Finance & Administration Council Committee - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, everybody. It's 4 o'clock. I'm going to go ahead and call today's Finance and Administration Council Committee meeting to order. Please go ahead and confirm your attendance. Do have a quorum. Next up is approval of minutes from the Finance Committee meeting on Tuesday, June 9, 2026.

Move to approve unless there's no change.

Second. Motion to approve. Any comments or questions on the minutes as presented? If not, please cast your vote on whether or not to approve the minutes. We'll move into new business. First up is Resolution 26063, a resolution authorizing the City of Jonesboro Grants and Community Development Department to apply for the United States Department of Transportation FY26 Bridge Investment Program Planning Grant. whereas applications are now being accepted for the United States Department of Transportation FY26 Bridge Investment Program, whereas the City of Jonesboro owns and maintains numerous bridges and structures that are critical to the safe and efficient movement of residents, emergency responders, freight traffic, pedestrians, and the traveling public, whereas the City of Jonesboro recognizes the need to proactively evaluate bridge conditions, identify preservation and rehabilitation needs, assess long-term infrastructure requirements, and establish a prioritized investment strategy for future bridge improvements. Whereas the City of Jonesboro desires to develop a comprehensive bridge prioritization and asset management plan that will include a system-wide assessment of city-owned bridges, detailed engineering, evaluations of priority structures, cost estimates, and recommendations for future preservation, rehabilitation, replacement, and funding opportunities. And whereas the City of Jonesboro is seeking federal funding in the amount of $600,000 through the FY26 Bridge Investment Program Planning Grant and commenced it for providing a local matching amount of $150,000 for a project, a total project cost of $750,000. Now, therefore, be it resolved by City Council of the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas that Section 1, the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas, supports the submission of an application to the United States Department of Transportation for the FY26 Bridge Investment Program Planning Grant for the development a comprehensive bridge prioritization and asset management plan. Section two, the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized by the city council of the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to execute all documents necessary to effectuate this grant application. Section three, the grants and community development department is hereby authorized by the city council of the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to prepare and submit all required application materials and supporting documentation for the FY26 bridge investment program. Section four, the city council does hereby authorize the mayor and city clerk to execute all agreements, contract certifications, and other documents necessary to accept and administer any grant award received through this program. Moving forward to full council. Second. Motion seconded forward to full council. Any questions or comments from the committee regarding this agenda item?

Are there specific bridges that are being looked at or a focus of this? I was wondering about the Bridge Street Bridge. Would that be part of this?

Craig says it is, he was shaking his head. We went through the list that we get from the National Bridge Inventory in the state of Arkansas and tried to pick the 17 most critical bridges based on their different evaluations and picked those to do a study on. So that eventually then we could use that to apply for another grant for, you know, the funds to replace and build bridges in the future.

And it's been a subject of concern for a while.

Sure. Yeah. So that's why, yeah, we need to get a study done so that we can come up with a plan.

Any other questions from the committee? Anything from the public in attendance or staff? If not, please cast your and let the record reflect that Dr. Anthony Coleman is present. Go ahead and cast your vote on whether or not to forward resolution 26063 to full council. Next up, resolution 26068, a resolution by the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to accept the attached fee proposal for construction engineering and inspection services for the South Carraway Road widening project, whereas Pickering Firm Incorporated was selected for the South Carraway Road widening Parker Road to Fox Meadow Lane project, whereas the City of Jonesboro desires to accept the attached fee proposal in the amount of $374,157.81 for construction engineering and inspection services, and whereas funding for the execution of the fee proposal shall come from the capital improvement revenue bond budget, compensation shall be paid in accordance with fee proposal, therefore be resolved by the City Council of the City of Johnsboro, Arkansas that section one, the City of Johnsboro hereby accepts the attached fee proposal in the amount of $374,157.81 for construction engineering and inspection services for the South Carraway Road widening project. Section two, funding for the execution of the fee proposal shall come from the capital improvement revenue bond budget and compensation shall be paid in accordance with the fee proposal. Section three, the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized by the city council for the city of Jonesboro to accept the fee proposal and direct the purchasing slash finance specialist to issue a purchase order.

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion seconded. Forward to full council. Any questions from the committee on this one?

I just wondered, what's the timeline on that? Craig, what's the timeline on that?

The bids are scheduled to be opened on July 15th. It'll take us, we're hoping to see a groundbreaking by late August, early September, but it's gonna be a two construction season project, so they'll get started this fall. It'll probably be delayed some during the winter, and then it'll be possibly by the end of next, 2027, that it would be complete. That's kind of the tentative timeline for it right now.

I don't know if you can answer this, but possibly I was thinking about the bond itself. Are we on schedule as relates to the financial portion of this bond with the road and all the other projects that we have going?

With this particular project, yes. I mean, we're at one year, roughly one year into the bond. We still have another two years to have the funds expended.

What about the cost itself? Is it still in line with the budget that you have for the plan?

We'll open bids on July 15th, and we'll know exactly what the construction cost is at that point. The estimate is, yes.

Anything else from the committee? Anything else from staff or the public in attendance?

So Patty Lack, 4108 Forest Hill Road. I know on one of the bid proposals from the company is that my understanding from the last one is that it's going to be five lanes down to, I can't think of that one street, and then is it going to be three lanes all the way down to Fox Meadow because on the one proposal it said Fox Meadow relaying there. So is it going to be like a center turn lane down to Fox Meadow because it said it on the proposal sheet?

The current construction drawings is the five lane from Parker Road to Ladarette and then it transitions to a three lane and it'll continue three lanes south to Glenn's Place and then it'll transition back down to a two lane road section. at Glens Place, so it does not go all the way to Fox Meadow. Now the 10-foot side path on the west side of the road will continue all the way to Fox Meadow, but that'll be the only roadway improvement south at the Glens Place other than that transition. So it'll transition out around the driveway, northernmost driveway to the links is where it'll transition back.

Anything else from staff or public? All right. If not, please cast your ballot on whether or not, or your vote on whether or not to forward Resolution 26068 to full council. Resolution 26069, this is Municipal Lane. Resolution by the City Council, City of Johnson, Arkansas, to place the Municipal Lane on property located at 2410 West Matthews, partial 01-143-143, That's 01900 owned by George Hanna, Sr. in the amount of $5,566. Move forward to full council.

Second.

Motion to second. Any questions or comments from the committee? Anything from staff or the public in attendance? All right. Please cast your vote on whether or not to forward resolution 26069 to full council. Resolution 26070, a resolution by the City Council of the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas, to approve the attached proposal for additional services for the park located along Disciple Drive, whereas Resolution 25027 approved half to provide professional services for the park located along Disciple Drive project. Whereas the City of Jonesboro desires to increase the original professional services project scope with the attached proposal in the amount of $136,040 for additional design support services, construction documents, and architectural construction documents. Whereas funding for the execution of the agreement shall come from the capital improvement budget and compensation shall be paid in accordance with the agreement and therefore be resolved by City Council of the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas. That section one, the city of Jonesboro hereby accepts the attached proposal in the amount of $136,040 for additional design support services, construction documents, and architectural construction documents for the park located along Disciple Drive project. Section two, that funding for the execution of the fee proposal shall come from the capital improvement budget and compensation shall be paid in accordance with the fee proposal. Section three, the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized by the city council for the city of Jonesboro to accept the fee proposal and direct the purchasing slash finance specialist to increase the purchase order amount. Move to forward to full council. Second. Motion to second to forward to full council. Any questions or comments from the committee?

I have a question. Is there any possibility at this stage of a swimming pool being included in phase one of the Disciple Drive project?

At this point, we're working to fulfill the requirements that we've laid forth in the grant to qualify for the grant. That includes the multi-use fields, playground equipment, and walking trails, pickleball courts. And so the priority is trying to identify enough money to be able to do that. And then, as always, we're continuing to try to identify funds available for another swimming pool, whether it be there or at Allen Park or at somewhere else in the city. And obviously, you know, with the the opening of the ridge coming up early next year, hopefully that'll alleviate some of those as well, but we also have some pretty serious maintenance decisions that we need to make on the YMCA pool as it continues to age.

We have to realistically think of ourselves as having one working public pool right now, and so that puts us in kind of a crisis as far as public swim facilities for a city our size. It's about a quarter of what's recommended by the Parks and Rec Association.

And I think as we continue to look at future budget cycles, we're going to need to identify, one, as a body, if we're going to prioritize a pool, and two, where that funding is going to come from. You're probably looking at the Parker Park pool. At the time we built it, it was somewhere around a $4 million pool. I think you're going to probably see at least that for any other pool facility that we build. We'll just have to decide what takes a backseat to be able to create funding for that. Thankfully, we have a pretty skilled finance department that can look and really try to cut anything that might need to be cut or reduce anything or look for excessive areas that maybe we can help reduce. promote efficiency. I know that last finance meeting, we kind of worked through some staff realignments that actually saved a little bit of money. So it'll take a lot of small bites. But at the end of the day, it's just a matter of resources. And we are not necessarily blessed with the strongest sales tax percentage of you know cities around here so we have to make do with what we can and we'll have to seek out grants as well to help offset some of those costs so it certainly is a priority to to continue trying to find funding for more swimming it's just where it's going to come from and what expense right you've seen that there's a demand

as far as lanes for competition, swimming practice and all. But we also need plenty of access for young children to be able to learn how to swim. To grow up some lifeguards for these pools.

And our priority of the city is recreational swimming for all the kids in Jonesboro to have a place to learn to swim and to enjoy to swim. And that's obviously very evident at Parker Park. It's a very popular pool. Very proud of that pool, and we all should be, and we'd really like to see that replicated elsewhere.

It's not really made for swim team competition practice.

It's made for the community to enjoy.

Yes, and swimming lessons to some extent, yeah. But we have to be realistic about the various needs we've got, and we don't have the facilities currently to really meet those needs. And that's all.

I do. Thank you. And I agree with you. And on that in prioritizing pools. But my question was, I was looking at the actual contract itself. I can't pronounce that name.

Half or half. Half. All right.

Great. I'm not too familiar when it comes to construction or even commercial construction in that regard. But part of that fee was, in that first phase, a meeting for $6,000 just for the meeting, the first meeting. Is that realistic? I mean, I just so happen to see that.

I mean, $6,000 for an initial meeting? Now, I know that they came up and they spent some time here on the ground during the evaluation of the site. I'd have to look at the exact details of the contract. I don't know if Mr. Light's still in the room, but he was the one that kind of worked with them on that.

I mean, it's literally one of the first things. It's over $10,000 for a meeting and then $4,000 for a tree survey or something like that.

Like I said, they did come here for several days on site inspections, but I can definitely get some more detail about exactly what that consists of.

Yeah, because from what I understand, this phase is literally, and you can correct me, this proposal or this resolution is for us to pay for them to come in and basically give us a plan.

Right? Well, it's a plan and it's also to manage the actual construction of the project. To manage the construction.

Oh.

Yeah, so doing all the different engineering designs and drainage and layout, obviously.

So it will include all of those, all the, excuse me for my lack of better understanding, but the pool plants, it'll include all of that in this?

Yes, this will, currently we're at about 60% plans and this will get us to basically construction ready plans. Saying basically, I'm listening to your words. Yeah. Well, I mean, obviously this is a pretty in-depth design and build, and there's a lot of intricacies that come in and out to make sure that we don't damage any of the ecology or cause any kind of runoff issues, or actually retain a little bit of water and some green space, and also to make sure that we save as many significant trees as possible during the build of it.

Sure. I'm not questioning the validity. I'm not questioning that. I'm just questioning the amount to make certain that it makes sense for what it will produce. I'm just asking, I'm just looking at that. Let's say a project manager of $6,000 in a tree survey app. Tree survey, okay. But kickoff for a meeting?

that $6,000 is for the kickoff and project management of the entire contract. So that is not just a one-time meeting, that's for managing the completion of the project to get it to 100% construction drawings, get it bid out, get it awarded, and get it constructed. So that's what that fee is. It's not just one meeting.

Okay, just, sorry if I sound,

Ignorant, but I just, it's. Any other questions from the committee? Anything else from staff or the public in attendance?

Patty Lack, 4108 Forest Hill Road. I'm glad that you brought that up because I was kind of confused. So as of right now, there is nothing out there then? I have not had the chance to go out there. So is there anything being done on that property yet? Nothing? Okay. Thank you.

Anything else? Please cast your vote on whether or not to forward Resolution 27070 to full council. Last item under new business is Resolution 26071, a resolution to approve Jonesboro Police Department terms and conditions for new hire incentives. Excuse me. Whereas the 2026 City of Jonesboro budget allocated funding for a total of 175 uniformed police officers. Excuse me. Whereas as of 6-1-26 payroll records identify 151 field positions and 24 vacant positions. Whereas the 14% staffing shortage has created a surplus in the FY 2026 police personnel budget that will be redirected to incentivize the hiring and recruiting of P1 level patrol officers for the Jonesboro Police Department. whereas hiring, recruitment, and retention incentives are required to operate within current year police personnel budget, and whereas new hires are required to agree to a multi-year employment agreement to encourage retention, whereas detailed information, incentive amounts, and commitment requirements are included in exhibits one and two attached with this resolution, and therefore be resolved by City Council of the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas that section one, this Jonesboro City Council endorses the attached terms and conditions of the police hiring and recruitment incentives as described in this resolution and the attached exhibits. Section two, the Jonesboro City Council authorizes the creation of a restricted account consisting of excess Jonesboro Police Department personnel funds necessary to fulfill multi-year hiring and recruitment incentive commitments executed in FY 2026.

We'll move it forward to full council.

Second. Motion seconded for full council. Any questions or comments from the committee?

Yeah, I do. Chief, can you give me a kind of an idea of what these incentives would look like if I was a, if I was to apply and what it would look, I'm assuming, for this applicant.

Yeah, I don't have the breakdown sheet in front of me, but in short order, if you're a non-certified officer, there's a $5,000 incentive. And upon hiring, you'll receive a portion of it. And then as you reach $5,000, certain milestones like graduating the academy, you'll get part of your incentive as you complete your FTO, you'll get another part of your incentive after your first year anniversary, there's another part. So all these incentives are spread out over multiple years, it's not all a lump sum. If you're a certified officer upon hiring, you'll sign a contract, all these will be contractually signed by the applicant for a certified officer upon completion of the signed contract. There's a $5,000 hiring on immediate incentive, and then after they reach their first milestone of FTO completion, and then one year, there's $2,500, and then the second year, $2,500, and the third year, $2,000. So for a total of $12,000 for certified officers.

Certified over two years experience, right?

Certified over two years or more experience.

Because I can certify less than two years is $3,000 upon hiring and then $1,000, $1,000, $1,000 on their anniversary day, so $6,000 total.

Correct, yeah.

I know you're just, you're at a disadvantage.

Yeah, well, Keith handed me a sheet, so I was trying to remember off the top of my head, but you should have the sheet on your screen at this point. So that's the breakdown of it at this point. Then on the second part of it is a recruiting bonus to incentive our officers to get out and talk to people individually to recruit applicants. And we have found that's the best way to get officers in the door. It's just one-on-one conversations with individuals and talking up the police department and policing itself. It works the best. We have advertised by radio means, social media means. It brings in applicants, but it's getting the quality applicants. And when you have a one-on-one conversation, you generally initiate that conversation because that person has character traits that you identify as probably a good police officer. That's probably having good people skills, good social skills, talking to the public. So officers tend to recognize individuals that we encounter that would probably make a decent officer. so to incentivize that we offered this a five thousand dollar recruiting bonus and again that comes in increments as the recruit uh reaches their milestone then they get part of their incentive also so it creates a relationship between the recruiting officer and the recruit kind of a um you kind of have an investment to make sure that recruits gonna make their milestones through the incentives. So right now, go ahead, you had a question. I'll elaborate more. But with this coming to light, we have kind of began to publish this information and it's immediately had the desired effect. Currently, We're looking at about 14 certifieds in the background process. I'm hiring two at the end of the month that's already completed backgrounds, and one of them is from Knoxville, Tennessee Police Department. And then an upcoming test in two weeks, there's another seven certifieds that have recently applied. And so right now, as of today, we have 34 scheduled to test in two weeks, and just a few weeks ago, we did a test, and we're doing background zone 20 out of that pool. So in the past month, this is the biggest recruiting cycle we have seen in quite a while. Historically, the past year, we processed close to 300 applicants, and I got seven qualified out of that. It's not that I'm short of getting applicants, I'm short of getting quality applicants. So with these incentives, I think we're hopefully gonna get some quality applicants Come in all we'll still have to go through extensive background investigation Everything that we have on cue, you know, they may not pass our standards but the fact matter is that the numbers are They're coming in at a better rate than we've seen in a long time. So I think once we get fully staffed this program, we can reevaluate it, we can reevaluate the numbers if we need to stay in existence or lower the numbers. But my goal is by November 1st, hopefully the latest, we'll be fully staffed with a list of eligibility list.

Wow, that's major. I just thought, and I read this, but I just thought the question warranted an opportunity for the chief to really address this openly, because everybody don't read, so I just wanted to make sure you could say that.

You're correct, and I'm sorry, I tend to go more off into it than normal, but I know there's people listening besides y'all, but at the end of the day, we're 25 short today. I just had another retirement last week, so that put me back up to 25, But as I say, there's light at the end of the tunnel, and the light's getting brighter every day right now. So things are looking very promising, and my staff's been advised it's all hands on deck. Get these backgrounds done and get people on board.

Thank you, Chief. It's great to hear.

Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from the committee?

Chairman, I was gonna wait for other business, but I feel like this is a good time to ride this wave since we're talking about all the good from the recruitment efforts that we're having here. Chief, I know that we were talking about a 14% deficit in the staffing model that we've been carrying over the last six months to a year. On that, I know that we've had 151 officers that's been picking up that slack in the meantime, and a point of conversation that we've been having and been talking about is you know, doing something for those officers, more focusing on the retention component of this. I was playing around with some of these numbers just a little bit earlier today, and you know, looking at it from an annualized basis on the 24 vacancies, even if every one of those officers would have been at the P1 level as a recruit at $51,000, that would have landed us at about a $1.2 million budgetary savings from the salary line item on that side. And even on the recruitment and incentivized efforts, even if we max those out, best case scenario, 24 recruits that are fully certified with more than two years of experience, along with 24 officers that we paid out for those 24 individuals, that comes at a cost of about $168,000 that I was looking at And I mean, if we look at that minus and doing some kind of one-off bonus for the officers that we currently have that's been picking up the slack over this entire time working overtime, protecting the streets, making sure we all sleep well at night and everything else. Those 151 police officers that have been holding the line and been protecting us, if we did something like a one-off bonus, let's say it's something that would be in the neighborhood of like $2,000, that would land us at approximately $302,000 to be able to do a one-off bonus to say thank you, the appreciation for those officers that have been working in this minus 14% category here. I mean, that still would allow us, which we know it's not gonna be the full annualized visual of this, we would still be able to bring roughly $730,000 of unrealized expense and salaries back to the general budget. Is that something that you think that would help us retain the current officers that we have, just trying to get a pulse on our men and women out there in the field?

Well, yes, sir, certainly do. You're correct in everything you stated that, you know, there's 151 that's been toeing the line, and the call volume has certainly not decreased, and there are certain divisions that I've had to shut down because of staffing shortages. And I think that if we could do something like what you mentioned, we'll certainly go a long way with the current staff that's been out there day in and day out and working over, working multiple shifts just to help keep our staffing minimums. There's times, you know, we're running seven or eight officers on the street instead of 18 or 20, and it's kind of a safety concern, but I commend the men and women of the department that have stepped up and have towed the line during this whole process.

Great, and I know that we've got a very skilled finance department. I know some of these aren't necessarily realized savings or expenses at this point, but I'd like to continue this conversation and see if there would be something we'd be able to do maybe in the near future for them.

And I just wanted to point out a quick clarification, Councilman. If you recognize the, I guess, the full possibility of, kind of like you said, everybody gets the $12,000 bonus and all the retention stuff is taken care of. In order for this to not be a budget amendment and to not, I guess, impress on next year's budget, we're going to actually all of these multi-year commitments will be committed to a restricted fund so you know theoretically you could be looking at somewhere around a four hundred thousand dollar budget impact for this year um so there so it will be a little higher than what you'd mentioned but i understand the methodology you're talking about this year the next year's money goes on next year's budget but we're trying to make sure that we don't do anything that restricts next year's growth potential or next year's funding and by If you're an applicant and you qualify for the $12,000 and there's a $5,000 incentive, so you're talking about a $17,000 that we're gonna put over into a restricted fund and that's what we'll pay out in years 27, 28, and so forth. So we're trying to secure this program all with leftover funds or additional funds that are available from that 15% shortage this year.

Definitely, and that $2,000 was just a shot from the hip number on that. I think that it'd be great if there's any opportunity at all for us to say thank you to those men and women. I'd like to see us move forward with that.

Sure, and like I said, I just wanted to clarify, this is a good opportunity for me to point out why this is not a budget amendment, because the funding exists, and again, not to put any kind of limitations on next year's budget or make any commitments towards next year's budget until budget time comes around. Gotcha, thank you, Brian.

Chief, the only question I get, how many officers would, in this situation, would move up the ladder? Has that been a part of the incentive plan?

to move up the ladder. Well, in order for somebody to move up in rank, somebody in rank would have to retire. And so over the past couple years, there has been some movement up in ranks. In the next five years, there will be a lot more movement up in rank, as in the upper administration or upper level supervision in the department is going to start seeing a major turnover. There's eight of us right now who can retire any time. So I'm trying to set the department up for the future and develop those upcoming leaders, getting them prepared in leadership classes and things like that and ready to take over to continue running this department. So it's important that we keep what we got. So thank you for bringing that up. Again, I think those officers that are watching, I think, would be certainly appreciative of these efforts.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

I just want to say, according to what I appreciate your comments on that. Councilman Emmons, I know I've talked to officers who've gone, when the call volume's high, several weeks without a 94 or an evening meal break or a break in the middle of their shift to eat. The call volume's been so high they couldn't even take off to grab a sandwich or anything. So we've got a very dedicated bunch of folks. And I think if we can't afford to do something like that, let them know that we do appreciate them for their dedication to the city.

We're lucky to have them, and we always try to take care of those that take care of us.

Yes. We appreciate what you do. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Anything from staff? Anything else from staff? Anything from the public in attendance? All right. Please cast your vote on whether or not to forward Resolution 26071 to full council. That was the last item under new business. We'll move into pending items. It's resolution 26061. It's a resolution by the City Council of the City of Johnsonville, Arkansas, placing Ms. Follin on property located at 300 East Pine Street, parcel 01-144-183-21000, owned by Unicorn LLC in the amount of $865. Mr. Roper has asked that this be tabled indefinitely. DAVID BURRAGE. Move to postpone indefinitely. DAVID BURRAGE. Second. DAVID BURRAGE. Motion second. All those in favor? Aye. Say aye. You want to do aye, or do you want us to? I can do voting. Oh, she can do voting. Let's do voting. Please cast your vote on whether or not to postpone indefinitely 26-061. No other items under pending. Any other business for the committee today from anybody? All right, we'll move into public comments. Mr. Richardson. Are we going back to other business now?

It was just an announcement. Okay. I think each of y'all got the email earlier, but just for the public watching at home, and if you haven't got it, we are going to have a groundbreaking on Thursday at 9-11 a.m. for the 911 Center downtown. So hope to see everybody in attendance and look forward to getting this project started.

And I do have to correct something. I think earlier Mr. Richardson referred to it as the RAC or the Ridge Athletic Center. I think that might have a new name now. What was that name, Mr. Emerson?

I don't know.

I hear it in my dreams. The First Community Bank Sportsplex. Thanks to First Community for stepping up and doing that. So back to public comments. No public comment from anybody? All right. Next item is adjournment.

So moved. Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?