OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Miss City Board Study Session Summary - October 28, 2025

Meeting Portal — Tuesday, October 28, 2025
BodyFort Smith, Arkansas
SessionMeeting Portal
DateTuesday, October 28, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:57:36

Transcript — Verbatim
1:04

Good evening and welcome to the fourth Miss City Board of Directors Study Session on this October 28th 2025.

1:12

These meetings are being televised live for the benefit of residents who cannot be here with us in person.

1:18

Uh today at this time we will go right to the first item on the agenda.

1:26

Thank you.

1:27

Yes, sir.

1:27

This evening the board will be reviewing five departmental capital improvement plans.

1:32

A capital improv improvement plan is a tool used to schedule and prioritize major projects over several years.

1:39

The first CIP plan that will be reviewed is for streets, bridges, and associated drainage, and coming to the microphone is Ben Marts, who is the NM interim director of our engineering department.

1:53

Hello.

1:59

I apologize.

2:06

Okay.

2:08

So you all have already seen this plan.

2:10

There's been it's basically the exact same plan that y'all saw during the study session.

2:16

Um the I think there's two items on there, one dealing with um right of way abandonment around the airport, and also general and extension that are the two added items, but other than that, uh with the exception of items being moved from 2026 to 2025 that finished up early.

2:36

This is the same plan that was presented at the previous study session.

2:41

With that, um we've I went ahead and presented the 10-year plan here because the original five-year plan could not um contain the the plan as was in the previous year due to the the reduction of the sales tax.

2:56

And so in order to be able to show those projects being pushed off into further years, I wanted to be able to kind of show how that would look potentially.

3:05

And um I'm open to any questions or guidance that y'all may have on this.

3:11

Okay, thank you.

3:12

Thank you very much.

3:12

This time we will uh go to the board.

3:15

Are there any questions?

3:17

Director Newmart, you recognize Ben, thanks for sending this and thanks for the the corrected item.

3:23

You know, I originally looked at this and and I I had a couple concerns, but let's let's uh just kind of level set for everybody.

3:30

This the funding for this CIP comes from where?

3:33

This is all the sales and use tax, which is the five eighths.

3:37

So we've we've got you got some uh one percent um at the beginning of the year, and then once we made that adjustment, it's five eighth cents.

3:44

So that's correct.

3:45

You can see that on the uh 2025 um item where I've shown the one percent, which went through, I believe it was uh May.

3:52

Okay, and then dropped off.

3:54

Right.

3:55

So where we were getting about 30 million, we're going forward, we'll get about 18 million a year to be able to fund um streets and and drainage projects.

4:04

So um I look uh as I was looking at this, I kind of I was I was going back and forth a little bit because there there is at the beginning of 25, there's 51 million dollars there.

4:14

So that's carry over from from some uh from previous years, and then also the the combination of the one percent and the five eight percent for the for the year.

4:23

So it leaves us with a total total funds available is 74 million.

4:28

Um looks like we're spending the expenditures are about 26 million, 27 million, actually.

4:34

And so it's so it looks like we got 27 million, 30 million, 30 million.

4:37

Uh and I was looking at this and I was just having some questions and concerns about you know the spin down of that, but in reality, these are these are sales tax funds, the citizen the expectation is we spend those dollars.

4:48

Correct.

4:48

And the the expectation is we're not carrying over more money than we should.

4:54

Um because the citizen the expectation is the citizens want this money spent.

5:00

Right.

5:00

So we're we're care we're carrying over a large fund balance, 51 million.

5:05

But in reality, when we get into later years, is this fund or as we get into the the remaining 10 years on this, uh we'll be spending at about 18 to 19 actually in in 35.

5:18

We're projecting if no if no major change happens, we're projecting about 20 million dollars.

5:24

So we start to see that increase as we go.

5:26

So I think that's important to understand.

5:29

I just had some questions about the the larger spend in the in the beginning of the of the the first few years, but it makes sense.

5:36

We want to spend what the citizens have asked us to spend in terms of all of these items.

5:41

So I think that's important for folks to understand and to know.

5:44

So when they see um spending of 30 and and you know some odd million when we don't have that much, we've got some we're trying to spin that down into the projects that the that the people want.

5:55

So um I wanted to make sure that everybody's aware of that.

5:58

And then um, so we're not we're not proposing any new street overlays in 26.

6:05

Is that correct?

6:06

Correct.

6:07

Uh I mean there's no new projects really in 26.

6:11

We're basically catching up with what we've done from 23, 24, and 25, and then we're going to reassess with a um uh one of the line items for one of the new projects was to go back and reevaluate the roads.

6:24

Um with that they'll reevaluate roads, sidewalks, signs into account to see you know how we're doing on everything.

6:29

And we do that typically every you know, two, three, four years, depending on what the cycle is.

6:34

But when's the last time we did that?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure████████████████16%
Parks and Recreation█████████████13%
Solid Waste Management███████████11%
Public Engagement████████8%
Community Engagement███████7%
Procurement██████6%
Fiscal Sustainability█████5%
Transportation Safety█████5%
Budget Equity Analysis████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Miss City Board of Directors Study Session - October 28, 2025

The City of Fort Smith Board of Directors convened for a study session on October 28, 2025, to review five departmental Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) spanning streets, public works, parks, solid waste, and transit. A significant portion of the discussion focused on fiscal constraints resulting from a reduction in sales tax revenue, staffing challenges, and controversial infrastructure projects, specifically the Parrot Island water slides and the proposed indoor sports complex. The board also initiated a discussion on a new ordinance to increase oversight of major capital projects exceeding $500,000 not included in existing CIPs.

Consent Calendar

  • The board acknowledged the presentation of the five departmental CIPs (Streets, Public Works, Parks, Solid Waste, and Transit) as routine informational items.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Andy Postrick: Expressed support for the Unified Development Ordinance and the sidewalk programs; sought clarification on the Jenny Lind extension project.
  • Bridget Duncan: Expressed concern regarding traffic safety at the intersection of South and North 21st Street and Rogers Avenue, noting it as a five-way merge causing frequent accidents; suggested removing the South D Street access to reduce conflict points.
  • Kim Fodge: Expressed opposition to the city providing a $500,000 lease guarantee for the proposed indoor sports complex, arguing it should be a private endeavor during budget deficits; raised questions regarding the unexplained financial deficit and unpaid invoices at Parrot Island, demanding monthly financial transparency.
  • David Roberts: Expressed disappointment regarding the additional $2 million cost to install the Parrot Island water slides, questioning the need for further city funding; expressed full protection of Parks Department funds, stating voters did not approve them for non-park uses like slide installation.
  • Dan Williams: Expressed opposition to further funding for the water slides and emphasized the need for board accountability regarding leadership statements made during previous votes.
  • Richard Medford: Expressed concern that leadership focusing on entertainment projects (slides, convention center) neglects critical infrastructure (water, sewer, drainage); asked for transparency regarding the outcomes of the recent trip to the state capital.
  • Quentin Cunningham: Expressed full support for the proposed ordinance regarding capital project reviews; requested clarification on definitions between "essential" (emergency) and "non-essential" projects; supported the public comment regarding unsafe intersections on 21st Street; expressed strong opposition to the city prioritizing tourism projects (slides) over social services for vulnerable populations, including the homeless.
  • Molly Ancheveria: Expressed criticism of Director Good's conduct during a moment of silence for Charlie Kirk, stating that while personal opinions on politics are valid, walking out was a breach of decorum and professionalism; demanded the board hold leadership accountable for maintaining civility.
  • Crystal Cadelli: Expressed concern over the city's ten-million-dollar deficit while proposing significant spending on the slides and sports complex; criticized the lack of transparency regarding conflict of interests related to the sports complex and the convention center subsidy.
  • Chris Cadelli: Expressed opposition to taxpayer subsidies for the sports complex, citing a lack of private investment interest; criticized the reaction to a FOIA request regarding a potential conflict of interest, suggesting the public was treated poorly.
  • Talisha Richardson: Expressions of support for public servants, specifically directing praise to Ward II Director Good; emphasized the need for civility and respect for elected officials regardless of differing political views or the events of the Charlie Kirk memorial.

Discussion Items

  • Streets CIP (Ben Marts, Engineering):
    • Ben Marts presented a 10-year plan, noting that due to a reduction in sales tax revenue, the plan was extended from five to ten years to accommodate delayed projects. Annual revenue was stated to have dropped from $30 million to approximately $18 million.
    • Director Josh Gassavis noted the carry-over fund balance of $51 million but emphasized citizen expectation to spend sales tax dollars rather than hoarding funds.
    • Director Neil Martin expressed concern that without new overlays, the backlog of street repairs will continue to grow; requested clarification on the evaluation process for street resurfacing to ensure targeted spending rather than arbitrary scheduling.
    • Director Christina Savage asked about the methodology for rating streets; Marts confirmed a rating project utilizing camera technology to measure cracks for ABCDEF ratings.
    • Director Neil Martin questioned the method of street selection, stating it appeared resources were spent simply because money was available rather than on streets actually needing work; Director Kemp agreed, urging a focus on heavily traveled corridors.
  • Towson Avenue Transfer (Maggie, Director Kamp):
    • The board discussed the potential for the city to acquire Towson Avenue from the state. Administration clarified that DOT is reconstructing the roadway, and the city plans to take ownership of the finished product.
    • Director Gassavis questioned the benefit and cost of state acquisition, noting a $4 million figure for roadway work and high utility costs.
    • Administration noted that water line infrastructure issues may be resolved as a positive factor if the lines pre-date the roadway construction.
    • Director Kemp and the Mayor raised concerns about burying power lines on Towson Avenue, similar to the project on Rogers Avenue, due to the volume of overhead lines.
  • Public Works CIP (Matt Meeker):
    • Meeker presented a 10-year plan for vehicle replacement and a 2026 sidewalk program.
    • Director Kemp inquired about the fate of retired assets; Meeker explained assets go to a reserve fleet or are auctioned if not needed.
    • Funding sources were confirmed to include state turn-back money (fuel taxes), property taxes, and sidewalk assessment fees.
  • Parks & Recreation CIP (Sarah Deucer):
    • Deucer presented the FY 26-30 CIP, highlighting a $5.1 million project for the May Branch Greenway and a $75,000 shade sail for the Riverfront skate park.
    • Director Kemp asked about shelter materials; Deucer confirmed wood pavilions will no longer be used in favor of more durable options, though shade sails may be used for smaller structures.
    • Discussion regarding the "Portland Lou" (a portable restroom concept) indicated it is not a definitive decision but is being explored for the farmers market to reduce costs compared to permanent restrooms.
    • Director Kamp expressed concern over the cost and sustainability of the tennis court resurfaking project, confirming that a complete concrete overlay is planned for the lower courts.
    • The board discussed the ACME Brick property; Deucer stated the department has no funding for new development on that site and is prioritizing retention/detention ponds and potential parcel sales.
  • Solid Waste CIP (Dwayne McDonald):
    • McDonald presented a plan to replace five trash trucks, landfill equipment (bulldozer, excavator), and routing/scale systems.
    • The routing system was noted as expired due to poor performance; the team utilized manual operations temporarily.
    • Director Camp clarified that the skid steer replacement cost on the highlighted sheet is listed at $105,000, accounting for potential tariffs and price increases from the initial $93,000 estimate.
    • McDonald confirmed the CIP is fully funded by the Solid Waste Sinking Fund and does not currently factor in rate increases.
  • Transit Asset Management Plan (Ken Savage):
    • Savage outlined a plan for $9.6 million in investments over five years, with an estimated $1.2 million local match required from the general fund beyond existing revenues.
    • Director Kemp sought clarification on the local match amount, confirming the $1.2 million figure after budget adjustments.
  • New Ordinance Discussion (Director Christina Savage):
    • Director Savage proposed an ordinance requiring a study session review for any new major capital project over $500,000 not previously on a CIP or budget.
    • The intent was to prevent surprise approvals like the Parrot Island slides; Director Gassavis and others agreed with the need for guardrails but questioned if CIP items already presented to the board would require a redundant study session.
    • Director Kemp suggested focusing on non-CIP items initially to build consensus and allow for a seven-day waiting period.
    • The board agreed to review the draft further and target moving the ordinance for adoption at the November 18th meeting.
  • Budget Hearing Schedule:
    • The board voted 4-0 to reschedule the November 14th budget hearing to Monday, November 17th, at 8:30 PM.

Key Outcomes

  • Motion Adopted: The Board of Directors voted 4-0 to move the November 14th budget hearing to Monday, November 17th, at 8:30 PM.
  • Ordinance Direction: The board agreed to refine the draft ordinance regarding capital project oversight (for new non-CIP items over $500,000) and place it on the agenda for the November 18th meeting.
  • CIP Review: Five departmental CIPs (Streets, Public Works, Parks, Solid Waste, Transit) were presented and reviewed for informational purposes; no final votes were cast on the approved plans during this study session.
  • Public Comment Follow-up: The board agreed to take public comments regarding the intersection at 21st and Rogers Avenue under advisory with the Streets Department.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening and welcome to the fourth Miss City Board of Directors Study Session on this October 28th 2025. These meetings are being televised live for the benefit of residents who cannot be here with us in person. Uh today at this time we will go right to the first item on the agenda. Thank you. Yes, sir. This evening the board will be reviewing five departmental capital improvement plans. A capital improv improvement plan is a tool used to schedule and prioritize major projects over several years. The first CIP plan that will be reviewed is for streets, bridges, and associated drainage, and coming to the microphone is Ben Marts, who is the NM interim director of our engineering department. Hello. I apologize. Okay. So you all have already seen this plan. There's been it's basically the exact same plan that y'all saw during the study session. Um the I think there's two items on there, one dealing with um right of way abandonment around the airport, and also general and extension that are the two added items, but other than that, uh with the exception of items being moved from 2026 to 2025 that finished up early. This is the same plan that was presented at the previous study session. With that, um we've I went ahead and presented the 10-year plan here because the original five-year plan could not um contain the the plan as was in the previous year due to the the reduction of the sales tax. And so in order to be able to show those projects being pushed off into further years, I wanted to be able to kind of show how that would look potentially. And um I'm open to any questions or guidance that y'all may have on this. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. This time we will uh go to the board. Are there any questions? Director Newmart, you recognize Ben, thanks for sending this and thanks for the the corrected item. You know, I originally looked at this and and I I had a couple concerns, but let's let's uh just kind of level set for everybody. This the funding for this CIP comes from where? This is all the sales and use tax, which is the five eighths. So we've we've got you got some uh one percent um at the beginning of the year, and then once we made that adjustment, it's five eighth cents. So that's correct. You can see that on the uh 2025 um item where I've shown the one percent, which went through, I believe it was uh May. Okay, and then dropped off. Right. So where we were getting about 30 million, we're going forward, we'll get about 18 million a year to be able to fund um streets and and drainage projects. So um I look uh as I was looking at this, I kind of I was I was going back and forth a little bit because there there is at the beginning of 25, there's 51 million dollars there. So that's carry over from from some uh from previous years, and then also the the combination of the one percent and the five eight percent for the for the year. So it leaves us with a total total funds available is 74 million. Um looks like we're spending the expenditures are about 26 million, 27 million, actually. And so it's so it looks like we got 27 million, 30 million, 30 million. Uh and I was looking at this and I was just having some questions and concerns about you know the spin down of that, but in reality, these are these are sales tax funds, the citizen the expectation is we spend those dollars. Correct. And the the expectation is we're not carrying over more money than we should. Um because the citizen the expectation is the citizens want this money spent. Right. So we're we're care we're carrying over a large fund balance, 51 million. But in reality, when we get into later years, is this fund or as we get into the the remaining 10 years on this, uh we'll be spending at about 18 to 19 actually in in 35. We're projecting if no if no major change happens, we're projecting about 20 million dollars. So we start to see that increase as we go. So I think that's important to understand. I just had some questions about the the larger spend in the in the beginning of the of the the first few years, but it makes sense. We want to spend what the citizens have asked us to spend in terms of all of these items. So I think that's important for folks to understand and to know.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com