Fayetteville City Council Work Session - May 4, 2026
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Fayetteville City Council Work Session - May 4, 2026
The Fayetteville City Council held a work session on Monday, May 4, 2026, starting at 3:00 PM, with a recess for public forum and announcements, then reconvened. The council discussed 11 agenda items, including the 910 Future Fest, downtown updates, economic development program modernization, water/sewer assistance, transit amenities, and policy revisions. Several items received consensus direction, and two council member requests were advanced for budget discussion.
Consent Calendar
- Historic Preservation Grant for College Heights and Seabrook Hills: Council gave unanimous consensus to add an item to the May 11 consent agenda authorizing the city to apply for a $40,000 grant ($24,000 state, $16,000 city match) for an architectural/archaeological survey. Staff clarified the designation does not impose restrictive historic district standards.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Child Care (Inspired Horizons): Multiple speakers (Dr. Brooke Fletcher, Alyssa Reynolds, Janae Malcolm, Lenae Williams, Billie Harney, Kelly Huang, Teresa Tyson, Kierra Wallace, Luis Hernandez, Star Mashroe Donato) urged the city to make underutilized residential properties available for licensed family child care homes to address the 28% capacity gap for infants/toddlers and support workforce stability. Speakers shared personal stories of the program's impact.
- Data Center Moratorium: Speakers (Austin Wiley, Arlene Fields, Angela Tatum, Bobby Burgess, Lizette Rodriguez, Janet Menzak, Teresa Burns, Carol Ollinger) called for a formal one-year moratorium on data center development, citing environmental concerns (water usage, PFAS pollution), tax subsidies, and lack of transparency. Some referenced a recent 120-day stay and criticized council for not acting on a true moratorium.
- Other: Bobby Griffin requested improved victim advocate support; Joseph Murphy complained about parking issues from a nearby Airbnb; Ben Holtquist advocated for traffic calming measures on Rim Road.
Discussion Items
- 6.01 – 910 Future Fest (Fayetteville NEXT Advisory Commission): Presenters requested $350,000–$500,000 city sponsorship for a three-day festival (Sept. 24-26) at Segra Stadium, concurrent with the International Folk Festival. They reported $70,000–$80,000 in pledged sponsorships. Council discussed budget timing, youth programming, and securing local vendors. A motion to accept the presentation and bring it to the first budget work session passed unanimously.
- 6.02 – Community Police Advisory Board Charter Update (CPSAB): Staff presented revisions expanding the board's scope from police oversight to comprehensive public safety (including fire, EMS, OCS). Key changes: new name, four objectives (mental health, violence intervention, youth engagement, homelessness risk mitigation), modified membership guidance, and annual report requirements. Councilmember McMillan opposed, citing concerns about requiring a police citizen academy and lack of public input. Motion passed 9-1.
- 6.03 – Downtown Municipal Service District Q3 Update (Cool Spring Downtown District): CEO Ashanti Bennett reported on new businesses, marketing, events (24,000 attendees this quarter), ambassador program, and Juneteenth Jubilee plans. Council discussed expanding the ambassador team (currently two) and improving collaboration with the Downtown Alliance. Report received by consensus.
- 6.04 – Fayetteville State University MOU for Catalyst Site 1: Tabled at staff's request pending final approvals from state entities. Unanimous vote.
- 6.05 – Economic Development Program Modernization: Derek McArthur presented changes to business assistance and facade grants, including citywide eligibility, tiered loan amounts, and new priority redevelopment areas (the "Hand of Fayetteville"). Council provided consensus to proceed, with a request to review metrics tied to poverty reduction and mobility. Staff aim to implement by July 1.
- 6.06 – Water and Sewer Assessment Assistance Program – Phase V: Staff presented three options. After debate about fairness and budget priorities, council chose Option 2 (100% assessment coverage up to $5,000, expanded eligibility to 120% AMI, $1,000 plumber assistance, maintain two-year window) by a majority (Jones and Hondros opposed). Estimated annual cost increase: $100,000 to $120,000.
- 6.07 – Public Notice Visibility Improvements: Staff proposed larger signage, a centralized web portal, QR codes, and enhanced outreach. Councilmember Hare requested adding a provision to increase the number of signs per case. Motion to receive the report with that addition passed unanimously.
- 6.08 – FAST Service Standards and Bus Stop Amenities Inventory: Director Tiffany Neil reviewed current standards (66% of stops have only a pole) and costs of upgrading. Lowering shelter thresholds from 15 to 14 boardings would cost an additional $235,000. Council discussed sponsorship opportunities and requested a budget analysis. Report received.
- 6.09 – City Council Policies Review (Policies 115.15, 135.1, 155.2): The committee recommended revisions. Council approved 115.15 (research requests) and 135.1 (nonprofit funding) but tabled 155.02 (personal property disposal) for further language on real estate surplus notification. Motion carried unanimously.
Key Outcomes
- 910 Future Fest: Presentation accepted; to be discussed in first budget session.
- CPAC Charter: Approved 9-1 (McMillan against).
- Economic Development Programs: Council consensus to adopt proposed changes and priority redevelopment areas.
- Water/Sewer Assistance: Option 2 selected (additional ~$100,000/year). Staff to revise policy 150.1.
- Public Notice Signs: Motion to increase signage quantity added.
- Downtown Development Coordinator (Council Member Davis): Consensus to have staff bring back a proposal with budget and operational details.
- Downtown Convention Center Feasibility Study (Mayor Colvin): Consensus to proceed with gathering existing data and assessing feasibility; public engagement emphasized.
- All other items: Received or approved as noted.
Meeting Transcript
And welcome to the May Fourth work session. We will call this meeting to order, and the invocation will be provided by Council Member Ferguson. Let us all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Um, I may need your indulgence as well as I gathered up some of them to come back to you later after I've had a moment to confer with the city attorney. But probably most pressing for me at the moment is that um we receive word that uh the historic preservation fund grant for college heights and Seabrook Hills community architectural archaeological survey um is um they need authorization and support from the city for sixteen thousand dollars of grant match. Chris, where are you at? Um did I get that right? If you could come up briefly and talk about that. If you could come up briefly and talk about that, what I'm gonna be asking uh Mayor Pro Jam and looking to the city attorney since she and I have not had a chance to talk about this, is that if council can give me the nod that this is something that you generally support, I will put it on for your consent agenda for next week for you to approve, or um if the city attorney feels that for the sixteen thousand dollars and the authorization, we need to ask you to um add an item to the agenda to take action on it. Um my preference would be if we were able through consent to get your acknowledgement to do it, that we will put it on as a retroactive item for your meeting on is it Monday, June? Yes, sir, Monday. So, Chris, could you describe briefly what the item is? All right, there we go. Uh yes, sir, thank you. Uh uh for a little bit of time at the beginning of the meeting here. So um we received uh uh pretty pretty late last week that uh deadline for a certified local government grant from the state historic preservation office um was available. Um the city has recently uh applied for two of these grants. Um they were both for Broadell and um off of Merkison Road. Uh the first grant that we did performed in archaeological um and architectural and historic survey of the neighborhood in partnership with Fayetteville State University and the State Historic Preservation Office and the community to really compile a lot of information to tell a story about that neighborhood, folks who live there, um, and uh the growth of that area. The second grant we got was to hire a professional firm that would write the nomination to put that area into the National Register of Historic Places. That grant is still ongoing. We're right at the tail end of that process for that one. Um so every year these funds become available through the state, and we're eligible because we're a certified local government to apply for those funds. And so the request is to uh authorize approval for the college heights and seabrook hills areas, which are uh single family areas very very close aligned to the Broadale area. Um the grant is a total the project is a total of about 40,000 dollars, give or take a few. Um if it's 40,000, the grant will cover 24, and the city would need to cover the remaining 16. Um I don't currently have a funding source for this, so we would need to source it out of the general fund um at that time, but our grant policies and procedures and stuff require that council authorize staff to apply for it. Well, first let me go to councilmember here. Councilmember Hare, are you on? Yes, sir, I am. Can you give us some insight? Weren't you fighting for one of the neighborhoods to be uh designated historic? I don't know which one that we're referring to, but was college heights or seaborks either. Yes, they're they're both uh basically the same. They are both right there. Uh I think uh and and first uh just let me say thank you. I was I'm glad to be back with you all this, if no other way, but just on teams right now. Um I think our director just stated uh the the two different, but both basically the same. The Broadale Seabrook uh community and of course the College Heights community are somewhat within uh unison of each other. So I will be supporting uh for us to continue to move forward with this historical registry. What I would like to also ask uh, so I will move in to get a consensus vote for that, but also to have Mr. Collie to explain uh for the audience and and also to our members just what this registry means, and that this registry does not put any type of um uh full or bone restrictions on the neighborhood, meaning like they don't have to replace windows or different types of material structure as falls up under some of the uh the historical registries like we're speaking about sometimes for the downtown district. Thank you, sir. Did you want to address that, Mr. Collin? I think help some too, um Dr. Here and others. Um we um will definitely my recommendation in consultation with the city attorney as well is is that with the upward nod of council, just to say you're supportive of this, that we will give the nod um and will apply uh to uh the request came to us either on Thursday or Friday of last week. Um and um we would uh have all of those details and more in your agenda packet for next week, but we just wanted to give the nod, understanding how important this was to the council, the choice neighborhoods and the doctor here and others. If there's an effort or an interest to just kind of give us the nod or um to you, Dr.
openpublica.com