City Council Work Session - Regular Meeting

Fayetteville. In Jesus' name I do pray. Amen.

Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Pastor, thank you so much for that prayer. If you want to just take a minute, tell us a little bit about yourself and your ministry, please.

Well, thank you for having me. I'm Stapheria Nicholson, the pastor of North Carolina's campus of Temple Salvation Deliverance Church under my apostle, D.F. Allen, co-pastor of First Lady Gwendolyn Allen. We're an international ministry which focuses on the family, focuses on doing community work, and most importantly, encouraging people to stay faithful. It's easy to get lost in the shuffle of life. Some of the activities we have going on is we are blessed. Four years in ministry and serving. We'll have a youth day on July 10th. And so I hope that youth will come out, eat some popsicles and hot dogs with us, and just enjoy our ministry generally. And occasionally we offer clothing, food, and just that warm assistance that people need in days like this.

Well, thank you so much. Where's your youth day program? What will it be held?

It will be held on July 10th at seven PM at one 35 North main street and spring lake.

All right. Well, thank you. Thank you so much. Let's give a pass around. Thank you for that prayer. Uh, council at this time, um, We would like to read a proclamation in recognition of Pride Month. Do we have anyone here? Miss Jennifer, who was presenting this to you?

No one, sir. This is just for reading.

All right. Proclamation reads as follows. Whereas every June, communities across the United States recognize Pride Month to honor history, struggles, achievements, and contributions... to the LGBTQ plus community. Whereas Pride Month commemorates the anniversary of Stonewall Uprising of 1969 in New York City, a pivotal moment in the fight for LGBTQ plus rights that sparked a movement for equality and justice. Whereas the members of LGBTQ BTQ plus community have long enriched our society in countless ways as educators, artists, public servants, business leaders, caregivers, and neighbors, and continue to demonstrate strength, resilience, and courage in the face of adversity. Whereas Pride Month provides an opportunity to reflect on the progress made toward equality, recognizes the challenges that remain and reaffirm our commitment to dignity, respect, and inclusion for all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. Whereas the city of Fayetteville is dedicated to foster an inclusive, safe, and welcoming community where diversity is celebrated and all residents are empowered to live authentically and openly. Whereas during Pride Month, we support the rights of LGBTQ+, individuals to live free from discrimination and prejudice, and we recognize and uplift the voices and experiences of those who continue to advocate for justice and equity. Now, therefore, I, Mitch Colvin, Mayor of the City of Fayetteville, North Carolina, on behalf of the City Council and more than 208,000 citizens, to hereby proclaim the month of June in the year of 2026 to be in honor of Pride Month, Witnesses' 15th Day of June 2026. So we will present that, and let's give them a round of applause as well. And now at this time, we have a special friend of ours that is here. He has been very supportive over the last couple of years. And I'd like to ask that Colonel Chad Mixon would meet me at the podium, please. Well, Council, we, as you know, we have, over the years, we work very closely with Fort Bragg and the garrison commanders, and we develop a relationship oftentimes with them through difficult times, making sure that we... work together to take care of our soldiers and their families who are residents in the city of Fayetteville. The number used to be, Colonel, around 70% of the men and women of Fort Bragg who are active military live somewhere in the city of Fayetteville. So we share the responsibility to take care of those citizens. But over the last few years, you have been not only a great servant and partner for the city of Fayetteville, but also a friend to many of us with your bubbly personality, always have a smile on your face, and you've always been willing to help. So at this time, you know, we are saddened to see you go, but we understand that life is about the next chapters, and we wish you and your family well. We know that you've put in a number of years of service, which you'll share with us in a moment. But on behalf of the mayor and myself and the city council, Our key to the city is our highest honor that we can present. We'd like to present to you Colonel K. Chad Mixon in grateful recognition of your dedicated interest and untimely commitment to Fort Bragg and to the citizens of Fayetteville while serving as the Garrison Commander from 2024 to 2026. We say thank you.

All right. Mayor Colvin thinks that was huge. I mean, my dad was a city councilman for 16 years down in Florida, and I'd heard a key to the city, but never really knew what it meant until now. So I really appreciate it. But absolutely. Been in the Army 31 years. As the mayor said, retirement is here. I'm changing command and retiring on the same day, on July 24th. It would be a bittersweet moment, but, you know, 31 years, a lot of that has been here at Fort Bragg. And I'll tell you, in the early, you know, 2000s when the war kicked off, I was one of these guys from Fort Bragg, head down and rowing and deploying. Not looking back, but I think the majority of deployments came out of Fort Bragg. Every time I got here, I got deployed again, so that's what happens here. But I always look forward to coming back. This city, when I got here, is just a young kid, not much older than my oldest son, Chase, over here. um so far from florida and it's just become home for many years so so what a way to cap off you know uh a career as the garrison commander for brag i mean i've met almost everybody at the head table and city managers the deputies the you know cumberland county team hope mills everyone around here and it's just been there's a great group of people uh in fayetteville so Thank you for the last two years of friendships, and I look forward to continuing to see you all around. I'll be in Raleigh here soon working for Governor Stein for a little bit, and then we'll see what happens from there. But I really appreciate everything, and thanks for this. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Colonel Mixon, would you mind taking a picture with the council, with the key?

What do you mean? This way here, don't move.

He's approaching.

Awesome. Thank you again, Colonel Mixon and the family for your work and your contribution to our nation and to our community. So, council, with that, we will move into our meeting. We'll look for the city manager's report.

Thank you, Mayor, and good evening, members of council and public. A few announcements this evening. This summer, the City of Fayetteville is proud to welcome seven State Employees Credit Union Public Fellows Intern from Fayetteville State University. These talented students will gain valuable hands-on experience in local government while contributing to meaningful projects that serve our community. The SECU Public Fellows Internship Program strengthens the connection between higher education and public service, helping develop the next generation of leaders and professionals. And we're excited to invest in their growth and look forward to the impact they will have during their time with the City of Fayetteville, working in safety and wellness, human resources, the police department and ECD, And I'm not sure if we have any of those fellows here this afternoon, this evening. If we do, if you could please stand. If not, we will have them come back at the appropriate time at the end of summer. Also, we'll be celebrating America's 250th birthday on Saturday, July 4th in Festival Park with our annual Independence Day concert and fireworks show. This will be done in partnership with the Fayetteville Symphony Orchestra and the Public Works Commission. The concert will feature performances from the Fayetteville Symphony, Fayetteville Siphonic Band, and members of 82nd Airborne Division Band. Gates open at 6 p.m. and the concert starts at 7. And more information about the concert and what you can and can't bring will also be available on the city's website. The Fayetteville Fire Department will also host their Women in Fire Service event this Saturday, June 27th from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. This event gives women who are interested in the profession an opportunity to hear directly from female firefighters about their experiences, ask questions, and learn about training, support, and career opportunities available within the fire service, and would encourage anyone who has an interest in fire service, male or female, to please come out to that event. As we've done most recently, I'd also like to take this opportunity to announce a few retirements of two valued members of the City of Fayetteville team for their years of dedicated service, leadership, and commitment that they have made and the lasting impact they will have on our city, our community, and definitely our organization. Those two employers are Ms. Sherry Cooey, our alarm ordinance coordinator with more than 30 years of service, and Ms. Carla Reeves, a police sergeant who is retiring with 23 years of service. And looking at the retirements, I'd also like to welcome up a new member of the senior leadership team. I know many of you have seen him around. Taylor, if you could come on up to the podium. Mayor and members of council and community. This is Mr. Taylor Floyd. Taylor is joining us as our Budget and Evaluation Director. So I know that y'all have really fallen in love with Assistant City Manager Jeff Yates, but we need him back on other stuff now that the budget is being adopted. And Taylor has not left us. He was here during your budget meetings, and so we think he's made us some fairly tough stuff as well. Well, Taylor brings over a decade of local government experience, including budget and economic development work with the city of Raleigh, serving as a budget and performance manager for the city of Asheville. In Asheville, he led an annual budgeting process, performance management initiatives, and organizational planning efforts. He holds a master's of public administration from NC State.

Woo-hoo!

and a bachelor's degree in political science from UNC. We can get over that, because he got his master's at State. And I would ask, Taylor, if you could, anything else that you'd like to add to share with the council and the community?

Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Hewitt. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I just want to say I'm excited to be here. I appreciate the opportunity to serve the City of Fayetteville, and I look forward to working with the City Manager's Office, with our departments, and with you all on the budget process for FY28. Thank you so much, Taylor.

Thank you. Thank you.

Welcome. And then the last one, Mayor, is, as I mentioned, we have a late ad that we would ask Council to consider adding to the agenda, which is a $25,000 grant from the North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program. We received notice of this late today. It is for a non-match, again, of $25,000, and it provides us with overtime support for the Police Department, and the Chief is available to talk about how we'll use the funds if needed. But if not, Mayor, if we could, but again, ask your consideration to adding this resolution, which is in your packet, to the agenda at the appropriate time. And that's all I have, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Hewitt. We plan to take care of that. Let's give a round of applause for those who are retiring as well as welcoming. new members to the team. So thank you. And thank you for your service to those who are retired. A lot of retirements tonight. My goodness. So, uh, all right. So council, uh, as we move to the approval of the agenda, I'll go to council member Davis.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I move that we, uh, approve the agenda with the deletion of item 7.0 a four and the additional, uh, and the addition of the items of 7.0828, resolution for the Governor's Highway Safety Program.

All right. There is a motion. Second. All right. There's a motion by Council Member Davis. I think I heard it here. Second.

And Council, I'll look for the sure system. Sir, I see you. Yeah, I see you. All right.

So any discussion on the motion to approve with the modifications mentioned?

Discussion? Yes, sir. Yes, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to add a motion to reconsider the data center moratorium to tonight's agenda. That's discussed.

All right, so I got a motion on the floor currently, so unless there's a willingness to amend, okay. All right, then you'll have to address that. All right, but there's a motion to approve. Madam Attorney, how do we handle that motion? Because once it's approved.

Mayor Colvin, once the agenda is approved, there should be no more amendments to this.

Yeah, we went through that before. So if there's not a willingness by Hare or Davis to amend to include, then Council, I'll look to you for your votes on the motion. So it's not working? All right. All right.

Who are we missing? Yeah, mine is not working, unfortunately. But it's a no for me.

All right. Motion carries nine to one. Those voting in opposition, Council McMillan. All right, Council, we'll get to the consented items. That's the 7.08 items. Let me clear the deck real quick, just so I can see who's... All right. That's still from the last time, isn't it? Were you able to clear that, Madam Clerk? Huh?

I guess the SHER system is sleeping tonight.

All right. So, Council 7.08, I mean, the 7-point consented items count... Council Member Honduras.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I move that we table 7.083 to the August work session and adoption at a future meeting.

All right. All right, so that would be a motion to approve with the exception of OA3. Council, anything else? All right, Council Member McMillan.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, thank you. Move that we remove from the consent agenda items Alpha 2, Alpha 5, and Alpha 6 for discussion.

Okay, all right. So it's a motion to approve with the exception of OA3.

O-A-2, O-A-5, and O-A-6 that will be taken for a separate action.

All right. This is a motion by Council Member Hondo, seconded by McMillan. Discussion on that? All right. Council, I look to you for your votes on the rest of the consent. All right. Motion carries unanimously. All right. O-A-2, Council Member McMillan.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, let me thank every member of the city council and staff. We put in hours on this budget, and every member came with the interests of this city in mind. So let me be clear up front. My concerns about process are not absolute, and they're not meant to discredit anyone here. I agree with much of what this budget puts forward. I especially want to thank our staff, the city manager, and ACM Yates, who made hard cuts before they even walked into this room. They presented us with real options. They did it with poise and patience through a long and difficult process, and that deserves to be said out loud. And here's where I have to be honest in hopes that we will do better in the future. At points in this process, the language and behavior directed at our staff from this council was not fair. These are apolitical civil servants. They cannot push back the way we can, and they should not have to defend themselves in what was supposed to remain a professional process. So I have to apologize on behalf of the council because I watched it happen and did not speak up earlier or often enough, asking each of us to think about how we treat the staff and the kind of environment we create as leaders on this council. In our haste to reach consensus on the budget, there were Council motions made last week that cut short our opportunity to fully discuss items that were worthy of discussion. I appreciate support by members of the Council, namely Council Member Ferguson, to push for space to hear discussion. However, as a Council, we fell short. Tonight, I can take abbreviated space to voice disappointment that the Office of Community Safety was less than fully supported. OCS is, in fact, a fraction of the $227 million budget. What that office needs is not less, it's more, and a chance to develop a stable platform in which to grow. We were never given a chance to have that conversation or to discuss fully funding for teams with vehicles. We also missed out on opportunities to weigh the cut to recommended employee pay raise from 4% to 3%. Also missed opportunities to discuss concerns around implementing drones as first responders and discussions to examine the cost and rationale behind surveillance spending and ShotSpotter, namely. We did not get that debate and we absolutely should have. I've been thinking a lot about when to speak up and sometimes the hardest moments to speak is usually the moments when things need to be said. So I am not supporting this budget as presented tonight. And that's not against my colleagues, not against the good that is in this budget, but it is a vote for process that is worthy of the people we serve and the staff who serve alongside us. And I appreciate the space to say that, Mr. Mayor.

All right. Yes, sir.

Thank you.

All right. Councils, with that, entertain a motion to adopt. All right, there's motion by mayor Pro Tem second by well made up most of my hair second about Pro Tem Any other discussion? All right council look to you for your vote All right, I'm clerk that's nine to one those voting in opposition councilmember McMillan. All right seven point. Oh three councilmember hundreds

Yes, sir. I thought it was included in the first motion, but I can make another motion to table 7.083 to the August work session and adoption at a future meeting.

All right. This motion by Council Member Hardrow, seconded by Jones. Discussion? All right. Is that a discussion, Council Member McMillan? No. Okay. All right. Council, I'll look to you for your votes. All right. Who are we missing?

There we go. All right.

Motion carries 9-1. Those voting in opposition, Council Member McMillan. Oh, that was 10? Okay. All right. I thought I saw red up here. All right. Should have brought my glasses tonight. All right. Motion carries. Forgot them. All right. Item 7.04 has been removed. 7.05, Council Member McMillan.

Yeah, this is an item that forces us to look at shot spotter renewal. I asked to pull this item.

7.05 is the one before that. Okay, my fault.

Okay. Yeah, this is an item that should not have, I don't think should be on the agenda for consent. This is a youth curfew that went through several rounds of discussions, several rounds of meetings. and has been for years. I know that there wasn't consensus on this even as recently as months ago on the council. This is something that I think that cuts at how we approach youth safety, how we approach safety as a whole. A couple of years ago we moved towards a holistic approach and agreed that criminalization, I thought we agreed that criminalization was not the path that we should focus on. We established an OCS of which one of the pillars is support to youth and got on the road to, instead of speaking about kids as if they're problems, as if they're a nuisance, got on the road to actually talking about the resources that are available for youth in Fayetteville. When this was being discussed initially, there was a lot of talk about how youth could be targeted, how somebody that even looks like they're under the age of 17, 16, could be targeted by police as a result of the way this is written. One thing I want to distinguish is that I think we have solid leadership right now on the police force. I think we've had reassurances that this would not be enforced as red, where there would be some discretion and people would not be picked up because they are short, because they look young. And I think that should give us some comfort. However, we are policymakers on this board. We make laws that will outlast the current chief and should outlast all of us. And it's bad policy to have something that reads that we're targeting people because of their age. For that reason, I'd like some input from my colleagues on the council. I would like an opportunity also for the public to speak and would not like this to be rubber stamped on a consent agenda as it is tonight. I think ultimately we can do much better than a youth criminalization curfew. And that's what I'm pushing for and hope I'll be joined by colleagues on the council in a push to do something better and to focus on resources and not criminalization.

Thank you. Thank you, Council Member McMillan. Mayor Pro Tem.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I move that we re-adopt the youth protection ordinances written.

All right. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, seconded by Hare. Discussion? All right, see none. Council, look to you for your votes. All right, Madam Clerk, motion carries eight to two. Those voting in opposition, Council Member McMillan and Hondros. All right, item 7.086. Council Member McMillan. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

So I asked to pull this item because a three-year, $675,000 surveillance contract should not pass council in a single consent agenda vote. With meeting minutes and the drainage easement, the people we represent deserve to hear us say out loud what we are buying and why. So let me start with the question this council itself asked. When we directed staff to evaluate this technology. We ask one thing above all, does ShotSpotter make a measurable difference when there is no 911 call to go along with it? Does it censor its own, help us to catch a person who pulled the trigger, identify the item, and recover the evidence, and make an arrest? We have the answer. It came back from the Wilson Center and from our own staff, our Office of Strategic Performance, our Police Department, our Office of Community Safety, and the answer was no. I want to read to you what our own report found because I do not want anyone to think this is just my opinion. On every productivity measure that matters, shell casing recovery, locating witnesses, identifying victims, making arrests, Shot spotter only performed when it was paired with the 911 call. The evaluation found no evidence that shot spotter alerts on their own without a corroborating call meaningfully improve our police work. That was the core question that we all asked and the answer we got is no. And here's the part that should give every one of us pause before we sign for another three years. Our own staff wrote that they could not even make a clean comparison between a shot spotter only alert and a regular 911 call about gunfire because the data environment does not allow it. We cannot yet isolate what this tool adds. What we are being asked to commit is hundreds of thousands of dollars to find out whether the thing we already have bought is worth buying.

One minute, Councilman.

That $225,000 a year contract is not as abstract. It is one more mental health response unit. It is a violence interruption network. It is the credible messenger programs that actually reach the small number of people driving this violence. It is the things that our own evaluation suggests we could be investing. And I appreciate that. If I may close Mr. Mayor. What a vote no means it does not mean that I don't care about gun violence. It means I care enough that we spend our own money on what works. And that's on the preventative side. It's on measures like what the OCS brings. Thank you. I hope the council will consider that tonight.

Thank you. Council member. Council member here. Thank you. Mayor with. Great support from Raleigh Road to Markson Road. I would like to, from my residents, recommend that the city manager authorize, give him the authorization to execute the three-year renewal of the sound thinking contract. All right.

This is a motion by Councilman Mayer to execute as proposed, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem, discussion. Okay. All right. Council, I look forward to your votes.

I'd like some more time.

All right, you pushed it close. All right, yes, sir. Right on.

Second round, one minute. So the argument for the three-year option is what's on the table. And it's that a longer term lets the data framework, quote, develop over a more meaningful analysis period. They are telling us in writing that the evidence is not there yet and asking us to lock in three more years so the evidence can catch up. That's what's being asked. That's backwards. We don't buy three years of something to discover if it works. We prove it works and then we buy it. That's the procurement process, if we're being fair and honest. I know there's an argument that alerts come in faster, that there are more alerts with this system. Response times, as I've read, have been two minutes quicker, but more alerts and faster cars are inputs and not outcomes. A system that generates four times the alerts but does not by itself improve a single arrest or single case is generating police responses into our neighborhoods. Uh, not solutions to gun violence and those responses are not free. Uh, they cost in officer hours. They also cost in community encounters and consider also the shot spotter was initially named in connection with at least 1 death. The death of Lawrence artists near the inception of this program, and we're spending money in real time to produce these results and they shouldn't be lethal. Thank you. Appreciate the opportunity to say that.

All right. Council member green.

Thank you. Mr. Mayor. In the initial vote on this, I was. I voted for it. My district, for the most part, did want it. I do have an issue with the three-year renewing. So I am going to be voting against it for that reason. I don't think we should commit to a three-year process because it is my hope that some of the things we are implementing now to strengthen the police department will take the place of this and there will be new technology that doesn't put us into that three year timeframe with the, um, build out of OCS and the things that I hope and pray will, um, work towards the youth curfew eventually going away or the same things that I would hope that would make the shot spotter program obsolete. So that is my, why I will vote no. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Council member Ferguson, you had your light on.

Yes. Thank you, mayor. Um, that was kind of my question is, is the three year the only option? Is there not a one year option?

Uh, the motion on the floor is a three option.

Yeah, I know the motion on the floor.

I think there was a one or three on the cam.

Okay. Thank you.

All right. All right. Councilman Jones. Thank you very quickly. Thank you so much. Is it possible we can hear from the chief very quickly in that regard? My area also, they support this. I've spoke to some. Some oppose, of course, but for the most part, some were wishing. They had it in their area as well. The cost is, I know it's a significant cost, but I want to hear from the chief. Because I know, I think the study presented that the cost of gun violence, I think they had it at over $400,000 per person, if I'm not mistaken, for that. So I just want to get your thoughts. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Good evening council and your question, sir, just wanted to know, and I think I spoke on this before on the many occasions when we talk about shot spotter for me in the department stance, it's a tool. 1 of many tools that we do have in our toolbox that we utilize. In order to make the city safer and as long as the council and the mayor continue to approve the funding for this particular tool, we will continue to utilize it to the best of our abilities. Thank you, sir. Um, council member McNair.

Um, yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I do believe that this, um, technology is supporting by the road in cliff Dale, which is in district seven. Also, I have not heard any negativity towards this device. Three years for me, to me, makes sense. The chief supports it, along with the other technology, like the drones and so on and so forth. And so with that being said, I will support this tonight.

Thank you, Council Member McNair. Council Member Davis, you had your light. I'm ready to vote, Mr. Mayor. Okay. I don't see any other lights. Council Member Ferdinand, second round.

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to see the difference why we're looking at three as opposed to one. What would be the difference?

So, Is that for me or?

For anybody, I guess.

So the two options, I'm assuming it's a one for one and a one for three. Each year we've done it has been a one and a one and a one. And so in the CAM is the option to continue to do it that way or is an option to do it with more of a commitment that you can track data?

Right. So the difference would be you can track more data?

Well, I just think you have a longer period to assess. So one year at a time, you've got 12 months. But it's an option. So both are in the camp.

Right. So we couldn't utilize the two years prior? We have to do it at three at a time? Is that what you're saying?

No, no, no. It's a one or a three. I don't think there's a two. Right.

I get it. But you were saying three years, that gives us more time to assess. But could we not use the two years prior?

Well, I think the motion on the floor is for three. Right, right. Certainly, if you want to ask for a friendly amendment or you want to do something different, if that is not successful, then you have the option to do that. But the motion on the floor by the maker was three. Right. Got you.

Okay. Thank you, Mayor.

All right.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I did want to comment on this topic because I thought it was going to be self-explanatory. But, Chief, I don't think you have really given the community the ups and downs, or should I say the ups, of this program. A lot of people don't realize that our prime rate went down 43%. I'm going to say that again. Our crime rate went down 43%. So that's actually a down. It is actually down. That's the point I'm trying to get them to understand. We need all the tools that we can possibly use to keep our community safe, and this is just one of them. I don't think that it should be a discussion on one or three because we can't bind what other council members do. So, i.e., if we're not on council two years from now, they can always remove ShotSpot. Or the budget. Or the budget. Thank you, Chief.

All right. All right. So Madam Attorney, just to clarify that, just for listening audience purposes, all contracts are contingent upon the following year's budget allocation, right? Usually.

All contracts should include the non-appropriations clause, which states if the council doesn't appropriate the funds, then we can cancel the contract.

So as you adopt budgets annually, you always have that option.

All right. So council, we've had Mr. Hill, did you have your light on? It was a question about the price. The price also locks in the rate for the three-year term so that it would not increase. That's the main consideration there.

All right.

All right, Council.

Another round.

How many have you had, too? Just one. I don't know yet.

I've talked a lot, but not on this one. Yeah, you have.

All right, I'm losing track. All right, one minute.

Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to, for everybody, we should be making really informed decisions. And this council has had two rounds of information come back related to ShotSpotter. One was the cost of violence gun study, which talked about how Fayetteville pays somewhere around, I think it was like $37 million a year when you factor in all that comes with what gun violence is costing us. And it spoke specifically, and I'd love for you all to look this up, spoke specifically about not being able to tie ShotSpotter to the areas that it was in based on any type of data. What it said is we should be looking at socioeconomic data in terms of where we focus our attention as a city. And that beckons us as a council to pay more attention to socioeconomic factors. So we could go to these same four places. and really focus on socioeconomics and reverse trends in a way that is connected to science and data. Also wanted to name that we have several systems in play right now. There's Clearview AI, there's Flock. This is just one of them. Us as a city, at some point we're going to have to get a hold of all that we're employing and look at the data that is being pooled and then have something like what I said in the non-pillars, the IACP. Yes, sir. in order to understand all of these. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. It's a council. I don't see any other further lights. We'll look to you for your votes.

Madam clerk, who we miss?

Nobody. All right. Motion carries six for those voting. Couldn't see who was voting in opposition, but you got it, right? All right. All right. Okay. All right. So motion carries. All right, Council, moving to the reports, the record review report.

Mr. Hewitt, who's? Officer Wrench, I think, is going to give this report. Is that correct?

How are you doing, sir? Good. How are you, sir? Good.

So I'm going to pull it up on my computer here. All right. Evening, Council. I'm a specialist. Can you hear me? Yes, sir. I'm a specialist dealing with the Federal Police Department's Traffic Unit, where I'm signed as a crash rate constructionist and the record inspector for the city. Okay. I was going to say, I can pull it up here. Good. All right. So the Record Review Board serves as the appeal authority for decisions made by the record inspector. The board consists of six members, one chairman, which is selected by the council. Two are appointed by the chief of police. Currently, we have one vacancy. Two selected by the licensee, which would be the record companies. They all have to agree on two subjects or individuals to be a part of the Record Review Board. And then the record inspector, which is myself. I am a non-voting member. I'm the one that brings the issues to the Record Review Board. When a company is suspended or removed from the rotation list, the Board hears evidence from all involved parties and determines whether the action should be upheld, modified, or overturned. In 2025, the Board conducted three meetings that were administrative in nature and not related to companies or wrongdoing by the companies. So, my job is a record inspector again, I handle any complaints that come from whether it be dispatch citizens or other officers in regards to companies on the rotation list. My primary duties include investigating complaints, conducting annual inspections, reviewing violations and ensuring companies remain compliant with city requirements. Annual inspections verify that businesses, the wreckers, and drivers all meet ordinance standards. The same inspection process applies when a new company is seeking to be added to the rotation record list. If violations are identified, corrective action may range from requiring compliance to temporary suspension or, in serious cases, permanent removal from the rotation list. Mind you, if the company is removed from the list, they have to wait 12 months before they can reapply and go through the application process. the police department maintains the city rotation record list which currently consists of 23 approved towing companies these companies respond to police requests for vehicle towing after collisions disabled vehicles blocking traffic and in other situations requiring vehicle removal Since the last report, one additional company has been added to the rotation record list. When a rotation record responds, the company is responsible for safely removing the vehicle and cleaning any debris associated with the incident. With that being said, the officers and our civilian traffic investigators, they are responsible at that time to make sure before a rotation record leaves the scene that all debris is cleaned up. Now, again, this only consists of rotation records where we call. There are incidents where a vehicle could break down or run off the road, and if they call their own tow company, if we're not called, there's no one holding that tow company responsible for picking up the debris. Does that make sense? So if we call them, we make sure before the rotation record leaves that we make sure that all debris is cleaned up from the roadway. Um, it is important to note that this requirement applies only to companies operating under the city's rotation program. The city has limited authority over private towing operations that are not dispatched through the police department in 2025 rotation records responded approximately 2860 times through the 1st, 5 months of 2026. there have been approximately 1177 responses through the rotation list. Let's see. In 2025, we had one complaint received involving allegations that a tow company improperly removed vehicles from an apartment complex. Because the allegations involved potential criminal conduct rather than a violation of the rotation towing ordinance, the matter was investigated by the Record Inspector and was not brought before the Record Review Board. Additionally, the complaint involved the company's private towing operations and not services performed as a rotation record for the city. Currently, in 2026, there are 4 open complaints under review. These complaint complaints primarily involved roadway debris cleanup and response time. And going back to the 2025 complaint, it was unfounded. Uh, this concludes my presentation regarding the record review board, uh, and rotation toe and operations. Uh, is there any questions from the council?

Uh, thank you, sir. You have a couple of lights on. I see council member hair, uh, and then male protein.

Okay. Thank you, mayor. Thank you for your report. One of the big problems over the years. It was just one of the items that you reported on, cleaning up debris from crash sites. And I will say that I have noticed some difference, some improvements with that. The person that does the inspecting of the site, Is that something that is that person has been in place all the time? all the time because I just don't remember hearing that.

So are you asking for each crash scene?

Yes, for each crash scene that's on our list.

So each crash scene is investigated by either a patrol officer or the civilian traffic investigator. It is their duty to make sure before that rotation record company leaves, it is their duty to make sure that that scene is properly cleaned up before the company leaves. And they have the authority to request them back to the scene if they find debris that was not removed.

Those two people have been in position all, all the while. So, and I was just wondering, and maybe it's, I don't know if it's something that our new police chief has started was stressing or if it's, Just due to some of us around this diocese have been screaming about over the, you know, the years, but I have seen some improvement with that. And I purposely look for them when I go through crash sites, or come back through and see if that area is clean. So, whatever. a big hands, a big thumbs up to those that are in place, and thank you for doing that for our residents. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, sir.

Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Special. I have two questions, really. Yes, sir. Major crashes that are on major therapies, if you have a crash on Rayford Road, and they choose not to use your record service, but to use their own, and they're blocking traffic, can you make them use yours?

so at that point when uh fable police when we respond to the scene uh if it's blocking a major thoroughfare um anything like that uh we do step in because when we call a rotation record they have 30 minutes to respond it is our duty to open that roadway that's our once medical is given if needed our main priority is clearing the roadway so if it's blocking a major thoroughfare that officer has the discretion to call for a rotation record other than wait for their own company

Gotcha, now the next question might be for the manager. When was the last time that record fees were increased?

It should be at the back of our budget book.

The fee chart?

The fee chart. Can somebody look that up real quick? Priscilla is scanning that now.

And do you get any out of the 23 people you have a rotation any complaints from them about fees?

Absolutely. Can you expand on that? The the 3 meetings that we actually had last year that I touched on that were not related to the. Rotation list as process, their meetings were about the fee schedule unfortunately is the record inspector. I have no say in that working for the city. I. They discussed that, and it was to my knowledge that they were bringing PowerPoints to the council for that process.

I've been getting phone calls and emails about it. That's why I asked that question. 2016 was the last time the fee schedule. But we can talk about that offline. You can get that answer back to me, Mr. Madison.

It's 2016. Yeah, 2016 was the last time. And one of the things, Mayor Pro Tem, that we're happy to do that. Some of the complaints I know that I've also filled it from council is about predatory towing from private lots. Our rates are negotiated, not negotiated, set, but they also include the maintenance, and I'm not sure, sir, if you could cover this, the maintenance of the computer system so we know where the cars are at and everything else and all of that. It's a whole lot of extra that we, security on the side and a whole bunch of other stuff, but this will make a great, further conversation but the questions that we're getting at the moment are about predatory towing and those fees are not set by this at all.

The rotation record, which I handle, is called through dispatch. There's record of it. Officers that are on scene of that are responsible for completing, we call it a tow affidavit, but it's record showing that a company came to the scene, towed the vehicle, and where it was taken to. Now, when it comes to the predatory towing or when it's not called through the rotation record list, we have no documentation of that. The tow companies, when they do conduct tows, they are supposed to call dispatch. But, again, if it's not in the rotation record duties or we didn't call them, we kind of are in the unknown at that point. All right.

Thank you. Councilman Hondros, did I see your light?

Yes, sir. Thank you. Motion to approve the report.

All right. Motion by Councilman Hondros, seconded by? Thompson. Thompson. All right. Discussion?

All right.

Look to you for your vote.

I saw Malik light on, did I?

All right, motion carries. All right, thank you, sir. Thank you. Take care, Colonel. All right, Council, as we move now to the next section of business, our public hearings, it's time we are preparing to hold hearings where the City Council formally seeks your input. Individuals designed to speak in the hearing should have signed up to speak with the City Clerk, must have signed up to speak with the City Clerk by name and address before the start of tonight's meeting. We begin with a staff presentation, then we'll move into the formal hearings. 15 minutes will be allowed for those in favor and for those who oppose the item involved in the hearing. Individual speakers, however, are limited to three minutes each, unless by previous arrangement a single spokesperson has been designated, in which case that spokesperson may use the entire time. When the clerk calls your name, we ask that you please come to the podium. Please clearly state your name and address for the record. You may then begin to address the council. When the light changes from green to amber, It means you have 30 seconds remaining, and the timer will ring at the end of your allotted time. So with that, I'll turn it over to you, Mr. Harmon.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of council. The first one we have tonight is a set of text amendments to the UDO. These came before you as a precursor here about a month ago at one of your work sessions. Thank you. And we'll just go through these once again. First one we have is a fence text amendment. This is in our industrial districts, the heavy and light industrial. And this is to allow for taller fencing in front yard and side yard areas. Currently, it's only four feet, which is what's allowed throughout the city. This would increase it to six feet. in those areas that would help with the security of those facilities and the safety of the general public as well and The next set that we have are some changes to some of our districts. The first one, our O&I district. Again, these are making sure that the numbers all correspond to each other within these. And what we've done is we've made those adjustments plus we've actually increase the density as you'll see as we go through in all of these. Gross density in our O and I district, for non-residential and multi-family from 12 to 18 or even up to 24 units, up to 12 units for single family attached in that district. Then in the NC district, the same kind of thing. What we also did was since the ONI district and the NC district are similar districts, similar uses, similar areas, making sure that the density in those areas also correspond to each other. Again, increasing some of the density here for our residential development. DT2, just kind of clarifying some of the things within it. The chart was a little confusing and kind of contradicted itself a little bit and so this one is just going through and making sure that this one is easy to understand or a lot easier and then the last one for the district amendments that we have is our mr5 district and that is again just making it this one so that it's easier to one read and then two that the numbers in each section on here actually correlate to each other. They were a little off before, they didn't exactly match up, so now they will. And then the last thing we have are two amendments, two different sections of our ordinance related to zero lot line developments. And what this will do will allow We'll take out the requirement for the special use permit when it's a three acre or less development and that will there's already a second Second Requirement for these developments anyway, and so that will just take out a layer of the of the review process for that. And they won't have to come to city council for a evidentiary hearing anymore. Mr. Mayor, that is all we have for these text amendment proposals tonight. If you would hold any questions, you have a staff till after you hold the public hearing, we'd appreciate it.

All right. All right. Thank you, Mr. Harmon. So with that, we'll open the public hearing. Madam Clerk.

Mayor, we have three speakers total for this item. Our first speaker in favor is Mr. Whitaker-Granis. Mr. Whitaker-Granis? Not present. Our first speaker in opposition is Ms. Amelia Maxfield-Chavez. Ms. Amelia Maxfield-Chavez? Not present. Our next speaker is Dr. Katie Intricaso.

Good evening. Good evening, council.

I meant to bring my phone up for my timer, but I'll trust y'all to keep that for me.

Right here, baby.

Okay, got it.

Hi, I'm Dr. Katie Intricasso. I reside in District 4, and I'm standing tonight in opposition to parts of the proposed UDO language amendments, specifically the zero lot line applicability amendments. Y'all, I'm probably not gonna use all the right terms, because I've spent a couple hours today researching all these acronyms, but I do have a significant concern with removing the special use permit. I do understand that we're dealing with lots that are less than three acres, I believe is the data, but by removing the special use permit, one of the requirements for that permit is to hold a public hearing. And so by the elimination of the special use permit, I have concerns that community members who are having this zero lot line development right up next to their parcels are not being given the opportunity to speak on that. And honestly, that's all I came up here to say. was the other amendments, like I said, been doing lots of research, there's lots of acronyms, but we've heard even topics tonight where the public hasn't been able to truly allow their voices to be heard, and I have a concern about those developments. Oh, I actually did have a second tie-in, but it's to data center development. As I was researching these zero lot lines, proposed amendment changes, and then the special use permits, There are cities and municipalities that are having what's called supplementary data center infrastructure that is allowable in acreages under three acres. And so that's another concern that if we have these supplementary mini data centers, they go by many different names, but they're there to host the bigger data centers to be supplementary. And oftentimes they are located in residential areas. So the same concerns that y'all have heard about data centers in general, I would pull over and apply to this as well to really consider taking out that special use permit requirement and allowing the public to be heard on this. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. All right.

Madam clerk, we have no further speakers.

All right. So with that, I'll close the public hearing. Councilman here. Thank you, mayor. Mr. Harmon, as you come forward, These are, just for clarity, and for those that may be listening tonight, the non-residential areas excluding residential, is only where from four feet fence to a six foot fence is the discussion, not residential areas at all.

Not in residential, only in industrial, not even just normal commercial, just the two industrial districts.

And a good thought just came up as one of our speakers was speaking. Whenever we, whenever, excuse me, have these discussions about amendments to our UDO. I know that when we first did our UDO, one of the big things was to make sure that we had stakeholders in the room when we were setting up the UDO. And I was a part of that discussion many, many years ago of that committee. Whenever we do these now, like these amendments here, Where is it that the stakeholders, the builders, the engineers or whoever is involved, are they in the room?

So that goes, these go through our planning commission and that's the job of our planning commission by state legislation. They're there to kind of be the first line of, we hold a public hearing at that point, you know, their group of citizens are appointed by you as a group and they look at it first, they give their concerns and then that passes to you. That's kind of the, how the sequence happens, and they're the ones that kind of take on that role of first looking at it.

So if I'm hearing you clearly, during that process, there is a public hearing? There is, yes. All right, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Yep. Councilman Hadros.

Mr. Harmon, don't go anywhere. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the presentation, Mr. Harmon. Can you remind me the difference of, in a nutshell, legislative public hearing like a straight rezoning and an evidentiary hearing like a special use permit as far as the speaker referenced? An applicant that submitted a special use permit would be able to voice their concerns, but I think there's a different threshold. Could you speak to that a little bit?

Yeah, and our attorney over here can chime in if she wants. But the threshold is that with the evidentiary hearings, kind of as the name implies, your decision has to be based on evidence that goes along with evidence the criteria of your findings that are required. In a legislative hearing, you do not have to base it on those findings of fact, basically.

Gotcha. So when you're talking about the evidence and the findings of facts, you're jogging my memory. So because we just had a evidentiary not too long ago. So the difference between either side, the applicant or the opposition expressing their opinion of why it's a good development or not a good development, why the special use permit should be approved or not. You have to have either an attorney, an appraiser, an expert in that field, an engineer, kind of speak to those things in order for that testimony to kind of carry weight in our decision making. Yes, expert testimony. All right. Mr. Mayor, if there's no other questions, I move that we approve the text amendments as presented.

No, the dean's got another question.

Okay.

Just, Mr. Harmon, please. Just one more thing. Normally when we do public hearings, it's on a particular item, a particular location. The mailers go out to those that are in. that within 1,000 feet that are related to that location. Whenever we do these public hearings that you were saying that we have, how is that done with the public?

Yeah, those are done... Basically, the notification is through the newspaper ad and the notices that our clerk's office sends out as well. Being that it's the whole city that these affect, we're not required to send notices out to the 70-some thousand households here in Fayetteville.

But you do notify the people in the immediate area?

Well, there's not an immediate area for a text amendment because this affects everyone within the city of Fayetteville.

And that was just what my thought. Like I said, when it came up, the speaker came up, I just started thinking about it. I know how we do them, but okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Harmon.

All right.

Yeah, it wasn't.

yeah so let me catch you on the discussion there was a there's a motion put up by hondros it was seconded by by davis all right discussion phase uh that was it and so uh councilmember mcmillan hey thank you mr mayor i hate to do this to you i see you get up and down at least four or five times not trying to give you exercise mr homer uh i just wanted to want to ask if you could walk us through the rationale uh behind removing special special use uh in terms of lot lines

Yeah, so one, I just want to clarify one thing that the speaker in opposition brought up. Zero lot lines are only for residential developments. So this does not affect any type of commercial or industrial. And the rationale behind it is when you have a zero lot line development, it's only the houses or the parcels that are in the middle, basically, of the subdivision that can be zero lot line. Everything that is on the peripheral around it has to meet the setbacks just like any other lots in the neighborhood. And so you kind of have a cocoon around the zero lot line areas. Um, and so that's kind of the rationale for it. It really doesn't affect, you know, if, if they were, if the zero lot line, if someone could come in to the lot, the side of you and becomes you are a lot line all of a sudden, then that would be a lot different. But since it has to kind of be in a bigger development and they are the center of that development, it really doesn't affect those surrounding it.

Yeah. All right. All right. It's been a motion to properly second. We've had discussion. Council, I look to you for your votes. All right. Madam Clerk, that's unanimous. Motion carries. All right. Item 9.02. Mr. Harmon, long time no see. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

The next item we have before you this evening is an annexation request. In your consent agenda items, you saw that you had a request for annexation that was included in that. That's already been before public hearing with the zoning commission. Now the annexation part is coming before you along with that. They are looking, this is Patriot Hauling LLC, and they are looking to initially zone to community commercial. They're on West Mountain Drive. It's two undeveloped parcels, and while it is on West Mountain Drive as they're main entrance they do actually have a small piece of property you'll see in a moment or small section of their property that goes out to 301 gillespie street as well so there's two entrances to the property you'll see this little skinny yellow area here to the north the proposed use out here is a u-haul center which actually is what is here on this property as well And so you've got these two properties and West Mountain Drive running here, 301 Gillespie Street out here. The Coliseum is right over here, just to give you an idea of where we're looking at. because this does have two different entrances to two different roads we as we've told you before we've now started putting signs out at every every road that that any piece of property that's coming for rezoning touches so that you know trying to get that visibility up out there These are some of the things that kind of surround this property. Again, there's a little bit of commercial. There's a couple of residential. There's some undeveloped in that area as well. Staff recommends that City Council adopt the annexation ordinance that's included in your packet. This is annexed in approximately 6.01 acres on West Mountain Drive and Gillespie Street, and there's the other part of the information, and we would recommend that you do it effective today, June 22nd, 2026. If you have any questions of staff, mayor, council, if you would please hold those till after the public hearing.

All right, thank you, Mr. Harmon. With that, we'll open the public hearing. Madam Clerk.

Mayor, we have two speakers. Our first speaker is Sabian Scafidi. Sabian Scafidi? Not present. Our next speaker is Marcus Ezell. Marcus Ezell. Not present mayor. We have no further speakers.

All right. Then we'll close the public hearing. Uh, councilman Davis.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If there's no questions, I'm ready to make a motion. All right, Mr. Mayor, I move that we adopt the annexation ordinance with the effective date of June 22nd, 2026. All right.

It's a motion by councilman Davis. I see councilman Ferguson. Is that a second or a question? Second. All right. Second by councilman Ferguson discussion. All right. Council. I look to you for your votes. All right, motion carries unanimous. All right, good job. Council, before we look for a motion to adjourn, Mr. Manager, 10.01, move that to upcoming work session.

Yes, sir, and I'd like to get with you, if I can, to make sure we cover all the items for the work session. Okay.

All right. Yes, sir. All right. Good meeting. Y'all have a good night.