Good evening and welcome to the Fort Smith City Board of Directors meeting on this May 19th of 2026.

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

At this time, we will have, I'm going to ask Director Neil Martin if you'll do the invocation, and Director Good if you will do the pledge.

Pray with me, please.

Father, we thank you for the opportunity to be here tonight.

Lord, what a what an awesome opportunity it is.

You are a great, wonderful father.

So be with us tonight, Lord.

I pray that you would protect us, guide us as we do the business of the city.

Lord, I pray that you'd bring unity to our city.

I pray that you bring us together as we make decisions that affect the future of our city.

Lord, we want to pray for our officer that was injured over the weekend.

Lord, I pray you'd be with Kyle Newman.

Lord, we pray you be with him right now.

Pray you heal his body.

Pray you be with his family.

Give them peace and comfort, Lord, and we pray that you'd return him to full health and and out serving us again.

So, Father, we ask that you'd be with him.

We ask that you'd watch over him.

And Lord, be with us tonight.

Be with those that are that come to speak to the board, give them wisdom.

Be with us as we make decisions, be with us seven on this board, Lord.

I pray that you'd watch over and guide us.

Lord, I pray that our words honor you.

I pray that we we speak with a sweetness and a kindness to each other.

And Father, I just pray that you would just guide us in each and everything that we do.

Father, we love you.

We thank you.

And Lord, we ask all these things in your precious and holy name.

Amen.

Under God, individual liberty and justice for all.

Thank you very much.

This time, I'll ask if there's any presentation by a member of the board on any item not already on the agenda.

Okay, seeing none, we'll ask for a motion to approve the minutes of the May 5th 2025 or 2026 recognition.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

All in favor?

Thank you.

A reminder, a motion and second to adopt each and of the following items must be offered before directors' comments are made, and public comments on items must pertain to the presented item.

Uh with that, Mr.

Diemel.

Point of orders.

Should we do we have to do the roll call?

Yes, we do.

I'm sorry, madam clerk.

Let's do the roll call.

Got right past me.

Thank you.

Director Jared Rigo.

Here.

Good.

Here.

Kemp.

Here.

George Kit Savis.

Christina Kit Savis here.

Settled.

Here.

Martin.

Here.

Okay.

Thank you.

May you need to ask the reapproval of the minutes.

Since we're now quorum.

Okay.

We do need approval of the minutes.

Thank you.

Second.

All in favor.

I thank you.

Okay.

With that, we will go to Mr.

Demon.

Maybe we make any comments.

Sure.

The public works week recognition is this week, May the 17th to 23rd, 2026.

And I'll defer to the mayor momentarily for the mayor's proclamation on this item.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

And again, this is our opportunity to recognize our public works team.

And there's close to six, maybe seven hundred of them that work very hard to make sure our city has the services and operations are running smoothly.

So at this time, we're recognizing the National Public Works Week in Fort Smith, Arkansas.

And whereas National Public Works Week is being observed in our city, state, nation, the week of May 17th through 23rd of 2026 with the theme rooted in service, powered by community.

And whereas public works professionals focus on infrastructure, facilities, services are vital and important to sustainable and resilient communities to public health, high quality of life, and well-being of the people of Fort Smith.

And whereas these infrastructures, these facilities and services cannot be provided without the dedicated effort of public works professionals who are engineers, their managers and employees at all levels of government and the private sector, who are responsible for building and improving and protecting our nation's transportation, the water supply, water treatment, and solid waste systems, and public buildings and other structures and facilities essential to our citizens.

And whereas it is the public, it is in the public interest of citizens, civic leaders, and children enforcement to understand and maintain an ongoing interest in the importance of public works and public work progress in this city.

And whereas the year 2026 marched the 66th annual National Public Works Week sponsored by the American Public Works Association, and now, therefore, our George B.

McGill, the mayor of the City of Fort Smith, Arkansas, do hereby proclaim the week of May 17th through 23rd of 2026 as National Public Works Week in the City of Fort Smith, Arkansas.

Congratulations.

Yes, Mr.

Demon.

Thank you, Mayor.

In keeping with the mayor's proclamation, we'd like to specifically recognize each of our public works departments and the employees that provide services through Fort Smith's Public Works Department.

Please pay special attention to the city's social media outlets this week for different highlights featuring our public works employees hard at work.

The American Public Works Association promotes one week each year as Public Works Week across the country.

The theme this year is rooted in service, powered by community, acknowledging that the roots of services run deep due to the men and women that keep the systems in their communities moving.

Tonight our public works departments are represented by the department directors, Matt Meeker, Director of Public Works, representing 178 employees.

Todd Mitke, Director of Engineering, representing 34 employees.

Sarah Deuster, Director of Parks and Recreation, representing 41 employees.

Dwayne McDonald, Director of Solid Waste Services, representing 100 employees.

Ken Savage, Director of Transit, representing 32 employees.

Lance McAvoy, Director of Water Resources, representing 113 employees for total 498 total employees currently working in the city's several public works departments.

We'll celebrate these employees with the annual public works appreciation picnic tomorrow from 11 through 1 30 at the Riverfront Park.

The mayor, board of directors, and public are invited to attend.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

At this time, we'll go to the Citizens Forum.

Madam Clerk, you're recognized.

First, we have Kim Fodge.

Each individual will have five minutes.

Good evening.

Before I begin, I would like to say that the Fodge family's thoughts and prayers are with Offerson Newman and his family as well.

I'd also like to acknowledge the passing of Don Clover, a longtime employee of the Water Department.

He was deeply respected and widely admired for his character and contributions.

Don gave more than he was ever formally recognized, and his loss will be dealt deeply felt by all who knew him.

My comments this evening are directed first to the citizens in attendance and those watching at home, but I believe they are equally important for this board to hear.

This evening, the board will discuss and vote on a proposal to change our form of government.

It's an important decision because it could affect our community and how it's represented for represented for years to come.

Depending on the outcome of tonight's vote, the petition process that is now underway, and ultimately the decision of the voters, this change could have lasting consequences for our city.

At this time, I have not decided how I will vote when this issue is placed on the ballot.

I'm still gathering information and considering the facts so that I can make an informed decision.

What I am certain of, however, is this no form of government will serve the citizens well unless those who hold office are honest, act with integrity, and place the public interest above personal gain and special interests.

That is why citizen involvement matters.

Residents must remain informed and engaged in local issues, not only through social media, but by paying attention to the decisions being made.

Attending meetings.

When possible, and communicating directly with directors, city administration, and the mayor's office.

No matter how you do it, the responsibility remains the same.

Stay informed, stay engaged, not only when an issue is controversial, and hold those in authority accountable for their actions and their inactions.

Thank you.

Next we have Quentin Cunningham, and he has a handout that I will be passing down to each of you.

Thank you.

Hello.

So we're also with the officer.

My brother was Sebastian County deputy for 14 years.

My grandfather served Fort Smith, Bill Reather.

I know it's horrid, but best wishes to him.

That said, I'm here tonight to present some data about the future Fort Smith survey.

On May 6th, I foiled the in-progress results of that survey.

First, I want to thank the staff for mostly fixing the issues I had with the Main Street survey.

This survey also now represents the entirety of Fort Smith instead of just the downtown area, which is big improvement.

As of May 6, the sample size is 611 citizens in statistics for a city of our size that translates to about a 95% confidence level with a margin of error under 4%.

The data is clear on certain subjects, and I want to bring those up.

First, my main thing, the homeless response.

240 people selected this as a top priority.

Out of those 240 citizens, exactly three.

Three people asked for punitive enforcement criminalization or removal.

The vast majority of our neighbors do not want to see undue harm placed on our less fortunate citizens.

It's time we stop pretending otherwise.

Second, the utility crisis.

This is the most staggering metric, and the one that surprised me.

83% of the responses, 512 people, are prioritizing the affordability of their utilities.

We are in a massive historic affordability crisis.

It's time to stop playing the political games and actually start figuring out how to lower our families' bills.

Finally, and the most concerning of all to me personally, there is a massive trust gap.

The survey explicitly asks citizens how much they trust city leadership rating from one to five, five being the highest, one being the lowest.

A staggering 52% voted that they do not have, they have little to no trust in this leadership.

33% had a neutral response.

That's not just a simple communications issue.

That's a crisis of legitimacy.

When this data looms overhead, you don't get to sit up there and tell us that we're not educated enough to vote for ourselves.

Now, we can try to debate unrealistic hypotheticals about what could happen in the future, but the fact of the matter is we have constituents that can't pay their water bills today.

If we're so worried about our positions or changing this government, maybe we should have governed in a way that didn't ruin our confidence level.

We've seen decisions get flip-flopped because proper research wasn't done.

Therefore, I am formally announcing tonight that I am planning to run for the position five seat for the Fort Smith Board of Directors because our neighbors, our animals, and our vulnerable population deserve a voice that will actually listen.

A voice that relies on hard data and is not backed by real estate or big business interests.

The data says the public is ready for a change, and I'm going to be here to provide it.

Thank you.

Next, we have Shane McKinney.

If you're off there, well, look like it is.

Most everybody?

Yeah.

I think that's what people are here for because that seemed to be of concern.

Over this past week, I've seen people put together study sessions outside of y'all's study session.

I had no idea.

I didn't even get invited to that.

I saw it online with the rest of you.

I've seen people put together 13-page documents that they were sharing.

No way associated with us whatsoever.

These are citizens getting involved.

I want to be very clear.

This is not Shane.

This is not Joey.

This is not any one person.

If Shane and Joey got hit by a bus walking out here, these people are going to continue at this point.

This isn't just a couple troublemakers.

This is people that have now become educated as to why they aren't happy with their leadership, why they haven't felt heard, why they don't trust their leadership.

In fact, half the citizens in the city probably thought they already had this type of governance.

And as the citizens are becoming educated, they want to see change happen.

And I think that's a fair thing for these citizens to want.

And I think the citizens desiring a vote is a fair thing for the citizens to want.

I think we'd all agree, but I'd just like to picture the two different scenarios I guess we could see going forward.

One, we decide to vote in 27, as was proposed by Mr.

Rego.

So we vote in 27.

We have one year to change our city, one year to decide whose salary is what, one year to answer all of those questions that were brought up because you're not going to answer them before the vote occurs.

You answer them after the vote occurs, because if it doesn't pass, you don't need to answer those questions.

It'd be a waste of resources.

So you have one year to do all of those things.

In the other scenario, a vote in 26, you have two years to figure out what salaries do we pay, to figure out how do we be competitive with other cities?

How do we make this work the way the other cities work?

Why would we want to shorten your time as the people that are in charge?

Why would we need to make that a shorter period of time?

And how does that make it better?

Just because we suspect the citizens out here aren't informed because they kind of look informed.

They look involved, they look engaged, they look unified.

I've seen people from every party, I've seen every type of demographic.

I don't even usually like to talk about demographics, but I know some of you guys do.

This isn't one kind of people in Fort Smith.

This is Fort Smith as a whole.

This is a change.

And we're gonna do it with or without you.

It's going to happen now.

Um they're not gonna let it stop.

Um so I would like you guys to come on board with the citizens and make this as smooth of a process as possible today.

I think the citizens don't really want us to have drawn out court battles or back and forth over which signature counts and which one doesn't.

I don't think that benefits anybody.

Um I don't want to make those videos, I don't want to do those things.

I want to get moving towards what issues can we deal with if this vote passes.

Um, and I think all of you would be a lot better served focusing on those issues.

What happens when this vote passes?

Because it's going to happen.

Um so why don't we focus on what happens after the fact?

Thank you.

Next we have Eduardo Guzman.

This November, Fort Smith has a choice.

Good evening, City Directors, Mr.

Mayor, Mr.

Acting City Administrator, Madam Deputy City Clerk, Madam Deputy City Administrator, and neighbors.

My name is Eduardo Guzman, and I'm a resident of Ward 1 here in the great city of Fort Smith.

A few nights ago, I attended the community conversation event regarding our city's form of government.

While I was there, I ran into one of my neighbors.

Now I see her a few times a week when I'm out walking my dog, but seeing her here caught me completely off guard.

She's a regular hardworking resident and not someone who I would usually see spend her free time at political forums.

The very next day I ran into her again in the neighborhood.

She told me that she had spent her morning out collecting signatures for the petition.

And what she told me boiled down to something incredibly simple.

She was saying, in essence, Eduardo, I care about this city, and I just want my voice to be heard.

That conversation stayed with me because she wasn't talking about abstract theories of municipal management or administrative charts.

She was talking about a basic human desire for accountability.

I'm standing here tonight because I believe in a simple leadership principle that government must be an active and responsive partner to the families it serves.

That is why I urge this board to reject any delay and pass the ordinance, putting the change of government question on the ballot for this November 2026.

What we're seeing in Fort Smith right now is historic.

This isn't a liberal or conservative issue, and it shouldn't be.

This is a powerful bipartisan movement where Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and independents are standing shoulder to shoulder, demanding that their voices be heard.

Our neighbors are doing this because they're tired of a system where the buck is constantly passed.

When utility bills skyrocket due to a decades-long consent decree with no end in sight, or when our neighborhood roads and local infrastructure lag behind, people want direct accountability.

They want a system where the buck stops with an executive that they can look at the eye look in the eye at the ballot box.

But the feeling that our leaders aren't listening, it's not unique to this chamber.

This disconnect is systemic, and we see it radiating all the way up to our representation in Little Rock.

We see a state budget where hundreds of millions of dollars are easily found for out-of-district mega projects and private vouchers, while the working families right here in Fort Smith struggle with basic daily costs.

For too long, we have been saddled with state representation that thinks its only job is to monitor the situation and check the political pulse of the governor while we are left here dealing with the actual heartbeat of a community that is being ignored.

We don't need passive bystanders waiting for permission to act.

We need resolution.

Arkansas and Sebastian County suffer from historically low voter turnout.

For years, leaders have asked how to get people engaged.

Well, to answer that question, I say, look at the signatures.

The people of Fort Smith are engaged, they are awake, they are organized, and they are asking for a voice.

To delay this vote until 2027 will be perceived as a classic politics as usual maneuver designed to insulate power, protect the establishment, and let special interests work behind closed doors to dilute public momentum.

True leadership doesn't see a surge of civic energy and say, let's wait a year and see if they maintain interest.

Trust the voters, eliminate the closed door maneuvering, and let Fort Smith decide.

Thank you.

Next we have Dan Williams.

Also, remember Officer and his family and our prayers, and I'd like to share with you tonight just for a moment about uh there's this ancient saying it's undeniable truth, and it applies directly to this government's board.

Without knowledge, the people are destroyed, and without a vision, the people perish.

When the financial documents are too convoluted to understand for the average citizen, knowledge is withheld.

When the numbers across three separate reports don't align, public trust is destroyed.

I recently, with a group of people sat down and looked at the official budget report, the citizens Q1 report, the accounts payable invoices, and they didn't align.

I found over four million dollars of spending discrepancies.

I emailed the financial department, I'm waiting on an answer for those things that I found.

I also will be emailing the board with that report.

Understanding that we're in a critical hour that has a lack of clear data and direction that needs to be seen is gonna permit us or not permit us to move forward in the things that we need to move forward in.

We have focused on managing things, not leading things, and I believe it needs to end tonight, and I believe you can send a clear message how to lead.

And so if I want something to change, what I have found out is I have to be involved in the change.

Many of y'all have seen me probably more than you'd like to see me at these meetings.

But me and my wife, we call it our date night, and we kind of enjoy coming because we never know what we're gonna hear.

I was at the Fort Smith uh school board meeting last night.

I heard some things that were encouraging to me.

How we're looking at advancing some uh things in our school system for uh the Ebbing Air Force Base, and I'm excited about that.

I believe there's things we can be excited about, every citizen could get behind, but we need a clear vision.

The problem that I believe that we're faced with tonight is to understand it's difficult to execute a vision in Fort Smith when honestly our current political system is not very directed.

We have seven members of the board of directors trying to steer the ship, and there's no clear vision.

Well, I respect the individual intent of the direction and the directors here that are on this board, and I appreciate y'all stepping up to this position, and I'm encouraged by others that are willing to step up.

You know, if we end up with 20 people running for mayor, that may not be enough.

I believe that uh involvement is necessary, and I believe I heard it the other night, it's the silver bullet to answer our crisis in Fort Smith is to get people involved, and I'm thankful to see people involved tonight.

While I respect your position, I don't always agree with the position you stand in, and I'm not afraid to communicate about that.

I believe the structure that we have, this director system, uh, the way it's set up without a strong mayor, it doesn't empower the people to hold the accountability.

I've seen a lack of holding people accountable in this structure in just the short time that I've been here.

We cannot fix Fort Smith's future with the same style of management that created our current confusion across the budgets and invoice files.

We need a government that speaks in one clear voice, and I believe you can make that decision tonight.

Numbers that the citizen can read and trust because we've already we already know there's a broken uh lack of trust.

I'm asking our community to look beyond the day-to-day management of City Hall and demand a leadership of vision.

Let's get invested.

Let's demand absolute transparency and honesty.

Let's reshape Fort Smith into an accountable city that's destined to be, I believe, what God has deemed it to be.

Thank you.

Next, we have Crystal Cadelli.

Good evening, board.

My name is Crystal Cadelli, and I was born and raised in Fort Smith.

I love our city, and that is the reason I have been consistently attending these board meetings for over two years.

Um all of the good things that this city does for us because I'm so hyper-focused on the fixes of the bad.

So I want to start tonight with giving a little bit of credit.

So I have noticed that we have seen major improvements in our water leaks, and we have also seen new business investments with the Bass Pro and Amazon.

Those are positive steps, and they should be recognized.

So thank you for everyone that was involved.

But recognizing what is right does not mean we ignore what needs attention.

Fort Smith's basic services should come first.

Water, sewer, drainage, public safety, animal welfare, and responsible financial oversight.

Water is not optional.

It is a resource we cannot live without.

The water transmission line is not a luxury.

It is an essential infrastructure.

Reliable, affordable water is necessary for families, hospitals, schools, restaurants, food manufacturers, et cetera, to function every single day.

If Fort Smith leadership wants to grow jobs, support industry and attract investment.

Water infrastructure has to be top priority.

This is why excess general fund money should be directed towards critical needs like water meters and transmission lines.

Every dollar should be used responsibly to avoid future water rate increases.

Drainage is another infrastructure issue that needs serious attention.

Poor drainage can wreak havoc on homes, yards, and roads.

It can also create standing water, which causes a mosquito breeding ground.

The burden shouldn't be placed on the residents to fix drainage issues tied to city infrastructure or long-standing citywide problems.

Residents should not have to repeatedly absorb the cost, stress, and property damage.

Grants are critical for Fort Smith.

Asking for a report is not criticism, it is transparency.

Accountability is not an attack.

In every workplace, employees are expected to perform follow policies and produce results.

City government should be no different.

Lastly, I would like to see more grants for law enforcement.

We need enough officers to serve every area of the city.

That's not only protects the residents, it also protects the officers that put their lives on the line for us every single day.

When staffing is stretched too thin, it affects response times, coverage, safety, and morale.

If the answer is to sell the crane and whole hog building to have enough funds to create jobs, and uh give them necessary equipment, then they should be sold immediately.

I have the most utmost respect for our officers and our law enforcement, and I pray that they all stay protected and safe.

Thank you.

Next we have Bill Hollenbeck.

Good evening, Mayor and Board of Directors.

First, I want to thank you all for your service to the city.

As your former sheriff and uh school chief of police, I understand the sacrifices that you all make to serve the public.

Although we may at times disagree with the decisions that are made here, I believe most citizens recognize the sacrifice and the public service that does require to uh be in public service.

I also like to give thanks and our prayer to Officer Kyle Newman and his family for a full and speedy recovery, as well as the other courageous officers who stepped in harm's way to stop that violent gum.

My wife Karen and I are praying for them, and we thank them all.

I'm here tonight to talk to you about the citywide movement to change our form of government, not to criticize the board, but to speak to all of you about the opportunity that's before us.

But the reality is that across our country and even here in Arkansas, many citizens feel that their voices truly are not heard, that they are overlooked.

But what matters most is how we choose to respond to that perception.

How do we choose to respond to that here in Fort Smith?

The comments that were made during a public meeting by our former city administrator created anger and frustration among many citizens, including me, whether intended or not, it has had a ripple effect that has been real.

It's left some people feeling discouraged about the relationship with our city government.

But I believe moments like this also creates uh opportunities.

Opportunities to rebuild confidence, opportunities to strengthen trust, opportunities to remind the people of Fort Smith that their voices do in fact matter.

The petition effort to allow the citizens to vote this November on a possible change in the form of government is not about attacking individuals or dismissing the hard work that the men and women on this board have conducted.

It's about giving the people a voice in shaping the future of our city.

At the heart of this discussion, it's not simply whether Fort Smith should have it as city administrator or a strong mayor form of government.

The heart of this discussion is trust.

It's about the feeling, it's about citizens feeling connected to the process and confident that their government welcomes the public input rather than fearing it.

Allowing the people to vote on this change of government sends a powerful message that Fort Smith believes in civic engagement, that Fort Smith values open dialogue, and that Fort Smith trusts its citizens to participate in important decisions about their community.

Change can feel uncomfortable.

There's absolutely no doubt about that.

But with change, it also creates hope.

And hope brings people back into the conversation.

Hope increases participation, hope restores confidence, that government still belongs to the people.

Tonight this board has an opportunity to make a statement, not just to Fort Smith, but to the communities across Arkansas, that here in our city, our city government listens to the people.

They listen to our citizens.

Here we welcome involvement.

Here we believe the public deserves a voice.

I do understand that there is some concern about putting that change of government on the ballot in November is too soon.

However, I say that the citizens of Fort Smith are smart enough and informed enough to be able to differentiate the ballot initiative of change of government versus the current mayor directors and city directors' election.

It is clear enough that these two are separate items, and the citizens know this.

Pass or fail, this is the process.

Regardless of where each person stands on this issue, I believe we all want the same thing.

A stronger Fort Smith, a more united community, and a government that its citizens can trust and believe in.

So the question posed to you on the board is this.

What type of message and what type of statement do you all want to make?

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your service, and I also thank you for your consideration to vote tonight to place the change of government initiative on November's ballot.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council for letting me get up here.

Tell you a little bit about my history.

My parents had O'Neill Flowers shop before that.

My granddaddy came from Greece and he created Little Jim's Cafe.

And it's in the history books because it had blacks eating on one side, whites in the other later in the 40s when nobody could eat anywhere.

And he never had any trouble.

It's in the history books, little Jim's Cafe.

So my family goes way back.

My background, I worked professionally for the Boy Scouts of America.

I had seven assignments and four councils in three states.

And I raised money.

I created big community groups.

I had committees.

I had 5,000 people at Camperie.

I had a sporting clay, generated $50,000 in one day.

Now that I'm back home, I've been home for four years, I've been gone, and what I do now is like the Regional Arts Center, I helped them with raising money at their gala and Reynolds Foundation, the Lutheran School Gala, the Blues Association, and the Boys and Girls Club Garden.

I helped them.

So and then I work at two ranches.

One at 6,000 acre ranch were turned into recreational property at Yaleville, and one at Rudy, Arkansas.

So I stay busy.

I don't have time for politics.

But if your time is up and it's a change time, think about moving on and give these people a chance to vote.

The catch is you all need to take your time because as a district chair, as a professional, I picked the district committee and the finance guy for the whole district, like five counties.

I had to live with them for one year.

So if I made a mistake, guess what happened?

Everything went down.

So if some of these are coming up, take your time, pick out somebody, everybody will help with.

You look at some of these other governments up north and other places, they've had this for a while, it's working.

Give them a chance to do that.

And then some of you other city council guys.

If you're tired of what you're doing, but you're still elected, but you want to step down, don't have an ego.

Just step down and give people room.

Give people room.

That's what I had to do.

Places I had to work.

But anyway, thank you all for your time.

Next we have Joey McCutcheon.

Okay.

Good evening.

I'd like to offer my thoughts and prayers to Officer Kyle Newman.

We have at least five board members who favor putting the change of government on this ballot.

Directors Rigo, good, Christina Kat Savis, George Kat Savas, and Neil Martin.

In the May 12th study session, hear what those five, what you five board members said regarding placing this issue on the ballot.

Director Rigo.

In nine years I lived in Fort Smith.

Anyone who talked to me about this subject knows that I very much appreciate, I'm very much support changing our government to a strong mayor form of government.

I saw firsthand the positive and necessary changes in Colorado Springs.

Of dozens and dozens of first-class cities in Arkansas.

Fort Smith is only one of three, who has city administrative city administrator form of government.

Is a clear indication that we are severely behind the times.

Then made the motion to put the change on the November 27th ballot.

Director Andre Good.

And I agree with him.

He said I have no problems with the citizens being allowed to vote.

I am all for that, and I've always have been.

Seconded Director Rigo's motion.

Director Christina Kat Savas.

For a city our size, we are out, we've outgrown the city administrator form, and everywhere I go, this is what people want to talk about.

The board should send this to the ballot.

I would love to see it on the November 2026 ballot.

I trust the voters of Fort Smith trust to make informed decisions for their city.

For us to sit up here and say we know better than the people out here, if that's the attitude, then we've got bigger problems than just the form of government.

Director George Kat Savis, the only director to have signed the petition that we support for November of 2026.

Billy, that's not true.

I've signed it.

All right.

Well, that makes two.

Director.

Thank you.

Director, Director Neil Martin.

He made the motion placing it on the November 26th, 2026 ballot.

He said he disagreed with placing it on the the uh November uh 2027 ballot.

Directors, the citizens of Fort Smith have heard your commitment to getting this on the ballot.

It's your job to figure out the details.

But ultimately, make this it make sure this issue gets on the ballot that you have committed to doing.

I want to be very clear here.

Some of you may not personally support changing Fort Smith's form of government.

That's fine.

It's your opinion.

You can vote against it at the ballot box just like we can.

You can you can campaign against it.

You can explain to the people and tell them why you're not for it.

But you should not tonight play games to make the people feel like their vote doesn't matter.

We all know how this happens.

This board should this board should make sure can make sure that neither option happens.

One vote fails 3-4, the other vote fails 3-4.

And then some people can walk out of here.

You guys can walk out of here pretending this was just an agreement over timing.

We know further that we're gonna face on this petition a lawsuit.

We know that the city clerk are gonna strike strike names off of this.

We know there'll be a lawsuit, we know the hurdles we face.

But if you keep it off the ballot and if you do that, let's be honest about what you're saying.

You're saying to the people of Fort Smith that you're too excuse the French, damn stupid to decide this question for ourselves.

You're saying you know better than we do.

You're saying this board should decide whether citizens are even allowed to vote on the future of their own city government.

One of you is already saying the citizens of the Fort Smith are too stupid to analyze the change of government in the next six months.

You're wrong if you think that the people of Fort Smith are not stupid, and they're not too stupid to understand this issue.

They can hear both sides, they can study it, they can decide for themselves.

If you oppose this change, fine.

Make your case to the voters, but don't play games tonight.

Tonight, get it done.

We want it on the 26th ballot, but if you put it on the 27th ballot, we want our vote one way or another.

Don't trust the people, trust the people, let them vote, don't betray our trust tonight.

Regnant populace.

Next we have Jacqueline Hooper.

Who?

Jacqueline Hooper.

I apologize.

That's it.

Hi.

So a lot of things.

Um I'm not someone who's ever spoke publicly like this before.

But a couple of things I want to say.

He just said that we're not stupid.

He's right, we're not.

Um, and Mr.

Eduardo Guzman was talking about his neighbor.

Hello, my name's Jacqueline Hooper, and I'm his neighbor, and these are the petitions that I'm walking around with.

In my neighborhood and every neighborhood that I can, I'm walking nine to ten miles a day, getting signatures, and I will continue to do that.

If you don't push for us, I will do that.

My reasoning for doing this is pretty embarrassing, Mr.

Martin.

I've spoken to you privately, but I decided to be brave.

I'm glad you're here.

Thank you.

Um, one of the main reasons that drove me to this is because Mr.

Dingman, I came to your office to speak to you.

I was turned away.

By your secretary.

She told me I had no way to talk to you.

I'm sure you were never given my number and never told I wanted to speak to you.

April 15th, I'm shaking so bad.

I'm sorry.

April 15th, 2026, I was sexually assaulted in my apartment.

This could have been prevented if the city prosecutor would take my complaints for harassment seriously.

He plainly says on the City Fort Smith prosecuting page that he will not prosecute things that are social media.

And he told me himself personally at the Marvin Altman Fitness Center that he doesn't really like to do anything with phones because it's hard to prove and subpoenas are expensive.

My sexual assault could have been prevented.

He could have been in jail for harassing me.

He could have been held accountable, but he's not, and he's still not.

It further went more to the fact that this goes into state, but the state told me that because he is not my boyfriend or my husband, and I don't live with him, I did not qualify for a protection order.

That is a state issue, I am aware.

I now have a protection order that the city is ignoring.

Why?

Because Colton Pace, the city prosecutor, says I don't have proof to give him that he can take to court and win.

Instead of letting a judge see my case, he's being the judge himself.

I am exhausted, I am not sleeping, and now I'm really not gonna sleep until this is on ballot.

Because I come from Fayetteville, where it is a very strong mayor government.

I am a Republican voter, not that that matters, but I voted for Mr.

Lionel Jordan, who is a democratic man when I was in Fayetteville, and I would do it every time because he was the right choice.

So when I seen a mayor that would speak to me in person, and now I live where a city administrator doesn't even know my name, but Mr.

Jordan does, he's my friend on Facebook.

Please do better, and please think about Colton Pace, because he's not the right choice for our city.

Thank you.

Next we have Phil White.

He did it all.

Okay.

I'm gonna be taking the other side, so they'll start throwing rocks at me.

So I get ready.

Mayor, I want to thank you for your leadership.

You've done a great job as mayor of our community that I love, born and raised here.

Um had family members that work for the city, uh, water department, my great uncle was the chief of police, and uh so my aunt worked at the water department and took money.

Um the city, I owe this community everything that's happened good in my life, and probably some bad happened, but that's probably my fault.

I hear two issues here tonight.

One is the ballot.

26 or 27.

Do y'all pass it and forget about uh signing the ballot or let him take it to the ballot?

Well, there's a reason I figure that they don't want to have to do the ballot, they might not get enough of the votes, enough of the signatures that are qualified signatures.

That's the only legitimate reason I can see.

They say they want to put it to the people, let the people decide.

Okay, get the signatures, do the process.

That is the process.

Y'all can bypass the process, I understand, if I'm understanding right.

I went to a forum last week over at the bakery of an attorney that was uh came from Little Rock, I believe he was, uh, to explain the two forms of government.

The transition's not gonna be easy if we changed the government.

That's gonna be cumbersome and difficult.

And you're gonna hit some rocky or some rocky roads, and it'll be tough.

But on the petition, let them do the petition.

If they get them, it goes to the vote.

The people decide.

If they don't get the uh petition done, and well they get another petition going.

But let the people decide.

That's fine.

That's one issue.

The other issue is the form of government.

I'm not for changing the form of government.

If there's anybody to blame, I want to thank Jeff for stepping in as the acting position.

The mayor has done a great leadership job, representing our community.

And the directors, if there's anybody to blame tonight, it's probably y'all.

You know, I like y'all, and you guys and some of you are good.

I have my doubts about some, but I'm trying to be honest with you.

Y'all haven't elected a administrator.

Been a year and a half.

Who's fault is that?

Whose fault is that?

So I would say, if anybody to blame, look in the mirror.

Y'all should have hired a director.

Things would have been a lot better.

Uh director, I'm sorry, administrator.

You know what I'm trying to say.

Um the mayoral form of government, this is not a popularity contest.

Would whirlpool take a vote out or whirlpool, they're not here, you know, ring.

Would they take a vote out in the plant and say, who wants to run and ring?

No, this isn't a popularity contest.

You need to hire an administrator that is a professional that understands this is a big budget.

Well, you got $300 million or more, over 2,000 employees, you need a leader.

You need somebody that understands uh finance, they understand regulation.

I'm sorry, but if I go to Walmart, and I've got a cashier, and says I want to be an accountant.

Well, maybe they could be, you know.

You need to hire somebody that knows the job.

This isn't a popularity contest, folks.

I appreciate that this is a community thing, and everybody needs to think seriously about it, but it is not a popularity contest.

You don't want the person that can smile the best and get the best votes.

You want somebody that is an administrator, they understand business, finance, law.

That's my point.

Next we have Chris Cadelli.

Sorry.

Well, I think he laid out a great case for the changing government.

The fact that we got four directors that pretty well run this show, three that do their best, but never can find the fourth vote for anything conservative at all.

So I thank you for your comments.

Um also I want to start by, you know, saying that my thoughts and prayers are with Officer Newman.

Um I hope God's hand is on him and his family.

Uh, I'm gonna reserve the rest of my comments about the uh change of government for the agenda item.

Um I want to go back to last week's study session.

I gotta admit, the first item from last week's study session was a real head scratcher to me.

Uh I sat here and uh listened to Directors Settle and Rigo express real concern for the lack of a cap on our savings.

Um, you know, for the um various operating funds for a moment.

I thought I I thought somehow I ended up in the twilight zone.

Then I thought, uh-oh, someone's probably got a 251-foot water slide they need to unload.

And director Settle probably learned about it and found out, hey, that would give us the tallest water slide in the world.

Or maybe this is an effort to find the mountain of money we're going to need for the new part they want to put the reckless spending cock, as I affectionately call them, for the new part they want there at the old ACME brick site.

Nevertheless, as a concerned citizen, I've sat through numerous board meetings where funds for various critical needs weren't available.

Not to mention the fact we just completed budget cuts across the board, asked a lot of departments to make really tough decisions, didn't fill vacant positions, etc.

I was also here for a recent meeting where the board inform was informed by one of the department heads at the water department that we routinely or that he's routinely having to deal with operating in crisis mode.

Additionally, I was here when we heard that the uh the critical need to replace patrol units.

My point is I don't understand the need to study for a problem that clearly doesn't exist, and finally, I just have to say the pattern of disrespect hurled at citizens from various city officials is very disappointing.

Whether it be Mr.

Rigo, who in the past called a citizen a charlatan, and his public opinion that he expressed last week that the citizens somehow didn't have the intelligence to be able to properly educate themselves on the change of government within six months' time.

That was a huge insult.

We certainly can't forget Director Settle floating the idea that if any irreg irregularities are found in the Parrot Island audit, they're probably from the high school kids working at missions, and of course, the most egregious of all when the former disgraced city administrator called a citizen stupid on the mic on a hot mic.

The frequent calls for decorum really should start with the board.

Thank you.

Next we have Lavon Morton.

I thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I'm LeBon Morton.

I live in Fort Smith.

I'm here to address the financial statements that are produced by the financial department and the history of the financial statements.

There was some I watched last week's board meeting, and there were some questions raised about the accuracy of the financial statements, and I want to address those.

I'm a CPA.

And I've been on the audit committee for the 25 years that's been in existence, all but two years.

Now the history of these quarterly financial statements that were the subject last week.

When I came on the board, there were no quarterly financial statements.

So you get all the way to the end of the year, and you had no idea where you were until you saw the budget comparison.

No idea, and I would ask questions, and I still got nowhere.

So I asked if that could be done.

And Andy Richards, to his credit, was able to use the new system that was installed in 2018 and put produce those financials without a lot of work.

There's a lot of information in there that I found them to be very accurate over time.

When I have questions, I call Andy and I have questions almost every quarter, and those are always explained.

So I think they are accurate.

And I would say a question was raised about auditing the quarterly financials.

No public company in the United States, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, none of those have quarterly audits.

They're too expensive.

You have to have a once-a-year audit.

For the city, it costs between 150 and 200,000 to get the audit.

It would cost probably $150,000 every quarter if you had an audited quarterly financial statement.

So it would be a gigantic waste of money because in all the years I've been on the audit committee, there have rarely been any significant adjustments to the financials.

And for the three uh city directors who sit on the audit committee, and I'll say they they ask very good questions and they pay attention, they attend the meetings.

And for the four citizens, or the three, three in addition to myself, two of whom are C CPAs, one of whom is a very respected and uh experienced businessman.

We have a very good committee, they ask good questions and they get answers, and we produce a really good product.

And I actually talked to the audit partner this afternoon in the audit that's been done so far up to this point, there have been no real issues found, and we'll have the full audit within uh 30 or 40 days.

So I just want to say the financial statements are reliable, and I would also like to say to Dan Williams, that I would be happy to meet with you and your group, and I won't won't say I'm gonna be able to answer all the questions, but I'll try and I'll point you to the people who can.

And I would say in my time looking at the budget, I understand the fact that the budget is hard to figure out and uh complicated.

So I know that when you when you look at that, and all of you do too, you know from the years you've spent looking at the budget that's very difficult to figure out.

So I'm not surprised since some things appear to be hard to reconcile, but I would say at the end of the day, they will reconcile.

The city has very good financials.

We have very good, hardworking department heads, and we need to think about those department heads who really try to do a good job.

Sometimes they're the victim of things that happen to them that they have no control over, but uh everyone I ever worked with in the six years I was a director, and in the time since has always worked hard and done the best they could.

I'd like to say one more thing about the city billing for water.

I've helped out some individual customers who uh contacted me about their water bill.

Some people watered their yards in the month of March.

We had not switched to winter averaging at that time, so they got charged the full sewer charge on all the water they use for watering their yards, and the the practice is they don't get charged for that.

The city should make the effort to go through for anyone who got charged the sewer charge on thousands of gallons of water that went on the yard and reverse that charge.

I know they will you will if you ask for it, but you need to take a look at that, I'd say, and make sure that the city is fair to all the citizens on that because it's 200, you know, for the people I helped it was $200 for the month of uh April, I think.

So that's all I've got.

Thank you.

Next we have Jason Skirbitz.

I apologize if I mispronounced your last name.

Y'all are gonna have to forgive me.

I've never spoken in public like this before either.

I usually don't get up here for the simple purpose that I don't have or I don't do a very good job of controlling my temper or my tongue, and I'm having a struggle with that right now, looking at this board of directors.

Shame on you guys.

Shame on you for the piss poor job that you have been doing to the city of Fort Smith, not for the city of Fort Smith.

And some of you I do happen to agree with up there, you know who you are.

But the Fab Four, you guys are a disgrace to this city to every voter that mistakenly believed what you have told them and put you in that chair.

I lost a good bit of sleep last night deciding and running through my mind what I might say to you guys without getting arrested.

And I apologize if you're offended and your decorum has been besmirched.

I wish you were as concerned about working for us, because that is who you work for, by the way.

I wish you were as concerned about that as you are your precious decorum.

I can't really elaborate any better than what these guys before me have already said on the change of government topic and other topics, they've said it a lot better than I can.

But I just want you to know and remind you, and I would mind you every chance I get.

Next we have Joe Elskin.

And I think that a lot of it is very helpful.

For the future.

I don't think they do.

So my concern is that in five months remaining that there be a campaign that would educate people on the details.

I mean, this is complicated.

This is not easy.

They need to know what they're voting for.

They can vote for change, but they need to know what that change is.

Um I also think that a big concern of mine is the leadership, the right leadership.

Because you looked for a city had been for over a year.

And it's really the person, their integrity, as Kim said, uh, you know, their honesty, integrity, and the skill set that they have.

This is not an easy job.

And finally, um are not perfect.

I'm not either, but um you just organized police department because they do shoddy shit and under the table shit and give special preference to different residents.

I'm involved in a serious hit and a run.

The person had surgery, taking painkillers.

I was with two city detectives in City Hall a few weeks ago for the record.

I can't lie.

What it is is what it is.

When the car was me and a fact that it came out black.

Now it's black and sober.

There's three felons that live in the building.

He's repairing it.

The cops show up.

She moved from the passing lane into the slow lane and clean the track the direct trailer.

The cop says, I'm gonna let you go, no paperwork.

Well, I won't see the paperwork.

Then I'll get on to Colton Page.

He's a pig to the public, he's cradled.

He's rocked the sex offender, Chris Dalopolis on Townsend Avenue that owns every city car lot on that road.

I'm going after him and the chief of police because my vehicle was stolen because he uses a mechanic shop, Wizard Auto, and they try to jack my shit and told my vehicle.

I reported stolen because of the corruption and the legalized organ organ, the mob is like working with the police department here.

It's protection.

There's a trooper today in Missouri, 13 felonies involved with tony legal vehicles.

He tried to tell me the landlord had a tote.

The landlord didn't have a tow.

Are in bed together, and it's far from over.

Colton Page dragged his feet with me for six months.

He's a human piece of shit.

And I'd like to see him in a jail cell where he belongs because he abused me.

And I'm a senior citizen.

He's a convicted sex offender and a money launderer and gone to prison.

I'm not a felon.

I have no record.

You people are all a piece of shit the way you represent us in this city.

Very pissed poor.

Have a good day.

Well, it's true.

I'm telling what it is.

That concludes citizens' forum.

Thank you.

With that, we will go to the first item on the agenda.

Thank you, Mayor.

The first agenda item this evening includes two distinct ordinances placed on tonight's agenda by the board from last week's study session discussion.

Both items relate to a petition to call for a special election to consider a change to the former municipal government for the city of Fort Smith.

Item 1A would present such a petition based on establishing an election date of November 9, 2027.

Adoption of one ordinance or the other would represent the governing body's petition to set such election at the appointed date, but only one ordinance or the other may be adopted.

If neither ordinance is adopted, the citizen-led petition process may still proceed to establish such an election, presumably in November of 2026.

With that brief introduction, I'll defer to the board's discussion.

Okay.

Madam Clerk, are there any citizens' comments?

Yes, we have eight individuals that would like to speak on this item.

How many?

Eight.

Okay.

Eight.

And the first being Ken Fodge.

Each person will have two minutes.

Point of inquiry.

Are these uh folks specifically signed up for 1A or 1A and 1B?

There are certain people that have only put one and then 1A, one B together.

And so are they all being handled right now?

Yes.

What difference is it, Mike?

Well, what difference is the mic?

May we proceed to citizens' comments, please, Mayor?

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Um, since the board decided to put this on the agenda, and for discussion and for the board to vote on, they should not delay placing it on the ballot in 2026 for reasons of convenience or political advantage.

It should be placed on the ballot this year so that citizens have the opportunity to vote on it sooner rather than postponing consideration until 2027.

Citizens want it to be on the ballot.

Citizens should have it on the ballot for 2026.

Whatever they vote on, whether they agree with it or not.

The change of government, the citizens have a right to make that decision at the ballot and at the voting stations.

So it should be done 2026, not in 2027.

I believe the citizens are smart enough to make their informed decisions to do the research in order for them to decide what they feel is going to be the best representation of their city government.

Thank you.

Next, we have Shane McKinney.

I'm not in a big hurry.

I've been doing a lot of time on this, so sorry if I'm taking my time.

This is my second sign.

Is from my hands holding this sign for hours and hours and hours and hours.

A lot of people tell me I should get rid of it.

I want to frame it after we get a vote on this.

I'm gonna put it on my wall as a as a memory of how many hours and hours and hours I've spent out there, but I'm not the only one.

There's lots of other people that are out here.

Someone asked earlier about the signature number.

We're well over two thousand.

We will not stop.

I will not stop holding this sign until we get the number.

But when I finish this, we're gonna be fighting against the city to get a vote on it still.

We're gonna be looking at lawsuits, we're gonna be looking at uh signatures counting, not counting, and I'm gonna make videos about it, and lots of people are gonna see it, and it's not gonna be good for the city, it's not gonna be good for the citizens, it's not gonna be good for any of us.

The citizens clearly want to vote.

Uh, we had what 3,000 people turn out in the last vote that we had in the city?

We've got almost that in signatures already.

Um, you guys consider that to be a successful election.

We have people go to office, everything under less sometimes than what we've already gotten.

Some voter turnouts are less than the number of signatures we have in the city.

If we can make decisions around that as a vote, I don't see a reason why we can't recognize the people's desire for this.

I'll keep holding the sign if you want me to.

I won't stop.

Um, but I think the clean, simple, clear way is to answer all these people out here and just give us a vote.

Let us do it in November, not some election a year from now, because then we're just gonna be arguing about it for an additional year, and it's not gonna be good for anybody, and it's not gonna help anybody.

And I frankly believe in the citizens of Fort Smith to be able to make a decision, and I trust them to be able to vote on something.

The only reason to delay it is because you don't want the citizens to vote on it, you don't trust them enough.

I trust the people.

Next, we have Crystal Cadelli.

Good evening again, board.

Tonight I'm speaking in favor to put the change of government on the ballot.

We the people deserve accountability, transparency, and leadership, the answers directly to us.

The rally of residents to change the form of government didn't come out of nowhere.

It is coming from citywide frustration over reckless spending, a lack of respect for the citizens, and continued decisions that make it more expensive for families to live in Fort Smith.

The people have lost all faith in the majority of this board.

Mr.

Rego, Mr.

Good, Mr.

Settle, and Mr.

Kemp.

If you care anything about your constituents' voices at all, you will vote to put it on the 2026 ballot.

Holding a special election in 2027 will cost money that can be used on critical infrastructure.

I believe in the people of Fort Smith.

We are hardworking, intelligent citizens, and we are capable of studying the change of government over the next six months and decide for ourselves if we want change.

Whether it gets on the 2026 or 2027 ballot, this issue does belong for the people to decide.

And I'm hoping that you make the right decision tonight and save us the money of a special election and do the right thing for the people of Fort Smith.

Thank you.

Next, we have Kristen Kitchens.

So I would like to, we're gonna take a little um uh time travel thing here too.

June 22nd, 2022.

Ward two meeting at the um university.

I came in from town, and I had been um to some oil and gas commission meetings in Little Rock, and I had realized about special permits, and I brought up about a well name AP 03131 10268 in a FEMA flood zone, Danny Gordon May.

And um we're not supposed to have um natural gas well beds in the flood zone, period, and I let them know that with our flood administrator, which has been Gefkin at the time, and the designated after that was Dingman, and I put this on the record, and Andre spoke about it, and nobody set this thing down after I brought it up, right?

So I want to know how we're gonna shut this down after bringing up again today, right?

Because this is what happens with our form of government government, nothing gets done.

I come up here and I tell these things, and nobody checks on it, nobody calls me, nobody does anything.

So I want to know like what if Andre and I are gonna work together on this and we're gonna go get it shut down because it's in a daycare, and I told them about it if that's a daycare right there in Ward Two, the whole nine yards, and I just really honestly want to know how I'm gonna be able to get you guys to do something I can ask you and tell you about.

Point of Barbara, excuse me.

Uh-huh.

Uh, if you would keep the conversation on the item on the agenda.

Well, this is why, because I'm I'm trying to explain to everybody why this form of government isn't working because it should have been fixed years ago.

Okay.

Amen.

Thank you.

Next, we have Joey McCutcheon.

I do I do want to say that this morning and yesterday morning, we got up real early.

And uh this morning uh Ron, who's back on the fourth row, literally just got out of surgery, you know, and he makes his way to walk on a street corner and hold a sign.

And yeah, you he's worn out those signs.

You know, I haven't decided who I'm voting for mayor, but this guy over here cares, he's willing to stand.

We've put in each of us probably 40 or 50 hours standing on street corner, and it's worth it.

It's what our government, it's what our it's what our our foundation of our government, the right to petition, free speech rights, and I value that.

People have asked me, why don't you run for mayor?

I don't want to run for mayor, I don't want to run for city director, I don't want to run for state representative, but I'm gonna be fighting for freedom.

I'm gonna be fighting for transparency, I'm gonna be fighting for accountability, I'm gonna be fighting for citizen engagement because you know, Neil, you've been you've been there several times on the street corner.

You've you've come by, and I and I appreciate that.

George has because we may not get we may have got 15 signatures this morning, but what we did it was about awareness because we're fighting an awareness campaign so that people will show up because that's the that's the biggest part of this, because we can have any kind of government form of government that we want to have, but if people aren't engaged, it will fail every time, and clearly we need good folks serving on our boards and I disagree with with some of the things Director Rigo or Director Martin or at various times, but you know, you are serving and you are engaged, so I can I can deal with that.

Give the people the right to vote.

That's what I'm asking for.

They're engaged, believe me.

We will get our signatures.

There is no question, but that's only part of the equation.

We want awareness, uh, but we appreciate a vote on the November 26th.

But we want this on the ballot so that the people can make the decision.

And they deserve that that trust.

And I I appreciate it.

I appreciate you you giving me the opportunity.

And let's not forget the young man who came up this morning.

And it was late in the day and it was starting to rain.

And but he came up and he wanted to express what his concerns were.

And you know that's power.

When people take that time.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Next we have Chris Cadelli.

Yeah, I think it's pretty obvious that a no vote on this is going to be hard to distance yourself from.

I fully support this ordinance, especially for 2026.

I don't think there's any reason to delay this for a year.

Um I look forward to having a strong mayor council form of government, like nearly every other city in Arkansas has.

Next we have Lavon Morton.

Okay.

We have Carl Nevin.

Okay, good evening, board.

I'm gonna make this brief.

I know we've had we've listened to a lot of people.

I would like the board to vote on this second proposal, one B, because I think the voters already know how they're gonna vote.

I think they deserve to vote in the November election when we also vote for governors.

Thank you.

With the exception of Mr.

Morton, that concludes the citizens' comments for item one.

Thank you very much.

Just time.

Um we need a motion to adopt ordinance either 1A or 1B.

No, I want to make a motion with the rules.

I want to make a motion to adopt B with suspension of the rules.

Second.

Mayor, I have a point of inquiry.

It's not handled in order.

Because I made the motion, or because somebody we're gonna we're gonna do A for has nothing to do with the he said it wasn't it?

I made a motion.

What's the problem, Rigo?

I made a motion of inquiry.

Cat Sabbath.

Well, okay.

Okay.

That's this good.

Okay, all right.

Well, seriously, see your motion to be in court.

I made it already.

I asked if these were going to be handled in order, and that was my question.

I did what the mayor said.

Anybody want to make the motion?

Let's let's let's do this.

Let's handle them in the order that they're presenting.

I made a motion for item B.

Is there a second?

No, we need to vote on it.

We should not we should do these in chronological order.

Why would we do 27 before 26?

Yeah.

That's a question about how they were ordered in the agenda.

Let's let's vote on it's an order on the agenda.

Mayor, this is this is this is a trap.

If we don't vote vote on B first, this is a trap, because they're gonna turn down one just so it won't get on the ballot at all.

That's exactly what's gonna happen.

Let's vote on them in the order they're presented on the agenda.

And I don't think either way will make a difference.

So can we can we vote on B?

If A passes, can we vote on B?

We're gonna vote on A first.

Then we can vote on B.

Then we're gonna have a vote on B.

But if A passes, then there's no vote on B, correct?

If A passes, then the board would determine what passes and what does not pass.

Can we make a motion to reorder them in chronological order?

Let's vote on let's vote on A first.

So mayor, I do I do want to say something here.

Whenever we've in the past have had a um an item with an A and a B.

I don't know.

Whoever whoever made the motion, that's what we voted on first.

And if if that doesn't pass, we can do the we can do the opposite.

I don't I don't recall that normally we vote we vote on them in order to present it.

So can we point of inquiry?

Um, whereas, if if there are any more outbursts like that, we will ask that they be dealt with.

What?

Come on, let's get to that.

Let us get this worked out real quick.

We're gonna vote on item A.

We're gonna go by the agenda where the agenda is set.

Okay, we have a motion to adopt either one A or one B with suspension of the rules, motion for one B.

Second.

Second, you wouldn't either one A or one B.

Mayor in the past would we have mid metal to decide to pick which one I'm gonna do.

So we've got a motion and a second for B.

Let's go.

That's fine.

Okay, is that fine?

Yeah, okay.

Okay, okay.

All right, Madam Clerk, read the ones.

Ordinance for one B is an ordinance presenting a p a petition to the mayor calling for a special election to consider a change to the form of government of the city of Fort Smith.

And this is for November 3rd, 2026.

Okay.

Are there any discussions from the board?

Director Neil Martin, and we'll come this way.

So I think we need to make sure that we have this question answered in 26.

Um it's obvious tonight that the citizens want this in 26, and and and I'll say this, and I talked to Shane yesterday and I've I've chatted with Joey.

Um over the last couple days.

Um I specifically wanted to see the level of uh support for this.

I didn't sign the petition.

You guys all saw that.

I didn't sign the petition because I wanted to see the level of support.

I see the level of support, it's there.

So and I've I appreciate all you guys that have gone out and and worked for this.

To me, that it it it shows it shows me something.

A couple things to think about.

We have an acting city administrator that is in limbo with this, along with all the staff, Maggie, all our department heads.

They're in limbo about who their leader is.

And if it goes into 2027, they're in limbo for another 18 months.

We're in an active city administrator search.

If we wait to 2027, that search will produce no fruit.

Nobody will come.

We got to answer the question.

The citizens need to answer the question in 26.

So whether it's change of form of government or stay form of government, we can move forward.

We can move on in a direction.

Like some people said tonight, doing it in 2026 prevents additional costs in 27.

27 is an off-year.

Something of this magnitude does not need to be in an off year.

It needs to be when everybody's already coming out to vote, either 26 or 28.

26 is when it needs to happen.

It gives people two years to prepare and plan for their executive if it passes.

So we've got support, but they are really practical things that we need to consider as a board in putting this forward.

It needs to be 2026.

2027 is problematic in many ways.

So I'm asking the board, let's do it in 26.

Let's get the question answered in November, and then we can move forward.

You know, last week I feel like we were kind of blindsided with the idea of moving this to 2027.

Um, when Director Rigo and I placed this um on the agenda for discussion back in March, 2027 was never mentioned.

And one of the things that came up was that there's a desire for um this to be successful, but I would say that success requires legitimacy, and legitimacy comes from maximum voter participation, forcing this into a low turnout special election in 27 is voter suppression by design.

We should not be condescending to the voters by deciding how educated they are.

That's not our job as a board.

Our job is to send it to the ballot in a timely manner and let people decide how they want to be governed.

I feel like this delay is designed to determine if there's a placeholder versus a qualified and competent mayor in office in 2027.

I mean, you know what you can do in five months?

I mean, I don't know what it is that you think people need to study.

You can take a full college course on civics and learn about every form of government in five months.

I mean, I I don't understand how much studying people need to do.

It is not uncommon for me, and I'm a reliable voter.

I vote in every election.

It's not uncommon for me to the week of or the week before I go vote to see what's on the ballot and do a little research and decide how I'm gonna vote.

I don't need five months to do that.

Um, you know, on June 2nd of 2025, Director Rigo, you were quoted in Talk Business, uh talking about that people need to decide the structure by which they wish uh to be governed, and there was no mention of doing that in 2027.

You know, people just want someone that is accountable to them.

That's what I'm hearing.

That's what I'm hearing tonight.

That's what I'm hearing when I'm out speaking with people.

Um, you know, if you look at all the information that we've received just over the past year or so that's been inaccurate, we were told the water slides would be 4.2 million dollars.

That was inaccurate.

We were told that due diligence had been done before we were presented with candidates to hire for our internal auditor, that was inaccurate.

We were told that new water meters would generate additional revenue, that was inaccurate.

We were told our debt service coverage was at 99%.

We needed another water rate increase in December.

That was inaccurate.

We didn't do it, and I think we saw last week we're sitting at 165% debt service coverage.

So there's a lot of things that have been presented that have been inaccurate, and people want someone they can hold accountable.

Um, you know, I feel like what the issue is that you're worried about an incumbency advantage for someone who's been fighting for people over the power brokers.

And this idea that they can't get the signatures is it's condescending and it's gatekeeping.

And to the gentleman, I think he left that said that this is the board's fault.

I agree.

So, you know, that's gone on for what 17 months now.

So we what we have here is we have a grassroots movement, and that's wonderful.

And I said um last week that's democracy at its best, and I believe that.

But we shouldn't need a grassroots movement.

We should be in touch enough with people that we're listening to them and valuing the wishes of the people we represent.

So I'm in favor of sending this to the ballot in 26 because I believe that's where success comes from, that's where legitimacy comes from.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, you know, we've all uh mentioned it, um, but you know, my family uh as well has been uh praying for Officer Newman uh and his family, uh the folks, all the first responders who've been very helpful uh through across multiple jurisdictions, and thank you, Director Martin Martin, for your powerful prayer to open the meeting um focusing on that.

So, as I said last week, I want our form of government to change.

I have a great deal of respect for the people working hard to collect signatures, and I respect the folks who've signed the petition and are passionate about this topic.

The fact remains that the soonest we could elect people in the new form of government is November of 2028.

I've heard from many constituents over the last few weeks, engaged regular voters.

They hear and learn about the multi-year timeline and the prospect of increasing our number of elected officials, and they ask me what's the rush.

I've heard no compelling logistical reason why this question should be placed on the ballot this year, a full two years before any elections can happen for new elected officials in a new form of government.

When there is the time available to make a change, why wouldn't you use it to try to inform as many people as possible about all facets of changing the form of government?

If it's a good idea today, why would it be any worse of an idea with the opportunity to involve more people in the conversation?

Good people can and do disagree about this topic and about timing.

If we place the question on the 2027 ballot, we'll have a significant amount of time to bring more people into this conversation.

Simply placing something on the ballot does not guarantee a successful outcome, and I believe that taking more of the time available to us and devoting it to building a strong consensus for success will lead to a winning vote.

I genuinely meant no offense or criticism to anyone by a proposing an alternative approach.

It was simply an idea to think about.

I want to thank everyone who's here tonight who's watching at home for the interest and passion they have in this topic, and thanks to my colleagues as well for your uh thoughtful uh consideration on this very important issue.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you, mayor.

I've taken quite a bit of notes and they're quite messy, so please bear with me.

But first, I want to make a statement that I trust our city staff, you know, and I trust the people in this community.

You know, when I say people in the community, that includes us too.

We are the people.

I believe you're all my life.

I love Fort Smith just as much as you guys do, and I work for citizens way outside more than citizens, citizens of war too.

And my record will speak to that.

And I know my record is not even calling and call it for question at this moment, but you know, we have to put our trust in each other to do what we say we're gonna do.

And in saying that, our city clerk's office does not and will not try to eliminate signatures.

You know, the petition um verifying uh procedure is what we all go through to get on the board.

Uh is what was what we have to do.

So the petitions need to be verified.

This is gonna be no different, and I assure you that the clerk's office will verify as many signatures as they possibly can.

So I don't see any problem with that where I'm hearing that people think that we're just gonna try to mark people off the signature uh petitions uh just because we're trying to not uh verify enough signatures.

Um second, you know, I was in the leadership for Smith class, and our quote for that year was about one by Margaret Mead, and it says never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world.

In fact, it's the only thing that ever has, and I absolutely agree with that.

So I have all the respect in the world for those citizens that are going out with the petitions, uh whether you're signing or just collecting the signatures, and I'm all for everyone getting behind this petition.

You know, at not any time have I said that citizens weren't smart enough.

You know, my second to Director Rigo's um motion to put it for 2027 was the fact that, again, it was a surprise.

It was not anything that we had talked about or I had even considered, but in talking to folks, I think, again, in talking to folks that had questions about well, what are we talking about, what are we doing, thinking that I wanted to give citizens that we should give citizens as much time as possible, not that they need it, just to have it.

I'm sorry, I don't know about you guys, but you know, I'm working double shifts this week.

I've got a niece at home who's waiting for me to babysit.

We have busy lives.

You know, I want to take that consideration in for the public who might not think like Christina Cassavis, saying five five months is enough.

You know, this is not, it's not rocket science, no, but it is a life-changing decision that we're gonna make, and I don't have a problem with one way or another, how the citizens vote.

I have no dog in the fight.

I'm going to continue to serve regardless as long as I'm up here, and that's what we do.

That's what I know I personally do.

Uh okay, I said that, said that.

Oh, someone spoke to uh the fact um about our staff uh and our citizens being put in limbo, and I absolutely agree with that putting on 2027.

So had we gone in order, you know, you would have heard me vote no on the 2027 um A1 Director George Cassavets, because this is not up for, you know, we're we're not trying to hold anybody hostage here, okay?

Um so I would have voted no for that.

Um, and that's all I have for now, but I do have other comments.

I just oh, oh yeah.

Uh Miss Kim Fodge um made a very important statement, and thank you for saying it.

You made a lot of good statements, but I absolutely agree the citizens have to stay informed, they have to stay engaged, and whoever the leadership is, they have to have certain qualities that we're all looking for, but the utmost quality is serving our citizens, you know, not just one group, not just one vocal group, not those that don't want to come out and vote, not those that aren't registered to vote, and there's a whole lot of that.

There's a whole lot of citizens in Arkansas that just simply don't vote.

There's even more in Fort Smith that don't vote.

There's even more citizens on the north side of Fort Smith that has a lower turnout.

So, all this all the citizens, all citizens don't want this change.

Not all citizens even want it on the ballot.

But I'm supporting you guys to put it on the ballot.

I'm supporting you guys to get the petitions done and get behind that effort.

Again, it's got to be a citizen-led effort, not politicized.

That's all for now, thank you, Director Kemp.

I do I do believe that Director George Cassavis is enemy, sir.

No, go ahead.

Go ahead.

I'm not so thanking.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, George, for your time.

Um, when I took office uh in January 25, I raised the question: is there any consideration or conversation around changing the form of government?

And there was none.

Um, then uh learning myself coming alongside, attending Arkansas Municipal League conferences, getting more involved, getting closer to government, uh hearing our department heads talk about the work that they're doing, how they were doing the work, raising questions to acting city administrator Jeff Dingman.

Um, the reason I brought it up was not so much a critique at the time of those people, but rather we had just terminated Director Carl uh acting city or administrator, not acting, administrator Carl Gefkin, that would have been a great time to figure out what we decided or would want to do.

And then I listened to my colleagues, and and what do we do?

We focus on an internal auditor search.

That took a while, as we've already talked about, and then from there uh we did a local posting and did a uh put it on a few um associations to look for administrator, but I think that was more of a look for local.

Is there local people that want to step into this role and let's see who in a local mindset would do that?

That was the premise behind that, and then when that did not bring forth that, we came back and said, now we want to do a national recruitment, and we identified uh one of the top recruitment firms in the nation to begin this work, and they've done their work, they've done what they've promised.

We contracted $35,000 of city taxpayer money to begin a city administrator search across the nation.

Um, they have put together a promotional piece after listening to the each of the board of direct uh board of directors that met with them one-on-one where they were able to make their case about what they would like to be included, and then they've put together a timeline in keeping with our director of human resources, and it's a timeline that moved fast by the end of July 31st.

At the same time, we see a candidate for office partnering up and saying, Hey, I'm going to do this, and he's done a good job of doing it.

The effort is there, it's a valid effort, it's a great effort, actually.

It's more than a valid effort, they already have over the two thousand signatures as they talk about, they're going to get it done.

For me, this is a principal decision.

We are government servants.

We are we were elected in this current form of government to hire a city administrator, and so therefore, for me, that is the task at hand, and why would we interrupt that task by taking away a group of people that have worked hard to put it on the ballot the way they want to put it on the ballot, how they want to put it on the ballot, pursuing their rights to exercise that and go forth.

Why did we wait so long for that effort to start?

I don't know, those are a lot of questions.

Why did we not entertain and roll out more discussion if this is such a robust topic that we're now getting into?

Why did we not invite in the Arkansas Municipal League?

Why did a resident have to do that?

Why did we not have honest dialogue looking at things and not pulling on things that are not true?

I mean, when I watch someone try to pitch this, we need to pitch it with reason and understanding and data and facts.

And for me, I I haven't seen the compelling case of why the board could do this.

Now, if it would been that they had turned this in and they had 3,200 signatures and 2,000 of them were thrown out, and it was egregious, and it was um, you know, wrong, then by all means, let's have this conversation as a board of directors.

But at this point, our job, out of the people that have spoken, we've heard from nine non-political candidates.

We have best of my estimation, I've been trying to look through my emails as quick as I could.

Uh, approximately I've had five emails about this topic, and we have a city of 90,000 plus people in a metro area much larger than that that are counting on utilities.

We talk about people needing water.

And then to me, to critique or look at a colleague such as Director Rigo, who has already said he's openly for it, and then just to watch him be benign tonight when he's been an advocate for it, shows me that this effort's maybe not as united or as informed as it should be, because why would we make enemies out of someone who really says they want to do it?

But instead of watching, I've taken copious notes sitting here, and it just it's not compelling why it is our job to take this away from the efforts that they have put forth our job by many who have not spoken to us in silence as agreement that we would hire a city administrator and use this form of government at its optimal strength.

And then if it gets to the ballot, as I suspect it will, then the people can make that decision then too.

But they've made their decision to put us in office.

They've asked us to do this.

I've already raised the question.

When the question was not discussed at that time, we moved into action.

That's what we have done.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Uh Director George Cassavage.

Cody, I next question.

If item B fails, then we're gonna vote on item A, correct?

Uh if there's a motion in a second, yes.

After item B, if it fails.

Well, the item B is on the floor, correct?

Right, it wouldn't be on the floor.

If it is turned down, then we vote on item A.

If there's a motion and a sentence, if there's a motion, it's okay.

Yes.

If item A gets turned down, then what?

We moved item two.

What?

We moved to item two on the agenda.

I can't understand you.

We move to item two on the agenda.

If I don't if both if you want to.

So we vote on a unit.

What I'm saying is both of them get turned down, then there's no there's nothing.

It's everything's null and void as far as the case.

No.

Well, if I may not be missing may not be understanding you.

If the board doesn't approve either option on number one, yeah, then that means the board has not adopted an ordinance to present a petition to the mayor.

Um, and so yes, that's correct.

The board has not done that tonight.

Uh, this board could do it another night.

Um, and so that would conclude the discussion on that item tonight, yes.

Okay, so the only thing we have left is a petition to get it on the ballot.

The only thing you're talking about the citizens' effort to get it on the ballot.

Yes, well, I mean, I'm not doing it.

That's certainly still valid, absolutely.

That's still valid.

That is still valid.

That's still valid if the board doesn't adopt something on item one, the citizens still have.

In fact, it's better than that.

If the board approves item A, which puts it on November 2027, that doesn't foreclose the citizen effort to put it on 2026.

That doesn't that supersede their petition to put it on 2026?

That's correct.

The citizens could still do that, and if if they do that process and it gets on the ballot in 2026, there would be no election in 2027 then.

Okay, so there's no midterm election in 2027.

There's no general election 2027.

It'd be a special election, correct?

It would be a special election on the second Tuesday in November, pursuant to that statute that we've signed in the materials.

Yeah, and you know special elections are very little voter turnout.

Which I mean it's just been like that forever.

But uh I I'm just um, you know, I believe in the people.

You know, if that's what they want, then that's what they should get.

I'm not in a position to tell somebody uh that that you don't understand what's going on, you need more time to understand it.

I think that that that's that that's that's ludicrous.

People, you know, all my years in the restaurant business, 50 years, I've learned one thing.

I don't care what race, religion, financial status or anything, color, people are smart, and but if you can't figure it out in four months, then somebody thinks that that there's a real problem somewhere.

Thank you.

I'm done.

Director Christina Savage, you were next in the queue.

Arkansas law allows for this.

There are two ways to get it on at the ballot through petition or through board action.

All we are doing is exercising our statutory power to send it to the ballot and let voters decide.

And I think it's also worth noting, if it did have to be a special election, it could have been March.

It doesn't have to be November of 27.

Because I asked there's no there's no election scheduled for 27, none.

If you're gonna do a special election, it could have gone on in March, but this is an effort to kill the momentum that's building.

And um, you know, I I would ask Director Rigo, you've been talking about this since at least June 2nd of 2025, so nearly a year now.

If you were worried if about education and you have an interest in this being successful, why didn't you start educating people at that point in time?

Additionally, we received um over the past week we received the brochure for um recruitment of a city administrator that had a salary of up to two hundred and sixty thousand dollars, which this board has not approved or appropriated money.

Um over 200,000 at least.

I mean 260,000, that was new to me, so I would I would ask Director Kim why was that figure okay?

Uh mayor answer, Mayor.

Yeah, okay.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um the board was emailed that and was asked to give feedback.

Did you provide feedback?

I did provide feedback, and I said you're misdirecting people telling them they're gonna make 260,000 coming here because we have not appropriated that.

We've never paid that much money.

So you're saying that Carl Gefkin's two hundred and five thousand dollar salary, then benefits did not go higher than two and five thousand?

260,000 is what's in the brochure.

Correct.

And his compensation package was about that much when totaled.

Let's let's get back on the item.

Well, no, that this is on the item.

This is related because we're talking about another city administrator at you know, evidently now 260,000.

I mean, we think we need to educate people, people should be educated.

Do you want to pay a city administrator 260,000, or do you want to hire a mayor and we'll determine the salary for that going forward?

Thank you.

Okay, Director Neil Martin was next in the queue, and then Director Regal, and then we'll go to Director Kim and then director good.

Yeah, I just I just want to make an appeal.

Um for 26, I feel.

Haven't talked to anybody, but I feel like we've got three votes for it for 26.

We just need one.

We just need one.

If somebody's open for it in 2027, I don't feel that's gonna pass.

Let's get it on 26.

We can have the education, and then at that point, it's it's on the ballot.

Those that won it, it's on the ballot.

It's in a normal election year.

We'll have good turnout.

Let's just, let's just, I don't think 27, just doing the math in my head.

I don't think 27 is gonna work.

Let's do it in 26, please.

Um I'm just I'm just appealing to my fellow colleagues.

Let's get it in 20.

If you're on the fence, if you want it in 27, and that's your that's your your number one thing, let's compromise and let's get it on 26.

Director Rigo.

No, thank you, Mayor.

Okay, Director Good.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um Director Christinka Savage.

Um, your statement that this was an effort to sabotage the petition uh effort.

Um, my again, my second to even suggest putting it on for 2027 was an opportunity for us to discuss it, which we're doing right now.

So, for you to say that my effort for doing the second was an attempt to sabotage this, is absolutely wrong.

My comments were not directed towards you.

They were in general, you said these efforts, and and again, I just wanted to clarify that this is not an effort to sabotage, it was to get more time for citizens and more time for us to discuss this, which we're doing now.

Secondly, and of course I've said this before.

Absolutely, I'm I blame the board for a lot of the problems we're in right now.

You know, and I did mention uh last week at the study session, uh I noticed a lot of the issues coming up on social media, uh, was addressing accountability and transparency.

You know, I'm all for that.

I believe we all are for transparent transparency and accountability, um, regardless of what was said tonight.

We all are fighting for accountability and transparency here, but when you have a fractured board like we have tonight, it makes that very hard to do.

And by action seen tonight, it's obvious.

The attacks, I mean, it's ridiculous.

I mean, we can't even have decorum amongst ourselves without the pettiness, and we want the citizens to do better.

Thank you, Director Rigo.

Uh Mayor, all I just wanted to say about um the time and the date picked or the thought that went into it.

Um, not only the personal experience that I had in Colorado Springs, but uh I remember I believe it was Mr.

McKinney mentioned the um very informative, very well put together uh document that was on social media this week from uh Mr.

Max Avery, I believe, where he uh talked about examples from four uh cities, a city in Virginia, uh, two cities in California, San Diego and Oakland, and then Fayetteville right up the road, um, that have made changes within the last 35 years or so.

Um, and the time of those changes, and it was the same in Colorado Springs, the time of making the change, asking the folks to make the change, and they were all put forward and led by citizens, as as has been the case here, that decision was made in all of those cases within six months or a year of then the actual elections where you pick people.

There's no um, I mean, I it's I find it fascinating to call a uh literally an ordinance that says you shall have a vote on this, somehow trying to stop people from having a vote on this.

I want the change to be successful, and I believe, as I said a few minutes ago, that the more people that come in to the conversation and the more chance you have to build a consensus for success will lead to ultimate successful passage of the change in the form of government, not just placement on the ballot.

That's all.

I mean, I I know there are people up here who don't believe me.

I know there are people out there that don't believe me.

That's okay because I look in the mirror and I look in my heart, and I know that what I spoke to you in the last two minutes is a hundred percent true.

Thank you.

Um Director Kemp and then uh Director Christian Savers.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just a point of clarity, really, the board will have the opportunity to set the salary, a range is a range.

Um the board should, if it does hire a subministrator, whatever the search ends up looking like, needs to match competitive environments within our culture.

And so that was the aim and the focus of the firm.

And I do want to be careful that this is one more point of why what I see in these conversations, changing the form of government won't save money.

I just I want to government's leaders that will be elected, then maybe needing a sub or department head or a chief of staff or a deputy in this way.

Uh, you know, I want to be careful we're we should pick this idea because it is more effective and efficient for the community, not necessarily evaluating dollars.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Director Christina Savage.

So the brochure says salary range, $260,000.

That's not total compensation.

That's not benefits included, that's salary range.

Just I just wanted to make that clarification because you're talking about benefits and total compensation.

So this would be 260,000 plus benefits for us the city administrator that you're pushing so hard for.

That's that's my belief that in a a midterm election we are going to see higher voter turnout than a special election.

Thank you.

Any other comments from the board?

Director said, thank you, Mayor.

Uh thank you, public for being here.

Uh to Chief Baker.

Sorry for you know uh Officer Newman.

It's it's a shame what happened in uh our prayers our family affairs here.

My wife has come, she rarely comes.

Uh, over the 20 years I've been a board member.

She's came maybe three times.

She's back in the back.

Um so I got a couple questions for Colby.

Uh so I'm really gonna go to some things.

So after last Thursday, um I reached out to people throughout the state.

Um last Thursday, John came to here and had a forum and I listened to it.

Uh I appreciate John coming here and talked to John afterwards.

It was a good felt it was good that people showed up and asked questions, he felt very good.

Um so I had a question that somebody asked me about the new form of government if it happened.

So I'm gonna ask that question first, then I'm gonna ask a timing on the constitutional officer.

So uh give an example.

Let's just say, for example, my wife decided to run for mayor and was a mayor.

Could she be mayor and I be a council member on the new form of government?

I don't know without looking.

Okay.

If we could find out, it'd be interesting to know that.

My other question is, but you were talking about the new form.

I think yeah, the new form.

If you can find that, we appreciate it.

Um, so I when I talked to people at this throughout the state, I I was trying to ask them, does this timeline make sense?

And I couldn't get it right, I couldn't get an answer.

I some people thought we needed this six months prior to the election, which have been May, uh May 2nd or May 3rd.

Some said 100 days or 70 days with the 30 days.

So my question is last week I re-watched what you said, and you used the word our opinion many times.

Did you ever vet the timing you told us to the Arkansas Secretary of State or the Attorney General?

No.

Shouldn't we know that first?

Because what happens if the timing you say is different than what they think?

Because we're all assuming that it's 26 to 28.

But I had people tell me they didn't know either.

Well, I don't know if I understand your timing question.

Well, we vote on 26 to change the form of government, but it then you have a re you have a re mayor vote in 28, and that's the mayor that actually runs.

Kind of what my question is, if we haven't vetted this what you gave to us through the Secretary of State or Attorney General, I'd like to know that timing for sure is right.

So your your timing question is the elections under the mayor council former government twenty-eight.

Yeah, what happens if they say nope, what happens in 26 starts the government 27?

Oh, there's I have no doubt that that's what I told you is correct.

Yeah, but I mean I need uh state constitutional officers tell me that.

Well, okay.

Uh I have no ability to get an opinion from the Arkansas Attorney General.

Uh, the AG will not.

But we can't call the Secretary of State right and find out if they if that's timing makes sense too, correct?

We can.

I'll be shocked that the Secretary of State is going to answer that question.

But we we can try.

Then how do we know that that is what the state constitutional state of Arkansas constitution is not to say it is?

It's not a constitutional question.

The timing question is clear in the statute.

The statute says following the approval of the change of form of government, the the uh officials under the new form of government shall occur at the next election required in the laws for those officials.

Yeah, what happens if the next election is March of 2027.

What because the statute says it's in November uh of twenty-eight.

But you also told us that the statute allows us to have election any time.

No, that's a special election.

But not the general election.

But according to state statutes, they only allow for two per year.

To what two elections per year by the state two specials?

No, two state two elections per year.

I guess my question is why didn't we vet this through the state?

Secretary of state or the or attorney general.

Well, I I wasn't directed to.

I'm confident in our opinion on the timing.

Uh we can certainly ask the Secretary of State uh if you want us to do that.

You know, uh to my board, I wish we had that.

I wish we had that answer tonight because I think it'd make it easier to understand this.

Well, you would write it into the ballot initiative, correct?

I mean, that's what would be written into the ballot initiative.

People would vote on would be the timeline.

I mean that would be not.

They're talking about the timeline to vote on the new officials.

Yeah, all that information would be included in the ballot initiative, would it not?

No, ma'am.

No?

And you know what what would be we're talking about on the ballot to change the form of government.

Is that your when you're talking about the ballot initiative?

When people go to vote, they would see the timeline.

No, ma'am.

No.

That's my point.

Why don't we?

Even if we well, I I that may never be on the ballot.

I understand that, but I to me we should have had that answer before tonight.

Thank you.

Just by one, I'm not done yet.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Go ahead and wrap up.

Thank you.

I've been quiet for two hours.

And I'm gonna blow some notes and say my piece, and then we're gonna do what you want to do.

I represent all citizens of Fort Smith.

The ones that are vote the ones that are registered voters and the ones that are non registered voters.

I represent everybody.

Andre and I have had have had a pass in this.

We both collected signatures while serving on the board.

We know what it takes to get signatures.

Correct, Dre.

George was there at the time, but he was against what we voted for.

We also have we also set precedent of what we did in the past.

Signatures were turned in, there were questions on those signatures, and then the board said, Okay, we see that there's enough signatures turned in, we need to vote this through, and the board put it on the ballot.

Precedent has set been set by this board already.

If there's three segments of signatures, as said already, turn those suckers in.

As Director Kemp said, give us a reason to put this on there.

But without anything, oh, while we're hearing this is something, give me a turn it in, and then if it doesn't like what we have it is.

The last thing is this.

I'm disappointed that we didn't contact Secretary of State Attorney General.

I think we should go on that path.

But listen to John last week talking about the transitional government and how whoever the mayor and the board at that time will have a massive say on salaries and things like that.

It begs me the question of this.

Should if you're running for mayor or family member current for mayor, or you have a family members considering running for mayor, or you might be considering running for mayor yourself, you should abstain for voting because you are going to potentially, as mayor, set the salary of that future mayor, and as elected mayor, you will have an up have a better chance of getting re-elected for the new government than you do anything else.

Because you're talking about comparing to Fayville, that's a 150,000 plus job, and they don't have water and sewer, and they don't have uh sanitation.

We run those departments here, which makes that job even higher.

So you're talking a thousand percent pay increase if you consider it favorable.

To me, if they turned it in and said, Hey, here's 3,000 and we're 200 short, it makes easier argument.

But I have not seen that at all.

But if you have a family member that's running for mayor, or you're running for mayor, or you're considering running for mayor, I would say you should abstain for voting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

It just time we're gonna take a 10-minute recess.

Just let me respond to that.

I I will abstain from voting on salary or anything related to that.

I've said that multiple times.

I will abstain.

I'm not abstaining from this, but I will abstain from anything to do with setting the salary, any of those parameters.

Colby, I had one question for you because we seem to create these fantastical scenarios to oppose things.

And.

So, I don't know.

So, I'm not.

So, I'm not.

So, I'm not going to be.

We're gonna reconvene.

Thank you.

Yeah, can we call the question on one B?

I would like to call the question on one B.

I will second that.

Okay.

That requires a vote on calling the question.

Okay.

And we will do that, madam Clerk.

Real quick, does it have to be seven O or is it just to have to be a majority?

Okay, majority.

Okay, thanks.

No, because I have one more very brief thing I'd like to point out.

Good.

No, if there's still more conversation.

Yes.

This is to call the question on voting.

Yes.

Settle?

No, I'm always allowed to sit our four directors to speak.

Martin.

Four in favor, three opposed.

Okay.

So now we need to now call the question.

Okay.

Um B.

Director Good.

No.

Dang it.

Kemp?

No.

George gets saved.

Yes.

Christina could say.

Settle.

Martin.

Yes.

No.

So the motion to point of clarity in what I was asking is with the abstention the motion fails.

So three to three.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Need a motion on item A.

I'll make a motion on item one A.

Okay.

We need a second.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Oh, with that, we will go to item number two on the agenda.

Item two is a resolution authorizing partial payment to Kraft Reynolds as a progress payment on the 2017 SSA remedial measures project number 19-15-C1.

This is presented for approval due to the dollar amount of the progress payment requiring board approval according to our procurement policy.

Deputy Director of Engineering Jimmy Johnson will speak to this item and answer questions from the board.

Jimmy, you're going to have to pull the microphone and speak into it, please.

So this uh the overall project was for nine million a little over nine million dollars.

And to date we've uh paid two million three hundred and forty-seven thousand dollars plus current payment is for one million one hundred and two thousand eight hundred and forty-three dollars and twenty cents.

Overall uh progress on the project is dollar-wise, we're 40 percent complete.

Time-wise, we've used 34 percent of the time, so we're a little bit ahead schedule on this particular project.

With that, I'll stand for questions.

Okay, thank you.

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

Yes, we have two.

The first being Shane McKinney.

They talk to you about several different cool extension uh settled, but I'm pretty sure the voters are gonna know where that landed.

Um I'm really disappointed right now, guys.

Um, this is a perfect example of a city administrative government working at peak efficiency.

Nothing happened.

Thank you.

Next for item two is Joey McCutcheon.

I just want to say this is another uh consent decree item.

Um we fought the battle several months ago.

Uh you know, where we we have a bid, I'm not real good with all this stuff, but we have a bid, and then it comes to the board, and it's you know what, 10 million dollars on this one.

The next one.

Well, I'm gonna speak to this one.

I'm just gonna say my same comments.

Uh I've asked the board and and I think Mr.

Dingman has answered this question.

I've asked that that we have an outside engineering firm independent of this city come and monitor uh this three hundred million dollar tax extension uh that we had uh so that so that uh so that it's not monopoly money anymore.

We have somebody who's watching what's happening with our taxpayer dollars.

We have somebody with knowledge outside of this city directing the projects, telling us, advising us, counseling us what's best first, what's best second, what's complying with the consent decree.

Um, and that's important.

It's important that we have an outside set of eyes, and it's important that before we vote on a bunch of other projects that we do this now.

You know, this is another thing that we've just put off and put off.

I talked about it when we were campaigning, when we were in the campaign.

When we were fighting the battle of should you vote for it?

Should you not vote for it, why should you, why should you not?

There was a talking point that we brought up that you need to have somebody who's got an outside set of eyes because we know that money's being squandered in this city, and uh, I mean, you know, we we can we can talk about numerous instances instances.

So, where are we on that process now?

Um because it needs to be done before we continue to play like we've got a bunch of monopoly money.

If I might respond to that, the program manager request for qualifications process is underway.

The request for qualifications are due uh tomorrow, May the 20th, and so pending pending receipt of those, we'll call through the all.

We made a directed effort to attract national firms to uh submit qualifications.

I haven't seen who's submitted yet, so uh tomorrow we'll know that, and then we'll know what our pool is to select from, and we'll go through our qualifications review and whittle those down and have probably a number of them, at least one or two, make uh direct presentations to staff for us to make a recommendation to the board to do program management for our consent decree projects.

The other thing I might spend, well, it's more related to items three and four, but you know, the with the bonds that we have issued uh that we issued in October, we do have spin down requirements in terms of being able to spend uh percentage of those dollars within a specified time frame, and so we are mindful of that as well in terms of how you know how we need to bring these projects to the board for getting them underway.

Okay, and for transparency, I'd like to say thank you, Mr.

Damie.

You did call me the other night.

We had this conversation, uh, and I appreciate your explanation tonight.

Thank you.

Okay, Madam Clerk, and was there anyone else?

That concludes citizens' comments on item two.

Okay, thank you.

We need a motion to adopt the resolution.

Some of second, thank you.

Any comments from the board?

Okay, seeing none, please call the roll.

Director Kemp.

Yes.

George Kit Savis?

Yes, Christina Kit Savis.

Yes.

Settle?

Yes.

Martin, yes, Rego.

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Passes seven in favor, zero opposed.

Okay.

Item three.

Items three and four are related to consent decree remedial measures project number seventeen-13-C1.

The proximity map is on page 21 of tonight's agenda packet.

Item three is a resolution approving a construction contract with inliner solutions LLC in the amount of six million eight hundred fifty-seven thousand nineteen dollars and forty seven cents for the repair and replacement of 15,000 linear feet of eight inch and twelve inch diameter sewer lines and approximately 100 manholes over a period of 450 days.

Item four is a resolution approving a contract with Hawkins Weir Engineers for construction observation on this project in the amount of 587, 585,600.

This project will be paid from the 2025 sales and use tax bonds for consent decree and wastewater projects.

Mr.

Johnson will further introduce these items and stand for questions.

Okay, thank you.

Uh board, do you want to bash these items?

Jimmy gets ready.

Yes, yes.

Okay, thank you.

We'll be here, Jimmy.

So the only thing I would like to point out is the three the of the five bids that we received on this, three of them were uh the original bidders and the two of the bidders were come down on their price significantly amount.

What the successful bidder come down 40 percent, whereas the second uh lowest bid on the original contract come down approximately 25% on their base bid.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, you're welcome.

Um, it says comments on either uh three or four.

We just have Larry Yancey here to answer questions.

Okay, thank you.

Uh motion to adopt uh item three and four.

So move, second.

Okay, uh any comments on either director settle.

Uh thank you.

Uh, Jimmy, has anybody has entered solutions done work for the city before?

Yes, but they have recently, or is it been a while?

They are currently have a contract with us.

Okay, I couldn't remember.

Okay, thank you.

Director Neil Martin, did you have a comment?

So, this is the one Mr.

McCutcheon just mentioned where um we the board didn't like the bid um originally when we got it and we decided to break it up.

So this is this bid is 40 percent savings over this portion of that original bid.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

Okay, so it went from uh I can't remember what it was.

It's this 6.9 million, 7 million is is what this is.

Um where is the phase two bid?

We haven't gotten the phase two bid yet, have we?

Phase two bid is going to advertise in about a week or maybe two weeks.

So we're getting close to introduce that and and then after we that one goes through the bid process and the award process, the phase one of the other project will go out to bid.

So we're we've got them all staggered where they're not all coming to the board or to the bidder so at the same time.

I think what we're seeing here is about a three million dollar savings off of the original bid, and uh by pushing it out by pushing it out or or not voting on that, splitting these out.

We're gonna see significant savings.

Obviously, we got to see phase two, but we at least on phase one have three million dollars worth of savings.

That's correct.

Okay, thank you.

If there are no further comments, uh please call the roll.

Director George Kit Savis.

Yes, Christina Get Savis, yes, settle, yes, Martin.

Yes.

Rego?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Kent.

Yes.

Passes seven in favor, zero opposed.

Thank you.

Item five.

Item five is a resolution authorizing an agreement with Garver LLC for an amount not to exceed eight million five hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars for engineering design and CMAR administration services associated with the Mazard Water Reclamation Facility Improvements, project number 25-15-81.

This design project is on the consent decree wastewater CIP for 2026.

It was estimated at 9 million dollars for this work, and it is for design work related to a significant upgrade to the Mazard wastewater plant, construction of which is included on both the consent decree and non-consent decree wastewater CIPs.

This design project uh will be paid from the 2025 sales and use tax bonds for consent decree and wastewater projects.

Mr.

Johnson will further describe this project or answer any questions from the board and uh also we have Lance McAvoy to answer questions related to the treatment plant specifically.

So the only thing I would like to add is we're currently under um consent administrative order from the state because our treatment plan has been failing in meeting this permit limits and discharge on for ammonia, and that's been going on for uh a little over two years or more where we've not been meeting the ammonia uh standards, and that off answer any questions.

Okay, thank you.

Are there any citizens' comments, Madam Clark?

Yes, or we have uh Jerry Martin here to answer questions.

Thanks, Jerry, for being here.

Uh motion to adopt a resolution.

So move.

Second, thank you.

Any comments from the board?

Please go on.

Director Kemp and then Director Settle and then Director Neil Martin.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I've had a couple firms reach out to me, different firms.

Just to Mr.

McCutcheon's comments, I I agree.

Um, and this may be one particular case that I think we need to look at tabling.

Uh the reason being is um what has been brought forward to me was that we're requesting a lump sum fee, whereas all the other engineering agreements for the city of Fort Smith were on an hourly charge.

And the question really is that they question how Garver will commit adequate resources to the city of Fort Smith to be able to bill 714.5 thousand dollars a month for the 12-month contract.

Uh there was not a detailed page that allowed the other firms to see what this firm is billing, and then the comment also was from different firms that agreed in local local engineers that the timeline that they turned this around for the city of Fort Smith to offer up such a large number.

It seems as if they're throwing out just a percentage of the project and seeing if we're gonna buy it on it.

I personally would like to see it tabled.

I I can direct those firms to staff to talk with you all, but I personally would love to get answers to the questions that I've been asked by them.

And I could also fully disclose it.

I don't fully understand all those questions.

Although other than I understand that's a lot of billable hours, and I'm struggling to figure out if they have that much staff, they're really going to allocate to this project to be able to bill us a lump sum.

So I I personally would like to see this tabled and that we get some answers.

So I don't know if Jerry wants to come up and address the uh the billable hours, but I know they're uh they're a large firm and and they are geared up to the and and it's not that it's been a forty short term, yeah.

They they've had a long time to look at this.

They they actually did our uh initial study years was it been four years ago?

Uh we come on, yeah.

Yes, good evening, directors.

Um, so we originally started this project, the initial master plan study, and I know several of you actually have visited a plant with us whenever we presented this back in 2021, and you got to see the failures that were happening at that point in time.

Jerry, will you adjust the microphone, please?

I'm sorry, can y'all hear me better now?

All right.

Um, so we actually started the master plan in 2018.

We took a little bit of time off due to COVID, it kind of killed a lot of the things going on.

We finished it in 2021.

At that point, we actually presented um to this board at the Mazard plant.

Y'all came and actually took a tour of the facility, walked around and saw the things that were happening, the failures that were happening there.

So we've been actively working on this project now going on eight years and assisting the city with this.

Um, as Jimmy mentioned with the CAO, we have been actively working with the city on that as well, and working with the EQ to try to come up with ways to do this, and this is kind of where we're at on what has to happen due to all the equipment failures and the failures out there.

Uh Director Kemp, to your question.

We have over 1,500 people in our company right here in Arkansas alone, right now, with our team that we have, we have over 300 active employees dedicated just to water and wastewater, and those are majority of those are just right here in this region, right up the road.

Um, so we do have all the resources committed to it.

We understand this is a very complex timeline on this project.

You have a very short timeline because of the CAO, which is set.

We have till the end of 2028 at the current CAO to get this project done.

We are throwing every resource that we can at it.

We've got a team already identified, we have a teaming partner that's bringing additional resources on as well to be able to help us execute this project.

Again, it's we've got a very tight timeline on this one.

Um I understand your concerns with that, but I am committing that we have everything that we need to do to get this project done for you.

I you know, I appreciate your comments, and I thank you, and it's nothing directed towards uh the fidelity of the process as much as it is for me to understand it, um, and wondering why we couldn't take this to a study session so that we can have this broken out for us, especially when we see that typically, and Jimmy, maybe you can speak to this.

Uh uh, why did we not include the why did we why do we do a lump sum fee and not hourly, just an hourly rate.

So, with this the way we've got it laid out, there will be no addendums to this process, you know.

And it's a not to exceed, you know, they if if they get into the design and and there's a component that they define that they have to uh assign less hours to, then they're not gonna bill us just the full eight million dollar eight points seven five million dollars just to build the money, the the dollar amount.

So they're gonna use what is needed to get the design in on time and and not have recourse for asking for more money.

Thank you.

Um, and director Kemp on that real quick.

Um, this is a fixed fee contract, so although we call it a lump sum, it is a fixed fee.

That is the fee that we are presenting to you.

We're not gonna go over that fee.

There is no additional for the design phase of this project.

There is a second phase that comes up on this, which will be the CMAR phase itself.

That's gonna have like the construction services, and that'll be the contractor, and that'll be the actual construction phase that wherever this comes into it.

Um, to your point about the cost and everything.

Right now, right now we're estimating this being about 130 to 135 million dollar project.

Our fee right now on that, just around that is right around a six to just under six and a half, which if you look at uh USDA, ANRC, ACEC, ASCE, I know there's a lot of acronyms there, but those are all the national organizations that track engineering fees related to project cost.

We're actually under on that as well.

And so I understand your concern on that, but again, this is going to be a fixed fee.

You're not going to see another amendment come up here for another design part of this contract.

We know what the contract is, we understand what the the scope has to be for this.

Again, we've been tracking it for eight years.

Um we originally started looking at the numbers to the quick turnaround that you mentioned.

We've been working on these numbers and developing these fees for close to six months.

So as soon as we were seeing that this was going to start happening again and that we were moving forward, we were already starting to work on that process.

So that's why we were able to turn around in two weeks, and that's why we've been able to commit that we can get this project done about 2028.

So if there's potential savings, will you all render back the savings, or is this a billing a lump sum you will be building this fee?

So we developed the fee based on hourly estimates, and we actually cut the R fee because by going to the lump sum part of it.

We've already cut our fee down because of the billing stuff.

That was one of the things with it.

On the back end of it, just the efficiency of administrative staff and billing staff and all those people working on it as well.

Um, if there are some areas that we are extremely efficient in, there might be a little savings for us on that.

But the real reality is based on what we have seen for this project, what we've got going on this project, honestly, we're gonna come in even lower.

I think on our percentages than what the industry is on it.

And I think we're gonna be because looking at what has to be done, the costs that are there and everything that's going on with it, I'm afraid we undershot our hours to be blunt.

So, but we're gonna have a lot of our staff committed to to doing it.

So, am I to take that you will bill this fee?

Do what?

You will be billing.

Overall, we're planning on billing this fee at this point, yes.

Thank you.

I guess you know, I it did stand out to me as well.

I'm just curious.

I mean, even when you compare like into item number four, the the Hawkins Weir uh materials uh compared to this agreement with Garver, why that change from hourly build rate to the lump sum fixed fee.

I mean, whatever euphemism you want to use.

That seems to very much, at least in my experience on the board, be uh outside the norm of how these types of contracts and projects are typically written.

So is there any insight you can give us as to why this one is different?

Uh and and I would also be inclined to um you know have an additional conversation at a very soon study session about this to articulate uh uh some of these things better because I just I think this is unusual, and I don't think you would deny that it's unusual.

Well, the the entire project is somewhat unusual.

The CMAR process, you know, it's not a design bid uh uh and build, so it is cutting down on the time frames of so we can actually with this contract, we can actually when we're bringing the CMAR on, we can actually start construction before the design is complete.

So is it's designed to fast track the project.

But if I may, the the question was about why is the billing different, not about how is the project different.

Did you have any additional insight, Jeff?

I did not other than that was how the project the project agreement was presented to us in terms of uh the engineer engineer making the fee that they needed to to cover the hours needed for the project.

My my understanding was that the they estimated the number of hours and staff uh according to the rate sheet that they did provide, and with the number of hours that they attributed to each component of the project, they arrived at that that fee.

Well, and I and I certainly do not mean to imply that uh or suggest that anyone on the staff uh did anything that they should not do or anything like that.

I just think this is such a substantial amount of money handled in such a uh noticeably different way that it probably merits additional conversation.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Um, I think you would thank you.

Uh Jimmy, thank you very much.

Um Jerry, thank you for coming.

Um so I did some quick math here.

So, first of all, let's go to page um 94.

You mind, Josh?

So this is atypical.

Uh, we typically get a very good breakdown of billable hours, how much how many people are gonna have here.

So I did some quick math.

I took 8.575 million divided by 12 months, divided by 225 dollars an hour, and came up with roughly they're committing 20 people at 40 hours for the next 12 months to do this.

I've never seen an engineering document this big in the time we hear, maybe back during the initial consent decree.

Looking at Dre, maybe.

I've never seen it this much.

I wish this was saying, hey, we're gonna have uh five people for X amount of hours at this rate for project management surveys this way.

That to me is what we should have had.

That way we can really tell this.

We don't have that.

So I kind of agree with my colleagues on the over there.

I think we should table this, put it back to next week's study session, talk about it, and then bring it to a vote in two weeks from now.

So I mean that's probably the best way, and then allows Jerry and uh Jimmy Jerry with uh Garver and Jimmy and uh Lance give us more detail, kind of put this together because this is a big deal.

I agree with this, and two weeks isn't gonna impact too much, but at least to the citizens, we're going through our due diligence.

Let's make sure everything's out there.

20 people at 40 hours at 225.

Seems like a lot of people, and then and then is there another piece of this?

I heard something about well, they got the construction side.

Is this includes construction or not construction?

It does not include construction.

To me, that's then well what's that fee gonna be on top of this.

So we have an estimate for that, uh, and how long that's gonna be.

So I think having everything as a holistic approach kind of gives us better what we're looking for.

So that uh I'll agree with my colleagues over there.

We should we should table this and to next week's study session.

Thank you.

We will go to director good and uh director George, thank you, Mayor.

Um the gentleman from uh Carver.

Can you come back?

Um I apologize.

I do not have, I did not get your name, I didn't remember it.

Jerry Martin Darver.

And I do remember meeting you and speaking with you, so I didn't realize it's been so long since we had the tour and since we had our meeting.

Yes, sir.

So again, Director Settle, the reason why I believe this is being pushed this way is because this is unusual circumstances, but I I don't have a problem with the study session.

But I was gonna ask um uh last Macboy because I do remember taking the tour vividly, and all the the problems that we were having and things that needed to be addressed then are still not addressed.

So I just remember um Lance speaking to us on that.

Do you have anything to add?

Um, since um uh my seat mate here had mentioned um needing some different additional information.

Yeah, um, so Jimmy alluded to the um consent administrative order, which uh was put in place after the board agreed to it in February 14th of 2024.

Um if you remember from that DEQ worked with us and this was to help us with DOJ and EPA not get hammered with fines from them, and they suspended the fines.

Um we've worked with them uh greatly during the time period.

One of the items that uh that we've looked at is how many times we've had to slide the schedule from what we originally proposed because we had to do a corrective action report, which is 48-page document, and then we have to do quarterly reports and tell them what our time frame is, and back at the end of 24 when we came up with a proposal for financing the consent decree and this project, because if you look at how the the bond initiative was written was for clean water compliance, so it it took care of both the CD aspect that we have, meaning additional capacity at Mazart as well as the aeration basin switch over to come into compliance.

Um they said, yeah, look, we understand you have a plan, we're gonna let you go with that, and we're not going to hold you to that, but it once those bonds are issued, we expect to see movement.

Those bonds were issued over six months ago.

So that's my only concern is I do know DEQ is cracking down.

Hot Springs has been under two CAOs, and I know they're being penalized now for one of them.

Um will two weeks, three weeks make a difference to hold a study session.

I can't speak for DEQ.

I do understand the concern.

This is a little different.

We immediately began looking at value engineering and how to cut cost.

And that is one of the areas where I believe uh, and I can't speak for Todd because he's not here, but Mr.

Mitkey kind of looked at what would the normal cost, because you do have an administrative cost that goes with billing that you end up paying for with a lump sum for lack of better terms.

Uh, does that save us money on the engineering side?

And it also puts them at risk.

Some of that engineering also is the um geotechnical, so they've got to have geotechnical testing.

So, Director Settle, to your point, the the dollar amount and the number of people may be a little skewed because of that.

If the board wishes to do a study session, I welcome it, and um, but I did want to kind of give some history on that uh CAO and the fact that this this one project will eliminate the largest wet weather SSO site that we have, where millions of gallons are poured out into the Mazard Creek, which then runs into the uh Arkansas River, and will bring us into compliance with our ammonia limit and actually help us for future growth.

All right, very good.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Jerry, thank you so much for being here to uh address the board.

Uh Jimmy, thank you, Lance.

Thank you.

And I just want to just bring up um to my board and those still listening that are here.

You know, this is why institutional knowledge matters.

You just can't put someone in one of these 20 one of these spots and expect folks to pick it up like that.

So thank you, gentlemen.

We appreciate you.

Jimmy, what what kind of permitting costs $239,000?

What kind of permitting?

Yeah.

Uh so part of the project is to run a new discharge line out into the river.

So that's going to require but but who's charge who's who's the permit to is to comply with who?

The core the state or the federal or what?

Both both.

Yes.

So it's costing us 239,000 just to comply.

On top of to get to to uh for lack of better terms to jump through all the hoops, yeah, and and pay pay their review fees, yeah.

It's pretty expensive.

I think it's ridiculous, but whatever.

Director Christianity.

Um my question is for Stafford administration.

When was the last time that the city entered into a contract with uh professional services engineering design firm for a fixed fee and not hourly?

I can't recall one in the recent history.

Go ahead.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Any other questions from the board?

Mayor, I make a motion that we table item five to the next week's study session.

A second.

Okay, thank you.

Um Madam Clerk, would you call the row?

Director Christina Cassavis.

Yes.

Settled.

Yes.

Martin?

Yes.

Rego?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Kent?

Yes.

George Kittsabas.

Yes.

Item is tabled.

Seven in favor, zero opposed.

This time we'll go to uh item six, which is the consent agenda.

Mr.

Damon, you recognize.

Thank you, Mayor.

There are eight items on tonight's consent agenda.

We have a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute a friendship pact with the city of Wask, Poland.

A resolution authorizing the city to submit a notice of intent to apply for the 2026 Arkansas Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for the Mill Creek Bank Stabilization Project.

A resolution authorizing the cities to submit a notice of intent to apply for the 2026 Arkansas Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for the Riverbank Stabilization Project, a resolution authorizing a contract with Russell Exterior LF LLC for the Miss Laws siding replacement project.

A resolution granting a temporary revocable license for the placement of a wall landscaping and a sign in a public utility easement.

We have a resolution accepting the revised bid for the purchase of a sewer camera truck for public works.

A resolution authorizing application to the fiscal year 26 safe streets and roads for all grant program for the benefit of the River Valley Communications Center 911 facility and a resolution authorizing application to the fiscal year 2025 rule law enforcement violent crime reduction initiative grant program for the benefit of the public safety communications department.

Thank you very much.

Madam Clerk, are they any uh citizens' comments on any of these items?

Yes, we have one for item six C, two for D, and then one for E to answer questions.

So the first on item C is Joey McCutcheon.

So I want to talk about Ms.

Laura's it's it's a symptom of this city's problems.

Number one, let me think, talk about two things priorities and history.

Um first on priorities.

First of all, with respect to last Poland, it sounds like another great opportunity for the mayor to get another free trip to uh to uh or Mr.

Rego or one of the board members over to Poland.

So let's get that passed tonight.

But priorities.

Uh you know, we'll spend all this money on Parrot Island, yet we will let our history fall in.

You know, we need to preserve our history the good, the bad, the ugly, the history that you don't like, Mr.

Good.

You know, like a Confederate monument, uh Mr.

McGill.

You know, I support, I support a hospital for African Americans, and I spoke on that.

But you come to me wanting to take the Confederate monument down, you you and you and Mr.

Gefkin.

So we need to respect all history.

You know, because what would happen?

What would happen if if a citizen over on the north side of town let their property get in a state of disrespect repair, like you did with with the with the Miss Laura's, you would call neighborhood services on them, or does that not apply when it when it's in the CBID district and the downtown dudes?

Why aren't the downtown dudes in your ear, Mr.

Kemp?

I mean, the thing was falling in.

I went out and took pictures of it.

We budgeted all this money.

It's priorities, and we've got a lack of priorities.

We'll spend six million dollars on water slides, but we won't spend the time to repair siding, and that's that's disgusting.

So let's respect all history, Mayor McGill, all of it the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Yes, sir.

Did you have a comment?

I doubt it in public.

We had our meeting, you, me and Mr.

Gefkin, we had our meeting in the Sebastian County Courthouse in the big room.

Remember that day?

What does this have to do with it?

It has to do with history and a respect of history, Mr.

Rego.

Well, number one, and let's not pick and choose.

I don't think confederate history should be respected.

Number one, he respected or we're going down the same.

Why are you yelling at us about something we're voting on that does what you want?

Because it's taken you forever to repair this to repair the history.

A brothel.

Maybe the downtown dudes didn't want a brothel downtown because it might give us a black eye.

On item 6D, we have Shane McKinney.

So I just want to thank everybody for uh putting the effort into saving Miss Laura's.

I think it is an incredible part of our community.

And one of the first things I spoke to you guys about back in December was the sighting the disrepair.

There's there's other things that are needed but I just wanted to reiterate more than almost anything else that people when they're staying in my my places say about Fort Smith is they they like Miss Laura's like it's incredible the value we get for that compared to I don't know how many 30 million dollars for the Marshalls Museum 50 million.

People prefer that little Miss Laura's the the value for our visitors uh I think there is absolutely top notch um I think we should look at also how low these quotes came in compared to what we had budgeted and considered how could we use some of the other money that was budgeted towards that to possibly improve other functions of it.

I don't know what other needs they may have but um I think I think it's a great site I think it's worth investing in and uh it's pretty economical I mean when we're looking at a budget that's you know what 300 thousand that's uh I think for city value to what it means to visitors and what it means to the memorability of staying here I think it's great so I'd encourage you guys to look at what else we could do for them with the rest.

I'll just say to that that we still have some parking repair improvements that need to need to happen at the museum and that's what the balance of those dollars are for we needed to rebid that part of the project okay.

We did have Mr McCutcheon signed up for six DC he was I spoke on item six C.

He signed up for C and D.

He just spoke on I'll say okay and then on item six E we have Samuel Seeger to answer questions.

Okay thank you.

Were there any other okay thank you this time we entertain a motion to adopt a consent agenda thank you.

Okay.

Did the board pull any items okay I apologize who seconded George Gassavits okay I apologize again who made the motion director thank you uh if there are no further comments Madam Clerk please call the role.

Director Settle yes Martin Yes.

Rego yes good yes Kemp?

Yes.

George Kit Savis Christina Kitzavis passes seven in favor zero opposed okay thank you very much this time we'll go to the officials forum again let's keep our police officer um in our prayers and our police department and all of our emergency service uh workers this time we will go to uh director near martin you want to start us off yeah um I I would like and I'll try to be brief here I would like to study whatever we need to do to change our water and sewer billing from CCF to straight gallons it's it's it's very difficult to compare and contrast with that 748 gallon ccf thing I would like to explore the option of billing straight gallons.

I think that would that potentially makes it easier for our residents to understand their billing.

So I would I would like to I would like to do that I'll second them on that if we need to bring it to a study session or what we're gonna do.

Very good idea very good.

Second um uh I spent some time with our fire department uh a couple weeks ago.

Um Sarah Harrison, I think she's here.

Uh uh and I went down to uh spend a day with the fire department.

I would encourage everybody to do it it.

It was really cool.

One of the we talked a lot about homelessness down there.

Um and um uh just the challenge and the the the many the many hours and dollars that are associated with with um homelessness calls are related to homelessness and and things like that.

Um we've heard a number of times, and I don't know if we've necessarily had it verified.

We've we've heard a number of times that entities, municipalities are dropping people off in Fort Smith with um no real plan for them, with no home for them, no place for them to go, and ultimately they go to the homeless shelters.

Um I would like to discuss or talk about if we find an entity or a municipality outside of our city sending people here to get rid of a problem on their side, whatever that is, that we begin fining those entities or municipalities from doing that.

You know, we talked about not criminalizing homelessness.

We don't want to criminalize uh homelessness, it's not illegal, but I think we need to look at investigating those entities that are sending people here and putting stiff fines on them.

Joplin is doing this, and I think it's something we need to explore ourselves.

Not saying we start now, but I'm saying that we need to look at it and see if that's a way that we can decrease um some of the what we hear is is cities are sending their problems over to us, and I don't think that's fair for our citizens and our residents to um to have to uh um to pay for those services and those types of things.

So I would like to explore the option of finding entities, municipalities that do that.

I don't know what the legality is, but we've got to find solutions for some of this.

I'm okay with bringing that up, but I would I would ask if you're okay with it.

We include our um homeless services to see what avenues they could apply help us with that.

Sure, yeah, definitely.

I think this is part of the whole of the whole community needs to come together on this.

I'm okay with I'm okay with Lucy.

But we are we we've talked many times about taking care of our homeless.

I'm okay to take care of homeless.

I'll take care of anybody from here, but when you know people are being busted from other cities and you see them crop across the Midland Bridge from the bus station and they're headed downtown.

You know that's happening.

Yeah, yeah, I agree.

I got nothing else, Mayor.

Okay, Director Gassavits.

Um I'd like to direct administration to reach out to the um uh secretary of state's office and get an opinion um on uh changing the form of government the timeline and provide us with that bring it to a study session.

I was told we have to have a state representative to initiate that and I was gonna do that tomorrow.

Okay.

That's all okay.

Director George Gosavage.

Neil, you're exactly right about the homeless, but let me tell you, I've talked to police officers up from all across the state in the restaurant, Russellville, Conway, Little Rock.

They buy them a bus ticket, the homeless.

So here's a bus ticket to Fort Smith.

You know why?

Their selling point is they have a homeless campus.

Yep.

They get here, gee was I'm sorry, we have no room.

That's that's one problem.

It's it's I think it's gonna require a little detective work.

You know, I wasn't for these flock cameras, but we've got them.

Yeah.

I think we can match up some things and and potentially uh fine or or cause some harm to those entities or municipalities that are sending them here.

Okay.

Uh Jeff, are we doing any work that acne work out at and group?

Uh not any active work.

No, we do have some soil that we are recovering from other projects from parks and utilities that we are putting on ACME, but we're not doing any.

Is there any plans to sell the shit the sell the shell out there?

That is one thing that's being explored, yes, sir.

Okay, and let me see.

Maggie.

Quick question.

Yes, sir.

Person goes in and gets their permit, electrical plumbing, everybody approves it.

So here you're good to go.

They start building.

Here comes the city.

Well, this is wrong.

But it's on the plans.

You all approved the plans.

Well, sorry, you gotta change it.

Why?

That is a very complicated question to answer right now, but I'd be happy to because I don't know.

There's a lot of specifics that go into that.

And so I don't know exactly, but I'm happy to to meet with you and talk talk it through.

Well, I mean, if if a plans are submitted and they were signed off on and you got a permit, and then something was either added or deleted in the field, there could be changes that need to be added to those plans.

But they went by the plans and the city says, no, sorry, we made a mistake.

You have to spend another five thousand dollars correcting it.

Do you have a specific example?

Oh, yeah.

Okay, great.

I've can we're yeah, I would love I would love to hear about that.

Okay, and our police officer Kyle Newman, I understand, is doing a lot better, thank goodness.

Uh if you y'all ever get a chance, y'all do it right at one ride around with police officers and see what they go through every day.

It's just you can't imagine until you're actually there and seeing what these guys do every day.

You know, pull over a car at three in the morning and walk it up to a car not knowing if you go they got a gun or what, but I've always been an advocate of two police cars per two police officers per car, which is a safety issue.

But maybe in the future.

Well, last question uh paradigma, 92,000 in debt already, and it's April.

Is that is that undistributed operating expenses, or what is that, Joe?

Um, according to the financials you sent out.

That's what I got through.

Sure.

I mean, I'm I'm presuming that's 2026 operating expenses to date.

Um they are getting to the point where they are um in their operating season and able to generate revenue.

So that should that should change around.

So we'll get a monthly P and L.

Yes, sir.

Well, the season passes were down, it looked like they were okay.

Thank you.

That's all.

Okay.

Yep.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, we've got some about a year that has exposed this situation, and there's now an investigation going on.

Can we have that discussion tonight and let him bring the fortification?

But it's the would also be uh taking advantage of massive price.

Do you have do you have information related to dumping?

I mean, I know there's I you're you're the gentleman that was talking about insurance, and that's I saw that Facebook post.

Do you have information about the folks being dropped off here?

Can we give them a couple minutes just to what's the couple minutes?

So so his his handle is hope fuels, right?

Yes, sir.

And you made a post just the other day about challenges or insurance fraud related to to homelessness.

Yes, sir.

So uh you know I was I was talking about I'm I I'm specifically talking about people being dropped here.

I have that as well.

And you've got information related.

Do you mind speaking to that?

No, sir.

It's the same story every single time to get a hundred different homeless people to cooperate on any story would be a physical impossibility.

Homeless people lie to you, yes.

That is absolutely correct.

They will lie to you to get you to feel sorry for them.

That's absolutely correct.

I've spent a year with them out on these streets now.

I used to know 80% of the homeless people on these streets, and now it'd be a guarantee that I don't know 15.

Just within the last three months, you ask anybody out there, and it's the same exact story.

Somebody comes to get them, they pick them up on a bus, they tell them they've got a spot at Hope Campus.

They pick them up, they take them to the Salvation Army, drop them off in the middle of the night.

They go to Hope Campus, Hope Campus supposedly knows nothing about this.

Whenever they're at Hope Campus, like I said, they are signed up for Florida Blue Cross Blue Shield.

I guarantee you what that does is that gives a six-month period where there's an investigation fraud through insurance where they cannot get any help in the city of Fort Smith, let alone the state of Arkansas.

So this is this is kind of uh Nick Shirley kind of uh fraud situation.

Um so you were he's focusing on fraud.

I mean, we've had a bunch of people tell us the same story.

People are being dropped here, and it's hard to get corroboration on it.

We've there's something here.

There's enough smoke here that we've uh there's a fire, and we have got to get this under control.

So I I'd like some information from you after this.

Absolutely.

But we've I think we as as a community have got to do uh uh more be more forceful about this situation here, and that doesn't even that doesn't even take into account the insurance part of this, which all of us are having to pay.

So um thank you for that.

I I do want to talk to you a little bit about that.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

But but he knows that he knows communities that we're this is happening in hot springs.

They're dumping people on us.

I don't know why we're not in touch with hot springs.

I don't know why we're not in touch with with uh Oklahoma City.

I don't know why we're not in touch with Conway.

Yeah, I mean, this is a massive problem and and and we need it solved.

And this young guy, this young guy has grabbed the bull by the horns.

He's been, he's been he's given interviews uh to the Fort Smith Police Department.

Okay, and and there's gonna be probably feds involved.

Yep.

But this is a massive problem.

Well, and and and I will say this.

I I watched some of your stuff.

This is not I'm gonna expose fraud.

It's you're out helping, you're handing food and water out.

That's the whole point of this.

And I think finally, I just got a sense that you're like, I've had enough.

I've gotten four people off the streets this year alone.

Yeah, yeah.

So I think that I think this guy does really good work from from a good heart, but he sees people taking advantage.

Yes, sir.

And we've got to get this under control.

We really do.

Thank you, sir.

What's what's your name, by the way?

Dakota.

Dakota.

Yes, sir.

You will and share your last name?

Palmer.

Dakota Palmer.

Yes, sir.

We'll talk to Coda.

Thank you, sir.

Director Camp.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I don't know if I see Chief Baker in the room or if he's already slipped out.

I had a question for him.

But he probably slipped out.

Okay.

I do I do want to have a study session on this potentially then uh unless there's an answer from administration tonight.

But my conversations with him was my thoughts and prayers go out to Officer Newman, and as I was talking with him uh on the phone, I was asking about are we going to be taking care of him?

And then it was uh expressed to me that he has to take sick leave and expire all his sick leave and then go through this process.

And I would like to make a motion that we have a study session and a review of our policy for all our first responders.

If they're hurt in the line of duty doing their job, they should not have to use a sick leave.

I agree.

That's I agree with that.

And so, yeah, I I just is he on it this is gonna sound really well I'll we'll yeah, I just want to pick it up.

I I don't think any firefighter, any any responder, any policeman should have to be taking personal sick time.

Uh my thoughts and prayers are for Officer Newman.

I'm I'm really encouraged by this community and how they have come around and done fundraisers to support him, and I just hope that we as a city staff would continue on the normal pay structure for a first responder during their time uh until they get a doctor's release.

Thank you.

That's all director good.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I like to uh thank and congratulate um uh the the Lau community for a successful um community event that they hosted as well as the Fort Smith Boys and Girls Club for their recent community uh events.

Uh thank them very much uh for putting forth efforts to bring the community together.

Director Rigo.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just wanted to send out a quick congratulations to my nephew uh who graduated from Christ the King School this evening.

Okay, thank you very much.

Mr.

Dingman, you're recognized.

Uh just to the board members, uh please keep Friday, June 26th clear on your schedule uh for uh strategic planning workshop.

We'll get the the time and the location.

I will just tell the staff that I will be leaving.

If I do if I do can go, I'll be leaving at one o'clock that day, regardless.

I have to leave at one o'clock, okay.

Um and then the city offices will be closed on Monday, May the 25th on observance of memorial day.

Mayor, could I say something real quick?

Yes, go ahead.

Uh do you all have any interest in changing the name of this place from the blue line to something else?

I I made that a while back a with director uh when was here, or director Morton.

I wanted to call it the Fort Smith Town Center or the Fort Smith something.

Fort Smith meeting hall or something like that.

I like the Fort Smith Town Center, but I'm okay with something.

Well, what's up?

Why can't we do that?

Well, we can have a discussion on it.

All right, I'll find that.

Okay, okay.

Thank you.

If there's nothing else to come before the board, motion to adjourn.