not not having 15 minutes, you know, not a constraint.

I do think we could add if we needed to add more time, we could do that, but then that would be voting, and and it would kind of defeat the purpose of having a 15-minute time period there.

I I don't know about the the voting present versus voting yes or no.

I think that is um I mean just because some entities do that, I don't necessarily think that needs to be part of our process because as a representative of the citizens, I feel like I should be able to explain myself succinctly on why I support something or do not and vote yes or no and and that be my vote.

I think that voting present is just it it adds a level of something I'm not sure that we need here.

Um, so I would say don't be coy, just vote yes or no and explain yourself.

Um I don't know how I would love I love Mike's idea about approaching people and being able to graciously tell them, you know, hey, maybe we we did a good job, your your questions were on spot, you know, but I'm assuming that also includes telling someone, hey, you talk too long.

And you know, I don't know what else to say on that, but I I we need to be efficient for ourselves and staff, and we we sometimes go off in loops and circles that just you know just accelerate and and just go out of control, honestly.

And it's not fair to the citizens when we do that.

People sit here night after night after night, and they want to hear their you know, you know, they don't we don't know what we're doing half the time, so they don't know either.

And so I just want to be be clear on that.

That um, you know, there are some things I like about this, some things I don't like about this, but we could all be better, we could all use the time better, and and I think we should we owe that to our citizens, honestly.

And I would remind everyone, I've almost used my not all my five minutes, but um a member of the public when we voted to uh limit the con comments public comment, mentioned how long each council member spoke, and I was the person who spoke the least and was interrupted the most, and that's another thing I don't like is is being interrupted because that that breaks your train of thought and it also then you have to address the person that interrupted you.

You feel obligated to do that.

So there's a lot of things we ourselves could change, and they're just some of them are just common courtesy.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Bunch.

Uh Miss Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

And thank you, colleagues.

Um, you know, we made a lot of changes last year, and I actually think sure we could always do um better.

We could improve ourselves, absolutely, but I think we actually made some really um that we were better this year than we had been in the past.

So um I just wanted to acknowledge that.

Um yes, we need to have efficient meetings, absolutely, but I really don't want to curtail discussion because some of these are really complex, some of these are new, some of the there's a lot of nuance there that I think needs to be brought out.

And um, as you guys know, I always ask a lot of questions in agenda session, but things change between agenda session and the council meeting, especially with extra information that staff provides um before before uh a council meeting.

Um tonight I'm a little um concerned because I I goofed up and I did not get Kit's latest version.

You sent it to me, I didn't print it out of the rules and order and procedure.

And so I don't know if we want to go through all of each and every one of those tonight.

If we do, I will acknowledge my lack of preparation and and specificity on some of the changes that I that I would like to see made or are not made.

Um but I just thought I would point that out.

I know we have to um we have to pass something before the end of the month.

And for me, I would be fine with the current version, just leaving it as is, the one we had last year, and and me and me finally getting the right version to uh to look at, but that's on me.

So I'm just gonna put that out there and say thank you.

Um okay, Mr.

Stafford, I think you are next.

Thank you.

And and the first thing and I want to do is address uh council member uh uh Dr.

Jones' uh uh questions about why can't we just ask all our questions at agenda session?

And I think the reason is because we don't get full presentations at agenda session, we don't hear from the applicants at agenda session, we don't get a full presentation of rezonings from Jonathan at agenda session.

So there's no way for me to know what quite now I would I would personally prefer that we do get a that we do go through the rezonings uh agenda session, and then that I think would move things along a lot quicker.

Um but you know that's not how it's been, and so uh I I can't ask questions based on information I don't have, so that's my answer to to your question.

Um as far as uh council member bunch brought up the the right to vote present.

Um just about every elected body other than us has a right to vote president.

It's different than regular regular Roberts Rules order because we have to have a quorum.

So uh we have to vote, but there are certain situations like it just off the top of my head think of three of us that have either abstained or or had a desire to abstain uh in the last two years, and and those were I think important times.

It should be used very rarely, it should be used with great caution, but there are times when there's a legitimate uh cause for a government official to vote present, and and so I I think it's it's vital.

Um, but that's just my opinion.

Mr.

Berna, and then Miss Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I would just say on the I I've got two issues with I don't care for the voting present.

Uh I think that if we as uh council members interject ourselves in the conversation to form potentially a decision, then we should uh we should vote yes or no.

And and uh if you want to abstain from any kind of conversation, that's your right.

Um if if and you you can uh uh you know make that determination and disclose the reasoning.

Um but I don't know that I I'm comfortable saying you know just because the quorum court does it or just because the legislator does it uh then we are to do it uh because they also limit public comment to I think the county limits to 15 minutes total.

Uh so you know just because it's good for one body doesn't mean it's the right fit for us, and and we may vote to do it, but I I won't support that aspect of it because I think we have a responsibility as citizens that if we're going to try to shape a vote by discussing it, then we should vote uh yes or no.

Uh the other item on the on the change that I didn't understand is uh it takes three to pull off the consent at the agenda session, but only one at the council meeting, and I I just I didn't understand that and and council member uh more mentioned that the other night at agenda session.

I I didn't understand that that didn't seem to jive if we're gonna do it.

I think we ought to do it both, we ought to do it the same way both both meetings.

So that was my only two concerns about it.

I I think as as on the 15 minutes, look, you know we made changes last year.

Everybody seemed to be pleased with it.

We were very courteous to people if they they needed extra time.

We gave them extra time.

I think we as a body have to acknowledge the fact that the city is growing.

We are making we're making uh more decisions at every meeting, just about any more.

And and it that's only gonna increase.

So if if we can do the little thing here or there to move things along, I think that's that's appropriate.

So I'm okay with that part, but uh I I can't support the the voting present, and I just have concerns about the consent.

Miss Moore.

Thank you.

Oh, thank you, Mayor.

Sorry, I'm too short for that.

Too tall.

Um I appreciate the dialogue tonight.

Um, I think it's it's uh shows the representation too across our city, across the eight folks here that we bring kind of a diverse set of viewpoints on how a meeting runs.

Um I really uh at the end of the day, I I echo some of council member Turk, you know, looking at this last year, we made some um bigger tweaks, but also I think we just said let's be more thoughtful, and uh I think we were able to see our meetings improve substantially, and so for me, I'm always rooted to when we're looking at our rules of word and procedure, it's like, well, what do we really, you know, what kind of end goal do we have for those?

And so um, much like council member minister Jones um spoke about about the 15 minute, and I think it's been echoed, you know, for me it's like when we look at a rezone, um, you're looking at like what's the best case scenario and the worst case scenario that can come on that property.

I mean, with thinking about our questions, it's very similar, right?

I mean, every single thing that comes before us isn't packaged up with a bow, right?

And just flies right through.

We have some items that we have no questions on, and we have some items that we have 50 questions on.

Um that's just the dynamics of all the different items that come before us.

And so I think again, it's like leaving it open because I feel like um we're gonna have a lot of back and forth um that's gonna kind of mitigate and take away procedurally in those meetings.

Um additionally, uh uh I wanted to double check with the uh with the city attorney because in looking at the version that we adopted that's kits updated.

I don't see the consent agenda being set up in the same way.

I think that was already cleaned up that it doesn't take three council members to pull something at agenda session.

Um I don't see that language listed in here, and so I did just want to double check in this version.

I've gone through it several times, so in the event I've missed it.

Um and and I just expressed and would just want to reiterate, um, I agree with council member you know, Burno we should do it one way, but you know, to me, consent means uh everyone's in agreement.

Uh it's a hundred percent agreement, and every other body that I'm a part of of other entities, um uh including Washington County's quorum court, who I don't agree with everything they do, um, you know, they don't put things on consent unless there's a hundred percent agreement when they know one one member is gonna be um counter to that.

And so my uh thought would be you know to to be able to give staff if we're gonna pull an item, I want to be respectful and give them plenty of time and get agendized to know that they are gonna present, you know, what their night's gonna look like versus you know, pulling them up here at the very beginning of the meeting, having to ah, and um and do a presentation for us.

And so I'm open to feedback on that, but I I hope we'll leave our consent the way that it exists today.

And so I I want to say thank you to my colleagues for this last year for the efforts we have made at moving our meetings.

I mean, I haven't looked at the numbers, but I know we've gone home a lot earlier this last year, and so I do think just through us being you know mindful with each other and trying to be you know respectful in those proceedings that we can manage that, and we don't necessarily you know, we don't need to be overregulated.

I think we talk about that a lot about government getting in our business, and we are the government, and I think that we can self-regulate in these meetings.

Thank you.

Um the portion you're referring to, not being able to see in the amended modified version you adopted is this doesn't have page numbers, but it's D1 under procedures and parliamentary rules, one agenda, that's where it mentions the three.

Um I lost track of who was next.

Well, can I then I apologize?

So I my ask would be then to strike uh that it would be three.

I want there to be one during the agenda session, one during council meeting.

So we have a motion from Minister Jones to um alter these.

I I wish somebody had modified and said, here is my amendment of my rules of what I'm proposing.

But but we have for minister jones the striking the 15 minutes and is seconded by Mr.

Stafford, though we want a discussion after that.

And so are you wanting to ask Minister Jones to modify her motion or are you wanting us to okay?

Okay, great.

Okay, Miss Bunch.

Well, if you if you want a list, we could go ahead and vote to keep what we already have in place.

Stafford though we want a discussion after that and so are you wanting to ask Minister Jones to modify her motion or are you wanting us to okay okay great okay Miss Bunch well if you if you want a list we could go ahead and vote to keep what we already have in place and everybody put their list together and you know so we have something before the end of the I I mean I don't want I just want you all to I was told by several of you that it would be helpful to have something to react to the administration proposed something it it we don't it you can vote for all of it you can amend it you can bring your own I just want to make sure we're following state law and adopting so these are your rules and yeah so right now we have a motion and a second for the so will you want are I I would like to ask Minister Jones are you willing to let us make are we voting on one thing altogether and so that's not in the term I think one one thing at a time is probably a little bit better and and basically it's an amendment of that subsection which says right now following initial staff and AFC presentation there will be a total of 15 minutes for council members to ask clarifying questions and that would be changed to there will be a period of time for council members to ask clarifying questions.

Okay subscribe a three indeed I I I also had a question about the uh you know the presentation uh people making presentations the amount of time that they needed to get their presentation in and the 15 copies and stuff like that um you know if they don't I mean you know I think everyone should get their presentations in you know public and and get them into the clerk's office so we can have everything but I also kind of feel that some people that might be wanting to make a presentation the 15 copies of everything might be kind of prohibitive for some people I'm not sure so and I did and in the one the administration proposed it didn't mention the 15 copies but I do hear you I mean point taken there's just a lot of stuff lying around here figure out where um Mr.

Burnout Mr Jones would you be open to letting us vote on to pass the rules as they are presently not not basically last year's rules and then work to get a clean version of what what we're looking at total and then come back not I mean we're we're gonna be conforming to state law by having the rules in place and and but then come back and try to work on a little bit cleaner version versus back and forth.

I I make a motion to amend my motion and but or to rescind my motion and to adopt the current not not the ones you presented but ours continuing to keep our current rules order.

Before we do that um Dr.

Jones has had his light on for quite some time I'm not just so that you all know sometimes you may turn on a light and get a little bit upset with me that I call on someone else first I let per the rule per your rules of order and procedure everybody speak once before I call on someone a second time.

So sometimes Dr.

Jones may have a light on but he's already spoken so I'm gonna call on somebody that hasn't spoken first.

So there's never a situation and when I try to play favorites I do it in order once everyone has spoken and then I and then I call on you again.

So Dr.

Jones I'm sorry I know you've been waiting patiently please go ahead yes I've just had a couple questions um the first question is what is the purpose of voting present I missed that is is there any rhyme or reason why any why we're why we're asking why that's being suggested who is your question to Mr.

Stafford he's I believe the one that proposed it I could answer okay okay uh so uh for case in point of of one uh thing that happened that that caused me to abstain and I believe others abstained at that I mean many of us abstained at that meeting I believe and that was we had a uh ordinance uh in front of us the or resolution in front of us that uh regarded a uh ceasefire agreement in Boston now I'm not gonna morally vote against suggesting that there's a ceasefire but I did believe that it was outside of the jurisdiction of this governing body to consider that so I didn't have a yes or no choice as far as I saw morally I only have one choice and that was uh to to abstain or to vote present um again just about and I can't remember I think uh council member Turk had a uh abstention at one meeting and and council member uh jones and I believe at the uh uh meeting I'm discussing I think many of us actually did that um after being part of the discussion and and so and and this isn't just Washington County does this or Arkansas State Legislature this is just about I would like to see another example of a of a governing body that doesn't allow a a a present vote I don't I don't

Um again, just about and I can't remember.

I think uh councilmember Turk had a uh abstention at one meeting, and and council member uh Jones and I believe at the uh uh meeting I'm discussing.

I think many of us actually did that um after being part of the discussion.

And and so and this isn't just Washington County does this or Arkansas State Legislature.

This is just about I would like to see another example of a of a governing body that doesn't allow a present vote.

I don't I don't know of one personally, and if someone could show it to me, I'd love to see it.

But um but there is like that would be one example that I could bring up that that I feel is a legitimate example that that I had no choice uh as far as a yes or a vote.

Both of those were for were incompatible uh to me, and it's not that I'm afraid to say something.

I think I was very vocal during that.

I stated my reasons.

Um, and again, this is something that should be used extremely rarely, but uh but there are reasons to do that, and there are reasons why governing bodies pretty much bar none allow it.

Okay, and the second question was the reason for taking uh during the agenda session and the meeting having different being able to when having three with the ordinance, but I'm sorry, taking having three people having to take something off the agenda opposed to having one.

What was the the Rhyme or reason behind that?

I don't remember we drafted these back in October as an administration with the expectation that you all would love it, hate it, change it.

Okay, okay, and I'm asking these questions because like y'all, I want to make an informed decision, and so if that's a problem, I'm sorry, but I just I didn't know and I wanted to ask because I have to vote on this as well.

And so as you mentioned, it's been since October, and I just wanted to know what was this, you know, why are we even discussing voting present?

So thank you for that.

And so thank you as well, because I didn't understand why is this even being discussed because no one had explained it, and so if I'm going to make it informed decision, then I would like the details as it relates to why this is even being presented.

So thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Jones.

I'm gonna be honest, I think I saw all three of you with your lights on at the exact same time.

So um, and I think we've all each spoke you've all each spoken twice, and so I think maybe the fair way to do it is just start here and anybody take one more turn and I just wanted a second your motion.

That's all.

And um, but I wanted to ask Ket because I believe Ket, sorry, here's another version.

Sorry, that was earlier on that uh cleaned up a little bit of language that took out equipment committees and things that didn't exist.

And so do you have that version at all, Ket, or should we just move forward as is and just do it later?

Okay, maybe we should just do it later.

Everybody's asking to do it later.

So I'm just gonna second Monique's motion and I'm gonna leave it.

On January 2nd, I sent everybody a memo and it had two versions.

Uh the one being basically almost the identical one, just removing reference to the equipment committee, which we don't have anymore.

Uh, and maybe something else that's non-stub status, but that was the only change because I thought that you might have trouble agreeing with the change in rules, and so that was gonna be the fallback position.

The other thing you could do is just even though the equipment committee shouldn't be in the rules, you could just reenact them the ones you have currently and uh and then we go from there and you all make further comments and decisions in the future when we don't have this time pressure where we have to get the rules passed.

Um Miss Bunch and Mr.

Burnout.

Uh thank you, madam mayor.

I would like to ask that the city attorney send everyone this week the most recent update because we've we've got January 2nd, January 14th.

We've got all of these things that we're trying to keep up with.

If you wouldn't mind, you know, I would be very appreciative if you would do that.

So we have the most recent one, and we're not having to go back through.

Can you do that for me?

Yes, it will be basically uh the one I did January 14th, although I might agree.

I think I might have omitted the three votes needed to take it off the consent agenda.

It is in there.

I just uh over elected, and I'll send that to you to make an amendment.

But I think in the time between weekends.

Will it have the red lines?

That's what I was gonna all the red lines.

It it's it's helpful to have one like you know, final copy.

And when we've got we've gotten these, and I've looked at all of them, but there's so many things going back and forth here.

And I want to make sure I heard you you're asking for a red line.

Yes, okay.

And the final I just wanted to make sure I heard that he wanted to.

I think that he sent out, I guess the most recent copy would be the first part of this baby.

Thank you.

I I just wanted to say get Sarah Bunch was the one that asked for you to send the red line out, not me.

I know you I know that that is something that's near and dear to your heart.

I'll have to ask the mayor for the word version because we don't have the word version.

I can I can do that or or convert the PDF back for you.

Just let me know.

Happy to do Mayor Ron.

Mayor Ron.

Yes, ma'am.

Yes.

If I could have just a moment.

Okay.

So uh council member Minister Jones um rescinded her motion and needed to go ahead and get verification from Mr.

Stafford that he also presents a second.

Yes.

Okay, and that was the motion to edit the subsection to for the time limits.

Thank you.

And my current motion is to keep the existing city council rules of order and procedures.

And that's okay.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second to keep the existing rules of order and procedure.

Mr.

Stafford, are you also wanting to comment before the vote?

No, that was I was gonna make sure that's where we were at because I had to step out, but yeah, that sounds okay.

And then we're gonna vote forward.

Okay.

All right.

So it it because that's not posed because we have public comment, Mr.

Williams, and because that's not so clarification because Minister Jones's motion is not seeking an amendment, it's seeking to adopt the current.

At what point is it appropriate for us to take public comment?

I would say right now.

Okay.

All right.

So if we have any members of the public that would like to comment on our rules of order and procedure, please come forward.

Hi guys, thank you so much.

I I came here because I saw the 15-minute limit, and I'm like, uh, it looks like we have more information we need to gather, not less.

And so then I started thinking about how the thing with the school and the forest made me feel like I was in my alcoholic family.

Everybody's like, don't talk about that.

And then like, boom, here's what's happening.

And then I noticed today that the neighbors that got together and created their historical beautiful thing.

But then the neighbors that weren't informed about what was going on, that didn't happen.

And so they're no stupid questions, is what I've always believed.

And and in fact, curiosity, uh might call a cat, but cats have 10 lives.

But thank God we're doing this.

Thank you for the dialogue.

I mean, I'm so happy.

I I'm gonna come to these all the time because this is really awesome.

So uh yeah, no 15 minute limit.

Thank you all.

Good night.

Thank you.

And do you mind to just for the record state your name?

Susan McDonald on I live behind uh Heartland Forest.

Yes, thank you, Miss McDonald.

Keith, do we have anyone that is called in on Zoom?

We do not.

Okay, I'm bringing it back to the council.

I will remind you all that this is a resolution, and we have a motion and a second to move forward.

So, Clerk.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

Yes, Clerk Paxson.

So I just want to take a moment, and I know that city attorney Kit Williams explained that he wanted to go through the amendments one by one.

And I know that the current motion is to pass the resolution to match the current rules that or the previous rules that you used.

However, because uh council member bunch did reference uh an amendment that I put forward regarding that.

I do want to take a moment to explain that so that way that's clear for everyone because I've been asked many different questions about how the process works of facilitating information, whether that be presentations from city council members, from members of the public, from members of staff.

So currently the information that you send, we're more than happy to facilitate your information and get it to the proper department.

What this was, and the reason why Mayor Ron wanted to include that, and based on my understanding, is that we wanted to have a clear set way that was transparent for everyone to fully understand what the rule and the requirement was.

Now going along that note, I just want to say how amazing it is to get to work with Mayor Ron in the in the format that we've been working because to have an individual that's gonna sit down and type out your rules of order and procedure and edit it and take so much thought and you know consideration in mind on all the comments that have been made over the last year.

Uh also including comments that had been made even previous to that.

I just want to say how much I appreciate that and you know want to continue to encourage all of us to work together and you know make things better for individuals because you know we're here every day, we work every day, the full-time city staff and full-time elected officials, and that means that we're working with our members of our citizens every day.

We work with you on a regular basis as well.

So to go on and explain uh what the amendment was that I wanted to request, it changed a little bit from that initial version.

And if this could possibly be included in the future in the rules of order and procedure, I would greatly appreciate it.

Uh you know, when there's a small change in say how the city is operating their say copiers and they switch them all over to black and white in order to help us save money, right?

That's very important because you don't want to constantly be printing out color.

Well, that changes how we have to put our documents into our database management system, right?

Because we have to use what's called a snapshot, which is like a printer type of process.

Well, it flips the page, it turns the page, you can't see the page whenever it's set up under certain settings.

So all of that goes into the fact of staff time, right?

It goes into frustration time for citizens as well.

So just to be clear, um, and want to make sure that I touch base on the number three, but number one, speakers shall be encouraged to send any images pertaining to their public comment to agenda item comment at Fayetteville-ar.gov.

This will prompt an automated process to forward the image directly to the mayor, city council, and relevant staff members.

That's something that we already have in place and have had that in place for about three or so years now.

We actually set that up with uh Brad Fulmer, um, who is currently the IT director, and he does a wonderful job helping us with that.

Section two, speakers who plan to share and display a presentation materials during their public comment must submit the PDF version by email to agenda item comment at Fayetteville-ar.gov or submit a paper version to the office of the city clerk treasurer presentation material must be submitted by 5 p.m.

the day prior to the meeting.

So again, that agenda item comment email, it goes through a process in order to allow us to check to make sure that it doesn't have any malicious software on it.

So that way we're making sure the council city staff and citizens are receiving the same information across the board.

The last one I wanted to touch base on, and this plays a role for if someone submitted something after that 5 p.m.

deadline, which I want to thank uh council member Moore so much for staying a few moments longer to answer a few additional questions for me after the agenda session.

So speakers who have missed the above deadline but who would like to share presentation materials along with their public comment must bring 15 copies or as many as can be provided to hand to the city clerk treasure for distribution at the beginning of their public comment.

We're in no way saying that it's 15 copies that someone has to provide, it's as many as they can.

Uh, also that to reference that it needs to be given right before they start their public comment.

Um, I've been asked to not place materials out.

I've been asked to place materials out.

We want to be as transparent and as helpful as possible without adding to any confusion.

So if a member of the public is coming up to make their public comment, the best time if they have materials to hand it to us would be in that moment to be distributed.

So you're not going through, say, 20 pages of documents on your desk.

So I appreciate you giving me that additional time to explain that amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you, Clerk Paxton.

And I think now I'm gonna ask you to call the role on the vote to keep the current rules of order and procedure in place.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

Okay.

And I hope that at some point someone will consider an amendment to strike the reference to the equipment committee since we don't have one anymore.

And some other cleanup, some things that we are doing that aren't in compliant with our rules.

I think it would be good to change if somebody wants to in the future.

Thank you all so much.

Keith, do you have any announcements before we adjourn?

Yes, I have one.

Our emergency manager Shane Wood is closely watching the weather event that's coming up this weekend.

So it does look like there's going to be some significant accumulation of snow Friday evening and Saturday morning.

So we're working with city staff to try to prepare for that.

Our transportation and public works department is going to start pre-treating roads early Thursday morning to try to get ahead of that.

And then working with recycling and trash.

It does look like it won't affect our operations other than commercial because our residential doesn't uh run on Friday or Saturday.

But just want to let you know we're monitoring that closely closely with Shane Wood and staff and trying to prepare for that as best as possible.

All right, great.

Thank you so much.

And we are adjourned.