Good evening.

Good evening and welcome to the city of Force Ridge Board of Directors meeting on this March seventeenth of twenty twenty-six.

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

At this time, I'm going to ask uh Director Neil Martin, would you do the invocation for us?

And Director uh Christina Kasavish, would you leave us in a pledge?

Let's pray.

Father, thank you for the opportunity to be here tonight to make decisions for the city of Fort Smith.

Lord, we always ask for wisdom and guidance from you, Lord.

I pray that you would um impart uh intellect and and um correct information into our brains, Lord, so we can make decisions that will move our city forward.

Lord, I pray that you be those that come and speak before the board.

Lord, we pray for wisdom for them.

We pray for um courage.

And Lord, we just we're thankful for all that you do for us each and every day.

And Lord, we're we're thankful for your son who uh who died on the cross for our sins, Father.

We love you, we thank you.

We ask these things in your name.

Amen.

And to the Republic for which stands one nation under God and the visible with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, thank you.

Uh that have any item of business not already on the agenda for this meeting for this meeting.

Okay.

Seeing none, we'll ask for approval of the March third regular minute.

So moved second.

Thank you.

All in favor.

Thank you.

As a reminder, a motion and second to adopt each of the following items must be offered before director's comments are made.

Also, public comments on items must pertain to the presented item.

This time we will go to the first item on the agenda.

Thank you, Mayor.

The first item tonight is a resolution reinstating mosquito fogging operations by the public works department.

This topic was discussed at the February 24th study session, and the board placed a resolution on this evening's agenda for consideration.

The city performed mosquito spraying for many years but discontinued the program in 2025 due to budgetary considerations.

There has been discussion on both sides of this issue the past few years.

Some residents favor the program for control of nuisance and potential disease carrying mosquitoes, while others contend that the chemicals used have detrimental effects on residents, pets, pollinators, and other beneficial insects or the environment in general.

Board members have recently received feedback from residents opposing discontinuing the program, which has led to this consideration.

Okay, thank you very much.

Are they any citizens' comments, Madam Clerk?

Yes, we do have two that have signed in.

The first being Nancy Rainey.

And then she has also provided some information that I'm passing out.

Okay, Ms.

Rainey, you're recognized.

Nancy Rainey, 8108, Adam Drive, Fort Smith, 72903.

Good evening, and thank you for giving me time to talk about item number one on the agenda, citywide permethrin spraying.

As we head into spring and summer, our city will face rising complaints about mosquitoes because of concerns about mosquito porn illnesses.

While the goal of reducing mosquito populations is understandable, the blanket approach of using this insecticide carries significant unintended consequences for our local environment and public health.

This includes essential pollinators like bees and butterflies, as well as the natural predators of mosquitoes such as dragonflies and damselflies.

By killing these predators, we risk creating a rebound effect where mosquito populations actually surge once the chemical wears off because their natural checks and balances have been wiped out.

It also impacts bird populations that rely on insects as their primary food source, particularly during nesting season when birds might use permethrin uh coated nesting materials, which causes weak eggs and bird illnesses.

From a health perspective, while it's safe for treating clothing, large-scale aerial or truck spraying increases the risk of inhalation and accidental exposure for residents and pets.

There are better ways we should prioritize integrated pest management, focusing on larval control in standing water and encouraging residents to use personal protection.

Let's choose a path that protects our community without poisoning our yards.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you very much.

Next we have Kim Fodge.

Good evening.

I think that while this city should be responsible for spraying the public uh parks and other entities, I don't think it's the city's responsibility to spray private properties.

Um if individual properties have issues with mosquitoes, I think it's their responsibility to spray their own property.

Um Mr.

Meeker had mentioned previously that there's an issue.

Some properties don't want their houses sprayed, other properties do, so it's hit and miss, and we can just kind of rectify that by not spraying private properties at all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And last we have Gary Podgerski.

Good evening, members of the board.

Mr.

Dingman, is this the one?

I'm sorry, I'm getting some feedback.

Is this the uh one plan to spray the entire city, or are we looking at the hit and missing they they will reinstate spraying on the entire city with the exception for it for folks who have uh requested to be on the no spray zone?

Is that correct, Matt, or is it intended to be for the whole city?

Okay.

I I had intended initially about the whole city, but uh based on feedback that I got during the based on feedback I got during the uh uh study session, uh uh basically it was there will be reinstating the no spray list.

Thank you.

Okay, so I told a couple of you let the study session a mosquito can fly one to three miles.

Okay.

Whether we like it or not, Fort Smith has a river running through it.

It's a mosquito breeding ground.

I'm fully in favor of spraying in and around the rivers, and then around the water areas and around the little ponds, but I don't think we need to do the city for the reasons that these lovely ladies have said, in addition to the cost factor.

So that's my my opinion.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

That's all for item one.

Okay, thank you.

Some second.

Okay.

We have a motion.

This time we'll go to board member comments.

Uh Director Good, you recognize.

Okay, I'll start.

Um, you know, dealt with this several times through over the years, and I seconded um to put this up for discussion, because I think there needs to be quite a bit of discussion from the board, because it's obvious that we're not going to satisfy everyone's desire uh to either not spray or to spray, you know, even partially spraying, as Mr.

Miko alluded to, is going to be difficult if we have a hodgepodge of of homes in an area that we're skipping and we're having to keep track of who to spray and who not to spray.

Um there's just a whole lot to consider.

So give you a little bit of background where we were several years ago when we were talking about this, you know, one of the issues we were talking about were for natural prohibitants, uh, such as bats.

So the city actually installed some bat houses at uh care at Carolina Cross Park.

Um in the conversation, you know, people were concerned about you know bats oppose bat bites opposed to mosquito bites, particularly their pets and children.

So again, there's a lot of people for a lot of people against.

So this is just one of those issues that we know that we're not going to be able to please everybody.

So I am very much concerned about the lack of uh knowledge that that we've used, well, not lack of nodular lack of knowledge that that well, yeah, that we use in making a decision, uh, particularly when it comes to what this pesticide does to other insects, needed insects.

You know, I actually talked to uh a couple of people that have beehives.

I know the majority of people don't, but I do know several people that do.

And in a matter of a week, you know, this pesticide that we spray, you know, can kill you know a hive.

You know, I for one like lightning bugs around my house and butterflies and ladybugs, but also live uh by sudden pond, you know, which is a breeding ground, which has a stream running through it because it's part of a drainage easement.

And we have drainage easements all around the town, particularly the north side is a very low-lying area, so we have a whole lot of areas that hold water, which of course infestation grounds for mosquitoes.

So even though there's plenty of answers out there, alternative measures, I just wanted to open this up for board discussion.

Okay, thank you.

Uh directed George DeSavage.

Let me is it possible to spray targeted areas that are complaint driven and not everything?

I I mean we can do that, yes.

Um you're gonna run into the same issue any way you do it because you're gonna run into issues with your spraying in certain areas where people complain.

There may be people complaining because you are spraying, but I mean uh it's something that can be done, yes, we can do that.

Which would save money in the long run, wouldn't it?

Yeah, it's because we'd be using less chemical, yes.

So if there's a complaint for say uh village harbor.

Would you spray the all of Billage Harbor or just that area that's complaining?

Just the houses in that area that are having trouble by the Well, uh it's something we haven't I mean, we haven't discussed this really yet until now, doing this targeted spraying per se, I mean, and how that what that would look like.

But I mean, I would think we would spray like if somebody complained in a certain street that we might spray a street instead of just spraying the whole neighborhood.

Right.

I mean, because Ms.

Fodge, I think she, you know, she had a good point.

And I just uh you know, I I I'm really torn on this.

It's just uh you know, I don't know if we need to study it some more before we vote or not.

I I don't know.

But uh I'll just leave it at that right now.

Okay.

Director Rigo.

Thank you, Mayor.

And uh, you know, I certainly acknowledge um that this is one of those topics, I mean this is a top three thing I've heard on, and I would say the feedback is split very uh much down the middle, maybe 55, 45, one direction or the other.

And you know, I obviously was one of the people that was in the minority for retaining this last year.

Um I I will say I think it's important to to reflect on that when you look at the people are speaking out about the uh possible harms with the bee population or pollinators or the bat population.

This was something we did with regularity in our community from the mid-1960s until last year.

You know, has there been a noticeable improvement with the bees or the pollinators or the bats not having done it for a year?

I think that's uh question that's worth keeping on the mind.

And then, you know, it's it's just interesting because so much of this is is anecdotal.

I live on a street uh four uh eight house dead end street, four on each side, and the that mosquito truck uh up until last year always trundled with regularity uh down our street uh and lightning bugs were every night, much to the delight of my children.

So it I think this is one where um people are going to be able to point to things that prove their preference one way or the other.

And this is one of those situations where we have to think of a a broader responsibility that comes with having to to try to do something to address the mosquito population, and also the recognition that we just stopped doing something that had been done since the mid-1960s, and there are going to be consequences from a mosquito standpoint uh because of that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Well, I wonder instead of forcing this on people who don't want it, should we instead of spraying the whole city and letting people opt out, should we let people opt in the ones that want it?

Would that be easier?

I I don't know that it would be easier because I think what we we have uh what we've seen here at least in in the past uh year, I think there's probably more there there's definit a strong contingent that doesn't want it, and there's a strong contingent that wants it, but I do think the the contingent that wants it is somewhat more, and it might be easier to exclude people than to opt-in people.

But I mean we we we can do it either way.

Uh however the board wants us to do it.

I mean, that's that's the way we're gonna do it.

So thank you.

Director Neil Moore.

So I remember when we we made the decision to go away from this, it was primarily budgetary.

So we we in 24, I think we we made the decision to to go against it.

Part of the information that you shared with us is that drivers were being threatened.

You know, we had drivers being threatened that were driving around spraying this stuff.

So, you know, I think those things still exist.

I think there's still budgetary concerns as it relates to the 2026 budget.

We um made some pretty specific uh difficult cuts across the board.

And um we still are trying to uh be positive in 2026, but we're already not there.

We've already gone negative in terms of uh slides tonight in terms of spaying neuter vouchers, which we I you know we saw a long-term benefit out of that carryovers and carry forward.

So we're we're already going negative.

So we're where we tried to be balanced, we're not.

We're not anymore.

So this just adds to that.

Um, uh in and many people that reached out to me.

They they said getting it through the spray is not the most effective way.

Doing it at the larva larva at the larvae level is the way to do it, which that this this spray doesn't get.

We still have no data.

Either way we have no data.

We have no data that says this this works that this has decreased the amount of of uh mosquito population.

I would love to be able to get that data but in lack of data to me it doesn't make sense to to do something when we don't know the output.

You you can't uh you uh what's as the old saying go you can't uh you can't measure something unless you actually collect the data for it and and we don't necessarily have that so um so I'm still a no I've been a no the whole time on this one and I think this is the smart choice for citizens.

I posted something out today on Facebook and I was really surprised I did it on my lunch hour and I got back to my phone like almost at four o'clock and it was so many people saying don't do it don't do it don't do it.

And you know we're we're hearing that tonight.

So I'm a no and I'll be a no on this one appreciate your your work Matt and uh and but I don't think this is the right thing for us.

Director Kemp Thank you mayor uh thank you Mr.

Meeker for standing here tonight and answering questions.

I think um I'm in agreement with Director Martin on this that you know data and there is um I had a my barista this morning uh did a deep dive into this and he's of high interest into this conversation and sent I think you and probably sent you an email he sent me.

Yeah the same guy okay good yeah Alan's a great guy and Alan uh and I even talked on the way to the meeting and I just I said man I wish you could be here and he said I'm sorry I've got to work till 730 tonight but he pointed out that UALR uh University of Argus Little Rock has a group that is studying mosquitoes especially mosquitoes in Arkansas and but he had a bunch of data a lot of research to share with me and he was pointing out that this is only going to address the biding age of this and not really getting to the issue and he brought up some good ideas of even going back to the GSI maps uh GIS maps that are out there and looking at identifying low areas in addition to along river edge properties uh places that are flood prone within the community or have standing water and increasing and standing up more larvacide eff uh efforts or even planting plants that will draw in dragonflies to the ecosystem but you know in his fairness he was even saying that he would not necessarily stand in opposition to spraying but that don't just use what we have and don't go buy more chemical until we've had more research and data and I think to that effort as this or as this item stands tonight I'm a no but in the spirit of what Alan has talked to me about if it was targeted to what would be identified as from the GIS map as low areas or river or focusing on those particular areas only I could be for that but uh as it stands as far as just blanketing the city and then from a personal standpoint even as a kid I remember uh in Fort Smith that that truck coming and you're on your bike with your friends and immediately thinking hey I think I should go inside right now like I don't know if I should stand outside and I know we've talked about you know the how we dilute it and try to be safety and conscious minded but even mentally I thought I don't know if I should be breathing this and so for me uh I'm a no as it sits here tonight uh for me personally thank you director good thank you mayor Matt um do we I'm sorry do we dilute um uh our chemical such that it does not affect mosquito lava larvae and water because what I read what I was sent also is that what we use does actually kill the larvae.

Well no what what we're what we use we have larvacide tablets available for people but what we use in our fogging operations is an adulticide and so it's only kills the adult materials but it is diluted it's not straight product okay and so uh it is diluted to uh set them out you know based on the manufacturer's recommendations okay okay thank you I appreciate that second I wanted to make a comment on um public perception you know um what what I found is a lot of the people that I've spoken to that are in favor of spraying pretty much just want to know or want us to know that they are taxpaying citizens and that they want to know that we're doing something for uh their benefit um I and I don't know if maybe announcing it first might have been a better idea but people want to see that we are doing something with taxpayer dollars uh in in in ways other than just street fire safety public safety any other comments directly I'm sorry go ahead thank you I just had a question uh in the budget realm uh if if Andy was available uh to answer question you know so so the in our materials we talk about you know the budget information budget out of the public works street maintenance fund if we were to proceed uh with this tonight

Any other comments?

Director Rego, I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

I just had a question uh in the budget realm, uh, if if Andy was available uh to answer question.

You know, so the in our materials we talk about you know the budget information budget out of the public works street maintenance fund.

If we were to proceed uh with this tonight, Andy, you know, is this is this going to take us out of balance, if you will, you know, the the uh comments have been made around um operational balance.

Can you speak to that please?

Uh in particular with the street maintenance fund.

I mean we're spending a lot of capital out of that fund.

I think we were spending up the fund balance, so we weren't necessarily in total in balance per se.

Uh from an operating perspective, I can't say for sure, but I would think that our operating numbers would still be in balance for street maintenance fund with the 150,000 included.

But we're spending, you know, we're we're we're buying equipment and uh you know doing street equipment out of that fund, using up that fund balance in 26.

Sure.

Director, I think I misspoke on that.

That you're it is coming out of the street maintenance fund, not the not the general fund.

So we're still spending the dollars, it's just not out of the general fund.

So I I didn't misspeak on that.

Thank you.

Thank you for the clarification.

I mean, is there, and I wanted to ask, would there um well I guess I would uh kind of sensing where some of the commentary is going, but also not wishing to you know have nothing moving forward.

I mean, is there I think I'll make a motion uh to amend what we have here in front of us to um focus on the um on spraying in the the public park areas and then uh directing staff as well to look at you know present us with some options for GIS uh mapping, perhaps along the riverfront or main waterways, um, so that we could still do some beneficial work, but you know, perhaps focus it on the areas of of greatest need.

So I mean I'll make a motion to amend it.

I'll second that before before you do that, uh Director Settle was in the queue.

Sorry, we had a couple of people in the queue directory.

That's fine.

I sorry about that, folks.

Um I was actually going to bring the same thing up.

Um my in-laws live next to a uh city waterway, uh, and it's concrete and and they have a high mosquito.

And one thing I heard all past past year is about the mosquitoes.

So maybe what you're bringing up is kind of what I was gonna do is do we do something and then figure out where those waterways are, those water paths, and determine if they're if they're high probability.

It's not just gonna be particularly on the riverfront, it's gonna be Little Creek, it's gonna be inner waterway uh drainage areas uh over by Kimmons is part of it where that's where they live at.

So maybe that's kind of where you're going with that, and I think that'd be an acceptable option and uh start with public parks and then we branch off on the Africa as needed or necessary.

So thank you, Mayor.

Director Christina Savage.

So I I agree with that.

I was gonna make a motion that we provide this as a service to people who opt in to it.

So residents that want that service, they they're paying taxes, they want those tax dollars used that way, they can opt in to do it.

Could we add that to your motion as well?

And we'll see how that goes.

And we've we've gotten a lot of communication around this.

It's it's been pretty evenly um split, I think, from what what I've seen.

So there are residents who want that, and I'm fine with letting them you know opt in to have that service.

So could we include that with your motion as well?

Yes.

Director Rigo, you want to make your motion?

So that's the question.

I would just make a motion to uh combine um I'll remake the motion, I suppose, uh, to focus efforts on the uh public parts, parks, and congregation spaces, spaces, uh main waterway, thoroughfares, and then also provide a opt-in uh option for residents in other parts of the community who uh can reach out to the city and indicate that they would like a service provided to them.

You want the GIS GIS for the waterways, right?

Yes, but come back and tell us what those areas are okay.

Okay.

I'll I'll second that.

Okay, we've got a motion to second.

Um is there any further discussion?

Madam Crook want to call the roll.

This is for the amendment.

For the amendment.

Directors Rego?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Kemp?

Yes.

George Get Savage?

Yes.

Christina Kitsavis.

Yes.

Settled.

Yes.

Martin.

Okay.

No.

Motion passes.

Six in favor and one opposed.

Okay.

And I'd make a motion to pass the resolution as amended.

Second.

Okay.

If there's no discussion, Madam Clerk, please call the royal.

Director's good.

Yes.

Kemp?

Yes.

George Kit Savis.

Christina Kit Savis.

Yes.

Settled?

Yes.

Martin?

No.

Rego?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Six in favor and one opposed.

Thank you very much.

Mr.

Sam will go to item number two.

Item two is a request by the public works department to appropriate funds for the purchase of an additional AMR mobile meter reading setup.

The city currently has three such systems with no spare.

All three systems are required for the timely and efficient reading of the AMR meters.

So any time one of the systems must be down for repairs or upgrades, the overall billing schedule suffers.

Adding a fourth unit will allow a backup unit that can be used when repairs or updates are needed and ensure that three units are always available.

Mr.

Meeker may have further comment and we'll answer questions from the board.

Matt, do you have any comments you'd like to add?

No, uh administrator Dieman covered everything.

So thank you very much.

Madam Clerk, while they need public comments.

None indicating.

Okay.

We need a motion to adopt the ordinance.

So move second.

Thank you.

Any comments from the board?

I'm sorry, who moved and who seconded?

Got it.

Any comments from the board?

Please call the board.

Directors Kemp.

Yes.

George Kit Savis?

Yes.

Christina Kit Savis.

Yes.

Settled.

Yes.

Martin?

Yes.

Rico?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

It's approved.

Seven in favor and zero opposed.

Item three.

Items 3A and 3B relate to the construction of water slides at Pearl Island Water Park.

These items are the result of a competitive bidding process where sealed bids were accepted separately for the concrete and construction components of the installation and for the aquatics equipment and piping components on March 5th.

The bids were discussed at the March 10th study session, and the board advanced these items to this agenda for consideration.

Item 3A is acceptance of the bid and approval of a contract with SSI Incorporated for the concrete and construction portion of the project in the total amount inclusive of payment and port inclusive of a payment and performance bond of $1,751,910.

Item 3B is acceptance of the bid and approval of the contract with clarity pools for the aquatics equipment and piping portion of the project and the total amount inclusive of a payment and performance bond of $664,200.

The combined total amount of $2,416,110 is within the amount identified and appropriated for this project.

And this work will combine with the contract approved with CSM waterworks last year to install the slides and get them operational.

Remaining funds allocated to this project will be used for items such as fencing, sidewalks, landscaping, third-party inspections, or other items that will be needed to complete the project.

With that stand for questions from the board.

Okay, thank you.

At this time we'll ask for comments from citizens.

And each will have two minutes.

Good evening.

Before any work is performed, I think the city needs to vote on whether or not they want to agree to the county no longer bearing responsibility for the park and uh the city taking on full responsibility for ownership.

So until anything that agreement is passed, I think any work or any construction on these water slides needs to halt.

We should not bear the full responsibility when we only own half the park.

Thank you.

Madam Clark.

Next we have Joey McCutcheon.

Thank you.

I agree with what Ms.

Fodge just said.

I also want to talk about two two things, two processes, and that's trust and that's transparency.

And uh frankly, both have been damaged during this conversation.

However, well-meaning Director Kemp was when you don't have competitive bidding, it uh it undermines trust.

It gives us the perception that something's going on.

Uh we know that we know that you know there it wasn't just Royal Ridge.

Now we know that that three local companies, SSI, Steve uh Beam Construction, and Royal Ridge all submitted competitive bidding.

And we also learned from transparency from having these public discussions that uh just looking at the bonding, I believe Director Kat Savis spoke to that.

Um for SSI, uh Steve Beam, 19,000, and a whopping 88,000 dollars uh for from uh for Royal Ridge, and that that tells that should tell the board why we need uh an open process because what that indicates is is that uh that's a premium.

I mean, that's a risk premium, and that could expose citizens to danger.

Uh if we go with Royal Ridge and the things collapses and kills our citizens, I mean there but but I think trust and transparency is what we need to re-establish uh in Fort Smith.

Uh I appreciate the board reconsidering and and doing competitive bidding.

We need to do competitive bidding in all projects.

That's transparency.

Thank you.

Next we have Dan Williams.

Good evening, board.

Uh July 2024 is when this started.

There was 50 people in here against it, and y'all went ahead and did it.

Transparency is a key.

We're learning things today and continue to learn things that wasn't talked about then.

Um the definition of ignorance is not knowing what's going on and making decisions out of not knowing.

Um there's this other definition called stupidity, and that's being ignorant on purpose, and that's where we're at.

It's very sad to see, and it's very hard to talk about like this because I believe our citizens in this city deserve better.

And I feel like y'all will continue to vote and out of complete stupidity.

And it's it's so hard, it's so much affecting our community.

And everybody I talk to says the same thing.

They want to be able to trust, they want things to be different.

And you would think we would after two years we could get to a solution.

Uh, but still we don't have the transparency, and we still really at this point don't even know how the process was laid out like it.

But in 2024, we were going to spend 2.1 million dollars.

September 3rd, it went up to 4.2.

The board voted on it, okay.

Not everybody, it was four to three.

In 2026, we had uh this other vote that we looked at, but it was based on uh on this idea of getting bids and not really going through the proper channels again, and that's another transparency thing.

When are we gonna get it right?

When are we gonna get it right?

Um well, I'll tell you when I believe when citizens vote some of y'all to the street back to do things that y'all need to be doing.

If you really cared, you would really listen.

There was a lot of people here that that night, two years ago, that said no, but we had someone say it's just a drop in the bucket.

Well, guess what?

It keeps dropping and it keeps adding up.

So do the right thing, don't do it.

So they're not wrong.

Next we have Shane McKinney.

Hi everybody.

I want to thank you for supporting bats and uh more supportive of blood suckers than some of you let on, I suppose.

Uh so I think that was a good decision.

But that said, this water slide issue.

This is an opportunity for some of you to kind of end some suspicion and in some problems.

This has not been good for any of you.

This has not been good for my city.

There are serious issues of hundreds of millions of dollars, and we're caught up on just a few million because of the trust that was broken because of the transparency.

Um frankly, if I had a tenant who wasn't able to pay their rent, and I found out that they were putting lifts on their truck and fancy under lighting and all the fun stuff in life, when not taking care of their base essentials, not keeping the water bill turned on, that's the kind of tenant that I have to consider eviction.

And I think that's what you're feeling from a lot of the community, and I know some of you want to say this is a silent majority here, this is just or just a silent few, a silent minority or a loud minority or whatever the hell we say for it.

But um, there's a lot more people than this.

I'm talking to thousands of people online right now.

Um thousands and thousands and thousands.

It may feel like just a few people sitting in here.

But this isn't good for y'all.

And it's not good for us.

There's a time when you've sunk enough money into it and you can say, you know what?

Yeah, we tried it.

It wasn't a good deal after all.

Let's cut our losses and move forward.

You guys have another chance to do that.

You don't get that chance very often.

Most of the time, once you've decided to get like now you're stuck.

But you guys really can uh change this whole conversation.

And it only takes one of you to change their mind.

So which one of you would man up and do this?

Or a vampire up.

And last we have Gary Podgerski.

Wow, I get to go last.

Okay, so for those of you who may or may not know, I live in Ward 4.

So that's you, Director Gustavich, and I know your opinion on this.

Okay.

Do I?

I know your opinion on this event.

I also know that I have three at-large directors.

So that's Director Martin, Director Custavus.

I know both of your opinions and Director Settle.

I think I know your opinion as well.

So I'm going to ask the question to Director Suttle.

How many people have contacted you personally pro and against this issue?

Prover a thousand.

Easily.

And against 20.

Personally.

Not in this form personally.

So you're you're keep telling me that a thousand people.

Look, you asked my opinion.

No, I'm not asking your opinion.

I've had over a thousand people contact me over these.

Okay.

All right.

Wow.

That was the last for item three.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

This time we'll entertain a motion to adopt the resolutions.

So moved.

Is this for item 3A and 3B together?

We're gonna we're gonna bash these together.

Second.

I and B?

Yes.

We'll bash them together.

Okay.

Uh so we do have a motion and a second.

Okay.

This time we will entertain comments from the board.

Director Christina to say.

You know, Fayetteville, Fayetteville just passed a resolution authorizing their own aquatics facility.

And when we look at uh the visitor breakdown of who attends Parrot Island, I think for last year it was 71% of people out of town with over 30 percent of people coming from Northwest Arkansas.

So we've got to wonder what is that going to do to our attendance, our revenue.

Um, I I think we're gonna see a big drop in the coming year.

I you know maybe we could sell these slides to Fayetteville if we looked into that.

No?

Okay.

I think you know, I think I've talked this thing until I'm blue in the face.

I think you all all know how I feel about it.

Thank you.

You have a comment from the board.

Director George Cassette.

Kobe.

Kobe, let me ask you a question.

Originally, when the county and the city went 50-50 partnership on that, are you familiar with this at all?

I am familiar with the joint agreement between the county and the city that uh proceeded and led to the creation of Paradisland Water Park, yes.

Okay.

Now, since the city is paying the full amount of the slides, is the county there's still 50 percent partnership, aren't they?

That agreement has not been amended, correct.

No leases have been presented or anything.

Well, I I think one was discussed or proposed by the board or the quorum court, but to my knowledge, there's been no amendment to the arrangement by which the the parties are 50-50 joint joint owners of that facility.

So as this stands now, if say the water park does make money this year, are the county still entitled to the 50 percent of the profit?

Yes.

Even though we put up their 2.1 million or the the deal says the parties split the the net profits, they bear the cost uh equally.

So yes, that's the arrangement.

And then the split the losses are still split 50-50.

That's the arrangement, yes, sir.

Well, you know, Kobe, the the this thing from the get-go is just the biggest cluster I've ever seen.

You know, start at 2.1 million, then 4.2 million, now 7 million, it'll be another another million four said and done.

Um, I haven't supported it from the start.

I'm not changing my position.

I I I you know we'll time will time will tell.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you very much.

Any other Director Kent?

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I'm definitely not surprised.

Appreciate the discussion from people that I don't think this was a meeting about changing each other's minds.

It's about avoiding uh delay and moving forward without any unnecessary delay or risk of litigation.

The uh restructured competitive bid process for round two, there was a round one for round two, reiterated that this was still the best way to save the city money.

And I think it's great that we were able to do that without going with the first competitive bidding process.

A couple questions, just reiterate.

Uh when the prof the par the park makes profit, which my understanding is is roughly approximately a million dollars since it's been opened.

Uh it had a loss during COVID and it had a loss last year.

Doesn't both the county and the city leave the profits back into the parks fund?

That's correct, yes.

So I mean no no partner is taking it out of they're not taking their share of money and going home with it.

Correct.

Um is it also fair to say that both the county and the city are full 100 percent owners?

Yes.

Okay, so it's not really a 50-50 uh point.

You know, to the point of tenants who can't pay rent, it's not applicable.

I mean, there's not a bill that the city is refusing to pay here.

Um the comments when we talk about transparency, as much as that's a buzzword within American politics right now, all these comments were made in public.

Uh I shared in public that I was talking to a local contractor, which Director Martin acknowledged because the same person who reached out to him as well.

So the performance bond, when I asked him about that as well, because I agree, that is wildly higher than their competitors.

To the point that was made was we misread that form that is built into our cost, but it still doesn't award them the lowest bidder.

So it is a moot point, but it does not bring any sort of conspiracy to me that uh that needs to be explored any further.

And so when we talk about being transparent, it's being open to public scrutiny.

I think that process has been awarded here and and done, and I think at this point uh we move forward.

And then at this point, hopefully, by the ordinance that we voted unanimously on for all capital exceeding 100,000 to bring to a study session before a regular meeting, we'll slow down any future development such as this, I would hope, and uh would bring us to greater clarity.

Thank you.

Director Christina Savage.

Well, I would argue it is a 50-50 split because there's two owners equaling a hundred percent.

So it Jeff, when we had to replace those cast iron pipes, was that in 24?

What was the cost of that?

Was that like close to $800,000?

Yes, it was in it was in early 2024, the cost was in the 790,000 range, and we had about half of that uh built into the into the parks capital replacement fund from previous years uh.

But we had to take out of the general fund for that, didn't we?

Yes, we did.

When we we split the other half of that with the county and uh took our portion out of the general of the general fund, yes.

You know, when you look at insurance too, and we're paying the property insurance comes out of the general fund.

The the general liability comes out of the parks fund, but the the uh the property insurance, that's out of the general fund.

Right.

And we're with this being a seven million dollar project, it's nearly doubling what we've got out there, so it's effectively doubling our insurance cost.

That that's another thing we have to think about.

And then I'm told that there's more cast iron pipes that need to be replaced, and that'll be coming after this.

The the entire park was built with the cast iron fittings.

Uh the ones that have failed have were in the lazy river area, and those have been replaced.

The other ones haven't shown any signs of failure.

But they are still there, yes.

That's I was I was told differently, but I just want you know everybody to be aware so that we can make sure we're all operating with the same information.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Any other comments from the board?

Mayor, I have one more.

Yes.

Jeff, tell me some how did how did the park get away paying $40 a month water bill for months?

That was the the water meter was not operating correctly, and that was unknown.

Did we not read it monthly?

So it wasn't read in other words.

It was not registered as with usage.

That's correct.

So it's just reasonable.

Somebody reasonable would say, wait a minute, this isn't right.

That's that's correct.

It's not right.

I mean it was that was but it went on for months, though.

Correct.

Mayor, please call for order, please.

Call for order.

Director Josh Savage for appreciate you appreciate your director good.

That's fine.

Um so do you have any what the water bill runs now per month?

Kevin, anybody?

Right now it's running zero.

There's no I mean when it's open.

Typically when it's open, it's it is runs about well for the year is about 30,000 for the operating season.

For three months.

Well, for the operating season, which is probably closer to four or five months.

So 10,000 a month for the little test and town.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Director Kemp.

Thank you for that.

And I think those are valid questions.

Um I have a question for administration.

How much does the water cost for Creepmore pool?

We don't we don't assess that to the the parking.

Thank you.

How much water does the city hall cost the city of Fort Smith?

We we do not charge city facilities for the water that they use.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any more comments from the board?

Well, uh I would just point out that those those things aren't co-owned by the county.

So the counties receive the benefit of the free water essentially.

Would that be a fair statement?

I mean that's that's correct, yes.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay, if there are no further comments from the board, uh Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Again, we're batching uh three A and B.

Directors George Kitzavis.

No to A and B.

Christina Kitsavis, no.

Settled?

Yes.

Martin?

No.

Rego?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Kim?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Four in favor and three opposed.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Well, we will go to item number four.

Item four is a resolution authorizing an agreement with American Resort Management to manage the water park for the 2026 operating season.

The resolution also specifies that the city and county owners will solicit proposals for management services starting with the 2027 operating season no later than July of 2026.

County Judge Steve Holtz is seeking similar approval from the quorum court at their meeting this evening.

This item was discussed at the March 10th study session where the board place this item on tonight's agenda for consideration.

Okay, thank you.

Are there any citizens' comments on item four?

Yes, we do have several.

Uh the first being Kim Fodge.

I find it interesting that in the last item, the City of Fort Smith is the sole owner under that agreement, but yet under this agreement for the uh management, we're co-owners with the county.

So it makes no sense whatsoever the way that y'all are handling all of this.

Absolutely not.

I mean, if we're gonna do it, let's do it right.

Um I'm glad to see that there are items in this agreement about the financial reports.

I do not think the management company, ARM, was very forthcoming with that information previously.

Um I've requested that information through multiple FOIA requests.

Thank you to Mr.

Dingman and Mr.

Gentry for helping me with that information.

Um it's my opinion because of all the issues that we've experienced with ARM and their mismanagement of Parrot Island.

I think they need to come to study sessions at the very least each month and provide information to the board about what their reports are showing, what's going on with the management of that operation, what's going on with the finances, maintenance issues, anything that the board wants to know.

The board was left out of the dark on a lot of issues concerning Parrot Island, and that is unacceptable, especially when you're voting to approve money going to them and when citizens are spending money to to supplement and subsidize it.

So my request is a parent island management be told to come to monthly meetings.

They don't have an option to opt out.

They have to attend.

Thank you.

I've asked twice.

And the excuse was we're busy.

Well, that's unexcuse that's inexcusable.

I'm just letting you know.

There the mismanagement at Parrot Island is is horrible.

Thank you.

Point of order.

Next is let's just maintain order, please.

Whatever.

I'm Carl Nevin, and uh I want to agree with Kim Fodge.

The only thing I want to add is we need to think about hiring another company.

It's been mismanagement.

And that's all I got to say.

Thank you.

Thanks, Rob.

Next we have Joey McCutcheon.

Joey McCutcheon Fort Smith.

Um Director or City Administrator, Acting City Administrator Dingman puts in his memo.

I've discussed with Arms Leadership that assuming approval that there will be increased scrutiny of financial performance, reporting, and transparency for the parks operating season.

I mean, come on.

I mean, even a man like Director Lee Kemp who thinks that transparency's a buzzword.

I mean, there should there should have already been financial scrutiny here.

You know, we're talking we we went through a charade last year, cutting cutting budgets.

Uh cutting safe, and it really wasn't a it really wasn't a charade.

People made hard decisions.

Uh you know, we gave up, we gave up security.

Uh we gave up public safety.

And now how much have we spent on ARM?

You know, the same ARM that many of this board said defrauded us.

That was the word.

They committed fraud on this board.

And director settle, come on.

You know, you did you know?

That's the question I want to ask you.

What did you know and when?

Because we've gone up.

How many millions of dollars on this slide project?

Did you ask tough questions when you're having your your your conversations in in uh Carl Gefkin's office?

I think you need to answer those questions because we're trying to get uh as I think the the quote was uh uh operational balance and Neil Martin has made tough decisions.

You know, we've we've got we've got a we've got a a an institution, uh Miss Laura's that's falling apart, yet we've got money to spend on ARM, we've got money to spend on water slides, but we we let a historic monument fall to pieces downtown.

I I just think trust and transparency.

Is trust also a buzzword, Director Kemp?

Thank you.

Next we have Dan Williams.

All right, good evening again.

Um course there's not too much I could add, but I do have a question uh on this.

Are y'all is this a resolution to approve or authorize uh the magic the management company that's been running it to run it again and keep running it?

And we hadn't got the audit back yet?

Should be in April.

Start getting that in April, or the the evaluation starts.

Okay.

So how can you do that with everything that's been going on?

How could you even consider why is that even on here?

That doesn't that doesn't make a bit of sense.

No one y'all don't run your home life like that without the proper information.

There could be fraud, and you're gonna agree to this.

Is that what y'all are saying?

Y'all are gonna agree to this, and there could be fraud.

Is that what y'all are saying?

Anybody?

Well, I don't know.

I'll be happy to dress your comments.

I would say audit not completed is at the top of my list of notes here.

So I think it's absolutely if this passes tonight, y'all are making huge mistakes.

Huge mistakes.

I understand this is some kind of something special project, and it was handled behind the scenes and you want it done and you want it finished, but this same kind of thing, this same kind of thing is a revealing of the things that have happened for years.

And we're and we're done.

Okay.

And someone needs to someone needs to step up.

Jeff, is it gonna be you?

Someone needs to step up.

Mills, it gonna be you.

Is it gonna be you, Mr.

McGill?

Are you gonna step up and you're gonna let this keep playing out like this?

Where's the integrity and the character?

Y'all want to set a standard for this community, but yet you won't even stick to a proper standard.

Right.

What's going on?

What's going on?

What's going on in your heart?

Thank you.

And last we have Gary Podgarski.

I'll call it Joey.

Okay, so here we go again.

Director Costabus, I'm going to ask you as my director to put forth a motion for an amendment to this particular bill, or whatever y'all want to call it, that no payment goes until ARM shows up here.

I'm pretty sure the payment goes where it goes.

I mean, they're doing this for money, right?

Yep.

Okay.

We pay them to do this.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Right?

Okay.

So the motion is that I'm requesting that you put forth as my director.

Okay.

Is that no payment goes from the city of Fort Smith to ARM until they show up?

Be happy to.

That's the first thing.

Second motion I'd like you put for is that you delay this vote for 60 days until that audit comes back.

Those are my two requests for you as my director.

You can do it right now.

I want you to do it in accordance with uh proper protocol as at the part of the the mayor.

Can I go ahead and make that motion?

Hold on.

Let's finish.

Okay.

Let's just follow the procedure.

Okay.

Madam Clerk.

Were there any more?

No, that was the last one.

Okay.

This time we will entertain a motion to adopt a resolution.

So moved.

Second.

Okay.

Now we'll entertain a comment from the board, Director Savage.

Go ahead, I'll make the motion directly.

That's me.

Oh, that one.

Okay.

Well, I would say I I think they were have they already been paid for 25.

So what we're discussing is for 26, so we would need to write that into their contract.

Is how we would need to proceed with that.

But I is that correct, Jeff?

Yes.

So I I don't think that this is who we should go with.

And um I had um at the top of my notes, the audit's not been completed.

I'm also when and I want to thank Director Martin for asking for the other um bids to be sent to us so we could review the proposals.

Um I did that.

And I'm wondering how this was scored.

Um, you know, at the very least, we should have used the other proposals to leverage a better deal with ARM, but I I don't think we can trust them.

You know, I'm I'm still I still think about that $8,000 check.

We had to bring it to their attention.

It wasn't just that they lost the check.

The woman who wrote the check contacted me, and this was in September, it had been written in May.

We had to bring it to their attention.

That's big.

Uh when I look at um when I look at um some of the other people, the SFM, um they said we provide best practices guidelines so the city county can plan in advance the costs associated with keeping the facility operating efficiently and compliant with safety standards.

They talked about transparency with financial reporting, including providing monthly financial reports.

Um they demonstrated ways to generate revenue.

They had all kinds of different revenue streams.

They talked about swimming lessons aligned with school breaks, lifeguard training classes, uh, physical therapy things for elderly people.

They have theme nights, tie-dye, glow swim, luau.

I mean, it seems like a much more comprehensive management practices than what we're looking at.

Um I know up front it looks like it's a little bit more, but when you take into account the the five percent we're paying ARM plus uh the 154,000 we're playing paying the director, it really kind of all comes out in the wash.

Plus with this SFM, it looks like you get um uh some marketing as well.

And I think we spent about 250,000 on marketing um last year, so I I'm not in favor of moving forward with ARM.

Um Thank you, Mayor.

Uh just a couple thoughts I uh would like to share on this topic.

Um, as was mentioned, I think it bears repeating.

Uh the quorum court uh decided from their perspective to proceed uh for this year with ARM tonight.

Uh I don't know if people were there uh making their feelings known to the quorum court, um, but that was a decision that they made tonight.

But that was a decision that they made tonight.

And indeed, the other finalist, aside from ARM, said the following statement.

At this stage in the process, we would not recommend transmiss transitioning to a new operating team.

This was the other finalist saying this for the 2026 season, regardless of the provider, a change on that timeline is likely to be disruptive and will not yield optimal results.

No operator can fully mobilize, implement best practices, and put their best foot forward in such a compressed window, regardless of what they may say.

And this is the other finalist saying this.

It also points out in the memo that ARM is prepared and fully cooperating with the audit process that's currently underway.

They're participating without issue.

I think it would be it will be interesting.

There's no going back on the audit.

And if uh um fraud, uh which is a word that gets said a lot in these comments, uh, is not found by the outside audit.

I do wonder what people's comments will be uh in response to that.

Um I'll just say this.

I you know, I am very agnostic about what uh firm manages our water park, but I'm not agnostic about chaos or doing something uh in a time of of transition and with a partial year and with a construction project underway, and particularly when the other finalist says don't do this.

So I'm all for uh looking and seriously considering for the 2027 season and beyond a different operator, but it just doesn't strike me uh right now as the time to make this change, particularly when the other finalist is saying don't do this.

So those are my uh comments.

Thank you all for listening.

Thank you for being here, and thank you for sharing with us.

Director Kemp.

Thank you, Mayor, and uh thank you for my colleagues for speaking to this.

I want to make sure that I specify some things.

One, we voted I voted for the audit, I stand for the audit.

Um I'm not for being the sole owner of uh the city being the sole owner of Parrot Island Water Park simply because, as I've stated on record already, the cast iron fittings, the other expenses that are still to be told or calculated, should be shared and then looked at upon the other way.

Since I voted for the audit, I think it is wise that if they are cooperating and have not looked to discontinue their service with us to keep them in communication with us, uh, and furthermore, to dig into comparative thoughts about what they do with their procedures.

Um I would like to see us do that.

I as much scrutiny as this water park is garnered because of um deals in 2024 that were there and all that.

Uh the Civic Center has costed us and will continue to cost us substantial money.

And we have put so much spirit around this.

Uh, you know, when we talk about Ms.

Laura's house, it isn't forgotten.

It's actually in the budget carryovers to take care of that.

That's not the city being negligent.

Bring us something to vote on, and we'll be happy to take action to it.

Um, when we talk about giving up on public safety, the police had vacant positions at the time that were still able to be filled.

Um, public safety has been a pursuit of this board in the pursuit of our first responders.

I think they've done a great job as the crime reports indicate that we get on our annual review.

When the question was asked by how how are we doing this, we have an obligation to either own and operate this water park this year, or except that if we want to make some changes, which I guess I mean I could hear further discussion from my colleagues and change my opinion on this, but just know that when we go to the end of the season and it doesn't show profit, know that we got in the way of that.

So, you know, I think when we look at this, we have a due diligence to run the water part to conduct the audit for transparency, to bring the results of that audit to the public, and to continue to do the best practice that we have.

And that's where I'm at on this.

Thank you.

Any any other director mayor.

Can I go ahead and make my motion?

Or do you just hold it?

Director settle.

Director Christina Savage has been a director settle.

Well, I I would just say we don't need an audit to know that there has been there have been statements of fact that were false.

And statements that led us down this path to these slides about the cost of the shipping, the storage of the slides.

I mean, we already know that.

We don't even have to wait for the audit on that.

So irregardless of how they're running the park, the just the whole situation around bringing the slides to us, the purchase of the slides, there were a lot of false statements made, and I I said it last week and I still believe it.

I think this is a slap in the face to the people we're supposed to represent to say we're going to continue doing business with someone like this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Director Settle.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just as uh Director Ego alluded to, the county and the city are joint co-owners here.

There was a group that put it through there, and they chose to keep what we have.

If you do anything to disrupt what you have today, you're pretty much going to have a lost season.

And then you're going to come back and ask for money at the back end, and we're going to say, what did we do to what uh Director Kemp said?

ARM is is well known throughout the communities.

Their owner got an award this past year.

Arm is a very good company.

They're going to have an audit, and as Director Ego says, what happens when there's nothing found?

Then what?

They've been very transparent given all the data to everybody.

I've been very quiet listening to everybody talk.

Now it's my friend to speak.

Okay.

So before we start throwing F-words around, be cognizant of a company, a private company that we have contracted that is known throughout the United States.

That is doing that has got the contract.

Let me break this, the contract to have Mattel-themed parks throughout the United States.

We are blessed to have somebody that big running our water park.

Just as much as we are blessed to have somebody like Oakview running our convention center.

Instead of what we did years ago, which was barely nothing and run it ourselves and not make anything, we got high quality companies running our facilities, and we should be proud of that.

Fortsmouth is as I said two months ago when Neils even said it.

Fordsmith is on a path of change, and if we don't do something to keep our trajectory going, we're going to fall behind.

Look at what happened around two weeks ago.

Favel, $61 million for aquatics facility.

Bam Burin, a tax increase, put $37 million for community center wonder water park.

Greenwood passes a tax help uh extension help with their park system.

Parks is where it's going to happen at.

People want parks.

People want things to do so they invest in their communities.

If you don't do that, you're going to fall behind and you're going to look back in the mirror 20 years and you regret you did not do something.

You know, Mayor, I've I'm a I'm a I've been very, very quiet tonight.

Trying to let the my board members talk.

But there's a point to where we start throwing words around, it starts impacting just not us, it impacts who we comes to the city, who might invest in our city, what companies are coming here.

In fact, it impacts everything.

The audit is going to be done.

We voted for it.

We'll see what happens.

But we need to run the park.

It's time for the season.

Seasons a month away.

Time for run the park.

Let's get this going.

Thanks, Mayor.

Thank you.

Director Josh DeSavage, you recognize it.

I'm going to make a motion, Mayor, to uh withhold any funds from ARM or withhold withhold hiring ARM until the audit is complete.

That's it.

Second.

Point of inquiry.

Do we know how long this audit will take?

April.

Well the review field work will be done in April.

The report likely won't be till the later part of May or even June.

Okay.

Thank you.

And I have a question as well, Mayor.

Yes.

Jeff, would you mind uh just speaking to it was touched on a little bit ago, but what is the payment procedure for uh this contract and this company?

The the payment procedure for the proposed contract is the same as it's been, and that is a a five percent of gross revenues of the park on a monthly basis is attributed to uh the operator.

And that is uh with withdrawn from the operator from the operating from the operating funds of the park.

So it's payment does not occur without revenue being generated with the park being opened.

Correct.

Correct.

And and months, you know, like the winter months when there is very little revenue, there's very little management fee paid.

And the summer months when there is considerable revenue, then that's when their that's when their bulk of their management fee gets paid because they do it on a monthly basis based on the five percent of gross revenues for that month.

And are they paid uh once a month at the end of the month, twice a month?

At the end of the month when the when the books are reconciled to determine what the net the what the gross revenues were, that's when they get their uh five percent.

Thank you.

But we pay their director 154,615.

We do not.

We do not.

That is paid from the park's operating fund.

The only the only dollars that the city are counting.

I don't disagree with that, but we don't pay that.

It is paid from the operating funds of the of the park.

Mayor?

Okay.

Director Neil Moore.

So we're 50-50 owners with the county.

Can we withhold payment?

Uh legally.

With uh if if we're the only ones that don't want to pay it.

Like if the county what what what recourse do we have?

I mean, can we actually do that?

Yeah.

So if if the idea was to have a term in this contract that says payment to arm uh is contingent and you know shall not begin until after some audit date.

I think you can have a contract provision that says that, but it will take you know all the contracting parties agreeable to such term.

Not a di not only the city, but yes the county, and yes on.

I saw them.

That was my question.

Okay.

There's three people have to agree to this.

And once there's no, then there's no premium.

Okay.

Thank you.

Direct Christian.

You know, why are we just letting them write the terms of the contract and just accepting them without any sort of negotiation?

You know, I'm not in favor of using them.

I think y'all probably are.

I mean, I don't know why we can't go back to them and say we've got other qualified proposals, submit your best and final terms.

You know, why don't you come up with some other revenue streams like these other people have done very thoughtfully?

I thought that was a very good idea.

Swim lessons aligned with school breaks, lifeguard training classes.

Uh I mean, this is our money, this is the park's money.

They should be they should be trying to generate revenue in all different ways.

And this was my issue with them last year.

It was oh, well, it rained, we had a rainy season.

We have a you know, we have a deficit instead of saying we're gonna stay open later, we're gonna stay open uh for a longer season, because in a private business you would have to do that.

You would have to find ways to make up that revenue.

Direct so uh just to clarify some things.

Uh last year was the first time uh the water park opened up for Mother's Day.

They did do that.

The water park does everything you said for already.

They do aqua jog weekly to do tiny tots weekly.

Aqua jog's a lot of people to use the lazy river to jog around to get therapy.

They do private parties every night the month of June.

There was only three nights that did not have a private party.

They do the largest swim lesson uh thing is uh National Day, they do that and pass swim lessons there.

They contract with other uh agencies like the fire department to use the uh water the uh way pool to do training.

Everything that you have said, they uh the park already does.

Then where is that revenue in their profit and loss statement?

It's part of that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other comments?

Yes, go ahead.

Okay, Jeff, I'm understand this.

They get five percent of the gross receipts, correct?

That's correct.

Okay.

But it but if the park loses money then they still get their five percent.

Right.

Well, if the park has a yes.

So where is the where is their incentive to be efficient knowing they're not gonna it's not gonna cost them any money?

I mean there is none.

That's why last year it operated in the red and they still got $94,000 a year plus their director got $154,000 a year.

We spent $250,000 on marketing.

I mean the list goes on.

Director George because I'm done.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

If there are no more further comments, uh vote.

Madam Cro, would you please call the roll?

This is on the amendment.

This is on the amendment.

Yes.

Directors Christina Kitsanis.

Well, it I'm turned around now.

What's the amendment?

Read the amendment.

You made the amendment, Director Kittsar.

Oh, the okay, go ahead.

Are you are you keeping that or were you withdrawing?

No, I'm just I just uh it's just what Mr.

Podeski asked me to do.

Well, what did we withhold pay the withhold payments from IRM and not hire them until after the audit?

But I think what Director Martin was saying, we can't legally do that.

Is that what Colby was saying?

Colby's saying that we um would have to get approved.

All three parties.

Us, the county and all the to agreement.

Okay.

So I think I think you need to withdraw that so we're not doing something.

Okay, just disregard it then.

That's fine.

I don't that's fine.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

With that, we will be voting on the original uh resolution.

Madam Cro, please recall the row.

Directors Christina Kitsavis, no.

Settled?

Yes.

Martin.

Yes.

Rego?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Kim?

Yes.

George Kit Savis?

No.

Motion passes five in favor and two opposed.

Thank you.

We will go to item number five.

Item five is a resolution authorizing a prioritized capital improvement plan for water projects specific to fiscal year 2026 only.

The original 10-year plan was discussed at the February 10th board study session where the board suggested the plan be condensed and limited to projects that have identified funding.

Funding is identified and available in 2026 for the following four prioritized water projects.

First, the I-540 water line crossing at Uper Lane, which need which needs replacement.

The Midland Bridge transmission line, which is leaking and needs repair, the racetrack road water line improvements, which has economic development impact, and the I-49 and Highway 22 transmission line encasement, which needs to be installed while access ramps for the bridge are being built for cost considerations.

Doing this work after the bridge and ramps are built will require boring and will be much more expensive.

Project description pages for these four projects have were included in will have been provided at your spaces this evening, and an electronic copy has also been emailed to you.

With that brief description, Deputy Director Engineering of Engineering Jimmy Johnson will address specific questions the board may have on these identified projects.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any comments, Jimmy?

I have no just stand for questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk, are there any citizens' comments on this item?

None indicating.

Need a motion to adopt a resolution.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

Mayor, I do.

Yes.

Director Rego.

Thank you.

Assuming passage of this tonight, do you all anticipate that these projects?

And I know it says in the memo that you know each one will come back to us for individual uh vote on the contracts as they're awarded.

But is it anticipated that these four items would be able to be completed this calendar year or the majority of them?

Yes, the the only one that might be an issue is the encasement projects because that's time sensitive.

We've got to get in and get our construction done prior to the contract that the state already has.

And that's the $250,000 item that has a TBD project number?

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other comments from the board?

Please call the roll.

I'm sorry, Director Newmar.

So this is for these are water projects.

Yes.

Right?

But it's not coming out of water.

It's coming out of streets, bridges, and drainage.

Is that coming out of water?

Well, that's not what it uh right here at the top it says capital improvement plan, streets, bridges, and associated drainage improvement.

Is that a misprint?

On the on the one that you distributed tonight, Jimmy.

Yeah, that's that's a misprint.

Okay.

Okay.

All right.

Well, that okay, that clears up something for me.

Okay.

Um we did not pass the CIP for water for various reasons.

And and one of the reasons, I think Director Rigo, don't let me put words in your mouth, but I think it's because it was unfunded.

Is that is that true?

Okay.

So where are these dollars coming from?

Most of the money is gonna be coming from reimbursements from state highway projects like Highway 45.

We're getting reimbursements from from that and uh sub uh uh an encasement project.

We've just completed this uh been reimbursed by the state, and uh we got some work going down on South uh just south of Zero Street and uh that is gonna be 95 percent reimbursed.

Okay, so so reimbursed by R Dot?

By our doctor, okay.

So we are expending the money they're giving us back.

So how much are we getting reimbursed from R Dot?

A total.

I mean, can you do you know what that that dollar amount is?

It's is it was a nine million dollars, but I think we've already been partially reimbursed from part of Highway 45, and I don't remember exactly how much we've been reimbursed from that.

And so all of that nine million dollars, including this 5.2 million, is water, is water uh uh reimburs uh reimbursement for projects related to water.

Highway 45 does have some sewer work on it.

Okay, okay, all right, all right.

Well, all right, I was really interested.

I really wanted to understand where that money was coming from.

That's all we have for water at this point.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

So because there's no dedicated money to pay for capital projects for water, right?

That's ultimately what we've been talking about as it relates to the uh water transmission line and all those other things.

So um okay, all right.

I just wanted clarification on that.

Thank you, Jimmy.

Director Rigo?

Thank you, Mayor.

And then just quickly, Jeff, as it says in the memo here, as the funding sources are identified for each of these uh $5.2 million uh in total, that's when they're gonna come forward to us for consideration or final approval.

Correct when we have we have the contracts ready and all of that is ready and we'll have the identified funding ready for consideration as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any other comments or questions from the board.

Madam Crog please call the roll.

Director settle yes Martin Yes.

Rego?

Yes.

Good yes.

Kim?

Yes.

George Kitzapis Christina Kitsavis yes it's approved seven in favor and zero opposed okay of note item number six has been approved with that we'll go to item number seven item seven seeks the board's approval of an engineering services agreement with truck design group for SSA work and sub basins P006 and P005 and the amount of 766 SSA work was completed on this area prior to entering the consent decree some of the remediation work has been completed.

However the condition of the remaining system in this basin has continued to deteriorate and the SSA work must be updated in order to design a suitable remediation plan.

Mr Johnson will address questions from the board on this side.

Any comments Jimmy just thank you.

Are there any citizens comments Madam Clerk yes uh one uh Mr Levon Morton is already gone okay is Lavon in the room okay thank you any other citizens' comments madam clerk none indicating okay thank you entertaining a motion to adopt the resolution so move second thank you comments from the board director Neil Martin I was surprised at this one um in the fact that we need to do uh sanitary sewer assessment um I under you know I understand that it's been a while since we did a sanitary sewer assessment but are there other projects that need sanitary sewer assessments that like I'm I'm my assumption is we we did all that at the beginning of the consent decree and so this one kind of surprised me so it it this was work was actually done prior to the consent decree and the pipes have continued to fail so the information we're designing on is is 12 years old.

Okay.

And this and it also there's also a continuum SSA so if we if we do the work as the SSA work as it is done 12 years ago we are would already need to do another SSA sure continuing SSA work on this area.

So when the cons when the consent decree started um would we shouldn't we have done an SSA on it at that time if we had the funding we would have but we didn't we did not have enough of funding to uh and then we we raised rates and we allocated sales tax all that kind of stuff so now we have the dollars is the let me ask this are there any other um projects that we need to do sanitary sewer assessments for because the assessment original assessment is too old there is an area in the city that has not had SSA work done on it at all and we're gonna have it's not under the consent decree.

Okay so we won't have to do an SSA on it for the consent decree.

If we don't do the SSA work in Fort Chaffee area there's a possibility that we could get a second C D on that area that area is not under the C D because it does the flow the sewer doesn't flow to our treatment plants.

Okay.

It flows to borrowing okay but but but any anything else in the city that's under the consent decree today does it require a sanitary sewer assessment no because because our original is too old.

No.

Are there any that will at in two years will be that way I I don't foresee any any more being that because you know the they're not nearly as old and and this is by far the worst area of the city as far as the condition of the existing pipes.

Okay.

Um secondarily I'll ask um how was this firm selected we uh selected the three firms there were three firms did I did I miss that that we uh okay there I see it I see it considered and they all three of them had statements of qualifications on file.

But this this wasn't a competitive bid um this is a percentage okay you're right you can't competitive bid engineering services okay all right and so we we selected these three yes okay and you know just for for information that you know they're it they're charging about ten dollars per foot and and we have active contracts now where you know after the contractors through construct with the construction they TV the lines and some of those the the average of those projects are 790 a foot just for televising it doesn't include cleaning it doesn't include the assessment it doesn't include flow monitoring it doesn't include um

And some of those the the average of those projects are 790 a foot just for t televising.

It doesn't include cleaning, it doesn't include the assessment, it doesn't include flow monitoring, it doesn't include um just there's just other things that other things is not included.

So I mean is it's pretty competitive with what we've seen.

Okay, thank you, Jimmy.

Director Christian Savage.

You know, a few weeks ago at a study session when I was talking about the problem with these consent decrees as you get into them and the scope keeps growing and growing, and I was told all of this work had been completed very definitively, that all of this had been done, and now this is coming up, and it it makes me wonder what what's gonna continue to come up.

This work was done prior to the C D.

I mean this SSA work was done prior to the C D being implemented.

However, the continuing SSA work continues on every 10 years, you have to do this SSA work again throughout the whole entire system.

So this area, if we if we go with the information we have, then in two years we have to do an SSA of this area anyway.

So all the work that was done when we entered into the consent decree, is that outdated at this point?

Because that's been that's been 10 years.

So there are some areas in that were completed, not only the SSA work, but the remedial measures work was always already done in the Riverland area.

There's a couple of sub basins that were completely completed prior to the C D, and they are pretty close to needing well in two years, they'll we'll have to start the continuing SSA on on those basins.

Let me just comment.

Let me just comment to that point.

I mean, part of the continual best practices for operating a sewer system is that you do sanitary sewer assessments repeatedly.

And so, you know, you you go go incrementally and and even if we weren't under consent decree, the best practices we would divide the city up into maybe ten segments and do a tenth of our system every year.

And we would that would be part of our normal operations that we would assess part of our system every year and determine what defects or what problems those are and what things need to be repaired or fixed or upgraded or adjusted for capacity issues, those sorts of things.

And so that part of the consent decree is a what is it, capacity management operations and maintenance requirement that we continue to do these these types of best practices efforts even after the consent decree is is lifted.

And so what would that I think that's part of what Jimmy is referring to here is that we have an obligation to continue doing this SSA work as we as we go a period of time after one section has been has been assessed, we'll we'll go on and do other assessments, but then we'll have to go back to that section at some point in the future to assess it again.

So that so this isn't oh sorry, go ahead.

But what I was trying to determine, is there other work out there that can be pulled in or grandfathered in under the consent decree?

I understand we have to continually maintain our system so we don't get into this situation again, but are there other things that are going to come up that are going to be pulled in that are under that purview of the consent decree?

That's what I was trying to determine.

Uh not that I can think of at the moment.

But it's possible.

I mean if if we have a line collapse and and it it hadn't ever scored or four or five, we have to immediately take care of it.

Right.

So emergency situations will arrive.

But I I had what precipitated was this was I had read I was reading through documentation on a congressional hearing, and this was something they were talking about, was that they've seen this with other cities.

They get into these consent decrees, they sign on to them, they think that's gonna be the end of it, and then once you get into this um into this agreement, then there's all kinds of other things that can be pulled in, and it just grows and grows and grows.

And I don't feel like we've seen that with where we originally started versus the dollar amount where we're at now.

So that's all for me.

Thank you.

Director settled.

I thank you.

Uh Christine, that's been my concern with the consent decree from day one, is it grows and grows and grows.

Um Jeff, is there any way you guys could um you and uh the team could put together a calendar of when we think we might have all to do the redo the SSAs for the 10-year uh notification?

So what I'm trying to get to is if we know that there's going to be a certain period of time where we're gonna get three or four or five years of SSA work, instead of doing it on a yearly basis, could we get a better deal if we did it, you know, if we did a one contract over a five-year period, would we get a better rate?

Would we get uh would it cost less?

So just maybe a calendar and saying, hey, in 2030, this is it, 2031, 2032.

I think something like that might allow us to see if there's an opportunity to choose a a local or choose a firm, whoever it is national or local, and then see if we can get a better rate for a SSA work, if it's especially if it's multi-year SSA work.

Any other comments or questions?

Okay.

Madam Crudder, call the role.

Directors Martin?

Yes.

Rego?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Kim?

Yes.

George Kitsavis?

Yes.

Christina Kitsavis, yes.

Settled.

Yes.

It's approved, seven in favor and zero opposed.

Item number eight.

Item eight is a resolution approving an engineering services agreement with RJN group associated with B Street South sewer upgrades in the amount of ninety-nine thousand nine hundred and sixty dollars.

Mr.

Johnson.

Uh it's uh so B Street is a line, a sewer line that could passes under the railroad tracks, and the railroad company requires us to do quite a bit of uh subsurface exploration before we do we can bore under their tracks.

And they've got a pretty stiff uh permitting uh price that uh RJN will be when they submit the permit, you know they'll be paying that fee.

That all stand for questioning.

Okay, thank you, Jimmy.

All the citizens' comments, Madam Clerk.

None indicating.

Need a motion to adopt a resolution.

So moved.

Second.

Okay.

Any other comments from the board?

Please call the roll.

Directorigo?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Kemp?

Yes.

George Cassavis.

Christina Kissavis?

Yes.

Settled?

Yes.

Martin, yes.

It's approved.

Seven in favor and zero opposed.

We'll go to item number nine, which is the consent agenda.

There are six items on tonight's consent agenda, including a resolution authorizing an MOU with Methodist Village regarding the 2025 TAP grant project, a resolution accepting award of the 2025 TAP grant funds for the Methodist Village Connector Trail.

A resolution approving purchase of two one-ton trucks for public works from their replacement fund.

A resolution approving a contract for Creekmoor Park Tennis Court Resurfacing Project, a resolution approving a contract for sustainer cisterna park pump house improvement project, and a resolution approving the purchase of 17 police patrolled vehicles for the police department from sales and use tax funds.

Okay, thank you very much.

Uh yes, on 9A and 9D, we have Andy Hannah only to answer questions.

Okay, thank you for being two individuals on 9D.

Okay.

The first being Nathan Marcott, is that correct?

Oh, oh, he answer questions only?

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

And then Joey McCutcheon for 9D as well.

Over the last year, many of our citizens are suffering.

You know, many citizens in this town are having a hard time paying their water bills, their utility bills.

It it just seems a bit tone-deaf when we're when we're spending a million two, and I love tennis.

I mean, I played at a creek more, and certainly I love improvements.

But you know, parks aren't where it's at.

You know, solvency is where it's at, Director Settle, and and uh uh a good government.

Uh and so it's it's concerning that we're spending a million two after you know the discussions, the hard decisions that were made at the end of of last year.

One of my concerns with with 9D is you know, we passed an ordinance uh 50 15, which is in your packet, uh back in uh 2015.

But times have changed.

Um this gives a local bidding preference, and I'm all for local companies getting projects, but we're giving a local bidding preference here to the tune of costing uh the taxpayers sixty thousand dollars when we have another bid that's lower than that.

Um, you know, just the fact that our a local uh bidder steep beam construction guy, great, but he needs to be the lowest bidder.

I mean, sixty thousand is not chicken feed.

This is taxpayer dollars.

And so I think this board needs to reconsider uh ordinance 2015 and change the shall language to May.

And in times where we can afford to give a five percent local bidding preference, great.

But when we shouldn't send a bad message when citizens are tightening their billfolds, um, you know why shouldn't we take the lowest bidder uh and save sixty thousand dollars and send that message?

And to me that's important.

So will you consider uh director Martin or Director Settle or Director Kat Savis or Director Rego looking at this ordinance and and changing the language to May as opposed to SHAW, which gives yourself some leeway uh in terms of bidding preferences.

Thank you.

Because I we all support local local local folks, and that's it's a good idea.

Good point.

Thank you.

Thanks, Jill.

Okay, Madam Kirk, are there any others?

No, that's it.

Okay.

Just to entertain a motion to adopt a consent agenda.

So moved.

Thank you.

Board comments.

I got a question on A.

Director Deal Martin.

Um we had somebody to speak, Mr.

Hannah, I think.

Or okay.

Well, uh I've got a question.

Okay.

So you know, you come on up.

Um, I guess I'm I'm wondering about the steepness of that trail.

Uh I I'm familiar with that area, and as it it's you're kind of on a hill and you go down into Caroline Cross.

Um how steep is that?

I mean, I know you might not know grades and all that.

We have to perform the topographic survey.

You have not you have to do that.

Yeah, yeah, we we have to do the agreement with the city first before we execute that.

I'm with you.

I I know people in that area.

Um that's a really like being able to connect that neighborhood with Caroline Pro Cross without having to get on 74th, this the sidewalks on 74th is awesome.

I I love this project.

I appreciate uh uh Methodist Village and what they've done here.

Um I think this is a really cool deal for building that connectivity.

And uh and yeah, I'm excited about it.

I'm just I'm just interested.

I I've I've walked that area, I've been back there.

I know the steepness of it, and you know, I'm just kind of interested in how that's if it's gonna be.

I will say, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but that that'll have to be an ADA compliant uh facility.

Okay, correct.

And so there will be there will be instances of grade, but there will also have to be landings of a particular length to be able to recover from that as they proceed on.

So I mean that will be a I mean the grade will be a challenge, but that's what they're there for.

Well, and it's it's it's for Methodist Village, but Methodist Village wants to do it for the community.

So I think I think that's really great.

So appreciate them and and uh all the folks that that are out there.

Director Seven.

I get questions on DNF, Mayor.

So go ahead.

D.

Uh only question for D to Sarah is how does the timing impact this year's uh tennis uh season is it gonna be I know it's a court two four-quarters at a time or how long will it take to do the project?

So we're looking at a hundred and twenty days substantial completion and another thirty days just to kind of tidy things up.

But honestly, working through this with the Western Arkansas Tennis Association and working with them, they do recognize it's our goal to always keep four courts open, but sometimes when you get in construction, that might not happen, but they are prepared to have to modify that.

And I think at the end of the day, sometimes you know, minor inconveniences whenever you're getting this product, they're willing to work with us, and we greatly appreciate that.

Okay, thank you very much.

All I think on F is uh to Chief, thank you very much for bringing this to us.

17 Dodge Durangoes fully outfitted.

Um I just see more officers with uh cars on the streets.

Thank you very much, sir.

Appreciate it.

Okay.

Thank you, Chief.

Okay.

There are no further questions on the consent agenda.

We would entertain a motion to adopt a consent agenda.

So moved.

We already got that.

Okay.

Madam Clerk, call the roll.

Directors good.

Yes.

Kimp?

Yes.

George Kitsavis?

Yes.

Christina Kitsavis.

Yes.

Settled.

Yes.

Martin, Rigo.

Yes.

It's approved.

Seven in favor and zero opposed.

Thank you very much.

This time we'll go to the officials forum.

Uh no comments.

I appreciate all of those who attended the state of the city address.

Um this time we will go to Director Rigo.

Uh nothing for me tonight, Mayor.

Thank you.

Director Good.

Thank you, Mayor.

A couple of things.

Um want to congratulate uh UA4 Smith uh Curtis Jans for being nominated for AD of the year.

I think there were 28 um awards, and he was one of those.

Uh also he let me know that uh more good news about UA Fort Smith, both men's and women's golf teams were both ranked in the NCAA division to us uh central region.

So the other thing I wanted I'd like to ask my fellow board members for approval by resolution to continue the support for Main Street in regards to the Leb Family Foundation grant.

We've been we've been matching the grant for Levitt for Main Street.

It's already in the budget, but we need to continue the series year is up, so we need to continue that by resolution.

Thank you.

Is that you want you would like that to come to a uh well either yeah, either do we need to have a study session?

I mean, we've already done it, it's ongoing.

Is it a continuation?

So that's your preference.

I mean, I would suggest a resolution for consideration.

Okay.

Resolution for consulting.

Was that not already approved when we did the contract with Main Street?

Or is you saying this is an additional this would be this would be in addition to this the I mean this is different separate a separate item from the agreement with Main Street Fort Smith itself.

This would be a resolution authorizing the um use of the budgeted $20,000 that we've got in the budget for the support of the Levit AMP uh group music series grant specifically.

Correct.

I would second in support of uh consideration.

I've never seen that in our budget before.

I've never seen us vote on that before.

We've it's been in the budget each each year.

It's been in the budget for the last three years.

We have made that contribution each of the last three years.

2026 starts a new three-year cycle.

There are dollars in the budget in terms of uh I think it's appropriate to have an agreement uh recognizing that contribution.

I mean, I'm a I'm a pretty good note taker, but I I cannot find levit in my I think we three years ago there was a we voted.

LEVITT, I believe so.

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh is there a second today?

There was a second.

Was this to clarify to place on the um April 7th regular meeting?

Yes, but that would work.

Yes.

Director Kemp.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh wanted to talk to my colleagues and just uh let you know an update on our uh services with Colin Benzinger and associates for the City Administrator search.

March 29th is a Sunday, and March 30th is a Monday, March 29, March 30.

Mr.

Garvin will be emailing the board and communicating with each of you as directors.

Uh Colin Benzinger Associates is going to send representation to Fort Smith to meet uh and collect feedback individually from directors, and then we'll build from that individual meetings.

Uh they'll also meet with department heads uh throughout the city as well as as long as availability allows them to before they have to depart again.

And then they will take that information to build a recruitment profile, which then will be sent back to us to review and give feedback so that they can then put together the uh promotional piece and what they will use to post and go privately recruit and solicit applicants for the city administrator.

So uh the reason I we advocated for this is that knowing that people have day jobs and maybe you're not available on a Monday, our hope would be that maybe you can connect on like a Sunday afternoon, somewhere in the time frame of like a four to eight p.m.

on a Sunday, or from an 8 a.m.

to 4 p.m.

focus on Monday the 30th.

And I didn't know if there's any questions.

29th and 30th.

29th and 30th.

That's all, Mayor.

Thank you.

Director George Gassad.

Okay.

Director Christina Savage.

Uh well, since we're talking about the city administrator search, um, you know, it it seems like a lot of people have just moved past it.

You know, an issue I've been receiving a lot of communication on is a petition circulating to change the form of government, and there's been an additional level of public interest um now that it was signed by our own acting city administrator.

Uh you know, I hesitated to bring this up because it's not my initiative and I didn't want to be disrespectful to another uh candidate in the mayor's race.

Um, but I I don't think we can ignore or pretend that this petition isn't out there.

Uh this is no longer a fringe discussion.

There's a lot of confusion about how this works procedurally.

Um I've had a lot of people asking me as I've been out talking to people, and I I've read the law.

I don't know quite how to interpret it.

Um I think it merits some public discussion because when we don't have concrete answers, the gaps get filled in with speculation and sometimes misinformation.

Um so I'm gonna make a motion that we hold a study session to discuss this process process, make sure the public has accurate information.

And I think we need to approach this in a transparent way so as not to further erode public trust because this is a conversation that's being that's being held out in the community and and I think it makes us look a little out of touch to not be holding that conversation in here.

I second that and I if I may I would just like to suggest that in the course of that conversation there's also we have some information presented about just the the procedures around petition gathering and and what you know because there are rules and laws and regulations and things on the books that go into how that process is supposed to uh go and I think that would also be beneficial to uh have a refresher or a chance to learn uh about that too.

Yes I think Colby that would be important for you to be here for that.

And then also I also wanted to bring up you know when we have the Citizens forum there are sometimes three, three and a half, four hour meetings people sit through to get the ability to speak to us.

And we shouldn't be limiting what they're able to speak about.

So I would I would like to make a motion we change the rule that says they can't speak about anything that's on the current agenda.

I've heard from citizens that feel like that that rule is not always applied evenly I think there was someone uh last week that was speaking on on the homeless issue when we had discussed it on the study sessions I think if you're a citizen you're wanting to connect with your government you should be able to talk about um anything that's on your mind.

Thank you.

One second I'll second it right thank you I would I would just say to that I mean I it it does require an ordinance change and so I mean that's certainly we could certainly facilitate a discussion of what that might look like.

But again make a change put it on the study session.

Thank you.

Director Settle I thank you mayor I'm going to change the subject for a few minutes to the public I'm wearing orange tonight for MS Awareness month.

Approximately 2.9 million people live with sclerosis worldwide nearly a million cases a year.

It's a congregative non neurodogal neurodegenerative immune disease roughly three times common in women than men's no cure there's no treatment or there's treatments but there's no cure.

You can manage the symptoms and slowness of the progress chances you know somebody uh that has MS but that you just don't know.

Higher chances uh that they don't even know they have it.

Uh the reason I bring this up is my wife's been living that for the past 35 years.

And she's a brave woman and uh with two kids myself it's uh it's hard on me.

It's hard on her but uh this is the month for MS Awareness month and uh and she's fighting she's fighting to to get an awareness out there for everybody.

And she's fighting for the City of Fort Smith but I wanted everybody to know that I'm wearing orange because of her.

Thank you thank you.

Thank you very much Director Sudd Director Dilmore.

Yeah thank you Director Settle nothing for me mayor.

Okay.

Thank you.

Jeff Sure thank you Mayor first of all there's will be no board study session or meeting next Tuesday March 24th we do have the staff request for the board to call a special meeting at 6 p.m on March 31st ahead of the regularly scheduled study session so that we might discuss uh um congressionally directed spending uh applications if if the board could make that I'll make a motion to do that.

Second thank you.

Um duty for I need four to call that special meeting okay um finally for auto paid customers um a number of auto paid customers scheduled for March 9th specifically there was an issue on that day and the auto payments did not occur pay it in citizen services have identified all 663 customers affected who will be getting contacted by pay it and or the citizen services team if you haven't already but if anyone um everyone should double check their auto pay and make sure it happened and if it didn't happen as it was supposed to then you should please contact citizen services.

Yes is that going to affect shut off notices no fees or penalties or shut off notices will be assessed regarding regarding that.

Is there anything else to come before the board?

I'm not motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn