Good evening everyone.

I'd like to uh welcome you to the June 9th, 2026 City Council of Fayetteville agenda session.

Um I'm filling in temporarily for Mayor Ron.

The first thing on our next meeting, we will have a call to a roll call, the pledge of allegiance, uh any announcements, proclamations, and recognition.

We'll have the nominating committee report uh on consent.

Uh we'll have consent and we'll have approval of the June 20 excuse me, June 2nd, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

And on these next everything else, I'll just read through it.

And if anyone has a question, please just uh flag me down and I will stop and we'll go on to staff then.

Otherwise, we'll just go through it.

Um is a purchase of petroleum-based oils and lubricants.

A three purchase of walk behind trench roller with attachments for the water and sewer department.

A four excavator.

I'm sorry, can you read can you read the data under it?

And I re and I ask that for public purposes because next week we end up putting on a consent and it was never read over.

So if you could read the entire thing.

Thank you for for reminding me of that.

Okay.

Start over again.

A two purchase of petroleum-based oils and lubricants, a resolution to approve the purchase of petroleum-based products and lubricants on an as-needed basis for various vendors and various quantities in excess of 40,000 dollars through December 31st, 2026 within the approved budget 2026 2000.

A three, purchase of walk behind trench roller with attachments for the water and sewer department, a resolution to approve the purchase of a trench roller with attachments for G for GW Van Keppel Company in the total amount of 45,000.

45,000 dollars and eight cents.

Pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, or delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price, and to approve a budget amendment.

A four excavator replacement through J.A.

Riggs tractor company, a resolution to approve the purchase of one excavator and attachments in the total amount of 104,746, excuse me, 72681 from J.A.

Riggs tractor company pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract, plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, and delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price.

A five water and sewer department work truck replacement, a resolution to approve the purchase of one Ford F 150 hybrid from Alothe Ford Lincoln in the amount of $53,593, pursuant to a source well cooperative purchasing contract, plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, and delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price.

A six purchase of one set of mobile traffic signals for water and sewer department, a resolution to approve the purchase of a portable traffic of portable traffic signals from OMJC Signal Incorporated in the total amount of $65,696 and 47 cents, pursuant to a by board cooperative purchasing contract, plus any applicable surcharges, freight charges, title licensing or delivery fees up to 10% of the original purchase price, and to approve a budget amendment.

Council member Moore.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um I just was going to ask on the mobile traffic signals.

I'm not sure who from staff, but um does that have a capability as well?

I'm curious.

I know with the I believe it's in the community policing department.

We have these islands that are these stations that do like speed.

Will this just be traffic light or does this have a capability potentially to even show people their speed as they're approaching it all to kind of show them what they're supposed to be going as they're coming into these work areas?

Unfortunately not.

These are these are a set of traffic lights that uh coordinate with each other, especially over crest of the hill.

Because you're only going to have one line of traffic, you've got to stop and go with the traffic.

Okay.

Okay.

So just totally I'm sorry.

Go ahead, Keith.

Sorry.

No, that's correct, or Tim said this is we do find that at times we have to have a staff person out there directing traffic in this situation.

Uh this will help with that, but this will also help when we have to close a road, kind of like we do on Rockwood Trail right now for an extended period of time.

It's going to allow us to have a traffic signal that's unstaffed, and we would we'll be able to keep it up 24-7.

We did look into into leasing or renting these, and it was a lot more cost effective for us uh to use it for uh to purchase one.

And do you have any idea or estimate of like um how utilized it'll be out of out of the gate, like 50% of the time it'll be in use and have some availability?

Do we have like an estimate on that?

Well, since the water and sewer department is doing a lot of in-house lineland jobs, we are taking a lot of roads down to one lane, so we're gonna be using it uh a lot.

Okay.

I just uh I'm curious as we have subcontractors that are out doing different projects around town.

You know, there just is a a lot happening across the city, and one of the things that I have residents that give me feedback on quite often is just having folks available to kind of flag around or kind of direct traffic around.

So I didn't know too if this would be a resource when it's available if some partner agency that's doing work for the city could potentially tap into it as well if they have staffing shortages or concerns, and that way just to make some of these projects safer through some of the neighborhoods or not.

Well, we'd certainly look into that, yes.

Okay, okay, all right, thank you.

Uh Tim, is this the same type of equipment that was already used on Rockwood Trail where there was a sign that said the the road was closed or a lane was closed?

Is that the same type of thing that we have?

This is actually uh stop and go traffic lights.

Okay, okay.

All right, thank you very much.

Excuse me.

Any more questions?

Yes, yes.

Tim, uh you said there was just a purchase of one, is that correct?

A set of flights, yes.

Okay.

Uh is this a possible pilot program in any particular area, or are you trying to pilot across the city in different areas?

Well, we'll do it across the city, but our first project will be Rockwood Trail since it's almost a one-way in, one way out in a lot of cases.

It goes up over the crest of a hill, and we'll get to certain areas where we have the road closed for an extended period of time, it will be up 24-7 helping with the traffic.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Tim.

Our next item A7, Southern Brothers Construction LLC, a resolution to award bid 2630 and to authorize a contract with Southern Buddhist Brothers construction LLC in the amount of 1,2009, 824 dollars for the construction of an electrical switch gear facility at the Paul R.

Noland Water Resource Recovery Facility and to approve a project contingency in the amount of 120 120,982 and 40 cents.

Can I ask Steve?

Yes, Minister Jones.

Steve, now was gonna ask Steve about the budget contingency.

Um can you tell me where there's coming from the project contingency amount of 120,000?

Yeah, that's in the water and sewer fund.

Um, the wastewater achievement plant uh building project building improvement projects.

Any other questions?

Okay.

Seeing none, item A eight is a resolution to approve amendment number one to professional engineering services agreement with Hawkins Weir Engineering or Engineers incorporated in the amount in an amount not to exceed 195,220 for additional services associated with the Nolan Water Resource Recovery Facility primary switchgear improvements project.

Okay.

Can we just get a brief explanation about how those work together?

I would think this is in conjunction with the previous item, and then just didn't know if we had any expectation of any additional coming.

Tim question.

Tim question.

Okay.

Thank you, Tim.

So the Nolan Swiss gear project, we've been working on this for several years.

Uh the Nolan plant has electrical switch gear that if you lose power from your main power grid, it will switch over to your generator to power your plant.

Uh we've known for uh several years it need to be replaced.

Uh with the way that the uh supply chain has been, we ordered the equipment over a year ago uh just through our own purchase order, and it will probably be here by this fall.

It takes that long for lead time.

And so as we did that, we put together a package for the construction, which you just heard.

Uh the Hawkins Wear, the engineer, they've designed it from the beginning, and now what this uh will do is they'll they'll go through the construction observation all the way through startup of the equipment.

So they are linked together.

Any other questions?

Are there additional components of this portion of the project with switch gear that we'll be seeing additional costs coming forward?

For the switch gear project, this should be it for this project.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Our next item A9 is a resolution to award.

Okay.

Do you want to finish this one?

Okay.

A resolution to award RFQ 2601 selection six and authorize a contract for Garver LLC in the amount not in an amount not to exceed 373,000 to provide design and construction administrative services for Kessler Mountain Regional Park Phase 3, improvements and to approve a project contingency in the amount of 27,000.

Any questions?

Okay, thank you.

I I do have one.

Yes, excuse me, Minister Jones.

Thank you.

Steven, is that one coming from Parks and RIC?

That contingency amount, the 27 additional 27,000.

Yeah, that's uh that's uh budgeted in the parks bonds and parks development funds.

That's out of the 2024 bonds.

Thank you.

Ms.

Moore, I just thank you, Mary.

Um I had a question just about on the phase three improvements.

Um it and it might be in some of the packet, and I've missed it.

Is there someplace where it shows the um comprehensive overview of what the financial outloads are gonna be for all of the phase three improvements with the contingencies?

I I don't believe there was in your um packet, but I believe the estimate on construction, which isn't real firm right now because we haven't gone into much design work, it's somewhere around four million.

Okay.

And that will be for um all of the different um consultants and in-house like design work will be the four million for this phase, or is any of that gonna be starting the implementation?

Oh, I'm sorry, I I kind of misunderstood your question.

The four million was for construction.

Okay, once we get to be able to bid it.

This this is the only consultants that we're needing at this time for the project.

And then the four million for the construction.

Okay, thank you.

Sure.

Okay, thanks, Ted.

Um this is A10, if I'm correct.

Is that where you all were?

Okay.

A resolution to approve the second supplement to the agreement of understanding with the Arkansas Department of Transportation for the Highway 112 Poplar Street to Drake Street project to accept federal aid funding in the amount of 500,000 with the required city match of 125,000, and to approve a budget amendment.

Um I believe Justin, do you're available to answer questions about this one?

Should anybody on the council have them?

Ms.

Turk.

Oh.

I'm sorry.

Oh no, okay.

Never mind.

Okay.

This is uh okay, great.

No questions about that one.

So we will go to A11, which also Justin can speak to.

It's a resolution to approve an agreement with Black Hills Energy, Arkansas, in the amount of 302,000 302,040 for utility relocations associated with the MILSAP Road and College Avenue intersection improvement project to approve a project contingency in the amount of $17,960 and to approve a budget amendment in the amount of $320,000.

Miss Moore.

Um, I just have a question about um this is one particular utility, but are there any other impacts that we're gonna see with any um work that's happening at that intersection as well, or is this the only one?

Um I I think this one was uh in particular because it was kind of an odd situation where the the Black Hills line was actually there before the city right-away existed.

Okay.

So we have a special contract with them in this situation to move this line.

Um I think there will be other additional uh utility impacts uh as well, but this one is a special contract because of the circumstance.

Okay.

In those instances, because there is right of way.

I mean, will this be the most substantial amount we'll see that the city will take on then?

Uh most likely, yes.

I mean, it's quite substantial, so I just was curious if there are gonna be additional impacts.

I mean, if that was multiplied across utilities, then it could be a million dollars.

So I just I wasn't I was thinking those would probably be lesser, but I didn't want to make that assumption.

Yes, most likely, and this should be eligible for reimbursement.

I mean it's an 80-20 match, which should only be have to cover 20% of this cost.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Thank you.

And just that that 80-20 match is pertaining to this one as well, right?

It wasn't in the short, it was it wasn't in the short title, and so I think that's what was confusing because when you just read it, okay.

It wouldn't apply, that's correct.

Perfect.

Okay.

Um a twelve, a resolution to award RFQ 26-1 section, I'm sorry, selection four, and authorize the purchase of on-called drainage design services from Burns and McDonald Engineering.

Hawkins We're engineers and Olson Associates as needed through June 30th of 2027 within the approved budget.

Alan can answer questions about this if you all have them.

Minister Jones.

Alan, can you come on up?

There thank you.

Um thank you, Alan.

I I guess my question is we have three different all three of those are consultants.

Correct.

Yes.

Is there um a budget for a consultant versus the project apologize?

I may not fully understand the question, but um the within the budget meaning uh for our uh 2027 budget for the uh stormwater utility program.

Okay.

Um we uh have used that program for about a year.

We found it to be very successful to be a little bit more responsive to um the needs and emergency situations that could come up.

Um so we've used those for both hourly services and design of full projects.

Um I forget the total number, but we've had a lot of projects going on in the past year, um, as I'm sure you can imagine, and that's really helped kind of speed the process and what we would be proposing moving forward.

Um I do believe you will still can see uh individual selections if it is a very large project that we would bring back to council.

Um but for certainly for these smaller projects and some hourly services to size pipes and do things for us, that's been very, very helpful for us.

And I and and I will I'll um turn to you, Kit and say if a certain amount on a project exceeds what amount would they need to bring it before the city council?

Well, it looks like to me that uh the budget has already been set uh by the council at one point, and so they're within the budget that the council is already set.

So I'm just saying giving part of that money to a contractor at what amount does it exceed that amount that it needs to come before the budget is approved, that's not the question.

If a contractor is getting 50,000, 100,000, it does not need to come before the city council because it's in the budget.

Well, I think that uh this takes the place of having competitive bidding.

Is that uh and uh two different this would be a professional procurement situation.

Oh, that's right.

It wouldn't be a competitive bid or any sort of contractor money.

We we would simply be talking about design funds uh that would go through a normal uh professional procurement procedure.

Um it it doesn't get into any type of construction or competitive bid waiver or anything like that.

And I think to answer your question more succinctly, Minister Jones is one way of looking at it.

If something isn't in the abut in the budget and it is over fifty thousand dollars, it has to go to council.

Steve, is that correct?

Can you shed any light on when something goes to council regardless of when it doesn't?

Yes, and if we're if we're authorizing, if we're selecting uh say a vendor to perform the construction, we'll bring that award to council.

But if it's a budgeted item within the city's budget and we already have that process in place or that contract, that's not something that needs to come forward to council.

Thank you.

I have a follow-up to that, but I don't know.

This might be for Steven.

So what if this isn't our approved vendor for this bike specific purpose and we have that ongoing agreement with them?

Um kind of piggybacking to Minister Jones' question.

Um if they were to then look to do another kind of um complementary service or something kind of like kind of in conjunction, does that come back before council for that to be added into the scope and then potentially with a budget adjustment, or would we just do an administrative update to that contract within the budget you already have approved?

How is that handled?

So uh it may help if I just explain briefly how we've handled that this past year.

Um so we we have a certain uh uh budget for our stormwater utility fee.

Typically um that come uh uh from a few different sources, but let's assume it's uh our CIP fund, let's say um we have some money allocated to that that this body approves.

Um so as long as we're underneath that amount, um, we have been able to do work orders underneath a master service agreement.

Okay.

Um so what we typically ask for is a work order.

Uh one of those work orders would be for hourly services for those emergency situations where transportation or stormwater maintenance may call and say, hey, we had a this pipe failed, do we need to replace it with the same size or do we need to upsize it?

We could very quickly respond to them through that process and say it needs to be upsized or it can be the same size, things like that.

Okay, all right.

And then we've we've also utilized that for um smaller projects.

We've got several projects in the past year we've gotten to 30 percent design in anticipation of taking those to full design as soon as there's enough CIP dollars to pay for the construction of those programs.

So those have been uh I think we've got about four to five projects right now keyed up at 30 percent, just waiting until we can have enough CIP dollars within that program to pay for the construction.

Um and at that point, uh the construction contracts would certainly come back to this body before we would move forward with any of that.

So I believe to uh to Mr.

Dotson's point, as long as we're within that working budget that the that the council approved, those work orders have not historically come back individually to city council.

We handle those through the administrative process with the mayor and and uh have it signed and approved that way.

Okay, all right.

Thank you for explaining that.

Okay.

Great, thank you.

Um thank you, Alan.

Um, next is a resolution to approve amendment one to the contract with Olsen Incorporated in the amount of $25,000 for grant application services for the railroad crossing elimination program.

If we have any questions about that.

And the reason why this is coming despite being below that threshold is because it's amending something you've already approved.

So in that case, we always go back.

Um A14, the most exciting thing on the agenda, a resolution to amend resolution 6726 for the City Hall elevator contract with Otis with Otis Elevator to provide for the payment of sales taxes and to increase the project contingency to $20,000.

I think it's fair to say we underestimated um how much was needed to bring our elevator up to the 21st century.

So I do I have a follow-up question about the elevator.

And if this is something to follow up in the future, that's okay too.

Byron, I would love for you to come answer any elevator questions.

Okay.

Please.

I only say this because I got to intimately watch the Washington County elevator concern that happened and their building that houses um Judge Warren and the public defender's office.

And that didn't seem like it was even a very aged elevator, but I think they were without an elevator for quite some time and it became substantially um uh more uh expensive because apparently some things have become antiquated fairly quickly, really, for the length of that building.

I know our elevator is at from what I understand, I think is probably older than what theirs would be.

And so with us putting the funds into this, um, I'm just curious too about when there are new emerging technologies and like changes in this industry.

Um, would you we have an expectation of this being serviced in the future and parts being available and things like that?

Um, is this maybe a 20-year outlook?

I mean, 50 years that seems like that's in flux, and so I was just hoping to maybe get a better idea, hoping in you know, five years we're not having to do the elevator again, hopefully.

Sure.

Yeah, this project uh is a complete modernization of the elevator to bring it up to current standards and uh some of the outside scope is to if there's any code changes that are required, we'll bring that up to code as well.

But there's also some monitoring uh elements to this uh modernization so that they can monitor things and help us with the updates with the service agreement.

So hopefully we're trying to get ahead of that.

So the modernization with that contract gives us um a length of service that they're saying that they're gonna be having like available parts and troubleshooting then into the future.

That's right.

Okay, thank you.

I think the goal is not wanting to spend good money on a bad product that then we have to completely just tear out again.

And I honestly was so surprised at how difficult that was with the county and to understand you know, there's elevators and every building under the sun to accommodate and just was surprised that they had run into that.

So I just didn't know how common it was too, and so just wanted to make sure I know that that we have a very particular elevator, I will say it has its own characteristics and elements that it adds to the building.

So didn't know if it could go with us for the long term or not.

So thank you.

Okay, great, thank you.

Next up, we have Jared who has a brief presentation.

It's a resolution to authorize staff to proceed with the Drakefield Airport Terminal Modernization Project in the amount of 200,000 to approve the purchase of furniture in the amount of 1575 and 74 cents from the Norman company pursuant to TIPS and Omina cooperative purchasing contracts and to approve a budget amendment.

And Jared can speak to this, and then um Steve and or Keith can answer questions about the funding source.

So, Jared, whenever you're ready.

Do we want to come?

Do you want us to move forward on some on the next one?

And then it's no big deal.

Uh okay.

So I had uh just a copy of the you have it in your packet already, just uh the renderings of that facility or of the new furniture rather that uh we are going to hopefully see tonight.

But um Devin, can you send Keith a copy of that as well?

But you do have a copy of it in your packet.

Uh this is exciting.

This is a really fun one for us tonight.

We have not uh substantially invested in the Drake Field Terminal in over 20 years.

Uh the furniture that's in the lobby, uh, best guess is from around 2003.

Uh I think we've gotten our money's worth out of it at this point.

So the main reason that we've brought this to you guys tonight uh is capacity.

Uh Drake Field has grown pretty substantially over the last 20 years.

And what we've found is that uh the lobby, uh the age of of the furniture in the lobby, the the fixtures, the furnishings, they no longer reflect uh kind of the standards that we expect from City of Fayetteville facilities.

Uh, but also they don't uh accommodate uh the traffic that we have.

Uh a great example is when we have sports teams uh from the University of Arkansas.

Basketball generally brings 40 people with them, uh, another 10 to 15 that hang out with them until the team's launch.

The lobby currently has seating for 20 people.

Uh this furniture, these renderings that you'll see here in a minute, uh, this should up our capacity to around 70, uh 70 seats.

Uh and the goal here is a the comfort of all of our traveling public, uh the university students, uh business leaders, the flying public, everybody that flies in and out of Drake Field.

We'll have uh a better place to stay, a more comfortable place to stay, and hopefully one that better reflects uh the vision that we have for the airp uh airport and better reflects just uh how the airport fits into the city of Fayetteville as a whole.

So uh Keith, do you have a copy of the renderings?

Uh and again, these are in your packet, but I figured it's easier to see it on the big screen because I can't see on these smaller screens, but um the bulk of this purchase.

This is a 200,000 dollar item.

Uh the bulk of this, I think around 159, 160,000 is the furniture itself.

Uh and you will see some of the furniture in the coffee shop we already have in place.

We'll be reusing the tables.

But uh if you want to next slide, please.

So starting with the coffee shop, uh, this area is already a coffee shop in the airport.

Uh when I say coffee shop, there's no barisa or anything like that.

Um it's self-served coffee.

We've actually partnered with our Segas, they're our neighbor just in the north.

Uh, and it's we love it.

It's a great partnership.

But uh the coffee shop already exists, and I won't spend a lot of time here.

If you want to hit the next slide.

This is kind of the bread and butter of what we're looking at here.

Um, right here in the middle, this is where our reception desk is currently.

Uh it's not a great spot.

It takes up a lot of real estate, it's kind of in the way.

So we're relocating the reception desk to the other side of the hallway, and we're trying to maximize the seating capacity of this area.

This is kind of directly in the middle of the facility under the skylight.

Uh, if you want to hit the next slide, Keith.

This is the same room, just closer to the windows.

If you've been to the airport, and I'm gonna invite all of you guys to come down and take a look if you want to to kind of understand how this all fits together.

Uh the best part of the terminal, in my opinion, is the view.

We've got these great big windows that are taller than that wall behind you.

And the first thing uh that we did with the reception desk in the 2005 remodel is we kind of covered up all the windows.

So we're hoping to bring the light back into the building, really shine.

You can see the trees across the runway.

It's a beautiful view.

So we're we're really hoping with the new furniture uh really lighten the place up, really make it airy and breezy and feel a little bit bigger.

And if you want to hit one more slide for me.

This is the room adjacent to that main terminal area.

This is for lack of a better term, we would call this the pilot's lounge.

It's right off of that room.

Uh it's a big glass room, but there are currently three chairs and one computer in that whole space.

It's criminally underutilized.

So this brings a lot more seating into that area and it gives the pilots a place where they can be separate from the passengers.

Uh, because one of the best things about Drake Field is we serve a huge diversity of aircraft, right?

We have uh weekend warriors, we have small business owners, we have uh you know, corporate uh corporate entities, banks, all of these guys are in the same building.

So having multiple spaces for them to separate and to talk to each other, quiet areas, things like that, that's important, uh especially when you have 60 basketball players.

Having having a quiet place to get away is helpful.

Uh and then I think I have one more.

That's our reception desk.

It is just flipping to the other side of the lobby.

Uh and it's a modular desk, very similar to what's downstairs at the base of the stairs.

Uh, and what we have found is the built-in we have currently is just not very good for updating and technology.

It's actually the old desk has cutouts for CRT monitors in it.

We've had it that long.

So we're hoping with a modular desk that uh as technology changes, we have a better, better opportunity to save some money there.

But uh that's the big picture again.

Uh, if you guys want to come down after this or tomorrow, sometime this week, take a look at the lobby.

I'd be happy.

Happy to show you guys what we're looking at and how this kind of fits together.

So great.

Thank you so much.

Um questions.

Um I don't know who we're just gonna go this way.

Uh Mr.

Stafford.

Okay, thank you.

Uh George, simple question, and it's probably because I haven't flown in a long time.

But is there an area or workstation area for the pilots uh to fill out their flight plans and stuff like that with like a desk or there are uh so actually in that pilot's lounge room, there's that's the computer uh that we have right now.

Uh with this, they will still have that opportunity.

We're relocating that uh over closer to our offices.

Okay, so they won't have any space if they can work on those slides later.

Unfortunately, everybody flies with these.

Well, yeah, exactly.

That's why it's been a while, so that it's probably not as needed as it used to be.

Not as much.

Thank you.

Um Ms.

Turk and then Minister.

Um so Jared, just a couple of questions.

Was this purchase in your budget for this year?

No, this is uh uh this was not in the original budget, no.

So even though I mean, so I guess I'm wanting to make sure this isn't tied to uh the new European project that we have going on.

And then I don't see any information that uh and maybe it's in the packet and I just missed it, um, about the increase in traffic in Drakefield.

So I I'm kind of wondering why this was overlooked, I guess, in your in your budget.

Sure.

So uh no, this was not budgeted before, and this is not tied to any one particular project.

Um really what we have found is we had hoped to budget this kind of incrementally uh through operating budgets.

Uh and the cost of of these remodels really kind of grew uh as we started looking at them.

Uh yeah, we've we've kind of piecemealed some furniture pieces over the years, you know, a couch here, a table there, but it really once we started looking at doing a uh comprehensive remodel of the space, trying to do one one vision for the whole space instead of just piecemealing furniture, uh, it made more sense to make it one large package.

Okay.

Keith, can you speak to where the budget comes?

Can answer uh council member Turk's question.

But I know for a number of years I've helped Jared on some technology issues down there.

One of them was video security, and they just didn't have a lot of money to do some of these projects.

So we were just kind of piecemealing it little by little.

And I think with uh some of the new activity down there with OSN that's coming down there, and also we had tried to improve some things related to the university traffic.

We have a significant amount of traffic down there, and they were working on and he was kind of piecemealing things together, and it just made a lot more sense to do this uh at all one time.

So I don't know, Steve, if you can kind of expand on uh the budget.

Not really.

I mean, it's in the 4470, the sales tax capital fund.

So basically we're just um moving some of those sales tax capital fund uh the funding sources around so we can cover uh this expenditure out there at the airport.

Well, and I think that's what was new information.

I think that's exactly what they were asking us where was the money coming from, and I think that's what we weren't getting.

So what you're saying is that it's coming from the sales tax capital fund.

That's correct.

As opposed to the operating budget.

Yes.

Thank you.

I have one more question.

Um so I don't know what I'm not on the airport board.

I I think Bob maybe you liaison on there.

Was this um was this um sent through the airport board for their consideration?

Yes, they've seen multiple versions of this, yes.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Okay, got it.

Ms.

Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, just in follow-up for this coming from the sales tax capital fund.

I think with some of the other spending we talked about, I think if it's in the um it's generated by the airport, it's generally put back into the airport.

I guess that's my question is um do we potentially see any potential upside that the airport fund has our funds that could be reallocated that are already to the airport before we take the sales tax capital funds.

Yeah, we've we've taken a pretty extensive look at the the funding sources and uses out there at the airport.

And you know, frankly, they run a pretty lean operation and they have for years.

And so really this is the funding source if the city wants to provide you know enough funds to run a large project like this at this point in time.

Thank you for explaining that.

Um and then this is similar in nature to what I've talked about with um, you know, I know we have a master plan that's gonna come back and we're kind of visioning for the future.

I think there's some different conversations happening, but I don't know yet if I feel like there's really been a comprehensive kind of city holistic what people really want to see the airport do.

And I'm real curious.

I heard about a particular class of traveler, which I think is probably a very small percentage in the total scheme of our um population.

But I believe at some of the other airports, they have you know additional things that drive some traffic into the airport, and so I'm curious with the master plan, what it maybe comes forward with, and some of our future plans.

If this is you know substantial investment in equipment and furniture, and I'm curious about other potential uh class travelers or just linger lingerers, I'll call them visitors.

Um because I think about um that there are other airports that people go to to watch the planes take off and land, you know, maybe eat at a restaurant, et cetera.

And so I'm just curious again, you know, with how substantial this outlay is for equipment and furniture, thinking about if we said we wanted to have this additional class of folks to come through, we'd probably be looking at another um dip into our improvement funds.

And so I'm hoping you can maybe talk to that and then give us an update maybe on the master plan as well.

Sure.

So we're uh can concurrently we're running the master plan and the business plan.

Uh you know, one is is federally funded, one is is funded internally, but uh both of those are coming back to us very shortly.

Uh we're within weeks of receiving both, hopefully.

Uh and both of those will there's a lot of data in both of those that will point to uh user types and you know kinda uh things like that.

But I will say one of the strengths that Drake field has is we have a very diverse user base.

Uh you know, we we have you know uh we have ninety-four T hangar tenants, uh those are uh guys like you and I, right?

The the cost of a boat and you've got an airplane, uh we have business travelers, we have celebrities, I mean we have uh the the full range from from entry level to top of the line and really with this project that's why uh to to council councilwoman Turk's uh point earlier.

This is for everybody, right?

This is uh from pilots to university students to to everybody in between.

This gives us uh this is a common area.

This is the main lobby of the building.

So the goal is you know, this this should no matter the uh the user type or or any particular growth in one direction, this will be available to everybody and it should be sustainable for a long time.

Okay.

But uh it back to your point, the the business plan and the master plan both will have a lot of data points.

Uh towards user.

And you said coming soon.

Do you have just a ballpark estimate of when?

Uh last update was we should see the final drafts within the next two weeks of both, and then both of those should be coming to you guys for presentation.

Thank you.

Um Keith, you had your light on the Yeah, just saying this we have had a lot of interest in the airport, and you know, in the university being a huge user of that.

And I think it's one of those things we feel this is an investment down at the airport to continue to make it a viable uh airport.

I mean, people have choices in this area.

Uh and we want to make sure Drake is as is one of the primary choices uh for airplane travel in the area.

And it's been what was the last time you said that we've kind of invested in that lobby?

It's been many years.

2003, I believe.

Um, thank you, Jared.

Um the next item is a resolution to approve the purchase of an air compressor and fill station parts from Siddons Martin in the total amount of sixty-one thousand thirty-six dollars and sixty-four cents, pursuant to a Houston Galveston Area Council cooperative purchasing contract.

This is for the fire department.

Uh we need a new air compressor.

And Chief Harden is available to answer questions.

Chief Harden or Chief Hulse, either one can um answer questions if we have them.

The last item on consent is a grant application.

It is approval to apply for a safer grant.

It's a resolution to authorize an application for a staffing for adequate fire and emergency response safer grant in the amount of 1,848,461 dollars to hire 12 full-time firefighters.

That's if the grant were to go through.

Um and Chief, would you like to talk to us more about that?

Or at least be up for be up be available for questions if council has them.

Minister Jones.

Thank you, Mayor.

Is this a matching grant?

Or is do we have any we do have to pay a portion?

It is uh the first year we paid uh 25%, the second year we paid 25%, and the third year we pay 65%.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

It's okay.

Could you just tell us a little bit more about the grant, what uh what all this entails um and a little bit more detail?

Uh so the um well, the grant, the safer grant has been in place for many, many years.

It it was put in place after uh 9-11, uh, and it it's included to increase staffing uh for fire departments, uh, which that's what this will do.

It will increase our our level of staffing.

It will not increase our minimum level of staffing.

Uh so daily we have a minimum of 34 personnel.

This is just increasing the staffing factor.

Uh so it will relieve you know some of the overtime burden and uh when we in the rare times that we don't have people on vacation or military leave or any type of leave, it will get us at a better level of staffing.

So just to follow up.

Um have we um had these grants in the past?

Has Fayetteville been awarded those in the past?

We as far as I know, we've never received a uh safer grant.

Uh we have received an AFG grant uh which is out of the the same pot.

Uh but we've we've never uh we have um yet to be successful on this.

But we've applied for those grants in the past.

Um any idea why we weren't successful?

I feel like uh the biggest reason is because we always just ask for just a couple people.

Um with this, it's going to I mean, one of the intents of the grant is to uh to bring us in compliance with NPA 1710 that says you're supposed to have four people per apparatus.

Uh this I mean I I've I'm hopeful uh that this gets approved.

Um I could be dead wrong though.

I think that's the reason though that we haven't been approved previously.

Okay, thank you.

Miss Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um Chief, what um does the cost become in the years past year three and forward to the city?

Do we take it on a hundred percent at that point?

It does become 100 percent uh uh on the city.

I am prepared or I will be prepared uh hopefully next uh the next cycle that we we come together uh to share with y'all the exact cost impact uh long term.

Um the we're we're working on those numbers to try to figure out exactly what that would be projected into the future.

So if we're leaving this on consent and approving it just to apply, not necessarily accept the grant.

That's 100% correct.

This hit on May 19th had become available.

This is the first opportunity I could get it in front of you and the deadline is the 22nd of June, so we won't meet again before then.

Uh so I'm I need to get it uh uh approved to apply before then.

And I will say, you know, I have a little hesitation even applying without really understanding the long term.

We have other departments that we you know apply for grants, and we don't ever get rid of those head count, not saying that we need to, but just to be able to at least do fuller evaluation on it.

So I appreciate that those all numbers will come forward um before we would see those come back to us in the future.

Yes, we likely won't hear um it'll the we're supposed to hear for sure by September 30th uh as to whether or not we do have ample time.

Uh however the clock is ticking as far as getting people hired.

Uh we're going through that cycle.

Uh so I'm I'm working on a um a good presentation that I'll come back before you.

I I think by the time you get done seeing the final numbers, I will woo you and you'll think this is the greatest thing ever.

So thank you too.

Anything else?

Great.

Thank you, Chief.

All right.

Um what we will have then next week is a public hearing on a private club application, an ordinance to approve the application of Montelier Fayetteville LLC, DBA Oxpo for a permit to or Oxbow to a per uh a permit to operate as a private club in the city of Fayetteville at 2980 North College Avenue.

Chief Reynolds um handles those applications and can answer questions if you have them.

Okay.

Um that will then take us.

So unfinished business is what we heard last time from Allison and the parks department.

It's an ordinance to provide for the conservation and protection of certain city-owned real property to establish permitted and prohibited uses and for other purposes.

Do we have additional follow-ups that we want to ask Allison about tonight?

Um Alison and I did a discussion uh last week, and I think I got most of my questions answered.

Okay.

All right, great.

Um next item will be new business.

And I believe um a couple of you wanted to ask about so just the order of them.

Um we have on here that a vacate the vacation on East Cypress Lane is last.

And wondering Mr.

Berna, how you you feel about moving that to the beginning since it seems very simple.

It's 15 square feet.

Yeah, that's fine.

We can do D1 or D2, it doesn't matter.

I don't think either one of those is going to be very lengthy.

Right.

It might allow the the parties representing that to get out of the way before things that might take up more.

But but anyway, so sorry for jumping ahead.

The the the item D1 as it is now is an ordinance to align the city's definition of a private club with state law by amending section 11.02 definitions within chapter 11 of alcoholic beverages.

The short version is that the state used to require that um private clubs have an associated nonprofit, and that has changed.

Um we are reflecting our ordinances to comply with the statute.

Ms.

Turk.

And that's about as much as I know.

So you're gonna we're gonna need to have Chief Reynolds to expound on it a little bit for that.

Okay.

Um I guess what I'm because we're kidding.

Yeah, we just had B1 here with this private club club X uh application with Oxpo.

So how does that interact if we're changing our definition?

Is there any um ramifications or anything about that?

There's there's not.

I mean, if if you would like, I mean, you could switch them and flip them and and pass this first, but uh the state law was in effect in uh 2025, I believe April 2025 was when the state law passed.

And basically, in the short of it, it just uh it just allows our code to get caught up uh to state law, and so this ordinance brings the definition alignment with the Arkansas law, and it would allow for sole proprietorships, partnerships, uh corporations, and LLCs, and that's what'll be in front of you uh with this request is an LLC on the private club from the uh Oxbow, I believe it is.

Okay, thank you so much.

You're welcome.

Okay.

Um moving on to so do you all want to make that do you want to do the D3 first?

Or we'll talk about it when we get there.

D two as of now is an ordinance.

Sorry, I'm trying to figure out do you just what did we have to do it in order, or can we just switch it now?

Switch it.

We're switching it.

So Clerk Paxton, if you can make D3 the very first item of new business, that would be great.

It'll now be D1.

Okay.

Um an ordinance to make data centers a conditional use in the city of Fayetteville and provide for additional regulations on data centers by amending section 161.31, District I2, General Industrial, Section 164.27 data centers, Section 51.001 water shortages, and section 51.112 water service and extension policy of the unified development code and to declare an emergency.

Um councilmember Berna, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um after our recent discussions, lengthy discussions that we had about the uh uh company down south Fayetteville and uh the conversations that came up about data centers.

Uh I reached out to uh city attorney uh uh Pennington and asked uh, you know, I remembered Councilmember Moore bringing forth uh uh some changes a couple years ago, but I could not really remember exactly what what that entailed, so I reached out to say, okay, what what do we have?

Where do we have any vulnerabilities?

How are we protected?

And uh I just have to praise um uh uh Blake, uh city staff, Jonathan, uh folks in water and uh water and sewer, they have really uh done a lot of research on this, and when I called they they brought that up and I said, Well, let's I think now's the time to let's let's move forward with this.

Uh so it uh it it did highlight the fact that we are pretty insulated in Fayetteville because it's only allowed by use by right in one zone, and there's very lit limited availability uh where we where we are a little vulnerable is out in the county where um uh they're outside the city limits, but they're with uh within the water district uh of Fayetteville.

So we have some uh uh potential issues.

Unbeknownst to me, Councilmember Whitaker, you know, perfect timing.

He walks in uh uh he had also reached out, so uh that's why you know we we uh ended up uh agreeing to uh co-sponsor this through uh uh Blake.

So Blake has put together a presentation and I wanted to get we wanted to get this out there to everybody and plenty of time for y'all to look at it, digest it.

You know, obviously there's gonna be some tweaks and changes, uh, but I think it's a substantial ordinance that that would uh uh work well for the city.

Thank you, Mayor, City Council.

Uh so in 2023, the General Assembly passed the Arkansas Data Centers Act.

Uh this act does not allow the city to ban data centers outright, but it does allow us to enact reasonable regulations to protect the peace, health, and safety of our residents.

Uh we were aware at that time that these data centers were causing pretty significant issues for neighbors because of noise uh issues.

And so the data the Arkansas Municipal League issued guidance to every city in the state.

Uh they provided a draft ordinance, uh, and all that was focused on noise.

So on September 5th, 2023, we passed uh one of the very first data center ordinances in the state of Arkansas.

Uh we created a specific data center use unit.

That's unit 47.

We placed it under permitted uses at that time in I2 general industrial zoning.

We enacted some broader noise regulations targeted specifically at data centers in Chapter 164 with the purpose of reducing the potential impact on surrounding properties.

Section 151.01 defines a data center in Fayetteville.

It's a facility constructed and operated that is engaged in storage management, processing, and transmission of digital data, including facilities used for cryptocurrency mining, which houses networked computer systems along with supporting equipment, such as batteries, backup power generators, HVAC, and cooling systems.

Data center does not include a dwelling unit used for home digital asset mining as defined by Arkansas Code Annotated 141501.

It's important to note that that was specifically precluded from local regulation by the Data Centers Act that home digital asset mining.

So why is an update needed at this time?

We've started to recognize that data centers can also create significant water and power demands.

A UN report that was released just a few days ago focused on the environmental effects of data centers.

The report shows that data centers powering AI could put major pressure on electricity systems, water supplies, land use, minerals, and waste management.

Data centers consumed 448 terawatt hours of electricity in 2025.

If data centers were a country, that would rank 11th globally in electricity consumption.

Water use could equal the basic annual domestic needs of the 1.3 billion people living in sub Saharan Africa by the end of the decade.

The takeaway from the report is not that AI should be abandoned entirely, but that governments, companies, and users need to manage its growth responsibly.

The report argues that communities should be involved early in deciding where data centers are located with enforceable transparency, consultation, and grievance mechanisms.

Also, we've seen that there are two data center projects currently under construction in Arkansas.

You've got West Memphis and Clarksville, and three more have been announced in Pulaski County, Little Rock, and Conway.

So getting into the specific changes, first we're going to talk about the land use changes.

So the proposed ordinance moves data centers from a use by right in I2 general industrial to conditional use.

This allows for planning commission review along with public notification and public comment.

And that the proposal complies with other specific requirements for that proposed use.

And this is the only place a data center could potentially be located if it meets all of the other proposed requirements.

So getting into those specific requirements, there are going to be some new pre-approval reporting requirements.

The report has to include an energy management plan that addresses power use effectiveness, waste heat recovery, and renewable electricity generation.

The report must also provide detailed water usage projections, including annual use, monthly demand, peak flow, daily peak use, flow rates, meter information, and fire flow needs.

We're also requiring wastewater discharge projections, including peak flows, operational flexibility, total dissolved solids, and chemicals that may affect wastewater quality.

As far as water and wastewater protections, this requires the public water utility to certify that it has the capacity to serve the data center based on the report showing what the projected water usage is.

It requires a certification from Beaver Water District that there is sufficient current and future capacity and no adverse impact to customers.

If the applicant intends to rely on groundwater or surface water, a water feasibility study would be required.

Open loop and once-through cooling systems are prohibited.

Evaporative only cooling systems that use potable water as the primary cooling medium are prohibited.

And on-site groundwater wells cannot be used as the primary cooling water source.

Related water shortage rules would restrict operation of data center cooling systems that use potable water.

And according to our utilities department, this type of use would have to comply with our industrial pretreatment regulations for wastewater.

On the power supply end, the applicant has to provide documentation from the public utility serving that property that it has sufficient power supply.

Utility documentation must identify required transmission, generation, or substation upgrades.

Non-public or alternative power sources would require a feasibility review.

Backup generators must meet EPA tier 4 standards where applicable.

Routine generator testing is limited to Monday through Friday, 10 a.m.

to 4 p.m.

Uh, excluding holidays.

Schedule generator testing requires a 24 hour notice to property owners within a thousand feet.

And operator, the operator must maintain a public website, submit annual emissions reports, and file fuel handling and spill response plans.

This is just a bit of an overview of our existing noise rules.

These are not proposed to be changed.

We think they're pretty stringent.

And unless you want to take a look a closer look at them, we don't propose any changes to that.

Next to I1 or I2 districts.

The buffer increases to 100 feet next to any other zoning district.

And as said earlier, they must maintain a public web page that provides the reports that they're required to maintain.

Violations or failure to comply would allow us to withhold grading or building permits or a certificate of occupancy.

It could also lead to prosecution, amendment of the conditional use permit, or revocation.

Another section changes the water shortages provisions.

Currently, the mayor is authorized to restrict use in seven ways.

We're proposing an eighth, which is for any data center that uses potable water in its cooling system.

This is an overlay of the city limits and our it's not exactly our water service area, but it's close.

Basically, just shows that our water service area extends far beyond the city's boundaries.

Oh, go back.

So basically, the changes in the water, the water area, water service area would be similar to that within the city.

We would require reports showing water usage and projections.

It would require certification from the utility provider that there is sufficient capacity.

We could also require additional information in the event the utilities director needs that to make his recommendation to the city council or if the city council required additional information to approve any request for a main extension.

This this retains the requirement that the city council approve any extension outside of the city limits.

So there's still considerable amount of discretion.

And I will say that doesn't apply to the cities that we serve.

We have contracts with the cities around us to provide water either directly to the city or to their residents as customers of ours.

Those regulations, and I've got more specific information, but I won't get into it here.

But we believe the contracts that are in place limit the amount of water we're required to provide.

And so, in the event a data center proposed to move to one of those, we don't think we would be obligated to provide water to that data center.

So the key takeaways from the ordinance, uh it preserves the existing noise safeguards, it adds this broader public interest review, uh data centers are going to be classified as high impact utility users, and they're gonna have ongoing compliance duties.

Some of the unanswered questions in this proposal, uh, accessory data centers and uh tiered structures, there are some cities that use tiered structures to distinguish between small data centers and larger data centers.

Uh Jonathan Kurth could provide more information about our accessory use definition.

Uh we believe that an accessory data center that was tied directly to uh a building would be covered by the accessory use definition, wouldn't require that to uh comply with the the I2 zoning regulations.

Um but if the council wanted to look at a tiered structure or look at pulling out accessory data centers in a different way, we can certainly do that.

Uh the ordinance does not get into other forms of waste like e-waste or construction debris, uh, and there are no additional fees uh proposed or required in the proposal.

That's that.

Okay, if you will stay there for questions and um Mr.

Wheatiger, I don't think you were here when when I first introduced it, but since you are co-sponsoring, do you have anything you would like to add before we go to questions?

Thank you, Mayor.

I appreciate the opportunity.

Um nothing to add other than to express appreciation to the city attorney's office for all of your work on this.

Thank you.

All right, Minister Jims.

Thank you.

Can you go back to the presentation we were showing the um different areas, Formington Greenland, where we're supplying the water?

There were other thank you.

That one.

Yes, thank you.

I was just trying to forget what was the legend for the other items that are blue and white, the little dots.

If that was an industrial area, is that water?

Oh, those are our water tanks.

Water tanks, that's what I was showing.

I'll left that later on, just so you could see where we had existing tanks.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I want to echo and thank you to Councilmembers Berna and Whitaker for bringing this um forward and for all the staff that's worked on this.

Um I was revisiting it, and there's just so much to dive into.

I know I feel like this will be an iteration, and I have no doubt we will unfortunately probably continue this conversation on this particular ordinance because we're continuing to learn more.

Um, there are a great number of folks across the state that are working on this and incredible you know, expertise and minds and different just like pockets of this that I've been trying to understand and digest, kind of getting back up to speed from 2023, and a lot obviously has happened.

Um a few things that I just didn't want to surprise folks that I am chatting um with staff in the city attorney's office on, and I'm continuing to talk to folks, especially in Central Arkansas that are working on this, is just consideration of some of the other waste that was spoken to and having a management plan for that just because not necessarily knowing all those potentials.

Um the other thing too is um maybe uh more formalizing a thermal management plan where there's like an independent impact assessment that has to be done, um, ongoing monthly temperature monitoring um and what a mitigation plan you know would be in the event that they you know, so that there was something has to be put forward before it would get approval.

Um the other thing too is just um having explicit language about mon monitoring enforcement, something that um gives explicit language about inspections that are available and ongoing.

Um and then um fire suppression plan, we have one line of language in, and I think it infers, but it's not explicit.

And so, you know, I have a lot of concerns about in the city, we already have industries that have the potential to use all of our emergency response here in the city and probably in the region.

And so, as those considerations are even you know for data centers or even other industries that might um really stress it, really um having something that is an entire fire protection plan that goes through site-specific fire risk, suspression system, supply requirements, emergency access provisions, hazardous material management procedures.

Um again, I mean, we're learning all the time, and so I don't know if other things will get bubbled up from some of the conversations in Central Arkansas, but those were a few of the things that I um after going through this had just asked questions on.

Um, but I I think what we have would probably I would imagine be even with the way it sits today, first in the state, probably language on really constricting and uh giving regulation around how these would look coming into a city in the state.

And I don't know that I've really seen any um plastic litteroc passed something recently, but I was looking at the language and I don't think um that it's nearly um you know this in in de in-depth and in detail, it sounds like they're gonna continue to revisit.

But we we did kind of start with the Little Rock ordinance that pulled from other sources to kind of strengthen that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah no, that was great.

So no, I I'm super appreciative.

And there was a lot of stuff I learned reading through, especially in the water.

I mean, I think water is probably electricity are some of the biggest issues with these, that sounds like.

Um, and so I'm super thankful for the effort that's been put forward on it.

And the only other thing too that I don't know, there's the requirement that some of these things have to be done up front, but it didn't feel like to me as a language explicit to say that maybe it has to be kind of a third-party expertise in those areas too, because um, you know, if you're managing it yourself and you're saying you're the expert and you give us a plan and you say it's good for us to approve it.

I'm just curious too about us talking to Jeremy Ashley just about um even with the expertise we have, even with city staff too, that there are particular like projects and things that you need a greater level of somebody who's um able to look at these particular types of projects, and so um being able to flag in those particular areas um for those kind of emerging issue areas for there to be the ability that that's borne by the applicant and done um by an outside party that has some level of regulation that they have accreditation or credentialing that allows for them to provide that if that's something that we can figure out language for.

Okay.

Thank you.

I appreciate I've been swirling around.

I know you you're the recipient of that.

So thank you for for hearing me on that.

And I'm sure there'll be more things that I'll um send out as I just get more feedback from folks.

So and I think there was a letter from the EAC member.

Oh, that was another thing I had notes on.

And I won't take much more time, but um I I thought that there were some good points that were made by um Mr.

Pummel, who's the EAC chair, um, talking about I don't know if we can consider hard time limits with no automatic renewal so that the permit would be temporary for um the C UP.

I don't know if we can even legally do that.

And that somebody would have to put forward a performance bond for some of the things that he mentioned.

But he's got a quite lengthy and I have not digested everything that he's given us feedback on.

I haven't seen that if you're forwarded.

I'm so sorry.

I don't know that it made it to our office.

Okay, I'll forward it.

I haven't seen it.

I don't think the I'll just forward it.

Thank you.

Sorry about that.

I didn't mean to surprise you.

I should have looked at the two line.

No, it's okay.

It probably came in while we were at this meeting.

Um Mr.

Thank you, Mayor.

And um really want to give a shout out to everybody that's been working on this.

I I really appreciate all the all the detailed, all the effort that's gone into it.

And uh likewise with council member more, I I think there'll be some maybe some additional suggestions to maybe even strengthen this and make it even even a uh a better ordinance than it is.

But my hat is off to you, you all.

Um I had one question to Jonathan.

Um in terms of like there may be a lot of inspection, there may be a whole lot of review that goes in.

And so do you think right now with our cost recovery or or provisions that we have for staff time, do you think that those fees would cover something like this, or should additional an additional category of review or fees be um considered for a project like this?

I don't have an informed uh answer to that.

We've never seen a data setter come in, so I don't know that it really would take a heightened amount of staff time, especially if instead of doing independent reviews, we're evaluating someone else's performed report or review.

Uh I do know that as a part of our user fee study, one of the basic comp or tenets of it is that we don't craft fees for the most timely or time consuming review.

We have to try to average it out so that we're making sure we're not overcharging people of simple projects and we're not undercharging people that have very complicated projects.

So I don't initially have any concerns, but I also haven't don't haven't experienced reviewing one of these and also understanding that there are multiple different scales, like Mr.

Pennington alluded to there's small, medium, large, there's hyperscale ones, there's ones with substations, there's ones without substations.

So there's many different categories this could fall within.

So I'm not even sure if we did adopt a fee.

How would we apply it?

Would it be to all classes of data centers or not?

So at this point, my recommendation is to not adopt a fee associated with that.

I think if we do see a project like this come forward, we can make an informed decision at that time and and possibly adopt that as a as a separate item.

So do you have the discretion under our uh ordinance right now to be able to, you know, add up these number of hours, let's just say it's really excessive from what you've experienced in the past and be able to pass that cost on to the data center, or do they have to be in a particular category?

To charge fees, we have to have them codified.

Uh and again we're gonna do that.

So it has to be in a correct.

And we do try to account for the fact that some projects are administratively approved, and I could have an abrid abbreviated timeline.

We have some projects that uh go to our planning commission, then it get appealed to city council, and they take significantly more staff time than just an administratively approved item.

And so it's hard for us to try to uh create one fee that captures all those.

But the short answer is no, we don't have a a way to administratively change our fee dynamically.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

So, Jonathan, you said something that made me think you said you know, you haven't seen one come through, and if it were to happen, we could look at then applying a fee.

Then that would be too late, right?

That would be my understanding.

That wouldn't, I mean, at that point, it doesn't correct for that project, we would not have a right.

So I think that that I think that to your point, like now would be the time because once they come through, then what does it matter at that point?

Yeah, my concern at that point is that if we establish a fee and it exceeds the amount of work that staff commits to it, we have put ourselves in a potentially legally compromising position where we're overcharging for a service, which as a public entity is illegal.

But could we look at other cities or other experiences to kind of get an idea or at least just to check it out to say, oh, maybe it's not that much more of a burden, or maybe it's another 30 percent or 40 percent or something significant.

We could certainly look at what other cities have adopted uh nationally to see if they have comparable see if they have comparable standards and work backwards from there.

Um I'm sure it would be quite time consuming.

Keith, you had your light on.

Yeah, I have a couple of out-of-state colleagues that have dealt with this, and so I think we can definitely reach out to them.

Part of what they did is they outsourced some of that inspection or some of that review, and that was part of the process because they're so specialized.

So they were able to do direct cost allocation for that review.

I think they're in situations they're quite a bit different than us with they have very inexpensive land, and that was one of the reasons they were uh a very uh one was very far north to where their cooling actually is less costly, so that's why they were bringing it, and the other one was very inexpensive land, which we uh don't have that luxury here in Fayetteville.

But definitely they had some I've talked to them a number of times, and they have some really good uh experience on using third-party consultants.

Um Mr.

Berna, and then if we have anyone on if Dr.

Jones has on Zoom, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh Jonathan, you and I briefly talked about this.

Um, and I want to you can address it briefly tonight if you want to, but I want to make sure we put it on the record uh on Tuesday.

Could you explain the uh accessory use component of this?

I want to make sure that that we don't uh you know overstep our intentions because we do have uh businesses here in town that you know, Washington Regional has their data center, City of Fayetteville has a data center.

So how does that play into this ordinance or or exclude those operations from this ordinance?

Certainly, and this came up when we initially adopted a data center ordinance and a use unit for data centers.

There's a concern that as you just said, the city of Fayetteville, Washington Regional, the University of Arkansas, they all have data centers.

It can be a closet, it can be a separate structure on the campus of the a property.

Uh but there was a concern that we would inadvertently stunt our local businesses or local institutions from being able to have what is considered a necessary function.

Uh ultimately we feel safe relying on our accessory use definition, which says that it has to be on site and that it has to be subordinate to another activity.

So you could not create a data center for a use in Silicon Valley or whatever.

Sorry, just taking like a tech, a tech corporation in another state could not create a data center here unless they had a oversized office presence as well on the exact same property, which is not what we've seen anywhere in the nation so far as far as data center construction.

Does that answer your question?

And just to add to that, it it says incidental and subordinate.

So very, very small piece of the the principal use of the property.

Mr.

Whedaker.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um in this uh comment just to take with a block of salt for Jonathan, and that is when people fail inspections, we probably have a reinspection fee, or you're allowed X amount of staff time on a project before you know you're submitting for the fifth time and you still haven't made all your your corrections to your plan.

So we might want to look at everyone's entitled to X amount of staff time and inspections, but once you exceed that, then we have a per incident or hourly rate, and that might be the more efficient way to go about knowing how many hours someone would take and still be fair to them and fair to the the ratepayers of Ayedville.

My my final comment would be that I was pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this.

We're not banning data centers.

We're not anti-technology, but it's the notion of safeguarding the rates that our customers pay for water and for electricity in particular, such that we don't allow one entity to come and impact the rate that all the rest of us pay because of the consumption of those utilities.

And we simply are trying to be fair to business enterprises.

And so I don't want anyone to think we're picking on anyone.

This is that classic everyone pays their fair share model, and that's why I uh wholeheartedly support this.

Thank you.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, just a quick question.

Uh it's not gonna stop what we do here, but does the uh university would they have to abide by this, or they would we don't get to regulate the state?

Yeah.

Thank you.

Now what we could do potentially uh because they are a water customer, is look at potential regulations on water customer use.

So food for thought.

Okay, thank you.

Maybe that's something we need to look at.

Probably.

Interesting.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um right.

We I think we didn't actually read D three.

I know y'all will laugh at me because I'm mentioning it for a third time, but I do actually need to read it so you can ask questions about it.

I know I'm sorry.

I was trying to do it in the right order.

An ordinance to approve vacation 26-6 for property located at 1660 East Cypress Lane in Ward 3 to vacate 15.6 square feet of general utility easement.

Um, Mr.

Kurth is available to answer questions if anybody should have them.

And we don't.

Okay.

And so I think uh Clerk Paxon, we're moving that to D1.

And then uh we have a walk-on that uh Ms.

Bunch might have addressed before I got here.

I don't know.

Okay, okay, got it.

I just wanted to check.

Since I recognize I was a little bit late, I want to thank her for taking taking over and sitting here.

Um this is um an approval of a land acquisition.

I think you should all have it in front of you to enter into an agreement with Tommy Flowers Davis, trustee of the Tommy Flowers Davis Trust for the purchase of approximately 1,720 square feet of land adjacent to Buddy Hayes Park for $52,500 and for an additional $10,000 to provide funds for a project contingency for closing costs and other related expenses and approval of a budget amendment to recognize Southeast Quadrant Park land dedication funds and the total amount of $62,500.

Um I don't know if it's best to start with um if you all have questions to start with um Allison, but I know Jonathan and Keith also can weigh in if needed.

And Ms.

Turk, we'll start with you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um so I was looking kind of at the budget right here.

And so the green space fees or that is that come out of the park fund, or is that part of the hundred thousand dollars that's allocated to purchase property or enter into a conservation easement?

No, so those are parkland education funds which come in from development and they have to be spent in the quadrant that the funds are received in.

So it's specifically for um offsetting impact to uh the park system.

Okay, thank you so much.

Sure.

Okay.

I don't think we have oh, Mr.

Stafford has a question.

Also, do you want to hang out?

I'm just wondering if this is something they could go on consent.

Um from a legal stand, that would be up to the council.

I believe legally it could, because it is a resolution.

Is that that correct?

Okay, so that would be up to the council.

I would I would recommend that.

Okay.

I'm not seeing any objection to that.

I know Miss Flowers Davis would would love that.

I know this is something that we worked on with her for I think many years, if not decades.

So okay.

Um I think that's everything.

Um Keith's birthday.

So oh yeah, Dr.

Jones, I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

Uh I would certainly support that as well.

Thank you, uh, Councilmember Stafford.

Great.

Thank you, Dr.

Jones.

Um, oh, and I'm so sorry, Peter has one more thing.

I apologize.

Peter, you come on up.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Good evening, Council members.

Uh, wanted to follow through on a commitment we made with respect to offering a tour of the recycling processing facility where Fayetteville's uh recyclables are going.

It's the uh cards facility in Springdale.

And so been working with them to try to uh line up uh potential dates for that.

And so we're looking at the week of June 22nd.

So that's two weeks uh from now, and um can offer up Monday through Thursday of that week uh like a one o'clock time um would work best in order for you all to be able to tour the facility and also see our trucks um when they arrive and and see the materials that our trucks are are uh delivering to that facility.

We're also gonna open this tour up to the members of the environmental action committee so that they can attend um with you with you all.

So looking for any kind of direction or consensus on a date uh the 22nd, 23rd, 24th, or 25th of June.

The 22nd Monday at one would be best for me.

I know we've got some chief interviews up in the air for um central that week, and so some of those other days are kind of maybe getting tied down.

Okay, we have a Monday the 22nd at one o'clock proposed.

Anybody want to throw out something different?

Ms.

Turk, I know this is a request that you had as well, so I want to make sure.

I think that's a good day.

Okay.

Yeah, okay.

We'll uh we'll we'll get that scheduled and get that um notice out as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

We have a water and sewer committee meeting now, unless our uh birthday uh celebrant has anything he would like to add.

No, I do not.

Great, all right, thank you.

Happy birthday.