Okay, good good evening, everyone.

I would now like to call the April 7th meeting of the Fayetteville City Council to order.

Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Dr.

Jones.

Here.

Ms.

Moore?

Here.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Here.

Mr.

Barna.

Here.

Ms.

Bunch.

Ms.

Tark?

Here.

Minister Jones.

Mr.

Stafford.

Here.

Mayor Ron.

Please join me for the states of the mayor.

Okay.

Very first things first.

We have our city council presentations and reports.

The first one will be our monthly financial report from our chief financial officer.

The housing needs and assessment report has been delayed for two weeks in order for us to capture some data that we are waiting on from one of our partner organizations.

So we will hear that presentation in two weeks from Marley Stark.

But for tonight, Stephen Dodson has our sales tax and financial report.

Stephen, please go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor.

This is the January sales tax report.

In January, we saw taxable sales in the city totaling approximately 260 million, which was an increase of nearly 5.1% or 12.6 million compared to January of 2025.

Retail trade was up 3% year over year, representing an increase of $3.8 million.

In this category, we saw accommodation and food services were up 4% or roughly $1.2 million.

We noted the transportation and warehousing was up $2.6 million year over year.

And uh rebates in January of 2026 in the construction sector were $2.77 million.

And in the educational services sector were $4.4 million.

And those rebates were actually half of what we had experienced in 2025.

So we're now seeing the other side of the coin as far as the rebates go.

Some months we we note those effects, and other months those drop off.

Moving on to the actual tax collection results in January of 2026 compared to 2025.

The City 1 penny was up 5% or approximately 122,000.

The county portion of the city was up 2.1% or 41,000, resulting in a total combined sales tax collection increase of 3.73%, or approximately 164,000 compared to January of 2025.

And looking at the tax revenues compared to uh what was actually budgeted, in January of 2026, the City 1 penny was up approximately 2% or roughly $50,000 compared to budget.

The county portion that was down around 0.87% or down roughly 17,000 for a combined total uh for the month of January up 0.7 percent compared to budget or approximately 32,000.

Uh can I answer any questions for anybody on the uh sales tax report?

Oh I'm sorry.

Okay, uh moving on to the a monthly financial report, and this report is for February of 2026.

Starting off in the general fund, we noted that our property taxes were down around 2300.

Our sales tax was down one percent or roughly $56,000 uh through the compared to budget through the month of February.

Our franchise fees were flat.

Um alcoholic beverage fees, we noted that those were down around 9% or 17,000, and really that's the second month we've experienced uh so far uh with uh a downturn in those alcoholic beverage fees, so that's something that we'll watch.

Our building permit fees, those were up around 46 percent, or roughly 261,000 through the month of February.

Uh state turn back, that was flat.

Uh our charges for services were up two percent in the general fund or around 8,500.

And all in all, that yielded a fund total um down compared to budget through the month of February, approximately 0.4%, or roughly $39,000 in the general fund.

Looking at the street fund, uh, we're down around 5% or $71,000 year to date there through the month of February.

And we noted that that was the primary driver there was a reduction in our state turn back around 1% or 14,000.

In the parking fund, we're down around 7% or $31,000 through the month of February.

We noted that our charges for services were down around 4%, and our fines and fees were down around 11% through the month of February.

Another thing to note uh in the parking fund, we drilled into those numbers in a little bit more detail.

We took over the management of the bakery parking lot in September of uh 2025.

So we didn't really have much experience in budgeting for what those revenues were gonna be.

We did note that that uh the revenues in the bakery lot are down around $15,000 for the year through the month of February, and so we'll be uh tracking that pretty closely and determining whether we need to do any sort of revisions, and obviously we'll be um utilizing this year's data to feed into the budget process for next year in that specific lot in the parks development fund, we're down 2.5 percent compared to budget through the month of February, around 22,000.

We noted that our HMR tax collections were up around two percent, around 17,000, but our charges for services were down.

Um and so was our projected interest income.

Uh we noted that um that pretty much through all of our funds with uh significant investment balances.

We've just um you know, we're kind of experiencing the effects of the economy here uh on our interest revenue in the water and sewer fund uh our fund total is up 3.3 percent compared to budget through the month of February, or approximately 279,000 dollars, and that was uh strongly led by our charges for services, which were up five percent um over that uh time period.

Stormwater management, that fund is up five percent compared to budget through the month of February, or approximately twenty-six thousand dollars.

So that's tracking right where we thought it would be.

Uh once again, that is our new fund.

We just uh started collecting for that in September of last year.

In the recycling and trash fund, we are up uh 0.4% compared to budget or approximately 11,000.

And finally, in the airport fund, our gasoline sales for the year were up approximately 30 percent compared to to uh budget through the month of February, or roughly 118,000 dollars.

And our number of flight operations is also way up for the year, approximately 30 percent or eleven hundred more flight operations through the month of February.

And with that, happy to take any questions on the monthly financial report.

Uh did you say that the HMR tax, did you say two or ten percent?

Two percent.

Thank you.

Thank you, Steven.

Thank you.

Okay, we will then move on to our consent agenda, and unless we have a motion to approve as presented, we will go through those.

Second.

Okay, great.

So Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll on just the motion?

Dr.

Jones?

Yes, Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Wiedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Bernett?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Okay.

Will you please call the roll to pass the agenda?

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wiedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Barna?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Okay.

That brings us to item to section B of our agenda, unfinished business.

And the first item we have is District CCR, conservation, cultural, and recreation.

An ordinance to amend $161.38 district CCR conservation, cultural, and recreation to prohibit detention and retention ponds on C CR zone property.

This item was left on the first reading at the March 17th meeting.

So the council could suspend the rules and go to the third reading, in which case I would read the title only.

And then Councilmember Turk has an amendment that she's been working on with the city attorney that we can move to amend after the first time.

Okay, got it.

I see Minister Jones, your light on first, and then Ms.

Oh, uh Ms.

Turk Um Thank you, Mayor.

I um uh so we Jonathan and Kid and I have been working on on this, and I don't know whether we should advance this or or hold it for two more weeks.

Um maybe we should just go ahead and have the second reading of it and then you can figure out okay.

Blake, go ahead.

Whereas section 161.38 D bulk and area regulation require that one at least 80 percent of the zoned areas shall be left undeveloped as green space, two no more than 10 percent of the conservation cultural and recreation zoned area be dedicated to open space that also contains hard surface areas such as a parking paved trail or other impervious ground cover, and whereas drainage detention retention ponds should be prohibited from any CCR zoned area.

Now therefore, be it ordained by the city council of the city of Faitville, Arkansas, Section One, that the City Council of the City of Fateville, Arkansas here by amends section 161.38 D, enacting a new section 131.38 D3 as follows.

D3 detentions slash retention ponds are prohibited from any CCR zoned property.

Councilmember Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um sorry to speak out of order there.

Um so um Jonathan and Kit and I have have met uh independently, and we have discussed um right now under you should use unit one, that is the only allowed use within the CCR.

And um so what I've what I um advocated was that um detention and and uh retention ponds would only be allowed if they were included in use unit one.

So there's a long list of uses in use unit one that um we can we can go over, and that was basically the amendment that we had drafted was to only allow detention retention ponds with that use unit.

And then this afternoon, um sort of another idea came forward um because we did discuss this at the EAC meeting that if there was a nature building, a nature preserve, a nature center built within the CCR, um, under this current use unit one, um the that's not listed under here.

So uh detention retention pond would not be allowed.

However, um I just conferred with Jonathan that if the if alternative materials were used, such as uh a green roof or pervious pavers, then you wouldn't have to have a detention retention pond.

So I'm bringing all this forward to say that maybe we need to kind of think about that for the next two weeks.

Um because the I think the intention uh is there with only only allowing uh detention retention ponds with use unit one, um, but the um and if you were to build this nature center, uh there are ways that it could still be built.

It would just have to be used atypical or more conservation-oriented materials, which again I think the EAC and the drafters of the zoning type um would support.

So to clarify that would be an amendment to what's been presented thus far based on your conversations today.

Yes.

Okay.

Mr.

Carl, I'm sorry, go ahead.

So I don't know if we all if we want to go ahead and amend today or if we want to hold this and wait for a couple more weeks.

So um it's up to I'm whatever you think.

Um I saw Minister Jones first and then Mr.

Stafford.

Mr.

Jones.

Thank you, Mayor.

I guess my question is can we see the change with the amendment so we'll we'll know what we're voting on in two weeks.

Is it this one?

This one.

Okay.

All right.

Mr.

Stafford.

I was just gonna say uh I I'm gonna defer to Councilmember Turk's uh advice.

I I I fully support uh the intention that she brought forward with what she wants to accomplish.

If it works with this current amendment and we pass it, I'm I'm willing to go forward with that.

But if you think that you want time for us to if you think you want another two weeks, um I will I will defer to you.

Minister Jones or Mr.

or Ms.

Turk, if you want to respond to Mr.

Stafford, then Minister Jones.

Um I think I would like two more weeks to sit there and and make sure that we get this right so that we're not bringing this back again uh to everybody and make sure that there's not any additional considerations that we haven't thought about.

So some of these are um kind of at the last minute, uh and I appreciate that that they're being brought up, even if even if it is at the last minute.

Similar comments, I'd like to sit with this for two weeks because Jonathan, I have some questions.

I like to see this as a whole, not just as an amendment.

So if I can be clear on what the changes are, so I may schedule some time to sit down with you to make sure um that I'm clear on the full amendment, Ms.

Turk.

So what we could do now, so that everything's in the right order and packet uh for for in two weeks, we could vote on the amendment now and not uh pass the amendment but actually amend uh the proposed CCR.

Okay, and so that would be my motion.

So you're and to clarify you are motioning to amend, but that it is gonna be your wish that we don't move on and pass it.

We simply pass the amendment so we know what we're looking at.

That is correct.

Okay, do we have a second?

Oh, second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to modify or to amend based on what has been presented here on your paper.

Uh clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Weedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Okay.

Mr.

Pennington, will you please read the amendment?

And then we will take comments and let it lie on the on this reading.

Uh so the amendment would have the new section 161.38 D3 read as follows.

D3 detention slash retention ponds are permitted in a CCR zoning district only if they are serving a permitted use in use unit one.

Thank you.

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

Okay.

So we are going to bring it back and leave it on that reading.

And that will bring us on to new business.

Item C1, vacation 2025-34, northeast of South Washington Avenue and East Martin Luther King Boulevard.

An ordinance to approve the property just described in Ward 1 to vacate 0.11 acres of utility easement.

Blake.

Whereas the city council has the authority under Arkansas Code annotated section 1454-104 to vacate public grounds or portions thereof which are not required for corporate purposes.

And whereas the city council has determined the following described portion of utility easement is not required for corporate purposes.

Now therefore be it ordained by the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Section one, that the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby vacates the portion of utility easement as described in exhibit B attached to the planning department's memo.

Section two, a copy of this ordinance duly certified by the city clerk along with the map attached as exhibit A to the planning department's memo shall be filed in the office of the Washington County Circuit Clerk.

Section three, this vacation approval is subject to the following conditions.

One, any damage to early relocation of existing facilities will be at the property owner slash developer's expense.

Two, a 10-foot diameter circle shall be required around each power pole for electrical easements.

Great.

Thank you.

Mr.

Kurth.

Thank you, Mayor.

Jonathan Kurt, Development Services Director.

Staff is recommending in favor of this request.

The property is currently undeveloped and constitutes about three or a third of an acre of property.11 acres uh which encumber or are uh preventing development of the property.

Uh a staff has evaluated the request.

We have not identified any issues with the proposal, and again, we are recommending approval of it uh with the one condition that Mr.

Pennington rec uh mentioned.

Uh this is from SWEPCO specifically, the utility electric utility provider of the area, and they want to maintain a 10-foot uh utility easement around the two power polls that they have on the property.

Uh that is the only uh utility specific easement or condition that's being proposed.

Uh with that, I'm happy to take any questions that the council has and mayor uh West Bates is uh available as the applicant, but he does not have a prepared presentation.

Thank you.

Great.

Do we have any questions for the applicant or for Mr.

Kirth?

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

Okay.

We are back on the first reading.

So in yes, Ms.

Moore.

Uh I move that we suspend the roles and move to the third reading.

Second.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the rules to did you mean to suspend to the third and final?

Yes.

Okay, please to uh the motion to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading, please.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore, yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

An ordinance to approve VAC 25-34 for property located northeast of South Washington Avenue and East Martin Luther King Jr.

Boulevard and Ward 1 to vacate 0.11 acres of utility easement.

Okay.

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

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Okay.

That brings us to item C2, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2026-4 for approximately 0.5 acres located at 957 South Hill Avenue in Ward 1 from RMF 24, residential multifamily, 24 units per acre, rezoning to RIU residential intermediate urban.

Mr.

Pennington.

Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Faithville, Arkansas.

Section one that the City Council of the City of Faithville, Arkansas hereby changes the zone classification of the property shown on the map, exhibit A and the legal description exhibit B, both attached to the planning department's agenda memo from RMF 24 residential multifamily 24 units per acre to RIU residential intermediate urban.

Section 2 that the City Council of the City of Fable, Arkansas hereby amends the official zoning map of the city of Fayetteville to reflect the zoning change provided in section one.

Mr.

Karth.

Thank you, Mayor.

This property is southwest of the downtown area.

It is about 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Martin Luther King Boulevard and Hill Avenue, about half that distance south of the University of Arkansas's Art District.

What you see just across the street from this property to the east is the northwest corner of the National Cemetery, if that helps orient you to where it's located.

The property includes about half an acre of land, of which the southwestern corner, uh totaling about two to three percent of the property is within uh FEMA designated floodplain, uh, with the remainder of it outside of the floodplain uh representing the majority of the developable property of the site.

Uh the request, uh, as was noted is to rezone the property from its existing RMF 24, residential multifamily 24 unit per acre zoning designation to RIU, residential intermediate urban.

Uh staff does find this to be compatible uh from a land use standpoint.

Uh this area includes a wide variety of housing types, uh including uh numerous multifamily housing units to the northwest as it segues into the single family neighborhood to the south and southeast of the site.

Uh given the significant intensity of development along Martin Luther King Boulevard to the north, uh staff feels that this can act as a transitional zoning district, going from that level of intensity to the lower intensity uh neighborhood to the south.

Additionally, the RIU zoning district, uh staff feels that the RIU zoning district is more consistent with the existing neighborhood given it does not allow large multifamily buildings, it allows a building height of three stories, which is more consistent with the low slung neighborhood versus the multifamily allowance for five-story buildings, uh, which altogether uh factor into our recommending uh approval, certainly from a land use compatibility standpoint.

Uh similarly, uh we feel it is appropriate to see additional development on this property uh beyond the single family zone that is historically sat on it.

Uh this half acre of land uh has uh 11 factors uh that you can find contributing to uh what we uh find to be appropriate infill as very close proximity to a nearby grocery store, elements of the University of Arkansas campus, both transit systems uh in addition to uh many other amenities.

Uh similarly, we find that the RU zoning district and its continued allowance for a wider variety of housing types that uh is largely consistent with existing zoning uh aligns with the future land use map designation of the property as a city neighborhood area.

Uh when considering other uh issues, uh we've not heard any public comment uh on this request to date.

Uh this going from RMF 24 to RU does constitute a slight reduction in the required tree preservation requirements going from 20 to 15 uh and then reviewing the infrastructure in the surrounding area.

We did identify in the city's uh uh sanitary sewer master plan that there is a known uh wet weather sewer capacity issue.

Uh when evaluating that, we find that development of this property will be of such a small scale that it will not adversely uh impact that, but overall development in this area may afford the opportunity for a larger uh upgrade to that capacity.

Uh all told, again, staff is recommending in favor of the request when the planning commission heard this item, uh they forwarded it to city council by a nine to zero vote, uh unanimously recommending that the planning or excuse me that the city council also uh support it.

And I'm available for any questions that the council has.

And mayor, uh believe I have uh one of two individuals here as the applicant.

I'm not certain if they're online or in person.

Uh Sashi Sundram or Christopher De Ben, uh, if they'd like to make comments.

Uh okay would either of the applicants like to make comments at this time?

If so, just please come on up.

Hi, and please introduce yourself.

My name is uh Dax to Ben.

I'm with uh KJ Civil Engineering.

Um I don't have any further comments, but I'm here to answer any questions that any of you may have.

Okay, great.

Thanks so much.

Um, Council, do we have any uh questions for Mr.

Kurth or for the applicant?

Miss Turk, please go.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um my question is that's kind of a long and skinny lot.

Um, and then on the very back end.

Um looks like there's some um you know it's got some floodplain issues.

Um is there an alley or uh it doesn't look like on the map there are no alleys, and so I would assume the only access is from the front.

That's correct, Councilmember Turk.

The only right-of-way is the South Hill Avenue right-of-way that's on the east side or the front of the property.

Okay, thank you.

That's all that's the only question.

Okay.

I'm not seeing any more questions, so you can go ahead and sit down and I'll open it up to public comment.

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

Okay.

Do we have anyone that's called in or signed up online to speak?

Keith, that you know of.

Okay.

Bringing it back to Councilmember Wheedaker.

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

Clerk Paxson, will you please uh call the role to suspend the rules and take it to the third and final reading?

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

An ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2026-04 for approximately 0.5 acres located at 957 South Hill Avenue in Ward 1 from RMF 24, residential multifamily 24 units per acre to RIU residential intermediate urban.

Okay.

Seeing no further questions from the council, Clerk Paxson, will you please go ahead and call the roll for the final vote?

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Okay.

That brings us to item C three.

An ordinance to expand the physical footprint of the Fayetteville Farmers Market.

Allow additional market days and times, and authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages by amending 114.02, Farmers Market of the Fayetteville Code.

Blake.

Whereas staff recommends approval of an ordinance to amend City Code Section 114.02 to expand the physical footprint of the farmer's market, allow additional market dates and time frames, and authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages.

Now therefore be it ordained by the city council of the city of Faithville, Arkansas.

Section one, that the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals section 11402B1 of the Fayable Code and enacts a new section 11402B1 as follows.

One, the four streets around the square, east mountain block and center shall be closed to vehicular traffic immediately before and during the operation of the farmers market on Saturdays.

The exterior parking spaces for these four streets around the square shall be available for vendors and exhibitors pursuant to subsection three below as assigned by the rural mountain producers exchange management by closing these streets and parking spaces to non-vendor vehicular traffic.

Mountain Street extending eastward from the square up to Alley 36 will be closed to vehicular traffic during the operation of the farmer's market.

However, access to Alley 36 will remain unobstructed.

The street may be used for vendors and food trucks.

The farmers market shall be responsible for purchasing the necessary street closure barricades as determined by the city of Fayetteville to support the expanded operation.

Barricades shall meet the requirements of the manual on uniform traffic control devices.

Additionally, vehicle barriers capable of stopping a vehicle at 30 miles per hour or a similar standard as determined by the city must be in place during events by April 7th, 2028.

Vendors using large commercial delivery vehicles such as box trucks shall either be located on the interior parking spaces around the old post office building or outside the designated market area to maintain storefront visibility.

No vendor parking is allowed on the west side of Block Avenue except for food trucks, which shall be limited to the southernmost and northernmost parking spaces.

Section two, that the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas here by repeals Section 114.02 C of the Fayable Code and enacts a new section 114.02 C as follows.

C.

Days and hours.

The farmer's market may be open and operating Tuesdays and Thursdays from 6 a.m.

until 1 p.m.

And on Saturdays from 6 a.m.

until 2 p.m.

from the last two Saturdays in March until Christmas.

The farmer's market may open and operate Tuesdays from 2 30 p.m.

to 10 p.m.

Section 3 that the City Council of the City of Faithville, Arkansas here by repeals Section 114.02 D of the Fayable Code and enacts a new one 14.02 D as follows.

D articles permitted to be sold.

The following articles may be sold at the marketplace established hereby.

Vegetables, honey, raw juices, molasses, fruit, and other produce grown by the vendor thereof, plants, artwork, craft work, and other processed farm products produced by the vendor thereof.

All products sold at the marketplace must be produced in compliance with all applicable regulations of the State Department of Health and have all appropriate permits.

Food prepared by local vendors, including baked goods from local bakeries, nuts, coffee, tea, non-alcoholic and alcoholic beverages, and items from approved food trucks may also be sold.

Great.

Thank you so much.

And I believe Justin Clay, this is you're the staff representing the market on this item, correct?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Good evening, Council.

So as we just heard, City Code dictates the guidelines for market operations on the square.

The farmer's market has requested essentially four updates to the city code.

One, they want to expand their physical footprint along Mountain Street to the east, half a block to the east towards College Avenue.

Two, this uh item would lengthen the market season.

Currently, the market operates from April to Thanksgiving.

Uh, these changes would allow them to operate the last two Saturdays in March until Christmas.

Uh, the third item is a change to their operations on Tuesdays to allow for night markets uh so that the market could be in operation on the square uh between what was it, 2 30 p.m.

and 10 p.m.

And then the fourth change is to allow alcoholic beverages as one of the items permitted for sale during the farmers market.

Um Kayla Lindsay with the farmers market is here to um elaborate further on the need for these changes uh to discuss any outreach and feedback that's been received to this point and to just talk about the practical implications should these changes go into effect.

Great.

Thank you, Justin.

Miss Lindsay, would you like to address counsel?

Uh good evening, Mayor and Council members.

Uh for over 50 years, the Favel Farmers Market has brought the best in locally grown and made products to the community here in Fayetteville.

In that time, we've seen our city grow exponentially and the market has expanded along with it.

The ordinance changes that we are proposing will allow the market to continue to grow with our changing city while holding true to the core values of the farmers market.

Uh, we're proposing changes to expand the market footprint out of out of the square onto Mountain Street, add a Tuesday evening farmers market, extend the market square dates to include mid-March and December, and allow the sale of alcoholic beverages at the farmers market.

Uh, we initially submitted this proposal to Justin Clay and Sergeant Jennings and have made adjustments and changes to secure their approval.

Um, the Mountain Street expansion is uh designed to add 15 vendor spaces to the farmers market.

Um, these spaces are designated as new vendor spaces and also food vendor spaces and should allow for more new vendors to be brought on to the farmers market.

Um, as of 2026, the market has 110 approved vendors, uh, which is 35 more vendors than we have spaces for.

Um, so in order for the market to continue to grow, we we have to expand.

Um, the plan is also to add two new vendor, two new food truck spaces.

Um, one of the top suggestions that we receive from the community is that um we need more ready-to-eat options.

Um, and with the current wording of this city ordinance, we can only have two food trucks, one at each end on the outside of Block Street.

Um, when selecting a potential site for the expansion, we spoke to uh Callie Lane of House Collective, who collaborated with the market to put on her own event last year on Mountain Street, and we're um we're basically um using her footprint.

And um, she was happy to let us uh to let us use this uh the space because she believes it will bring more uh more foot traffic to her to her business as well.

Um, and we're getting great feedback about the expansion from local businesses, from the community, from our vendors.

Um, and we feel that using an exact footprint where another successful event took place last year confirms that we can achieve that this expansion successfully and complete the road closure safely.

Um, we're very excited about the Tuesday evening market.

Um, while the market has traditionally had weekday morning markets, we are seeing a trend in our changing community of less shoppers being able to get to the square on weekday mornings.

While sales at our Saturday morning markets are continuing to grow, weekday morning sales have not grown substantially in several years.

To increase sales for our vendors and reach a new customer base, the Tuesday evening market was proposed.

The market did a trial run on October 7th, 2025 and saw higher sales than any other weekday market for that year.

Following the trial market, we've reached out to local businesses on the square for feedback, both in person and through a survey sent out by Kelly Rich with downtown Fayetteville.

We've only received positive feedback both from the community and local businesses who are excited to have an event to bring the community to the square on a weekday night.

We're also proposing a change in the market's opening and closing days on the square.

And then Aura at the farmers market.

And at this time, we didn't know that our ordinance would restrict alcohol sales, and we weren't aware of Aura policies, but we couldn't approve this vendor.

We began speaking to city officials about making this change.

We particularly want to bring on a local brewery for our evening markets, but thought that it would be a great way to support local businesses by allowing a brewery to come on to Saturday markets as well whenever we do have space.

That's all that I have.

Oh, great.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

Um we'll start with Ms.

Moore.

And I don't know who my question is for.

It might be for city staff or the attorney.

It may not be for your Kayla.

I'm not sure.

Um I have just recently been getting uh questions and some concerns expressed around the aura um happening.

And so I just didn't know.

Kayla has shared so far that she's thinking about one brewery, but the way that this is worded, does this limit it to one brewery or does it open up that it could be like multiple um alcohol and brewery?

I just I'm not sure.

It would leave that discretion to the uh farmers market board.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, Ket.

Um, Ms.

Bench.

I'm sorry, Blake.

I apologize.

Ms.

Bench.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um I I have a question about the uh businesses that you contacted around the square.

Did you reach out a little bit beyond the square?

Because we have several bars that are down the street.

Uh and I don't think I don't really feel like they would have an issue with uh serving alcohol at the farmers market, but I think it might be a great opportunity to work together with some of these businesses and maybe have more business for everybody there is one kind of thing.

Did you reach out that way?

I agree.

Um, currently we did just reach out to the square businesses, but um, we are looking at different ways that we can collaborate with the restaurants and bars around the square, um, especially for our evening market, um, proposing different ways to have um just the a really nice co-marketing sort of campaign where um we say, you know, maybe have dinner at Hugo's and then come to the farmers market or um, you know, one of the other businesses that are nearby the square and just different ways that we can collaborate to them.

Um we feel that having um the market brings in so many people that I think that it's going to definitely increase sales for everyone around the square.

I would I would certainly hope so because I think Tuesday night's probably not the most hopping night on the square.

If we could get more business down here, it's better for everybody.

Thank you.

I think so.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, one of my uh Sarah Sarah Bunch uh just asked one of my questions, and I did hear from uh uh representatives of business owners that did have concerns.

Uh they have an adjacent neighboring business in the area.

Uh and and they did have lots of concerns about allowing alcohol sales at the market.

Um is the pro is the selection process open?

Yeah, you when you guys go through your process of deciding vendors whether it's alcohol vendors or uh food vendors or service vendors.

Is that an open process?

Is that a transparent process that the public can see?

Um as far as is it an open process?

Um anyone can apply to be a vendor, but no, our um our vendor selection process is um it operates within the board of directors and that's and then do you have a certain metrics that you have published that you use to decide how you're going to pick vendors?

We do.

Um we don't have um we don't have that in place specifically for alcohol vendors.

Um it's more um looking at the same way that we would choose um a food or any other beverage vendor.

Um we look for a locally made high quality product.

But you have you you look at everything equally and you have ways to to keep yourself from having bias in your decisions?

Oh, absolutely, yes.

And um our board of directors is composed uh specific, you know, totally of our vendors, and we have everything from farmers to crafters to other food vendors on the board.

Um I it's it's a very fair process for all of our vendor selection, absolutely.

Well, I I do want to uh speak a little bit about the board because I have received a number of complaints three years back about the obscurity uh uh and the operations of the board, and I know that that's not what we're here to discuss today, but in my view, if my taxpayers and my constituents uh are supporting something that they have an expectation of transparency and to make sure we're working with an organization that uh adheres to best practices.

Um, was just the obscurity and the and the lack of transparency in the selection process.

Uh you you kind of address that.

Another concern uh does your term does your board have term limits?

Uh they they do not.

So they uh do not have term limits.

So um uh every board member serves for three years, but then can be re-elected as many times as they like to, yes.

And then or as they what would you say your longest serving board members of how long have they been on?

Um we have had um I think our longest serving board member was on for somewhere around 30 years, but he is no longer a board member.

Okay.

Um are there members of the board that are uh have familiar relations with members of the staff?

There are, yes.

And and the board is in charge of of deciding on issues such as pay uh for staff and and uh discipline actions for staff.

Is that would that be accurate?

That is correct.

Um in these situations, uh board members who do have that sort of relationship excuse themselves from voting and from speaking during those issues.

So they do recuse, they do you do have a recusal process and they do recuse themselves during those issues.

That's correct.

Um it has been a thing, and when we look at best practices for for every board I've been involved with in my life, uh when you when you just see even the parents of conflict like that, having a family beyond the board and running the organization, it's it's I wouldn't consider that a best practice.

Um, and it's a concern that has been brought up to me by more than one person and and multiple times.

Uh I think that that's the gist of my questions, and and and it it does give me concern when we make these decisions to to help you expand and to help you grow.

That uh again, we don't have oversight over your board.

Um in my view, maybe we should.

This is a big part of Fayetteville.

Um, and maybe that's a discussion for another time.

Uh but again the the amount of concerns that have come to me, and and I thought it was you know, first it just started out as one, and I'm like, okay, here's somebody that's that's angry or has an axe to grind, but then I've heard these concerns over again.

Um and then when this came up, I actually just even today got a few different phone calls from different uh parties asking questions, asking questions about the process, and and and having that process not be transparent in public is concerning to me.

Um again, though I'm just gonna leave it right there for now.

Minister Jones.

Thank you, Mayor.

I guess um Councilmember Stafford answered one of ask one of my questions.

My questions is you said it was open.

How do you ensure that the application would be included in the farmers market is shared throughout the community because I'm looking for the farmers market to mirror who lives in Northwest Arkansas and it does not?

How do you ensure that your advertisement and opening for slots at the farmers market is available to everyone in our community?

Um we um it's open on our website and easy to find on our website, and we also um post on social media whenever it's open and just to make sure that everyone knows.

Okay, I just want to encourage that you post somewhere where someone, everyone in the city can see it, and understanding that digital poverty exists and everybody does not have access to your website.

Okay, sure.

Thank you.

Okay.

It doesn't seem like we have any more um questions for Miss Lindsay or for um Mr.

Clay.

Thank you so much, Kayla.

Um, I'm gonna open it up to members of the public who would like to comment.

Um, I would like to ask that we please keep your comments related to the matter that we are voting on tonight, and um state your name and address, and we'll have a three minute time limit.

Please come on up.

Uh good evening.

Uh, my name is Matt Varros.

I am the owner of Hatch Farm.

We were a member of the Fayetteville Farmers Market for five years.

Out of the 75-ish members, we were in the top 15 every year.

I would like to start by saying I am a huge supporter of farmers markets and support local businesses.

Unfortunately, I am here to tell you about the discrimination and lack of support that is taking place at the Fayetteville farmers market.

Farmers are held to the highest standard.

If a farmer wants to sell a value added product, we have to grow every ingredient to make the and make the product.

Craft and food vendors can do as they please.

Depending on your affiliation to the board and former board, there are certainly in season in the rules.

On a daily basis, there are multiple state and market rule violations throughout the market.

My farm was held out early in 2025 season and then hit by a tornado.

Needless to say, our season was cut short.

But since we had hardly any sales, managers said we were only guaranteed to keep a vendor status, but not guaranteed a sales spot for the 2026 season.

Farmers are finding it increasingly hard to sell produce at the market, and the crowds are too are great already.

And consist of mostly tourists, keeping local produce buyers away.

Every vendor must apply every year.

And if you're not accepted by January, you must wait and apply the following year.

This is an exclusive members-only organization.

They have different committees who approve different categories of items.

Who the committees consist of, I have no idea.

That information is kept a secret.

Board meetings are held on a regular basis, but that information is also not made available.

Minutes and decisions from the meetings are just implemented without knowledge of them, knowledge of the members.

Needless to say, Robert's rules of order is are not followed.

Market managers, market board members are all vendors during the markets, the focus is on their own booth, not the market.

Simple protesters and candidate supporters merely holding signs seem to be too much for the staff to handle.

Most morning vendors start setting up around 5 a.m.

Market staff in charge for the day show up mere minutes before the market opens, leaving vendors defend for themselves for hours.

That they do not have enough funds to support the vendors.

I feel approving this measure will become a burden to the town resources and taxpayers.

That's your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Next.

Hi there, y'all.

Um, my name's Cody Condry.

I am the board president of the farmers market.

Uh, y'all had a few questions.

Kayla is my partner.

Yes.

Uh, and she is the market manager.

I had I had no part of that decision.

Uh, any time any decision like that is made or anything goes on with Kayla, I leave the room.

I also asked the board if I should resign with this coming on.

Uh, she was actually working for the market for several years before she got that position and was brought forward by the market manager and asked to take over this position.

The rest of the board said that this was not even the first time in the history of the market that that something like that has happened.

It's uh actually Janet Bachman and her husband.

Uh, one was the manager and another individual was on the board.

So uh that's really something we looked toward, and I I asked if I should resign, and I really look into a lot of that.

I try to remain very, very unbiased in all my decisions and as fair as possible and consider the material uh dialectics of every decision I make.

Um, this expansion is very, very important for more members, and our staff works extremely hard.

Um if there's ever any questions y'all have, um, please do not hesitate at all to reach out.

I'd love to have a meeting with anyone who wanted to.

Um, and we do have quite the selection process.

Like, I don't know anything about crafts.

Um, I'm a farmer.

That's I know a lot about dirt.

But you know, it's really hard for me to know what is the best in a potter.

So the craft committee is announced every year at the board meetings, and they are all just extreme crafters, like people who have been doing this for years.

Our personal care committee is made up of people who make candles and make skin products, and they go through everything themselves every year.

They also are acknowledged, just like our food committee and everything else.

They're acknowledged every year, and everything is talked about at our board meetings uh at the or our membership meetings at the end of the year.

Um, hopefully you'll understand that as elected officials, sometimes you make hard decisions and it does not make everyone happy.

Um I always do my best, and I think the market is it's the reason I moved here from Central Arkansas.

I've been to markets from literally here all the way to California and back, and this market is why I came back.

Um, thanks y'all so much.

Thank you.

Okay, next, please.

My name is Tyler Eck.

I live in here here in Fayetteville.

I'm the owner of Honed In Sharpening and Honed In Knife and Tool.

I personally have vended as a business owner for seven consecutive years in downtown Fayetteville, specifically around the downtown square.

Five years as a member of Rural Mountain Producers Exchange, and two as an outdoor mobile vendor permit holder.

I am for a market that presents more opportunities to its patrons.

I am for a market that gives more opportunities to to more vendors.

I believe the Fayetteville Farmers Market for its location and robust community is our city's crown jewel of experience and opportunity.

That is why I'm asking for oversight.

Last year I submitted to Mayor Ron and other community leaders an email from a customer and market patron who was redirected and discouraged from seeing seeking our services, mere feet from the Fayetteville farmers market.

For this, I must express concerns with the same system managing an even larger footprint.

When we when we received our permit from the city to operate downtown as an outdoor mobile vendor permit holder, my daughter, my staff, and myself were subjected to harassment, threats, and intimidation from a board member who still holds their position today.

For this reason, I am concerned about the same system managing alcohol sales.

Which, after a change to city ordinance allowing service vendors, customers asking for us by name.

We have yet to receive acknowledgement, acceptance, denial, or anything for our 2026 application.

I implore you to change the ordinance to put a city staff member on the board of Rural Mountain Producers Exchange before you grant them more autonomy.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yes, please come on up.

Thank you.

My name's Mark Kane.

Um our farm name is Dripping Springs Garden, and we are currently the oldest farm on the farmers market.

We joined in we joined in 1984.

I was 30 years old.

I moved here to this area in Northwest Arkansas because of the beauty and the landscape here.

But it was because I came to see the farmers market in Fayetteville that I wanted to move within an hour radius of Fayetteville.

And that same year we joined the farmers market.

We've been continual members ever since then.

I was on the board.

I'm not currently on the board, but I was often on the board for over 20 years.

I have been at monthly meetings for all those 20 years.

And I can assure you the way the market administration is being characterized by a couple of our former members is not correct.

It's a very open process.

And there are difficult decisions to have to be made on turn in terms of who joins the market.

All of the board members are involved in those decisions about who can join the market.

We have many applications, more than we can take on every year, so some discrimination has to be made as to what who is going to be on the market.

Sometimes people are not going to be happy if they're not accepted, but that's because we don't have enough spaces for all the people.

As Cody said, many times decisions have to sometimes, I won't say many times, most of the operations are extremely smooth.

And I would encourage any of you who are interested in the process to contact the market manager or one of the people on the board now and go sit in on a meeting and see exactly it's a it's simple very similar to what you see here.

It's a democratic process.

The board members are elected by the people who sell it to market.

They have three-year terms and they can be re-elected.

I will let you know that for at least 20 years.

In fact, even now we have difficulty finding enough people for to run for the board.

Most people on the farmers market, most farmers, just like most citizens, would rather sit back and have all that work taken care of them by people who have to volunteer three or four hours every month to go to a meeting instead of the meeting, which which I've done and many people have done over the years to have the best market we can.

If you go down to the farmers market and you ask vendors if they're happy, if you ask customers if they're happy, I will be surprised if you find people that tell you they're very unhappy about and I've seen the market double and triple in size.

I remember when the market was facing the gardens, and we all all I watched each street close.

You know, it's impossible to have an organization like this that without some bumps occasionally, but I want to assure you that the process is not secret.

It's a democratic organization.

The board members are elected by the membership, and I would invite you to go to a board meeting and check it out for yourself.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Do we have anyone else that would like to make comments that's here?

Okay, looks like one more.

And if you're able and you would like, if you have comments, you're welcome to line up.

My name's James Morgan.

I've been on the market since 2001.

Uh and very pleased that the council made the change uh back then because I became the first meat vendor and been here since then.

I have been on several nonprofit boards, uh mostly in the Northwest Arkansas.

Um I've also been on USDA granting committees.

And of all I never there were biased members on the US Day Granting Committee.

We we were able, we always had enough people not to do that.

Um but it you know, and I've been on a national sheep associate work for a national sheep association.

Uh there were people that got on just so that they could make sure that their sheep sold better than everybody else.

I can assure you that the people that run for the market board almost totally have always been there for the market and not for their booth.

You know, that's the amazing thing about the farmers market, and it wouldn't have grown like it would has if the board members weren't working for everybody there.

And agree with the previous statements that say yes, there's been some hard decisions.

Um it's worked well, we keep growing, and it's great service to the community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, Keith, do we have anyone on Zoom who has called in to speak about the market?

We do not.

Okay.

I want to bring it back to members of the city council if um they would like to make any further comments.

Ms.

We'll just start at this end, Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I'm hoping we could leave this on the first reading tonight.

Um, like I said, I just received uh a few phone calls uh this afternoon and that raised a lot of questions for me.

I would love to uh have a discussion with the board members to get answers uh to some of those questions so I can make sure I'm doing my due diligence.

Um, and that my concerns are uh abated or or or answered.

So um I I hope we can hold this on the first reading uh if we're gonna vote.

I I based on just uh the information I've recently gotten, I I cannot support this this evening, but hopefully can in the future.

Ms.

Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um similar to council member Stafford, um, I've just gotten uh more questions, um, especially in regard to um I really got feedback that folks didn't understand.

They saw the expansion of the footprint and the um additional day, but and the the length of the market, but the aura was something in particular that was new, and so um I just you know hearing from Blake that it currently is you know wide open on those vendors, and it sounds like the market potentially is only thinking about having it a limited capacity, it seems like something to get additional information from you know, folks that I know local businesses um had let me know that they only found out in the last day or two that they understood that this was happening.

So um to understand kind of what when it might what might be a medium um ground uh to not take away from those sales.

And you know, I appreciate um that we've we've had robust conversation regard to the market.

Um I do hope, and and I'll reach out to um uh the market to sit down and kind of chat.

But you know, there there were a th few things um that were kind of back and forth, and I don't want to spend time since hopefully we're gonna I hope pause and talk next um time.

But I do hope that we can get just some clarity because I do you know that was brought up and I've had some folks say that they don't necessarily feel like they got acknowledgement of their applications and didn't quite um understand about getting potentially some feedback.

So just just want to kind of understand what that looks like and if we can get some clarity if folks are applying, and maybe there's just been some crossways, um, but would like to kind of understand that better.

Um and then in regard to the questions that council member Stafford had about kind of the board makeup.

I just was curious too about um if you guys could help us to understand if we're holding this, like what the um board and committee trainings look like, you know, if you guys um undergo you know different trainings.

So just answering those questions in the community that kind of um come up and been brought up tonight about board makeup to better understand.

But especially in regard to aura, just want to get some clarity from the additional businesses and then would like to talk with the um the staff and the attorney's office in the event that the um market is really just looking at a like a limited amount of vendors too.

That maybe that's something we want to consider.

And then also in our ordinance, um, we are supposed to do a um yearly update and kind of report on what's happened with the market, and so that's probably in our error that we probably should be nice and reaching out to the market and inviting you guys to come and present.

And so I think also if we um pause till um the next meeting, maybe that could give them time to prepare and actually do kind of their presentation.

So we'll also be in compliance with our ordinance to do um that update we're supposed to be doing each year.

So Mr.

Witiger.

Who doesn't live a beer for breakfast, right?

So you can have your coffee and yeah, stimulants and depressants in one trip around the square.

So the only concern I've heard, I've heard great enthusiasm for the expansion of the additional night for the half a block for the uh seasonal and uh everything that was stated about there not being opposition is absolutely true.

The only thing that happened at the 11th hour is that people realized, you know, I didn't really read the email that was sent to me, and now that I realize alcohol sales are in the mix, people have panicked a little bit saying, gee, I was unaware of that.

I would have provided feedback, and so I would be very interested in leaving this on the first reading as well, just to give people the opportunity.

And um, I'm not sure that there would ultimately be opposition to that, but that's the feedback that I've received.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Brna.

Sounds like we're gonna leave this on the first reading, but I would I would caution us that we're we're kind of getting off in the weeds and two separate uh uh discussions.

Uh I think we have the the ordinance change in front of us, and we should vote for that.

And if we have concerns about uh uh structure of the organization, then we take that up separately.

But I I think we're getting a little bit in the weeds on on some of the discussions that we're having that's veering away from the proposal that's in front of us.

Thank you.

I think that's very well stated, sir.

Uh Ms.

Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

I I too have some outstanding questions and and hopefully leave it on the first reading.

And um, I think having a presentation, uh summary presentation would be extremely helpful if that's a um if we're able to have that.

And then I looked on the website and I couldn't see where the board members' names or any kind of structure was was uh mentioned on the Fayetteville Farmers website.

So that kind of information would be extremely helpful for me just to understand the organization a little bit better.

And I do plan on reaching out and maybe having a meeting or two next week to uh with you all.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Um Minister Jones.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to stay in line.

I'd like this to stay on the first reading.

There are several questions that's come up that's in alignment what we're voting on.

One is um there's an opportunity around fairness in selecting vendors.

And my thought process was some vendors may want to be there at 5 a.m.

that may not want to stay to 10 p.m.

But I think there should be a process that they set up to include additional vendors that may want to be nighttime vendors and not necessarily to me, if we extend ours, it should also extend more vendors.

You it otherwise it is an elite club, and only certain people are being able to produce.

I can tell you I have an opportunity with this whole process because why does Black owned NWA get one weekend out of three months because we can't get into the vendor pool?

That's why I asked about opening up to ensure that that farmers market reflects everyone in the community.

And the third thing I want to bring up is I have also a big concern.

Managing people and process is easy, but you add alcohol and liquid to it, there's something else.

You have to have a process and a disciplinary process already in in order and in place before you just say, let's go and approve it.

So I wanted to talk in line with what we're discussing tonight, and I'd like to see that already addressed before you come to me and ask to manage those processes.

Got it.

Um, okay, it sounds like we're gonna be leaving this.

It I heard it from Ms.

Turk and also Miss Moore that perhaps they want a presentation.

Are you requesting that they provide that at the next meeting or just at some point in the future, or can you give them I want them to leave with some clarity on what we're asking of them?

Ms.

Turk.

Oh, thank you, Mayor.

Um, I guess I would really like to see it at the next meeting.

So uh things like um how many vendors there are, I think you mentioned that.

What different kind of of um crafts versus uh vegetables, uh all of those kinds of different sectors.

I mean, we all love the farmers market, so I think just getting a little bit more um information, also the selection process.

You mentioned some of that, but seeing it in a presentation in a graph, maybe you could provide an example.

And then I I really appreciate um minister Jones's um uh perspective about disciplinary procedures, especially if we're gonna approve alcohol there.

I do think uh greater infrastructure, and maybe we just don't realize all the um methods and infrastructure and rules that you have in place right now, but if you could could enlighten us with those, I would really appreciate that.

Okay.

Thank you, Ms.

Turk.

Um, and then the two questions I have just for clarity because uh we may not all understand based on how this reads reads the farmers market is not proposing that it as an entity sell alcohol, correct?

You are proposing that you allow the entry of vendors who are already duly licensed with the ABC, who already have their liquor permits, who already operate under those to be able to sell it as an official vendor at your market.

Is that correct?

Okay, and then you also already are part of the ORA and allow I could if I wanted to, you know, Saturday at the market, go to a business, get a beer, and walk around the market with it.

That's already allowed.

It's simply not allowed to be sold by a mobile vendor within your footprint.

Is that right?

Okay, got it.

I think there might have been some confusion about that, so I wanted to clarify.

Thank you so much.

And we'll leave that on that reading and go to our fourth and final item.

Um, an ordinance to amend section 39.10C and 39.11c to authorize the use of an experienced insurance adjuster to allow rare, exceptional, and substantially proven claims above 100,000 to be paid if approved by unanimous consent of the city council, and to declare an emergency.

Before we hear from the sponsor, uh, Mr.

Berna, we'll send it to you, Mr.

Pennington.

Whereas very few damage claims for water, wastewater, or other uninsured city vehicles or infrastructure problems would ever exceed 100,000.

And whereas if the city's experienced professional insurance adjuster would determine that allowable recoverable expenses pursuant to the Fayable Code would exceed $100,000.

Now therefore be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Fateville, Arkansas.

Section one, that the City Council of the City of Fateville, Arkansas here by amends Section 39.10, water and wastewater damage claims by renumbering C6 to C7 and enacting a new C6 as follows.

C6.

And if our experienced insurance adjusters professional analysis determines that the reasonable compensation for the valid and allowable claim exceeds $100,000, the City Council, by unanimous consent, may authorize payment of the claim over the normal cap of $100,000 and up to the amount of reasonable compensation as determined by the city's professional insurance adjusters analysis.

Section two, that the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, hereby amends Section 39.11 damage claims other than water and wastewater damage claims by renumbering subsection C4 to C5, renumbering current subsection C5 to C7, and enacting a new subsection C4 as follows.

C4, the administration is empowered and authorized to hire an experienced adjuster and rely upon the adjuster's professional analysis to establish reasonable compensation for any valid claim.

Section three, that the City Council of the City of Fable, Arkansas here by amends Section 39.11 C by enacting a new subsection C6 as follows.

C6, if our experienced insurance adjuster's professional analysis determines that the reasonable compensation for the valid and allowable claim exceeds 100,000, the city council by unanimous consent may authorize payment of the claim over the normal cap of $100,000 and up to the amount of reasonable compensation as determined by the city's professional insurance adjusters analysis.

Section 4, that the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines that these code amendments shall apply and relate back to any claim for a damaging event that occurred on or after December 1st, 2025.

Section 5, emergency clause.

The City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines that this ordinance should become effective without delay because some valid allowable damage claims might exceed the current $100,000 compensation cap pursuant to the professional analysis of our experienced insurance adjuster.

But without these amendments, the city council would not be able to legally pay that reasonable compensatory amount established by our insurance adjusters professional analysis pursuant to the existing requirements of the Fayable Code.

Therefore, to preserve our citizens' peace peace, health, and safety, the city council hereby declares an emergency exists such that this amending ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval.

Thank you.

Mr.

Berna.

Thank you, Mayor.

First off, as I said the other night in the uh agenda session, I want to thank uh members of the staff and and uh ordinance review committee.

We were asked um after the meeting that we had roughly two months ago where the individual had the uh uh sewer claim uh at that point in the discussions our our maximum allowable amount to pay was a hundred thousand dollars.

Uh this particular claim was in excess of that and uh was legitimate, but we had really no ways to address that.

So we were asked to go forward with a ordinance review committee meeting and try to uh come up with uh uh a revision of the ordinance by which we could um uh try to uh take care of our citizens but also keep the the city's best interest at heart as well.

Uh we feel like we have uh come up with a proposal for us to discuss.

Um and and uh Keith, if you don't mind to pull the um the uh graph up or the chart that I provided you, uh just pull down to the to just the chart.

Presently, as we speak here today, um our damage claim thresholds are as presented here.

Uh a dollar to $35,000 can be approved by the utility director without a vote.

Uh the $35,100 to $50,000 can be approved by City Council with five affirmative votes, and the fifty thousand and a dollar to a hundred thousand can require city council approval with six affirmative votes.

So we took that into consideration and with the uh the proposal or the issue we had with this particular uh claim, we chose to move forward with the proposal as presented here, whereby anything over a hundred thousand and one dollar we can by unanimous consent go up to the appraised amount of the claim by third party adjuster.

Uh we felt like that was fair uh with using the third-party adjuster, and we felt like it was fair that we did this the stair step uh approval process because that is far above uh more than what we presently can do.

So we felt like it was important that we have some uh safeguards in place that we are uh absolutely in unanimous opinion that this is a claim that should be paid.

Uh so that uh that that is kind of where we are.

Uh as we sit here today, I'll remind you that if we make no revisions to the ordinance, the maximum that can be paid is a hundred thousand dollars.

Great, thank you, Mr.

Bernard.

Uh Mr.

Stafford, do you have questions?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Um a few questions.

Um we also I should say have Tim Andrew our director of utilities here, and also the chief of staff is available for questions on this matter too, just in case.

I think this question will be maybe for Blake or or for the the uh um members of the ordinance review committee.

And I I'm wondering about uh a couple questions about unanimous consent.

Um one is is why why unanimous consent and not say three quarters or or six votes, and then the other one would that be unanimous consent?

Would that mean we'd have to have eight members present, or would that be unanimous consent of the members present?

I can start.

Uh so it would be unanimous consent of those present.

Okay.

Uh the language of the the proposal, the proposed ordinance amendment just says unanimous consent, so it doesn't say all members of the city council.

Gotcha.

Um, and then uh I think the other response would be that Kit's intent in drafting the ordinance this way was to increase that vote threshold depending on the the threshold amount that you're approving.

Uh you know, that's certainly something that the city council can change.

Uh this was the proposal that was discussed in committee and forwarded to you all.

I I think my concern there is that I think right now we have eight re very reasonable members of of the city council, but that hasn't always been the case, and I would hate for something to go awry because we have a uh a council member that was uh stubborn uh beyond reason or something that that so I do have concerns about the unanimous consent instead of a uh you know whether it's six or or seven votes, uh I do have issue with the unanimous consent uh concerns, I'll say.

Um another just my other questions I think are probably for you, Blake.

Uh and and kind of like maybe get into the weeds, uh, lodging and per diem is is that something that is set by the federal guidelines, you know, or that be set by the adjuster?

Uh the way it's written right now, uh there was no change to the provisions in uh the city code, and I believe it's just a uh it will not exceed three days of uh dislocation expenses.

So even if we pass this, it won't exceed three days of of lodging assistance, even when somebody may be out of their house for a month or so.

Correct.

That would require an amendment to this proposed amendment.

Okay.

And then uh final question.

Um with this current situation, uh would we do a uh a redo of the the like would we go back with the new adjuster and have them do a reassessment of this uh current situation?

Um can you clarify?

So what's before us now is just the ordinance.

Can you clarify what you mean in terms of the current situation?

Uh Mr.

Stratchy's uh situation that happened in December.

I think there was a assessment made.

Um it seemed like maybe there were a few things missed, or it seems like now we have more actual numbers in place.

So uh, you know, like actual receipts in place.

So I'm wondering if we will like reassess that with the adjuster with a new adjuster, or if we're just gonna say that was the what they came up with, and that's that's that.

I would have to defer to the utilities director on that because they are the ones that would work with the adjuster to to bring this forward.

And and then how is the adjuster going to be chosen?

Also a question for the utilities director.

Okay.

Mr.

Bernard, I know Tim's making his way up here.

You have comments.

I was gonna address your question about the the uh increase in approval level.

Each step along the approval level, it requires a greater number of affirmative votes.

We talked about your exact scenario.

Uh, but we felt that with the amount of potential uh claims that and this is a happens rarely, so but it each claim if it's a legitimate claim that should be very clear amongst all of us that we want to do the right thing.

If one renegade says that they don't want to do it, then you know that's up to them to be able to sell that to the to the public.

But we feel very confident that that the way this is set up with the third party adjuster that that is a wise way to do it and be good stewards of the city's money.

Okay.

Thank you, Scott.

Tim, do you need me to to ask questions again?

Or do you how you would hire an adjuster and go about how that would work and how you would do that retroactively for the previous situation back in December?

Certainly.

So the adjuster we have is one that we hired several years ago.

Uh we've been using him for several claims.

Uh he has experience working for other cities in the area.

He has uh about 30 years experience.

He's worked for other uh insurance companies doing this exact same thing.

So we have confidence that this adjuster knows what they're doing, and no, it was not our plan to send another adjuster yet.

And then to the point of, you know, since now a couple months has passed, there's receipts probably received, and I think there was an argument that a few things were left out.

Will we revisit this and come up with a new uh have the adjuster, you know, look at this uh again?

Well, the claimant needs to send those that information to the adjuster for him to look at.

I think he has asked for that, but hasn't hasn't received any paperwork from the claimant.

Okay, so he would still he wouldn't be just going off that number he came up with already.

He would take into account any new information he receives.

Certainly.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you.

Okay, Minister Jones.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I think um City Councilman Stafford, I think that's a great question because after you exceed a certain amount of damage, you should be um evaluating what type of adjusters you're using, their experience, their detail, their background.

Um, and I think it's almost like doing an RFP for a contractor selecting a contractor.

We should be evaluating different um adjusters as the amount increases and the amount of damage increases.

I don't necessarily say that years of experience always lends to one person knowing everything about claims.

So I think as the amount increases, I think there should be some barriers around how we select that adjuster as well.

Thank you.

Ms.

Moore.

Um I just a clarifying question that might probably is for Blake.

Um just going back to the um amount that we currently have in code being uh for the lodging, I think being at three days.

So if they turn in receipts and they've had to get temporary lodging and it's in excess of the three days and it's carried on, you know, for several months, does that mean because I think about the totality of their seats, say you know, they're going over this hundred thousand dollar threshold, would staff be because of current ordinance away, that portion of lodging, sorry, that was um over three days, would that just be discounted out of the receipts and reduce the amount?

So, you know, if say, you know, it was $20,000 uh additional um over three days that we stated in the ordinance, so it takes it like 120,000.

Would we then only be considering the 100,000?

Or I just I I was just trying to like figure that out as far as like I mean, is that three days is three days?

There's no there's no way to be flexible even with the changes we're making and saying this total amount because that that language isn't there.

Correct, not without a a further amendment because right now the the code section says no compensation shall be paid for inconvenience, loss of use, loss of profits or rents, consequential damages or anything other than cleaning, repair or replacement of property, and in extreme cases, dislocation expenses not to exceed three days.

Okay.

And do we know the three days what what that was based on when it originated?

I'm not sure when that was visited, so maybe putting you on the spot.

Sorry, Blake.

Guess is that that was included maybe from the the beginning.

I think the the ordinance was first adopted in 2012.

It's been revisited several times uh since then, but I don't know the origin of the three days.

Okay.

I just didn't know if it was like tied to a standard.

Is there any potential standards that might exist out there that would be a reference for like a typical, like with insurance folks?

I don't know if anybody in the room has that expertise of like it's a typical if you have a claim, there might be this many days that you'd potentially be displaced.

Because three days does seem like very short.

So I just I'm just trying to figure, I don't know if it's a couple of months.

I don't know if it's two weeks.

I have no idea.

There's like a standard.

I'm not familiar with any standards, but we can certainly look into that.

Okay.

And there wouldn't be anything to prevent us if we were to move forward with this tonight that we could further amend in the future in regard to trying to revisit on the accommodation portion.

That's right.

Okay, thank you.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Uh Tim, I have a question for you.

Uh, how often over the past, let's say maybe 10 years.

How often have we seen this happen?

Do you mean of this amount?

Yes.

Um, probably two, maybe three times in the last 10 years.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mr.

Burnett.

Tim, could you tell us uh briefly how we compare to other cities uh to your knowledge uh around the Northwest Arkansas community?

Well, I can only have a couple to talk about because uh haven't got answers from everybody, but uh some other cities will pay just the deductible amount on the insurance and go with that.

Uh others will hire the mitigation company and the repair themselves and pay for that.

Uh those are the two instances that I'm familiar with.

And I believe up until 2012, we'd paid nothing.

Is that correct?

I have to get used to this thing.

Um, I I think it was more uh on an ad hoc basis as I understand it.

And Kit had some concerns back then about equal protection claims because the city would pay some claims and would deny other claims, and there wasn't uh any kind of particular process to it.

Uh so then he recommended that the city council adopt this.

All right, thank you.

Okay, I'm not seeing any more questions, so I'm gonna take public comment.

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

Please state your name and address.

Hey, Chris Scrocky, 516 North Fallon Avenue.

Uh, nice to see everybody again.

Um, I'm the affected guy.

Um, so uh yeah, just uh to kind of add to a couple things there.

Um so January 22nd, uh Aaron Watkins with the water department sent out an email to the uh adjuster who was hired by the water department saying, uh hey, we need a little bit more work on this one.

Um for my FOIA requests, I saw that that adjuster had then sent an email to the um water department.

I wasn't on that email, but found it via FOIA and said, okay, hey, I'll reach out to Chris.

Um I've not heard back from from him.

I would like to.

That'd be great.

Uh, in the course of this uh work.

Um I received two construction bids.

I requested a third.

That guy dropped out, that happens.

The two construction bids were largely consistent.

They had materials which were not on the third party uh uh expert hired by the water department there.

I don't think that there was anything intentionally admitted there.

I'm not suggesting that.

Uh, what I do think is that uh as Tim just referenced, there have been something like two or three of the claims of this magnitude over the past several years.

Uh it did appear to me through FOIA that this was the largest claim that this person had worked on for the city.

He invoiced the city for two hours of work.

And so I think that there are some things that were uh missed.

And again, I don't think that was intentional, but I have been waiting for that uh person to reach back out to me per those email communications.

Uh that has not happened.

Um another thing that I wanted to mention was oh, you're talking about the uh how this would typically work in terms of um displacement insurance, et cetera, et cetera.

Uh I'm not the insurance expert.

I'll claim advanced amateur status at this point in time, having gone through all this.

But um there's something called like loss of use within the policy.

And so I actually asked my insurance guy this exact question of hey, had this been like a house buyer or something like that that had been claimed that had been part of my policy.

Um what would be the total amount that would be covered whenever I was displaced?

Uh I just Googled it according to Google since December 8th, it's been 120 days for me now.

Um, so my insurance policy, which is a pretty typical policy would actually cover up to about 103,000 and change uh for displacement.

Um so my original estimate was 80 nights, 165 nights, $13,200.

So just wanted to provide those data points.

You know, I've sent some emails again, have not received the follow-up that I was uh anticipating receiving from the water department here.

Um it was not, hey Chris, could you provide this as was just said that's not accurate?

It was hey, we'll reach out to this guy.

That hasn't happened yet.

So just want to say that.

Glad to take any questions as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

Do we have any other members of the thank you?

We have to keep doing public comment.

Thank you though.

Uh, do we have any other members of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Okay.

Um sorry, Keith.

I'm I almost also said kit.

Sarah's uh please Keith.

Please go ahead.

Do we have anybody who's called in on Zoom?

We do not.

Okay.

All right.

I'm going to bring this back to members of the council.

Um Mr.

Bernard, gonna give you first shot at it since it's your ordinance change.

Well, I I think this again, this has only happened one or two times in recent memory.

And so it's it's it's somewhat complicated.

I would I would propose that uh ordinance review can you know let's consider passing this as as it is now and then let us go back and look at the other uh the the housing issue.

But I I trying to remember and and Blake or and members, y'all might help my memory, but we initially kind of talked about that, but we were kind of hesitant to address that for some reason and I can't remember what that is.

Um yes, maybe I can follow up with um with what council member burner is saying.

We did talk about that the three days was kind of slim, that maybe we needed to consider that, but we were hoping to get this change to the ordinance passed tonight so that Mr.

Shrockey could get reimbursed and get whole again in his and in his re uh remodeling and get back to where he needed to be.

And so that was if I recall correctly, that was part of our discussion.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I I think I I thank the ordinance review committee, and I think this is by and large uh a really great uh solution.

Um I do have uh an issue because with the lodging and and uh with the three days because I think that does affect uh Mr.

Shocky.

And I I don't I don't know many contractors that could do a hundred thousand dollars of work in three days.

Um I'm sure they're out there.

Uh but so I I would like to uh and and Blake, maybe you could help me here to to bring forward an amendment to amend that three days, and I I'm I'm open to uh suggestions on what that length should be, and I'm also open to it being tied to the federal guidelines, the federal uh uh limits on that, so that so that someone's not staying at the you know, five-star resort or something that that you know that we just use those federal uh DM guidelines.

Mr.

Stafford, would you be open?

And the answer may very well be no, and that's totally okay.

But uh, would you be open to considering bringing that forward as an amendment after the fact since it does seem like you it have brought up what I think is a very good point of maybe tying it to some data or some federal per deal because that might take a little bit of legwork?

I don't know that we're gonna have an amendment that we can feel is legally sound tonight on the spot.

And so is there any reason, Mr.

Pennington, that if this were to pass tonight in the emergency where it clause were to pass that Mr.

Stafford or anyone else for that matter couldn't further amend after the fact?

We could certainly bring forward another ordinance to amend this part of the code at the next meeting.

And the only challenge to that uh what we're talking about though, is we would have on his claim, if if we're tailoring this to his claim, we would not be able to bring his claim forward until we clean up the ordinance because it would have to be retroactive to the date of his claim, or he'll get the the appra the adjuster's amount, but he wouldn't get any additional lodging.

Am I not correct?

That's correct.

And the ordinance further requires a release to be signed in order for us to make a payment.

And that release would would release the city from all liability, including for that extra dislocation time.

So if we if we want to hold this, and I'm thinking out loud, if you want to hold this, I'll call another ordinance review committee meeting.

We'll try to clean that up.

But in doing so, we're probably gonna have to table his in his claim coming to next meeting.

Uh is it in at the next meeting that we're supposed to bring it back forward?

Okay, so we may have may have to delay his um uh claim before the council for another two weeks.

So I I'm open to tailing this for uh two weeks.

I think we'd just be leaving it on or leave it on first reading.

Um I'm gonna get on to Miss Moore, she's had her light on.

And and I don't know if it it would oh I'm sorry.

That's okay, keep going, Bob.

Go ahead.

I was just gonna say I don't know if it would take another re ordinance review.

Maybe maybe Blake can just Blake.

Do you think you could draft something that would make sense, or do you think they should have another ordinance review meeting?

We can certainly work with you over the next two weeks to to come up with some suggested language for the council to consider, but it's uh ordinance review meets at the call of the chair, so I'd like to have an ordinance review committee meeting.

I think I think we can get it worked out versus back and forth and then come to the council meeting, and then we got pro we got to all discuss it again.

So I think we can I appreciate your work and it yeah, we just think we can put it we can pull it together.

Okay, council member more.

Well, we've kind of had the discussion since I've been waiting, but thank you, thank you, Mayor.

Um I'm in agreement.

I mean, that was my concern was just um wanting to make sure and hopefully we can just tie towards you know, some kind of standard would be helpful.

And it'd be helpful too that whatever standard it is, right?

That it um is one of those, it's moving over time based on inflation and time.

So if we're talking or whoever's sitting here won't be me in 10 years or what have you.

Um it's been moving, and it's not like why has it been the stagnant number that we've settled on?

So I appreciate the work that's been done on this so far.

I'm sorry to ask you guys to go back and do that.

And I guess my only other caveat in this conversation as no it's been in regard to you know one particular claim, but I think it's just you know, re kind of centering us that we're thinking about you know anything that would you know happen.

We're trying to clean up ordinance language in regard to that.

So while we want to take into account um the considerations of that one, I just we're trying to think about what would happen the city.

So hopefully there won't be another surprise that comes, and maybe if it does, it'll happen when we have the ordinance review committee meeting.

Um, but thank you for being willing to meet and to work on that.

Okay.

Sounds like we are leaving that on the first read.

Oh, Ms.

Turk, do you have a comment?

I was just gonna respond to Councilmember Moore and Councilmember Stafford's request.

Um, we can use the uh Office of Personnel Management.

They update the hotel and the pre diem and for the locality too.

So that's done every year, so that would be an easy one to tie it to.

Great.

Okay.

Uh thank you all so much.

Um before we adjourn, do we have any announcements?

I know we have one from you, Clerk Paxton.

Yes, good evening.

We have two advertisement periods going on right now.

Our office is currently accepting applications for the Fayetteville Youth Advisory Council on behalf of the city of Fayetteville.

Applications must be submitted by 4 30 p.m.

on Friday, April 17th.

And then separately, we've announced the time period for you to file for vacancies for the regular board committees and commissions.

Those vacancies are posted out on the city's website.

Applications must be submitted by 5 p.m.

on Friday, April 24th.

Thank you.

Mr.

Masito, do you have any announcements?

I do not.

Great.

We are adjourned.