Good evening and welcome to the Fort Smith City Board Register Study Session.

It is July 28th of 2026.

The meetings are being televised live for the benefit of our residents who can't attend with us in person today.

With this, we'll call it a meeting to order and we'll go right into our citizen forum.

Um the purpose of the citizen forum is to provide Fort Smith residents an opportunity to address the board of directors on any topic related to city business or operations.

Speaker shall direct their comments to the entire board and other attendees are expected to respect each speaker's time.

Rules of decorum with respect to this meeting are the citizens' form and citizens' comments on any item of business are posted on the monitors and are included in the sign-in sheets.

Please keep in mind this is a business meeting of the governing body of the city of Fort Smith.

All speakers and attendees are expected to follow the rules of decorum.

And with that, Madam Clerk, you recognize We do have several, the first being Quentin Cunningham, and each will have five minutes.

Over the last week, I've been all over the city, walking in the heat, driving across town, talking directly to our local business owners, rescues, and shelters.

I wanted to hear firsthand what's helping them succeed and what's holding them back.

The message I heard consistently consistently was not about a lack of vision or ambition.

It was about operational friction.

It was about the difficulty of navigating city processes, permitting, and the day-to-day challenges in our community.

Our one business even told me she hasn't been able to do so much as change her sign because of some of the red tape in the city.

These people are taking massive risks for us.

They deserve a city partner that's transparent, predictable, and accessible.

Unfortunately, that's not what many of them are experiencing.

Take our Central Business Improvement District.

Under Arkansas law, public bodies must keep records of their proceedings.

Yet upon checking the city's website today, there's not a single agenda or set of meeting minutes posted for the CBID for the entire year of 2026.

That isn't an isolated incident.

Several municipal boards have been m have missing records or broken links.

Sure, the citizens could FOIA that information, but that shouldn't be the default.

Moving the homeless out of downtown and into another neighborhood, that's not a strategy.

It's the laziest optics-driven solution we can implement.

It doesn't lower crime, it doesn't help our local businesses, and it doesn't solve the root problem at the issue.

However, I will uh point out Andre did uh meet with me directly regarding one of my proposals, and I thank you very much for that.

So I ask, will you continue to keep me waiting on the homeless issue?

Or are we going to at least try to move this needle in the right direction?

For Fort Smith to grow, we must move away from insular governments and hollow policy band-aids.

We need something to streamline the regulatory environment for our entrepreneurs, bring our boards into full compliance with public record expectations, and treat complex human challenges with actual practical leadership.

Thank you.

Next we have Richard Morris.

Richard Morris.

I hope the really needs it is.

Yeah, here in the aid one or aye again.

I switched into another channel to hear you better, and in between I couldn't hear anything.

So all right.

I wrote a little thing tonight, so it's not going to be shooting from the hip.

I think we'd get a bit more organized.

All right.

So good evening, Mayor McGill and members of the board.

My name is Richard Mars, and I am a resident of Ward 2.

Last week I stood at this podium during the Citizens Forum to speak about the importance of reconciling misunderstandings.

Having long been inspired by the proactive leadership I have witnessed firsthand on various city committees, boards, and commissions, I sought candor and collaboration under proper decorum and respect to convey reconciliation.

Within the five minutes of my allotted speaking time, I extended a gesture to Director Christina Cassaves, offering to talk through misunderstandings.

She flatly refused.

Following that forum's recess, Mayor McGill demonstrated true public leadership by proactively seeking me out to ensure there was no lingering misunderstanding between us.

That willingness to engage reflects the open responsive leadership that our community expects.

Unfortunately, Director Cassav's refusal in his room directly contradicts that collaborative spirit.

Public service demands accessibility, an open mind, and a willingness to engage with constituents.

Because she is currently running for mayor, her conduct at that meeting raises serious questions regarding her fitness for office.

I take no joy in bringing this to light.

But as many fellow residents have echoed, these hard truths need to be said.

I speak tonight out of civic pride and hope for peace in our city's future.

A future perhaps restarting right now.

Thank you for your time.

Next we have Shane McKinney.

Hello again.

I imagine if we spend, you know, 20 months and 35,000 searching for a city administrator, that we would have a large number of very qualified people to pick from.

And I think that's what the citizens, I think that's what any company would expect from that type of an investment.

And I think it's really sad looking forward that we have one person that's been here from the very beginning, and then one other person that we're going to look at tomorrow.

Um I think this is a sign that what we're doing isn't working.

If you're a company that has a job and you put it available, and nobody applies for that job, before 20 months pass, you're going to figure out what do we need to do different in order to fill this position before 10 months pass, before five months pass.

You're going to figure out what's going on, where is something wrong?

I think this is systemic.

I think this is a sign that administrators that believe in city administrator form of government aren't willing to come here and work.

I think the two withdrawals are more systemic evidence of this.

Uh, that we have a problem.

And I think the problem has an answer that's pretty obvious, and we've been talking about it for months.

The government change to the same form of government virtually every other city in Arkansas uses.

Where we elect somebody local, somebody that knows Rogers Avenue traffic and uh knows what Grand Avenue cruise nights used to be like, and somebody who knows what whirlpool meant to this community, somebody that's from here, that knows that South Side uh North Side rivalry by heart and has seen that their entire lives.

Why find somebody from Georgia?

Why find somebody from so far away?

Why, and then get left with the scraps that just happen to stick around after so much time.

We have a problem, and we have an easy answer to that.

Let's just put it on the ballot, let's change our form of government, let the citizens out here and at home have a vote to choose to elect somebody local, somebody that we can all get behind, uh, somebody that takes of their own time to serve this community, uh, that invests in this community of their own time.

For somebody being headhunted by a search firm, it's real simple.

We just, oh uh, they wanted me to put in an application, let me just send my resume.

Uh, I'll send it to 25 cities in the country.

It's an afterthought for them.

Somebody that becomes mayor, goes through the effort of the petition process, goes through the effort of all the financial disclosures and all the extra paperwork that it takes to file, and then goes through the effort of putting together committees and putting up signs and going to rotary and going to all the things to earn the respect and the trust of the citizens of this community.

They have to be a part of the community.

That is a much more transparent, much more publicly viable, much more publicly trusted process than what we're about to get into.

And frankly, if I spent $35,000 to hire somebody and was looking at two candidates after that long, I would say we have a problem.

And I think we all need to admit that we have a problem.

Thank you.

Next we have Jason Skarbitz.

Thank you for inviting me in once again.

I'm gonna talk about firstly about flop cameras tonight.

And I've got someone else who can say it better than I.

So have a listen.

Safety.

So today I'm excited to announce a new company called Shepherd Safety.

Our mission is simple.

Keep government officials and their families safe.

We're launching satellites to watch over Casa Grande day and night.

Our AI will monitor where government officials go, where they stop, who they meet with, and when they return home.

Bluetooth signals, advertising IDs, vehicle information, commercial data sources, so our authorized users can replay the movements of every government official and their immediate family.

There's no difference than the current flock safety capture systems.

Everything will be stored securely, and only authorized users will have access.

Local businesses will be invited to join our network so government officials can continue being protected while shopping, eating, or traveling throughout the city.

Some of you might think this sounds invasive, but and you may worry about abuse.

You may worry about unauthorized access, tracking innocent people.

We understand those concerns.

After all, those are the exact same concerns of all the citizens.

What, 864 now?

Something like that.

But we've been told not to worry.

Because you're doing nothing wrong.

You got nothing to hide.

It's okay.

You have no expectation of privacy in public.

So if we track all your movement, put it up online.

It's okay.

Only authorized users will have access, we made that clear.

And we're only going to store the data for 30 days, which is the footage.

So it's no different from flock.

It's no problem.

Privacy doesn't stop being been being important because someone says the word safety.

Okay.

We shouldn't accept this level of surveillance, our elected officials and their families.

And we shouldn't accept it for ourselves.

Now this is satire.

I would never do this to you.

Could I?

Probably.

But I wouldn't.

Because it's wrong.

Just like what you guys are doing to us is wrong.

I'm innocent.

I don't do anything wrong.

You're tracking and uploading my information, my movements every day without my permission.

And I don't appreciate it.

I'd like you to stop.

I'd like you to do something about it.

I'd like you to put it behind a warrant.

Just like my phone record.

That's what I'm asking you guys to do.

Spent the last several months talking to people all over COP.

On to the next item.

Item number one on tonight's docket.

The next greatest boondoggle, the police, second police precinct.

It's not just about ten million dollars, depending on whatever bond or initiative our city adopts.

If they keep pushing this latest boondoggle forward, that is, it'll be anywhere from twelve and a half million dollars for a ten-year bond to over fifteen million dollars for a twenty-year bond.

Never mind that we don't even have the initial ten million to start with.

But when but when has that ever stopped our friggin' board from reckless spending OPM, other people's money?

Now they could do the responsible thing and sell that dilapidated property to some other sucker.

But that's not what the city administrator and government does.

Instead, they seem to have some unexplained fetish about securing, buying, collecting properties.

And letting them sit and rot.

While necessary infrastructure projects go left undone, unmaintained, unplanned for, et cetera.

Apparently that is the new or not so new actually, Fort Smith Way.

Thank you for your time.

Have a good evening.

Next we have Crystal Ivey.

I have to admit speaking in front of the board is a little intimidating.

But after navigating some of our sidewalks in a wheelchair, this part actually feels like the easy part.

I'm here today to talk about something that affects the safety, independence, and dignity of many members of our commun community, the condition of our sidewalks.

For most people, a cracked or uneven sidewalk is an inconvenience.

For someone who uses a wheelchair, however, it can be a dangerous obstacle.

Broken pavement, raised concrete, missing curb ramps, and even unne and uneven surfaces can force wheelchair users into the street where they are exposed to traffic and traffic in much greater risk of injury.

Another serious concern is sidewalks that suddenly end without any warning or accessible transition.

Imagine following a sidewalk, expecting it to continue, only to discover that it abruptly stops and leaves no safe way to proceed.

A wheelchair user may have no choice but to enter the roadway, navigate loose gravel or uneven ground, or turn around and search for another route.

This unexpected loss of an accessible path creates unnecessary danger and can leave people feeling stranded, especially in areas with heavy traffic or limited visibility.

Our sidewalk should prepate pr should provide safe access for everyone.

They connect people to work, schools, medical appointments, parks, businesses, and public transportation.

When these pathways are not properly maintained, or when they end unexpectedly, they limit mobility and prevent many residents from per participating fully in community life.

Wheelchair users deserve the same freedom and independence as every other citizen.

They should not have to worry about tipping over, getting stuck, being forced into traffic, or discovering that a sidewalk simply ends with no safe way to continue.

I understand that maintaining city infrastructure requires careful budgeting and planning.

However, investing in sidewalk repairs and completing disconnected sidewalks is an investment in public safety, accessibility, and our community's future.

Much more than some water slides.

Regular inspections, timely repairs, continuous accessible routes, and the installation of compliant curb ramps can prevent injuries, reduce long-term maintenance costs, and demonstrate our city's commitment to serve all residents.

I respectfully ask the board to prioritize sidewalk maintenance and connectivity, especially in areas near schools, medical facilities, public transportation parks, and neighborhoods where citizens rely on accessible pathways every day.

I also encourage the city to make it easier for residents to report damaged sidewalks and locations, such as an app where sidewalks end abruptly, so these hazards can be addressed promptly.

A community is judged not only by its buildings and businesses, but also how by how well it services its most vulnerable citizens.

Thank you.

Miss Ivey.

Yes.

Miss Ivy.

Yes, sir.

Thank you for sharing that with us.

I'm sorry that you've had an inadequate experience on our sidewalks, and that is an area where we need to always be mindful.

And I was wondering, Maggie, if you wouldn't mind connecting with Miss Ivey to make sure that you guys can you can keep her informed about our sidewalk schedule for maintenance and improvement, and then also so that you can have a good conduit to share any ideas that you have about how we can do better.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Also, Miss Iva, could you kind of give me some idea what streets you are on?

Um Waldering connecting from Grand Avenue to Rogers Avenue.

Um we have Rogers Avenue where Walderan starts going down by the hospital.

Um those have been the most dangerous, and where it completely ends is on Phoenix at 66 to about where the first curve is after 66, there's where it stops completely, and you have to literally go back around.

It it's like at least a mile turnaround.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

No problem.

So note it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Joey McCutcheon.

Appreciate Director Rigo asking that question.

That's it, and looking into that same with Mayor McGill.

Um with regard to the comments on flock cameras, um, Benjamin Franklin once said those who would give up a central liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Thomas Jefferson echoed similar sentiments.

Uh and I think we need to look at this flock camera situation as violating our privacy.

Um we bought this police precinct for 2.85 2.85 million dollars back in March of 2024.

It was a result of bad leadership.

It was the result of the leadership of Carl Gefkin who let this city down.

Now we see the continuing trend because it's not just I'm a private business owner.

When I buy something, I have to keep it up.

I understand that because it comes out of my pocket.

But when we bought this building, did the board not know that we were looking at millions upon millions to transform it into either a training center or a police police precinct.

We need to sell that, get rid of it.

We also need to look into the convention center that is a that is a total disaster.

And we see more of this.

Of course, we've seen it in Parrot Island.

You know, the board claims that they they didn't know that you had to install this product.

I mean, that is absolutely ridiculous.

We buy this slide, get it on the cheap, and do we not know we're gonna have to install that?

I mean, that's part of doing business.

I mean it it it's it's so simple.

And now, and now this board has bought hook line and sinker into the green energy program.

And we've created multiple trails from this side of North Fort Smith.

Now we're gonna go all the way to Phil White's RV park.

Another perk for Phil White, I guess.

And I think Director Good is in involved in that.

Um, you know, have you have you looked at that?

I went out there and drove it the other day and track.

I mean, you know, it's a safety concern.

It's going to be a magnet for the homeless.

But it's another perk for Phil White.

I mean, the thing goes, I I, you know, I just had a suspicion, so I track it all the way, and it ends right at his back door in the RV park.

That's not to mention when we when we gave we took over Mr.

White's obligation at the Ferris wheel downtown.

Uh we took over his obligation because he couldn't sell enough tickets.

And then the board gave, mayor was part of this, he had a grand opening, I think, gave two million dollars to Mr.

White for to create utilities down to the RV part.

So now we got 2.85 million that that this board approved last board meeting.

Then we had the two million.

Uh then we took over his part downtown, which is now a a pro the taxpayers are paying to keep it up because he sold it, and then he said you can't move my Ferris wheel.

So apparently the owners don't want to take part of it.

And then the real disturbing part is the mayor gives $32,000 of taxpayer money to the classy cowgirl.

And then, and then here's the kicker.

I foil you the documents, and guess what?

The mayor at the same time asked Phil White for $6,000 to also fund the classy cowgirl.

And then Mr.

White says, I can't give you six, but I'll give you three thousand dollars.

Now, what's wrong with this picture?

But the bottom line is you're spending other people's money, and uh, and it's just a classic example.

This this project you voted, this this 1.7 miles of of concrete in a bad part of town that nobody's gonna go at night.

Nobody, nobody.

And you're gonna have to imminent domain, take my eminent domain private property.

And here's the problem with all of these things on the front end.

The green energy is fine, but we've got to keep that up in ten years.

Who's gonna keep up all the alleyways, the streets?

Uh that's going to be some other board's problem when you're spending mega taxpayer dollars to keep this stuff up.

So the major priority in this city is the water infrastructure.

This board has put this off uh forever, and you need to talk tonight about how we're gonna pay for it.

Because you're talking about 10 million dollars in bonds.

You need 580 million dollars to fix this water problem, and that's where the attention needs to be.

And you need to tell the taxpayers are you paying for it through water rate increases taxpayers?

Or or are we gonna have bonding?

Thank you, Mayor.

Director Good.

Thanks.

I just want to comment uh to the public.

Um information.

I have no uh involvement with the um RV uh park at all, other than to go there, like I do several other businesses around town and individuals and try to positely uh positively promote the city of Fort Smith.

The only involvement I've had was um same board action as any other board member.

Thank you.

Next we have Chris Cadelli.

Uh good evening, board, and and uh thank you for the opportunity to uh to speak.

Um, just a few things for those that were hoping to discourage public input, public participation, you know.

I think that if you look around, you can see that you know that you achieved your objective.

Um I'm sure we have some good reasons for a couple board members not being here tonight, but these aren't as well attended as as the regular voting meeting, so so you know uh good job there.

Um I I too oppose the second precinct for for all the obvious reasons, uh reasons already mentioned.

I've I've been told that the current precinct needs a lot of work, so if we've got money that needs to be spent, I would love to see it spent on uh updating, renovating, and making that place really look good for our our officers.

Um I really appreciate the uh citizen that spoke on the sidewalks.

I would just add that you know, I agree with everything she said.

That's a public uh service, you know, that's something that is open for everybody to use all the time.

That should be a priority for the city, and I would just say, hey, if we've got a million dollars that uh needs to be spent from the streets, bridges, and drainage fund, uh, instead of giving that as a handout, another handout to the housing authority.

Why not put that in with the uh the sidewalk bucket, whatever bucket that happens to be?

Um, and then why the sudden urgency to hire a permanent city administrator?

We've been treading water for nearly two years with the acting city administrator.

Uh is right now really a good time for the city to fill this position.

We have an election this November with all three at large positions up for grabs.

Um we'll have at least one, maybe two new new faces on the board.

Um why not wait until the new board is installed in January?

Additionally, as you're well aware, there is a significant community interest in the opportunity to vote on how we are governed.

We have four directors that have made it clear with multiple votes, they intend to uh deny us that opportunity.

Fighting against this obstruction for the uh to the right for citizens to vote on how we are governed is we have a group of local patriots uh who have worked tirelessly gathering the petition signatures to override this veto of sorts.

Um this hard work has been thoroughly documented with countless social media posts, uh media, you know, mainstream media has covered it.

Um the board has had multiple opportunities, multiple opportunities to quell any perceived drama, speculation, or uncertainty by merely recognizing the public interest and outcry in the question at hand and placing the ballot measure on the November ballot for the people to decide this matter one way or the other.

Instead of providing the clarity we need, we continue under this cloud of uncertainty.

Those carefully watching or participating in the effort to have a vote in how we are governed, understand this isn't going away.

I mean, we're not that I can these people aren't gonna stop.

I'm not gonna I I'm certainly interested.

I want an opportunity to vote on this, and I know a lot of people, even people that would vote the other way, they want that same opportunity.

They want to decide the matter.

The response and prudent action at this point is to continue with the acting city administrator until we have a new board of directors, a new sort of a new board of electors elected and seated in January, and the form of government question is voted on by the citizens of Fort Smith.

I would have to question the motive and judgment of any outside candidate interested in the CA position under the current set of circumstances.

Either they are trying to escape their own current set of issues, or they clearly haven't done their due diligence regarding the issues they are applying to take on.

This process sounds about as well handled as the debacle surrounding the first candidate hired for the director of internal audit last year.

So I would ask, let's wait, let's get the new board seated.

Let's see if we can't get the the folks an opportunity to vote on how we're governed and then move forward.

Thank you.

Next we have Crystal Cadelli.

Good evening, board.

I'm standing here tonight as a citizen, as a taxpayer and someone running for the board because I believe Fort Smith City government needs to get its priorities in order.

It's concerning when I sit here week after week and hear that our city finances are doing well, that we're okay.

And that would be like me stating that, hey, the roof of my house is falling in.

I can't afford to fix it, but I can pay my monthly bills.

So I'm financially secure.

Although I fully support our police officers and our firefighters, they are the people we depend on during some of the worst moments of our lives.

And they deserve the staffing equipment and support necessary to do their job safely.

That is why I have concerns about spending millions of dollars on a second precinct and training facility.

While we still have immediate public safety needs that are not being met.

Homelessness itself is not a crime, and people who are homeless should be treated with dignity.

But compassion does not mean ignoring criminal activity.

Trespassing is a crime.

Drug possession is a crime.

Vandalism is a crime.

Theft and property damage are crimes.

Those laws should be enforced consistently, regardless of the person's housing status.

We can offer people help while still protecting residents and businesses.

Compassion and accountability can exist together.

If the city has enough money to build a second precinct, then we should have enough money to fully staff our police department.

If we have eight to ten million dollars lying around, we should be able to purchase a pumper truck for Station 11 and provide competitive pay to our firefighters so we can keep them here in Fort Smith.

The funding concerns go way beyond the police precinct.

It is also about how the board makes major decisions.

Did we really fully think this through?

The timing and the spending of our money.

Why would any qualified candidate take the risk to relocate to another city or state or leave a job to potentially lose it in two years?

The search should have been put on pause until our form of government has been decided.

We cannot keep spending taxpayer money first and dealing with consequences later.

That's why I am running for the board.

And to keep Fort Smith affordable and support responsible growth for our future.

So I'm asking this board to really think through spending eight to ten million dollars on something that is not a necessity.

We need to be selling the properties that we don't need.

We need to be investing them back into our infrastructure.

We need to focus on our water transmission line, and we need to focus on the growth of our city.

Thank you so much.

And last we have Dan Williams.

Good evening, board and mayor and residents of Fort Smith.

I'm Dan Williams.

And since Andy's not here, I'll say it.

I love living in Fort Smith, Arkansas.

And so I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight.

I do uh appreciate that y'all didn't completely do away with the five minutes, so that's good news.

I'll uh try to be somewhat brief.

I stand here tonight really to address the 10 million that we're looking at for the police precinct.

It was just uh a few months ago that I saw Chief Danny Baker stand up here and in another meeting, it may have been in the other room, but I saw him get emotional.

I saw him get passionate because he was going to have to cut uh some budget.

And within cutting that budget was going to affect uh his retention, it was going to affect the potential of filling in these uh spaces that is so needed to protect uh not just the officers on duty, but the citizens of Fort Smith.

And I believe y'all are part of that.

And so although I am fully supporting our police officers, I cannot support this at this time uh and would hope that the board would not support it.

I believe that our city has some financial issues that need to be looked at, they need to be taken serious, and it's gonna start at the leadership, and I believe that y'all were placed in your position to lead Fort Sniff, not manage Fort Smith.

We have plenty of managers, not enough leaders.

And so uh to be a true leader is gonna require to look at the ledger, it's gonna uh acquire looking at timing, it's gonna retire uh really require maintaining financial transparency.

Just as you heard Quentin speak about the CBID, I looked it up while he was speaking, and as of 2026, there is not one agenda or one of those meetings posted on the Facebook, and so you know I feel like that is an issue.

Uh our city budget, uh we you know limited uh eight vacant police officers or at least those positions, and uh we're looking at potentially going in debt 10 million dollars.

You heard Joey mention 500 million dollars to fix the water issues.

We need to consider the water issues and the infrastructure before we consider this precinct.

I'd love to be able to offer our uh good men and women that are serving, whether it be fire department or police department a pay raise.

And I know recently we got one, but interestingly enough, I don't think it even meets the standard to keep them here.

And if y'all would talk to some of the recent retirees at the police department, like I had, you would find out that there are issues even in the police department and in these departments, and I believe it all goes back to leadership and the leadership starts with each of you.

Um we need to begin to look at how we prioritize and position uh transparency so that all citizens can kind of understand how to participate and be a part of.

Um tying another capital construction debt to a utility franchise or fees placed on bonds, it really I believe affects my pocketbook and your pocketbook.

We're already carrying a massive debt and obligation uh just as we finally got the judgment on the $800 million consent degree.

Um, guess who's gonna pay for that?

We are.

And that's gonna affect you, it's gonna affect your neighbors, it's already affecting families, it's gonna actually affect every one of these uh uh police officers and fire uh uh fire department people.

Supporting our frontline heroes, I believe, is a hundred percent our obligation, and it demands leadership that is willing to be accountable with finances in such a way that we can keep them in position, and we can uh not just take care of fixing up that.

I don't know if you've been by the property out there, but it does look pretty bad.

The site the signs are being torn off, there's trees growing up.

I mean, we're not even maintaining.

I mean, if that was someone's yard, I believe we would already got a ticket for it.

So uh get a chance to run by and look at it.

Um I know we're gonna find out a little more about what uh uh Chief Rake Baker is gonna speak about here in a little bit.

I'm interested in hearing this, but I do uh encourage you to keep talking and think about timing as everything, and right now is not the time.

Thank you.

That's all for citizens for thank you, madam clerk.

And we appreciate everyone's participation this afternoon.

This time we'll go to the first item on our regular agenda.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

The first item this evening is a discussion of a project funding strategy related to the proposed police precinct and training facility on city-owned property at 8200 Highway 71 South, known as the Crankea property.

The police department presented three concept options of varying scope and cost at the March 31st study session.

The board agreed at that time that staff should further develop option two for this project, including analysis on how to fund the project.

As we prepare to work through the 2027 budget, we need to address this and see if or how we are intending to include this project uh in to in the budget.

The police department staff asked that the option two concept be updated by the architect, and that update is in your agenda packet material for this evening.

And we have uh police department staff present to address any design questions.

Overall, the estimated cost of the project sits at 9.23 million dollars in two phases, and the staff has developed a plan to finance the project.

The concept involves financing such a project over a 10 or 20-year period.

It would involve no additional taxes, but would obligate a general fund revenue source that has not previously been dedicated or restricted in any way.

The governing body would specifically dedicate by ordinance a portion of its annual utility franchise fee revenues to debt service for the project.

Chief Financial Officer Andy Richards has prepared some sample schedules that he will review for you.

Andy, are you ready to roll it up?

Okay.

So the um the potential for borrowing to fund the precinct over long term.

And basically the assumptions are based upon the concept that we could get a bank qualified tax exempt loan, which we would secure the loan since it's over five years required to have a dedicated revenue source against that loan.

And so franchise fees revenues is always kind of, you know, it's a fairly common revenue source that cities use out of the general fund if they need to borrow some money for general government purposes.

So we're that's always an opportunity.

You know, these are revenues, it's about $8.4 million that we collect annually in franchise fees, it goes straight to the general fund, it's unrestricted.

Um any time we need to fund you know finance something, or if we ever want to finance something that's general government related, that's always an opportunity.

So this is just the proposal that we put together, you know, based upon um we can borrow up the $10 million under the bank codes uh for a bank qualified tax expense loan that that gets us an interest rate right now would be about four and a half percent borrowing rate.

So that's what the amortization is based upon.

Um we you know, and potentially it'd be a a fairly flexible uh borrowing.

We could do a construction loan if you needed to, um, or you borrow you draw down as you need to and pay the interest, and then once you're done, then you go on and pay the annual principal and interest amounts.

Uh anyway, the uh so the annual payment over a 20-year is about 750, 753,000.

Um it was about a 15 million dollar overall cost with interest, and then uh if you did a 10-year borrowing, the annual debt service would be about a million two hundred and thirty-four thousand.

I think the schedule in the back shows that it's about a twelve million dollar total cost uh to the project.

So that's just uh one way to finance this thing.

You know, obviously this is gonna tie.

I think you know, no matter how we structure this, um, you know, there's some flexibility how we do it.

I think we I think in general, as far as what we're talking about tonight, we kind of end up with it end up with the same result no matter how it gets done, which is um you know our fran our general fund revenues are eventually gonna have to cover something.

You know, I know we've got opportunities to reallocate how we use uh police sales and use tax.

Uh we've got some flexibility there because it can be used for operating and uh capital purposes for police operations and um so there's a there's there's ability if it you know we want to cover you know things that the general fund was covering or whether we continue you know the the standard uh what we usually pay out of the sales tax.

You look those are the opportunities, but eventually I think that it kind of comes back to the general fund revenues are gonna have to eventually cover this in some way uh the annual debt service payment on this project.

So continuing if the the board continues to um if the board favors such a project, the staff will proceed with consulting with bond counsel and the city's financial advisor to facilitate the franchise fee bond issue.

This would involve securing favorable financing rates as Andy mentioned and presentation of an ordinance for the board to consider at some future date.

There's no particular time frame requirement, but as I mentioned, we want to have an idea of how we're going to proceed with this project as we as we facilitate the 2027 budget.

At this point, Andy and I and the chief, of course, will stand for any questions that you may have.

Okay, thank you.

Uh Director Savage and then Director Regal, or we just come this way.

Yeah, it's hard for me to reconcile that in the same year.

The rest of the board voted to cut police and fire that we're considering this.

You know, I always say there's no future if we're drowning in debt.

Uh, you know, 10 million dollar bond may feel like progress right now, but this is a multi-decade claim on these franchise fees.

And thank you.

Um, we told officers, we told firefighters that resources were tight, they made a consolidation, they made cuts.

I don't know that this is necessary at this time.

I think this is something we should plan for long term and create a long-term funding plan for, but I feel like we rush into these things and then we just bond it out with without a lot of thought of all this debt that's mounting that's gonna be on the backs of my child and children all throughout the city.

Um so that that's my position on it.

It has not changed.

Thank you.

Thanks, Mayor.

Uh, I just had a couple questions for Chief Baker, uh, if you wouldn't mind uh sharing some info and some thoughts with us.

Chief, thanks for being here tonight.

Yes, sir.

What would you say uh is the benefit to the police department and in turn the community by moving forward with this project?

This has been a long-term uh stated need for the future of Fort Smith.

It's been part of our comprehensive plan.

It's been part of our capital improvement plan plan since before I was the chief of police.

Um this is this was not a fly-by-night idea.

Um we have been very open and transparent with uh plans about this.

Um the purchase of the the Ukraine Kia property, as I stated on the March study session.

Uh I don't believe that that that was the uh ideal um pick for a uh uh a police precinct, but the location was good.

Um the property as it exists now is is not uh uh that's not what the the uh final uh structure is going to look like.

I mean it's uh the it's the location and the property size uh is what's valuable to us uh regarding the the training facility and the second police precinct.

The things that went into consideration in trying to establish a location for a second precinct and a training facility, both of which were stated priorities, um included the locations of existing police resources in the city today, the traffic patterns that we are experiencing.

Uh those include uh widening of uh highway 255 and zero street, the widening of Highway 45, Highway 71, the establishment of I-49 on the south end of town, uh these roadway improvement and expansion projects are going to drive more activity, more traffic, uh, more crime in the south side of the city where we don't have police resources dedicated.

We're also experiencing annexation of additional land on the south end of town.

Uh that's where the city is growing.

When the citizens commented earlier that we need to focus on the growth of Fort Smith, and that's exactly what this is focusing on the growth of Fort Smith and as we're experiencing uh from the police department and planning for the future of the needs of this city.

Uh some other things that were that were considered was the growth of the commercial and industrial activity along Highway 45, the proximity of that property to the Ebbing Air Base and the Fort Smith or the foreign military sales mission.

Accessibility to the Chaffee Crossing District.

Uh that was one of the uh priorities was establishing police presence on the on the east side of town because of the growth at Chaffee Crossing.

Uh this served that purpose as well.

And also the proximity uh to I-49.

So all of those things uh were taken into consideration uh when the decision was made to purchase that property on highway 71 South.

Do we need the precinct today?

No, we do not.

And as I stated in the past, I do not want this precinct at the expense of police officers and and salaries for our police officers.

But I have been assured in conversations with administration that that is not what is taking place here.

Uh this uh this plan to finance this over 10 or 20 years uh will be coming from money that couldn't be obligated to uh salaries.

Uh we can argue all day long about uh it all being the same pot of money, but uh I understand that there are operational expenses that are incurred with increasing salaries.

Um but going back to what I said, do we need it today?

No, we do not.

Will we need it very soon?

Yes, I believe we will.

Thank you, Chief, and thank you for that context and and for acknowledging and pointing out that you know there there is a difference in uh when you bond money, uh and you of course you would never bond money to pay for ongoing salaries for uh raises or new officers, and you would not uh use franchise feed monies for that.

Uh I just want to a little sense from you, and this is the last question I have.

What's sort of the the interest level, the the excitement level, the the feedback you hear from the folks in the department about uh a possibility of a second precinct and and the need for that.

Is it something that um sort of department-wide uh you sense that there's a recognition of and then a potential excitement for?

I I certainly believe that that's there.

I think there's a concern that this project will detract from their salaries and from their uh having additional personnel, the help her help of the workload that they are experiencing.

Um I mean, if we can accomplish this without making sacrifices there, I think it'll be a win for everybody in the department.

Um I'm sure there are those that are probably opposed to it, probably uh some that have left the department uh that have expressed their um displeasure with the idea, but uh this is not something that was uh undertaken without a lot of thought, without a lot of consideration, uh and it's been something that has been part of our strategic plan for a long long time.

Thank you for your answers and for your context.

It's very helpful.

Okay.

I think well, I I just want to make clear that I do understand that we would not issue bonds to cover salaries.

That's not what I was getting at.

But you know, it it's interesting to me that we've spent over what seven million dollars now on the water slides.

We didn't have to issue bonds for those.

And it goes back to priorities.

And I always want to make sure your officers have what they need.

And you know, we've talked about that, and that's always public safety.

You always say we're in the public safety business, we're in the infrastructure business, but it just seems like our priorities have been backwards that now we're looking at a bond issue for public safety when we've spent other money very um irresponsibly that didn't need a bond issue.

I would like to see us get into a position where this is something that we can um pay for um you know out of the general fund and not have to issue bonds.

Thank you.

Okay.

George.

Can I can I say something to that?

Yeah.

If I mean if we're thinking about putting money in a piggy bank to do this uh in the future, then my recommendation would be to sell the property because we cannot continue to maintain it and be responsible for it if we're not going to move forward with it.

I'm sorry, Chief.

Could you repeat that?

I said if we are considering or if you're considering uh making this a long-term savings project and that we're putting money aside annually uh to begin the project at some point in the future, then I would recommend selling the property.

We we can't continue to maintain it, be responsible for it uh without some action moving forward.

The property can't sit there uh unimproved as it is.

Well, I don't I don't disagree with that.

And I would say initially I did vote for this because my understanding um when it was presented to me by Carl, my understanding was that this is gonna be a great thing.

You can do your own maintenance.

It would be a cost savings.

Um it was uh never explained to me in any uh sort of depth that the in engineering or architecture that was going to be required, and so you know, I think if I had known that on the front end, uh you know, I may not have been in favor of this particular property.

Well, I I uh I regret that you weren't.

Uh obviously we didn't have actual numbers until you know we did the architectural design, but previously administrator was told that it would require money to renovate.

Right.

I I think something must have been lost in translation.

Uh the way it was sold to me was this is move in ready, it's turnkey, they can get in there, they can start doing their training, they can do their own uh vehicle maintenance.

It's got everything, and I thought, well, that sounds like a great deal.

Um, you know, and I I certainly always want to make sure that the department knows that they're supported and that you have the resources you need to.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh Director Josh Cassavage.

Yeah, well, uh everything was a great deal with Carl.

Um you know uh Danny.

He uh I I tend to agree with some of the comments.

Uh you know, we're our our economic climate right now, our financial climate is not good.

And would we even have enough officers to staff that place under the current on our current hiring freeze?

Well, we have to restructure the the department to a certain extent.

I mean the building we're in, we're we outgrew it a long time.

Yeah, I know.

We've run out of parking, we've run out of office space, so I mean, moving resources, existing resources to a second precinct uh is not that's not gonna be a problem.

Um I mean, and then the other component of this and and what I consider probably the the bigger um benefit is the dedicated training facility.

Um you know, the ability to to have host more classes, uh to bring in uh uh law enforcement and public safety officials from outside the state to you know uh stay in hotels, eat at restaurants in our city while they're going to these classes, uh get us out of the building that's owned by the county that we're paying annual rent on.

How much rent we pay in there?

Uh it's five thousands, I'm sure.

Yeah, tens of thousands.

Yeah.

Well, and another thing, you know, Carl, when Carl gave us a sales pitch, he didn't say, 'Well, you know, the naming rights that came up.

Yeah, that was part of the well.

I mean, he never mentioned that to us.

I don't did he ever mention it to you all?

He never mentioned it to me.

So if we sell it, we're gonna be out six hundred and something thousand dollars.

I don't uh uh director Ketzab, it's I don't know.

I I got with the legal, uh had them review the contract when this discussion about selling the property first started.

Um bottom line, uh the response was um they could bring a a suit uh but whether they would be successful or not is unknown.

I mean obviously we could uh you know make a defense, but I mean in theory, yes, it's possible that that the city could be on the hook for the six hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars.

Okay, one last question.

What if I told you there's a couple of people that would build you a building for lease with the option to purchase?

Cheap, getting in cheap, plenty of land for expansion in the future.

Would would you mind if they made a proposal to you all?

If it was in the right location, sure.

Well, it's I mean it's out of chaffey.

And as far as well, we're at out of Chaffee.

Close to the golf course.

That's pretty inaccessible.

I mean, there's not a whole lot of well, but it's growing, it's growing out there, Danny.

You said Chaffee was boom, you know, growing.

I I mean I I would certainly take a look at it as far as the financing options that's completely out of my hands.

I mean, yeah.

I don't know, Danny, I'm just not ready to pull the trigger on this right now.

I mean, I I think we need to wait a few months and and see how see how our our finances come out.

You know, I I I mean, you know, I've never said no to the police department for anything from day one.

I've given you all whatever you wanted.

I said fine, but this is a lot of money.

So I think we need to be really careful which what our director we're gonna go on this.

That's all.

No, and I would I would add to that, I'd like to uh echo a little bit of what Chief Baker said.

Um there is we are at I think I feel like we're at a bit of a crossroads with this property that we either need to, you know, we we've owned it for two years, two plus two and a half years by now, and uh everyone can see the state that it's in.

We do minor things to to keep it uh to keep it maintained, but as everyone notices, I mean this that's not enough.

Uh the we're at a point I think where we'd either need to invest in this property or at least make a plan to do it and move ahead, or plan on doing some of us the southern precinct, which I agree is needed in some at some point at some other location in the future and move to sell this particular property.

And you know, when we when we talked in March, you know, I mean of course times were different.

We had a little bit different discussions in the community at that time, but you know, we had the we got the impression that the board wanted us to move ahead with identifying how we do a pre a project here, and so that's what this represents.

However, you know, as we look to expand the capabilities of the police department on the south side of town.

I I agree with the chief.

I think there is I think there is a need on the south side of town for us to have a permanent type of police presence there.

Does it need to be in this location under this current proposed design?

I think that would work.

I think we'd be great.

But can we afford to do it right now?

I think we have a way that we can make it work, but there's choices involved with that.

And so, and as Andy was mentioned, you know, this this is an obligation of uh previously unrestricted uh general fund revenues that we would we would be restricting to some degree, and so that that is an impairment on our overall ability to budget going forward.

Is this the right year to do that?

Maybe not.

But I think that I mean we wanted to show you that there was a way to do it, whether we continue to move ahead with it.

I think this is a this is an appropriate time to have that discussion.

Jeff, I just think we're looking at over the course of ten years, paying almost two and a half million dollars in interest.

Uh you know, is how long has this been on the CIP plan, Chief?

Uh since we began since the police department began submitting CIP on 20 2020, 2021.

So five years now, five years we haven't come up with a funding plan that we this is uh you know, I feel like we're being reactive and not proactive, and it costs money.

It costs it two and a half million dollars nearly in interest.

So, you know, I would like to see some sort of funding plan in place where we can just pay for it and not have to bond it out.

I mean, we we find the money for other projects that are much less worthy, and maybe this isn't the right location, maybe it it is more involved, or maybe y'all want to move forward with it at that location.

I you know, I would be um in favor of selling this and finding a location that's more ideal, maybe the costs are not as um great to get into it.

But I I think we have to think about these interest costs because we've got when we look at water utilities, you know, we just had the sales tax reallocation for the consent decree.

We've got uh the 2018 bonds, we've got what bonds from 2015 and 2016 as well.

You know, the the this adds up.

Thank you.

Good.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, just some comments, some thoughts.

Um, let me let me start with by saying that um, you know, when administrator Gefkin brought information and plans and ideas to the board, that's just what they were.

They were information for the board to decide how we wanted to move forward in.

Nothing ever, just like the buying of the garrison building of the ward building.

You know, it was a plan.

We never went in fullheartedly knowing how much it was going to cost to retrofit that building.

But we knew at some point we wanted to quit leasing it.

And just like this building, the owners were making a better and better deal on the price.

So the information that Carl did present to the board, including the the name, uh the naming rights of the current building, um, was presented at least to me, and I believe probably to the whole board if you spoke to me about it.

Um the other thing is Mr.

Richards spoke to um at some point, the general fund would be impacted for paying back this loan.

And like the mayor's already said, Mr.

Dingman and several others, and I just don't really need to repeat this part, but the timing isn't right because I've spoken to officers all throughout the year at every level on what their real needs are.

And this has been, you know, on the agenda, it has been on our sites for years.

But also knowing that we have more important needs to tend to.

And Chief, whether you've been promised that uh pay increases would be not affected or not, what we do know is the majority of of this budget goes to the police department out of the general fund, and I would rather have that to give you guys the needs that you need right now.

And right now, our retention is poor.

You know, we're losing officers to to smaller municipalities, Northwest Arkansas, Barley.

Charleston, I think.

But but fact of the matter is I don't want to jeopardize invested in this when we should be in Jeopardy when we should be investing in our people.

Director Kemp and then direct settle.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just to have some questions after listening uh here.

Uh one question for administration.

On the property that we have listed for sale, and we had a you know, a pretty good nice packet put together for those properties that are going to be sold.

Have any of those sold yet?

Just the one property I'm gonna forget which one it was.

And how much especially how much was the revenue out of that?

50,000?

Yeah, approximately 50.

Did we appraise those properties?

I mean, are they competitive at their listed price?

Yes, we took the um the commercial broker that listed the property, gave us comps essentially, and listed it.

Because I know some of those properties were bought in sort of like a moratorium, if you will, just to help projects that were going to be bringing economic development and perhaps the city, you know, like overpaid.

And if we're sitting here trying to recapture cost, um I think we need to make sure that we're selling these at market value.

And I would wonder then that if we list this property, what makes us think this one will move?

My question would be is there an opportunity, because I do agree with the sentiment that we have, and I have questions about this, but I see that we have other competing things that we need to be doing and investing in the police force.

Can this property be leased for a while?

Can it can it have a tenant that can take care of the function of the property?

And I mean, can it is the city allowed to do such a thing?

I think that we could do that, yes, and structured properly.

I think that should be explored.

I mean, if uh on the uh police uh chief, if you don't mind, uh Chief Baker, on the building, the police buildings where I was hung up, I want to say police building.

It was mentioned that there was some needs for the existing sh facilities that you have there.

I mean, I know it's you're saying it's inadequate, but is there also capital and like deferred projects that need to be done to make that facility functional?

No, we've I mean we've spent quite a bit of money over the last few years in maintaining the building.

The biggest expense was to the environmental system, the cooling tower replacement.

Uh we've invested uh money in in the uh some of the common areas, bathrooms, you know, replacing some flooring, uh doing that as we can.

Uh there is one major repair item that will probably be coming before you, the front elevator uh has failed.

Uh but we're uh in a process of uh gathering uh quotes for that.

Um but I mean outside of that, I mean it's a 30-year-old remodeled building and it's gonna need continued maintenance.

But I mean, there other than the elevator, there are no major structural facility issues.

On the police cap, I know we the the police cars, the 17 police cars.

Is there going to be a need for more police cars here in the near future?

Uh well, we're gonna be requesting 17 more next year, but I mean we have that planned and budgeted in our capital improvement plan.

But that's gonna be utilizing the police tax, right?

For that capital, is that the funding source for that?

A portion of it.

I mean there were a variety of funding sources.

I don't have the CIP in front of me, but um, but yes.

And then what is the we just recently had a study session for the beginning firefighter pay and we were talking about things in there?

What's the beginning salary for the police officer that's just being freshly enlisted?

With no prior experience?

Yes, sir.

Uh 50,000 and some change.

Okay.

And then how does that pair to the competitors?

And we talked about we're losing people.

I mean, what do they start there, police officers?

Uh well, I mean, the ones that we've lost the most to, uh, state police, I think they start at 64 or 67 now.

Uh Fayetteville has their starting uncertified pay up to somewhere around 64,000.

Um a lot of these smaller uh surrounding towns, I mean, they're I hate to say it, but they're headhunting.

Um, and they they have a vacancy, they find money to offer a salary.

Uh and they're, you know, when they're a five-man department, uh the input to their budget is not near the same as it is uh to ours.

Uh and you know, uh I mean we've long been a training ground for agencies all around us.

Uh uh and that's very unfortunate because when we're talking about um financial losses, uh the amount of money that that we're seeing walk out the door uh on on a regular basis that we've invested in training and time uh and equipment of these officers.

Uh I mean it's we need to do something to to stop the attrition.

Yeah, and I think for me, you know, I we talked when we talked about this back, I think in March, I was mentioning the Combine idea, but like if the way I see this is you know, we we've talked about police positions, police uh pay and salaries.

We're talking about CapEx, just cars, things you're gonna need, and real estate.

So there's four components, and if we're pushing, you know, two of the four, I mean, where where do you lean and priority?

Oh so uh that's a that's a tricky question.

The number one need uh for any police department is investment in its people.

I mean the officers need to they need to make a competitive salary, um, they need to feel like that they're taken care of, and then they need to have good equipment, i.e.

cars and and personal safety equipment and that sort of thing.

So I mean, those two are naturally at the top.

Uh but when we're talking about projects like you know, uh a capital expense, like a second precinct, um, you know, the this is more strategic long-term thinking about the safety of the city, the safety of the officers.

So it would really be hard to prioritize that any less than by what I've already said.

If the second precinct is going to come at the expense of officer salaries or officer positions, then I we we need to push the pause button on it.

Yeah, and I think you for that.

And I think for me, this exercise was about administration.

My understanding of you answering how could you finance such an option and you answer the question more than proposing for us to take action tonight.

This was more informative that there is a mechanism for uh lending.

Is that correct?

That's true, and also that not that just that there is a mechanism of for the lending, but that it will come at uh some dedication of resources that could otherwise go.

And I think for me, come back, you know, we've talked about priority base budgeting and things of that nature.

You know, this 911 center, I really want to know what we're gonna do with that.

Uh what are some options that we have for that, just like we have options here for police, the the CapEx, you know, we talk about you know, we have a dedicated tax, but really there's a lot of hoops that we're jumped to connect that.

This money is how it's going to be available for the for the purposes of lending, but really at the end of the day, it is impacting general fund, and if we move prematurely, it would impact salaries, and therefore I I would like to see us wait till the budget hearing conversations, see how we're wrapping this year.

Um, the sales tax was holding at like 1.6, I think is what Andy Richards had emailed us today.

Uh 1.6% growth.

That's not a 10% growth, you know, and I think we need to we're gonna have to think about staff uh health care cost.

Are we giving or we're giving how we're giving pay raises, how to continue to keep up with inflation.

I I think that tonight this would be premature to even take action.

I think it's been a helpful exercise to know that this is possible.

But um, I guess one other one last question I've been seeing or thinking was I understand that you're saying taking no action.

Is there instead of a nine million byte, is there a smaller bite that gets this process started, or do you see any advantage of a million and a half walk-in?

Or is it kind of like no, we need to wait till you're able to take into the lending process?

We were actually uh having discussions about doing this in phases um, you know, in smaller bytes, but I mean the impression that we kind of got that the last meeting was that we need to move forward, get it done.

Um, but I do think we have some other options.

Because the city does have, as it stands, you know, I answer the question is we do have a 30 percent.

Andy Richard, is that correct?

Uh we we're sitting at 30 percent reserve uh savings in the general fund?

That's what we've that's what the amended budget shows that we'll project it to end at 30.7 percent.

So I'd I'll just be curious to hear the phased approach as well.

This is uh Anthony Parkinson, Deputy Chief.

Good evening.

So in the the presentation with the phase two project, there was three phases with the third phase being something way into the future, if and when we need it expand that far, the design portion is already done.

But phase one was broken down into the immediate need was the training center, and what to do with that third building that was originally proposed by uh Carl to be a service center for all the the fleet vehicles in the city.

Seeing that wasn't gonna go forward, what are we gonna do with that building?

So the decision was can we incorporate it into tearing it down or renovating it where we can make covered parking for some of the specialty vehicles that we have and equipment to protect it from the weather.

So the first phase would be a little bit over six million, and then the second phase, which would be the precinct, that's gonna be about 3.7 million.

So you're saying the garage would be more useful, is what I hear you saying, than the second precinct at this current time.

Is that correct?

Well, I'm saying is the training center.

So there's three buildings on the property.

Okay, yes, sir.

And we we basically broke it down to minimizing how much additional square footage new construction costs.

So by doing that, we're basically merging the two closest buildings will be merged into one.

And in the design phase, it was going to be sectioned off where we could complete the first part of the project, which would be the training center.

So with that comes the parking lot renovation, and then that third building, what to do with that because it's just they're falling apart.

With with no one in there, they're falling apart.

So you need to take care of that third building with the first two in that first phase.

And that just comes out to 6.1 million, and that's with current construction costs right now.

And we've gone through this how many times?

Quite a few.

Quite a few.

So we have really revised this project multiple times over the past couple years to get down to what do we really need and how to how to fund it, which is what you know Andy did.

Yeah.

I mean, and I'm not advocating for this, but simple one thought of thinking through this is is there a way to make investment of the 6.1 million over three years or four years and pay as we go and accomplish that.

Uh you know, I don't know.

I don't know how construction costs would lay out on that.

But so we discussed all that, and it it's getting that that phase one has to be done at one time.

Okay.

There was no way to get around that.

Okay.

Thank you.

And thank you for your hard work.

I think you marry.

Sorry, board, I was late, had a work issue.

Uh Chief Baker, um, just quick question.

Have you done any analysis if we if we went forward with a second precinct of what we might potentially save with vehicle mileage uh because now you don't have to go all the way.

Some of the some of the offers wouldn't have to go all the way downtown every tight day, they could go to the second precinct.

Have you ever considered looking at that and what we might be saving from a mileage and a car usage standpoint?

I want to say possibly we did an analysis very early on about response times to various locations around from that from that location, and I seem to recall that that might have been I don't know.

I could find it if you could find it for us.

Could you give us back to the board?

If we did it, I will thank you very much.

Uh to Andy, my question would be if the board went through a 20-year note option, um just I hypothetically a 20-year note option.

Would the future boards be able to pay let's say they came into a higher revenue?

Could they pay more principal down so the loan would get less and less interest?

Would it be one of those type of loans where you could pay more principal, like a standard home loan and based upon the discussions that we had with the banks?

Um it seemed like there was gonna be some flexibility there.

If we wanted to pay it off early or pay down, I think they were open to it, but that's something that we could pursue.

Okay.

That's my two questions.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thanks, Andy.

Thanks.

Thank you, Chief.

Uh Director Gosavage.

You know, initially, when we were looking at the 911 consolidated call center, that was gonna be a $15 million bond issue.

And we were able to do that um without having to issue bonds.

And so I have a feeling is we I have a feeling this may not be the right location because of the requirements for the renovation.

If we decide it's not instead of putting it on the market, could we not sell this at auction?

Would that not be the way to go?

I mean, I'd I think we would get some advice from our our commercial realtors just to identify the the best path forward if we want if we decided to sell it.

I mean, I'm open to any option that makes us the the best the best deal that we can get.

I mean, certainly priority is getting um our officers and our firefighters paid better.

That that's certainly a priority for me and making sure they have the resources that they need.

I would love to see us investing in more personnel for the police.

Um, you know, and I I've talked with both of you, um, you know, I worry about drugs a lot, and we're seeing more and more dangerous drugs coming into the city.

I think we all read that article about carfentanol and how how little it takes to kill someone.

Um but I I we were able to get the consolidated call center done without having to issue bonds.

I'm hoping that we can as we get into budget season, find a plan that would accommodate um being able to do this without a bond issue.

Thank you.

I mean directed good.

No, I was just gonna say a comment on that really quickly.

What we've but what we've done with 911 Center is a temporary solution.

Um I mean we haven't invested yet in the the new radios that we've had plan two uh and the new facility we had plan to, which is all part of that larger number.

We've done a temporary solution in the current police precinct, which the headquarters building, which if we were out of there, there would be additional space in that particular facility.

And eventually we will need to move that consolidated center to a dedicated facility, whether it's another one we can identify as already city property or new facility, eventually we will have to have a permanent solution for that.

Right, I understand that.

But what we've done is we've bought ourselves time to figure out funding without having to issue bonds.

Thank you.

Uh Director Good.

Thanks, Mayor.

Good conversation uh to my fellow board members.

Um let me thank the PD management team for all your hard work going back and forth and back and forth.

Thank you, Chief Baker, um, for allowing this conversation.

Um the reason I wanted to speak one more time is you were talking we were talking about uh losing uh personnel.

And uh in my conversation with some of the uh officers, um, you know, we you know, pays the issue, uh insurance, take home vehicles, and insurance and training were all issues.

But you know, when we talked about training, I think a number that came up when we're talking about investing in our uh new recruits are cadets in training, and then we lose them to someone else.

We basically become a training center.

The investment we have in these individuals is upward to correct me if I'm if I'm close, but was that close to a hundred thousand dollars?

I would say I would say that as a conservative estimate, yes, a hundred thousand dollars an officer to find them, hire recruit them, hire them, train them, and get them on the streets.

Um we've had ten officers leave the department since January 1st.

So that math is pretty easy to do.

Thank you, sir.

The reason I I wanted to focus on that, I think as a board member who's heard that I'm sure a couple of different times would have recently heard it during coffee with cops um at farmers market, you know, it it it makes you think how we need to stop being that center for training and what is that gonna take because we're investing a lot of money that we're throwing out the door if we can't keep our officers here.

So we need to look at how we're gonna maintain and keep our officers here.

Thank you, Chief.

Thank you.

Uh Director Settle, you wouldn't actually keep it.

I think you may to the board, the Chief uh you know, about 10 years ago, I think this board um talked about the future of the city and it was brought up that as soon as the bridge got built 549 and 71 will be the hot corner of the city.

So I want us to think about long-term planning.

If it's not this year, maybe it's next year, but long-term planning to make sure we have the police force for the growth of this city, because in a couple of years that bridge will be done.

And then it's gonna be how quick can we get down to 71 and 49, because that's where the growth is going to be next.

So just think about that as you think about long-term planning.

Long-term planning is the toughest thing to do.

Um because you've got to think about the future.

Uh I'm not disagreeing with anything said here today, but we have to think about the future of our city.

Because what we don't want to do is have to go from 71 and 49, all the back downtown every day.

And so it's something to think about as we move forward.

Thanks, Mayor.

Uh Director George, could Savage?

Andy.

So from what I'm hearing from you, you really don't know what it what this would cost the general fund overall, right?

The the new precinct.

I mean, it's if if you I think the numbers that we came up with uh will be the cost that the general fund will will have to cover that in some way.

But uh what what is the cost from the general fund?

Well, what would the cost from the general fund be?

Well, have you all figured that is what I'm getting at?

Well, from a 20, well, the debt, the debt service payment.

So for a 20-year no, it would cost us $750,000 a year for 20 years.

On a 20-year no.

Yeah, and for a 10-year no, it'd be a million two thirty.

Okay, but that okay, that is fine.

But that doesn't include just the the maintenance of the building, the expenses of utilities.

That's right.

That's going to come out of the general fund, correct?

Oh, that will come out of the general fund.

Rupert or the sales tax or the excuse me.

Or the uh police sales and use tax could cover that, but you know, that would it's though those are the resources that are available.

Yeah, but see, without a firm number, I mean this just it is to me, uh it's a shot in the dark, and I just can't right now participate in that.

Thank you.

Correct.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um Chief, I one thing I've just said here is a thinking through this tonight, and I wasn't on the board when we did the crankea property, but you know, to the point of Director George Costavus here, uh, and I know you're talking about that's far out there for looking at it at Chaffee, but the one downside of this crankea property is that it's not even beneficial for the radio antennas that the 911 center has, and if they're looking out to that way because of the ridge and how that is in elevation, or even the landfill, I wonder is there an opportunity to explore at least just a training facility in combination with the 911, and then later identifying whether a precinct would add on to that or if you have a better location for a precinct, but if you're going to have to build something of of nature for the 911 center, I guess my comment would be could that be tied to a training facility and accomplish two things I keep hearing, which is dispatch of first responders is a big thing and training our people is a big thing.

I'm just wondering, can those two exist in that location together?

And then accomplishment no, not at Crankea.

I was saying to Director George Cassav's point, one consideration of considering something in the Chaffee area.

Uh I know it wouldn't necessarily maybe be a good second precinct, but if if it's on the ridge line high enough that a training and a 911 could be coexistent.

Um accomplishing something, sure.

That might be the return on the investment is we're having we have the facility to train our staff.

We have our way to direct our staff via radio communication, and we can't accomplish that in there.

And then to me, where I'm hung up is we're identifying first responder inefficiencies or deficiencies for long-term looks.

And so if training is one and if radio communication is one, what if we were to combine those two things and look at this Chaffee idea?

It just seems like then you could auction the crankia or you could sell it or use that as the seed investment into what we're going to have to do for communications.

Okay.

Thank you.

Director Cassavage.

Yeah, Andy, what I'm worried about is that we're treating franchise fees as if they're extra money uh just sitting on on the side.

But really, what we're doing is we're taking operating revenue that we already depend on for the debt service.

We're locking it into the debt service.

I mean, is that a fair assumption?

The the franchise fees is just a mechanism to secure the debt.

I mean, it's you know, you know, we got to have a dedicated revenue source.

Well, we have those, but of I mean, yeah, that's it's part of our general fund uh operating revenues.

Yeah, we spend a lot of money on debt service.

All right, I'm done.

Thank you.

Any other questions from the board?

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next item is a discussion of the board's strategic priorities for 2027.

The board strategic workshop facility by facilitated by Dr.

Vocal on June 26th, collected feedback from the board on various topics is summarizing the documents included in your agenda packet for tonight.

Administration will soon start review of the initial budget proposals submitted by a city's various departments.

So affording the board an opportunity to address these items and suggest board uh specific board priorities for the 2027 budget is timely at this point.

For tonight's discussion, if any board member has specific suggestions as to how to frame any of the discussion items from the June 26th uh uh session into a succinct and identifiable strategic objectives, staff will consolidate them ideally five or six into five or six strategic goals for the 2027 budget that the board could consider for adoption by resolution at an upcoming meeting.

At this point, I'd like to get the the discussion started with the board on your impressions of this discussion item.

Any discussion from the board.

But further add that you know, la in 2025, we went through this process and and we did not um effectively adopt a set of strategic uh goals for the budget process.

It came to where they were pretty well identified for us when we uh determined that we needed to to balance the budget and such, and so we I mean we that was the objective.

I think we still have maintain that objective, but we also want to incorporate any any I mean we had a lot of discussions that day, valuable discussions during that workshop, and I think some of that some of those discussions need to be captured into identifiable items that we could either incorporate into the budget or a plan of operations for 2027 in order to start moving some of those things forward.

Okay, thank you, Director Setter.

Jeff, I think the to the board, I think what we should focus on is those items that we can contribute to first.

The items that are that we have kind of the uh sole reasons how to do them.

Um if we're looking at getting a you know uh one of them was like past the issue three.

I think some of those issues that are legislative issues from the state, we need to put part in the parking lot, but focus on those items for our budget process that achieves the goals and and how to do those uh and give to the board.

You know, go back to what's it what's it take to run the city, and then what are those new items that we want to add uh that would impact our legislative our goals here that we talked about.

Um that's how I look at it.

I think that we should have the what's the basis to run the budget, the city, and then what are the new items that comes from police fire parks that helps achieve these goals and the future forcement goals that we put together?

That's my starting point for discussion.

Greg Camp.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I agree with Dr.

Uh Settle.

I think it's I would like to make sure that these are just actionable and measurable.

Um to me the thing I continue to feel is the competing general fund priorities.

You know, there's a those things that we find at the core of who we are uh and what we're here to do come out of this this fund in a way that I think it just we have to come back to prioritizing that.

I think that'll help the board let make a good decision on legislating something, but as you guys bring us something, I think it would make sure that we focus on what we can accomplish.

I know a lot of those conversations stemmed around building partnerships because the strengths and the opportunities were things that we don't always have a vote at the table, if you will.

But there are things that I think we do have a vote at, and I just if there are other measures that we can uh that we can vote on to build those partnerships.

Uh I think it will be curious to see where what does happen with issue three or how can local municipal governments create public-private partnerships more.

I mean, but if there are a way that we can continue to do that regardless of what happens, that's those are some of my beginning thoughts.

Okay.

Any other comments or Ribblewood?

Okay.

Seeing none.

Um have you reviewed a preliminary agenda?

I'm sure most of you have the agenda for August the fourth.

With that uh motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.