City Council - Regular Meeting

One minute. I show at 6 o'clock, mayor.

Okay, we'll call the meeting to order. This is a work session of Bella Vista City Council, April 20, 2026. U first order is review of the minutes from March 23, 2026. Anybody see anything they want to comment on? Roll call. Do a roll call.

Uh no, not for the work session. Um okay. Um now I wanted to go out of order a little bit. We were going to do items K and L first because there's so many things on the agenda. Item K is approve uh resolution approving the mayor's reappoint of Elizabeth Duncan to the tree advisory board position five for a three-year term ending May 1, 2029. And I believe her background is in your packet. Is Elizabeth here? I thought you might be. So, just so you could see uh who she is, item L is a resolution approving the mayor's appointment of Benjamin Sassine to the tree advisory board position four for a three-year term uh ending May 1, 2029. And Benjamin, I think you might be here also. So, his uh resume is in the back also. So, looks like they're both eminently qualified. It's uh always impressive to me what good backgrounds we get for people and relevant backgrounds for a lot of these voluntary board positions. We're very fortunate that way. So, next item is an ordinance prohibiting camping and vehicle habitation on certain public property, providing definitions, establishing enforcement procedures, providing exemptions, providing penalties, and for other purposes, and this is on second reading. Uh, Travis, did you want to say anything about it? Uh, I don't think I have anything else to add, mayor, that we haven't already addressed last time, unless any of the other council members have something they want to bring up or questions they would like to ask. I don't have any additional comments.

Okay. Any questions about it? Okay. Uh, next one is an ordinance amending ordinance number 2025-16 establishing a business license to exempt short-term rental management businesses from the licensing requirement and for other purposes. This is on second reading also. Uh, did you have anything you wanted to add on that Travis? I have a qu

I guess I'm having trouble trying to articulate why. I don't know what the benefit is and if Travis could explain just in loose terms what does this exempt or do or help? I don't understand. Yeah. So there was confusion on applicants and or city personnel and they were told that they may be required to get a business license whenever they should have been exempt. And so I thought this would just help clear that up a little bit.

I mean exempt in what way? I don't a business. I guess I may need Taylor to because that was when we went through the first iteration of this. It was a bunch of Taylor said this and this happened and I have no idea what the deal is. So yeah. and and she's here and she could probably answer questions if she would like that you have for her, but uh there was confusion about who needs one and who doesn't. Um and I don't know if any of that's been cleared up or not. Um but my understanding that ordinance exempt a homebased business.

So what are we trying to establish what makes a homebased business or what?

No, this ordinance would not be able to do that. That's in the zoning code. Um I believe actually I don't want to speak on the intent of this. Um I think the background is more what I'm going to speak about. I think in terms of maybe the staff confusion that was noted there is no confusion with staff. The same delivery is still being delivered today. Um, if you are a business that may not operate under all 10 requirements of the zoning code as a home occupation, we have 10 requirements and then some additional items as well that you have to meet in order to be a home occupation. And that applies across the board. So, if you have a business within a home in Bella Vista and you meet the 10 requirements within our zoning code, you are a homebased business and thus per this ordinance, you do not need a business license. However, if you do not there's if again it's all may. That's why we use terms like may because we it's circumstantial. We don't know exactly every single instance of each business. Especially when they reach out to staff and just say do I need a business license blanket for this. We'll typically say if you meet the 10 requirements here, you don't need it. Um but we're we're not attorneys. No one in my department's an attorney. So we that's why we use the term may. um if they have more questions on it, we'll typically if they push staff a little bit more, we'll typically offer them. You may need to seek private counsel um on your own attorney advice on what you would need. But yes, there is an email that I'm assuming is what you're referencing where say you may need a business license if they don't meet those 10 requirements of a home occupation.

Yeah, my I I would argue that we we shouldn't make a code that's so complicated that we have to tell folks in order to understand this, you need to get legal counsel. That's my opinion. Okay. I think what he was trying to do is make we already had uh people exempt who had a shortterm rental. And the reason we did is because they'd already signed up and paid a fee. We thought, well, we shouldn't make them sign up, pay another fee. What he was trying to do here is try and get people who manage short-term rentals to be exempt. Also, that was my interpretation. what you're going for.

What I mean, but what's so spe I mean, what how does managing short-term rentals change the landscape of Yeah, I know. Well, so that's a good question. It's because whenever they proposed this business license to us, they said from Taylor's department, the intent was to ensure that the property is zoned appropriately for them to occupy the business. And from the fire department side, it was in case they leave that business, they know for pre-planned and emergencies. But if you're op if you're a homebased business, then neither of those are applicable. So I feel like they shouldn't have to have a business license because the two reasons that the two different departments wanted it doesn't apply to them. Okay.

Well, while we're on this subject, I was going to refer to G in new business because that was an ordinance proposed by Wendy that's on the same subject. So I'll read it real quick. Amending ordinance number 202516 establishing a business license to repeal subsection 4F to make clear that lawful homebased businesses including homebased property management business and homebased short-term rental management businesses are exempt from the business license requirement while still providing that such businesses conducted outside the home are not exempt and for other purposes. So Wendy, do you want to

That sounds really complicated. I promise you it's not. Um I think when Mr. Williams made his original amendment back in the fall we were going over this that line uh with the exemptions regarding propert unfusion. So, this basically says we're going to strike what Larry had put in regarding that and just saying if you are a legally conforming homebased business which follows the 10 requirements, you don't need a business license. If you are not, you do. And so, if I have a personally I know somebody who has a property management company, they are a homebased business. They work from the right percentage from their home. They do not go and clean the homes. They don't do the maintenance on the homes. They don't leave their home to do their business. They are scheduling the cleaners, the maintenance, the gardeners, all that work from their home and are a homebased truly a homebased business. It's kind of like if you're a cleaning company and you're not doing your business inside your home because all your work is done outside of the home. So if you are a legally conforming homebased business, you do not need a license. If you are not, then you do regardless of what it is.

So in essence, we have two ordinances that are doing the same thing. No, no. She's trying to amend the ordinance in a different way by just eliminating 4F all together. If if your friend leaves her house to go meet with a potential client, does she meet the requirements for a homebased business or would she be required to have a business license? That's my first question. My second question is what is the purpose of having a business license for a homebased business if they leave their house? Like what what is the city's objective in having a them apply for a business license? We don't have homebased businesses apply for business. There is no business license

if they are operating fully within their home by phone, email, fax, if that still exists in a room that is 25% or less of their GFA amongst other requirements, then they do not need a business license. Okay? So, if that example where council member Hughes said her friend owns a property management company, does it all from her house, if she leaves her house to meet with a potential client, does she still meet the requirements of a homebased business? It would depend if they're conducting business for money for someone else outside of the home. Yes, she's meeting a potential client. Then, we would probably say you may need you need to check. You may need a business license. You should seek.

I think she has. I think she's clear like she's done her work. So, in order for someone in that position to know if they need it or not, they have to hire an attorney. If they're questioning it, I cannot give people legal legal advice. Okay. I cannot give legal advice. And it's a very it's Yep.

And then I think we also had a conversation regarding like, hey, for example, my mother-in-law is moving to town. Um, she's an alteration specialist and she's the kind of person would be homebased where she would beg for a business license for legitimacy. she'd want to be like, "Hey, I'll pay the $25 to be legitimate." And we had a conversation and said, "Hey, we don't typically take we don't want to take money from people who don't actually need it like where it doesn't fall." So, I think your department's doing a great job of saying, "Hey, no, you do not need one. We don't like to take a make a permit if not when it's not needed." So, Shay,

um, first, hey Wanda, this is crinkling a lot. Is that okay? or I just don't want your recording to not work for you. It just does something. Okay, just checking. I just Okay, great. Um

Okay, great. Um and then second, Craig, I think what would help maybe jog your memory, it helped me a little bit, was that when we were visiting this in the fall, um Council Member Wilms proposed an amendment that that then started specifically discussing property management companies. We as a council um accepted that amendment and then it went in. And so I think historically that's why um property management companies started becoming singled out and might have led to a lot of confusion. So then um we've have Travis's proposal and then we have Wendy's which is simply cancel out what uh what Mr. Wilms had brought initially. So that's kind of the brief history if that's helped jog anyone's memory.

I don't remember that far back. Sorry, but I I I remember going through it. Yeah, Larry,

I guess to to help help clarify the the amendment that I made, what the intent was that um the code read as I interpreted it at least is that if you did short-term rentals, you didn't require a business license. But the reality is is that it may be as a subject operation with other real estate renting or leasing or management. And so if they did both of those, the way the code was written, it would exempt bo the the real estate side of it as well. So that was the intent is what if they did real estate and they did shortterm it didn't exempt them as the code had the code had read and so it would require a license if they fit the criteria to require a license. Now, that's in concert with the homebased business because if they don't need a license for a homebased business doing one or both of those, then they don't need a a business license. And that's what you've said.

Is that correct? You've said if they meet the 10 10 parameters, if they meet the 10 requirements,

can I can I need a business license? I I I don't want to bring more confusion to it, but I do remember how we ended up here. And so I I if it's helpful, I'll add it. If if it's not helpful, I don't want to bring unneeded discussion to this. But so when we were first talking about and I can't speak to what everyone was thinking, all right, because everyone's thinking something differently. I I mean, we know what the final result of the vote was that it was adopted. We wanted to clarify originally that that short-term rentals did not have to get business licenses. That was that was the initial right

and that's what it said. And so then I think Mr. Williams what you brought up was well if we have a property management business and they reg and they are managing a short-term rental as a part of that right that doesn't give them the exemption.

Correct. because they're really doing more or in addition to that. So, that led to a change in that F where we put an exempt exemptions F, short-term rentals as defined by the city short-term rental ordinance. And then we added the sentence, property management businesses, even though managing short-term rentals as part of their operation, shall not be exempt. That's pursuant to that subsection. That's what we were trying to do, right?

I don't know what anyone was told on the phone. I don't know what anyone's saying. I don't know what anyone's thinking. I know legally whatever the law is is what the ordinance says. Okay. So, and it is it possible that somebody may have been told something incorrect and and and you know we I can't discount any of that. So, the reliance on well somebody's saying that so therefore we need to change the ordinance that we need to change the ordinance if the ordinance doesn't say what we want it to say. It would be what I would offer there. So there are multiple exemptions, okay? Any one of them would mean you're exempt. So the first one is if you're under 18 years of age operating a business. So let's think about that like the Girl Scout cookies neighborhood lemonade stand type stuff. Okay? They don't have to get a business license. B. Charitable or fundraising activities conducted solely for public benefit. Correct?

They don't have to get a business license. temporary see temporary businesses associated with festivals, farmers markets or special events limited to to the duration of the event. So no business license if you're going to sell tomatoes at the farmers market. The the little weekend events that we may have bicycle wise if they want to sell things like that don't have to get a business license. D religious organizations except to the extent they operate separate business activities such as a daycare or private school. So just operating a church, no business license required. If that church operates a full-time daycare center or a full-time school, then that would be different. That would not be exempt. E, homebased occupations as defined in the city zoning code. There's a specific definition of what homebased occupations are, homebased businesses, and that is what the zoning code allows you to do in your home. And if you're doing that and that's all you're doing and you're doing it in compliance with the zoning code, you do not have to have a business license. Okay? And then we came to F and we were going to say short-term rentals. And then we had the change. So, I guess what I would say to you is let's figure out what you want to have to have a license and what you don't. And then we'll word it the way we need to because I I think we're trying to argue what the wording was intended to say or what it Let's I I I would just suggest if the way it is right now, I'm going to tell you what the law is right now. And if you don't like it, then it needs to be changed. If it's a short-term rental, just because it's a short-term rental, you do not have to have a business license. If it's a homebased business that's lawfully operated in the city, it does not have to have business license. Okay? If you operate a property management business and you're doing that at home, even if that and you're doing it in compliance with our zoning code, you don't have to have a business license, right? If you're have an office, let's say you're

out by Allens and you rent a storefront and you run vacation rentals and you operate and manage properties, even if they're short-term rentals, you have to have a business license because it's not in a home. That's the current law. So, if you want to see any of those things change, then we need to make a change. If you're satisfied with that, whe that's working, then I would suggest to you we don't need to make any change. And that's where I am. Okay. Well, that's up to y'all. I'm just want to let you know, make sure we reset know where we are.

The way the way the law is written now, it should work. And if you don't qualify for a homebased business because you're doing something that loses one of those 10 points, then it's not allowed by the zoning code. It's a violation. And we can't license the violations. Right. Mayor. Uh Travis.

Uh I'm I'm personally okay with all that, Mr. Kelly. But what I will encourage the city council and the city staff members is that we're doing a real disservice to somebody who has a small business that's trying to operate in Bella Vista. If they call up and they say, "Hey, do I need a business license for this?" And we tell them, "You might and go figure it out on your own or go hire an attorney, that's a disservice to our citizens that are trying to run a small business." So no matter what we do, whichever direction we go, as long as we change that and help them through that process, that's my hope out of all this. And I would say this, and I mean no disrespect to any people that call us. We only know what they tell us. We don't know the truth. And and we have people that don't give us the whole story sometimes. And so we're never going to say, "Yes, you are lawfully valid. We put our seal of approval on it." No government is ever going to do that with anything.

That's why lawyers exist. I'm I'm guilty. I'm a lawyer, too. But when people say, "Well, I don't know what the law allows me to do or I want to be sure." That's why you talk to a lawyer. And I I certainly understand you want to have things written simply enough where a common person that's not a lawyer could read it and fairly understand what they're supposed to do. I understand that as well.

So if you qualify for a homebased business, then you're exempt whether you do one or both of those. So to me, it's clear and the amendment is not warranted. and and if they get an answer of no on the phone, then the response should be let me come in and fill out an application and answer those 10 questions and then it provides you with the basis to make a final determination. Some I would ask I would suggest this as well. Yeah. Without referring to any particular people that may have called. We have people that want to be confused and want to create a problem out of this.

Right. Okay. Yes, Taylor. There's another exemption too that gets lost in the conversation as well. Um, our ordinance also exempts entities that have licenses from other Arkansas cities. So, if they have a business license from Rogers or Centerton or wherever, they don't need a business license from us either. Yeah. And that's that comes up a lot during this conversation, too. Yes, that applies as well. That's state law. So if they're already licensed to do it in Rogers, they don't they can't be required to get a Bella Vista license. Wendy,

actually I had a question about that. So I was looking at City Rogers and they have like a homebased business like basically permit license thing. It's I think it's $40 and then $10 for every paid employee who also works there. Um it's not a business license. Would we accept those as well as proof of It is through their business license. Okay. I know I know it's under but it wasn't really technically it's just one of the categories they have. They have categories within their business license. So if they have that proof, that also counts. Perfect. Wouldn't need one. Thank you.

Well, we're just on second reading. The only thing out bothered me a little about Wendy's amendment was we started out saying clearly if you're an STR owner, you don't have to get this license, right? And when you take 4F out, then you start to now you have to be an STR owner who has a homebased business, which you usually probably do, but I talked about maybe doing an exchange, whatever. But thank you for that. Yeah. So, are we ready to move on? Yeah. Think about it and do something next week or next month. Thank you. Okay.

Thanks, Jason. Uh, next one is D. An ordinance requiring the Bella Vista Advertising and Promotion Commission to publish financial statements on its official website and for other purposes. And this is also on second reading. Did you want to add anything, Travis? We talked about this a little last. Yeah, I mean we we talked about this pretty in depth last work session, but just to reiterate, this is a tax um this is a tax that's imposed on anyone that prepares food in Bella Vista or has lodging in Bella Vista. Um, and they have oversight via a couple of the council members and um, they have I I don't fully understand the contract with the discover Bella Vista and whoever gets paid out of this u, but I've looked through their financials and I think that uh, just anytime you're taxing somebody that you should be willing to provide transparency in that. So, this is just an easy transparent thing. We already passed them to post their minutes. they could put the financials with the minutes which uh you know I regret that I didn't add that to um partly my intent to to capture that. Um so anyways slight mistake on my part and this is my way of correcting that. them.

Uh Larry, I guess they're subject because they're a governmental agency, they're subject to FOYA requests and so anyone who has an interest of whether it's passing or otherwise, they all they got to do is give them a call or send them a note and they've got it. So, I don't know that uh requiring them to post these it's a special effort on their part to do that. And not that they're trying to conceal something, but if somebody is interested, all you got to do is call them up and ask for it and they'll send it to you. So, I I think it's superolous personally. Over government overreach.

Anna, yeah, I just had a question. Um and I'm not sure who would have the answer. Um, if it's Cassie or Wanda or maybe Mayor Flynn, have we had foyer requests for AM in the past? Those would go to the AMP commission. Okay. They may call us and we send them over. Not to speak for you, Wanda, but but I know they have received a FOI request over at AM. So, one in we I don't know if we know exactly how many. I'm sure they get very much less than we do at the city, but I I know that they have had some. I'm just trying to understand the actual interest from the public. Like, have people been calling off the hook to get this information?

Half the people I talked to don't even know it exists. So, no, I'm maybe two, maybe three, and they're just redirected to the AM to get that information from them since we don't keep those records like Jason said. Okay. Thank you. Foyer would come through you then normally. Yes. Yeah. So you would Yes. Thank you.

Yeah. She is our point person for FOYA point of view. So okay, any more comments on that? Okay, we'll go to new business. There's E is an ordinance waving the requirements of formal competitive bidding and authorizing a contract with Superior Automotive Group and a total amount not to exceed 131,000 for the purchase of two 2026 Chevrolet Tahoe SSV vehicles with police upfit for use by the police department. Chief, I see you're already up here. Well, yeah, there's been a lot of discussion about Taho lately, so I want to make sure that uh I could answer any questions you've you may have. So, I provided some information in the package initially to to to show some of our justification. I don't know if folks have had a chance to read that, but the these Taho are not on the Arkansas state bid. That's why we're asking for a bid waiver. Uh the waiver specifically uh is is um based on the immediate availability of the vehicles with with a current vendor that we use uh is one aspect because the vehicles are available now. Uh and plus by using this vendor they come already um upfitted with our police equipment which is very convenient. So the overall price when we're given the price includes our equipment. So that way we don't uh we we end up saving money in taxes in that regard because the vehicle comes with the equipment. So that that is another good benefit for us. Um um besides that, I'm not sure if if if you have specific questions reference to requests in the vehicles.

Uh Travis, hey Chief, are these going to members of the command staff? And if so, where are those vehicles going now? They're done.

So So yes, they're going to the there's two different types of Taho, and this is a an admin version of the Tahoe. The one one reason we we rotate these, we start these in our command staff and they do get rotated down and the idea is uh to push these vehicles eventually into um our our pool fleet. Okay. Uh we've experienced with these vehicles uh the Tahoe specifically. I've been here for about nine years as chief. I've been a cop for 34 years. I've I've driven a lot of different police cars uh since I've been here. We've used Durango. We still have some. We've used Chargers. We've used Explorers. um some pickup trucks, um some Equinox I think um that was not very good and then some um and then Taho themselves. And overall the Taho is really the best overall police platform for everything we're trying to accomplish with one vehicle. Um and so yes, so they will be pushed down eventually. The idea is to start them up in the the admin the command the command staff and then they'll be pushed down into the into the travel the pool fleet for traveling. Um they're just better travel vehicles. we could get more in them. Uh, you know, civilians travel in them. City council members can borrow them. Uh, different city staff. Um, and and we like to have a few sort of unmarked, non really police looking Tahos for traveling because of of safety purposes and reasons if we put civilians in them specifically, our dispatchers use them a lot of times to travel and go to training and stuff. Yes.

And this has already been approved by the voters for the bond, correct? So, yeah, this this this is going to be a bond fund money. Um, and so we have it been approved for two years worth of uh vehicles uh in in the voter approved bond. With that said, I'd move to put this on the consent agenda. Oh, I'm so sorry. I tried. I'm sorry, Mr. I tried to put on the consent agenda, but I can't. Sorry. It's an ordinance. Yeah. I tried to give you as much information as possible to to to make sure that I can answer any questions, but if there's anything further, I'd be happy to answer. The term upfit means that they're going to deliver to you ready to fly. Right.

With the police equipment. Exactly. And that's that's the big benefit of getting the upfit uh rolled into the the the price of the vehicle before we take possession of the vehicle. Then we do save on on taxes on that upfit. We don't end up end up paying some taxes. So it is very beneficial. Thank you.

Okay. Uh thank you. I think that's all the questions. The next one's an ordinance amending the bill to zoning ordinance and map to reszone property described in reszoning petition number 2026-63851 county parcel number 16-43201-0000 from re residential estate district to AP agricultural preservation district. Uh Taylor, did you want to talk about this a little bit? Sure. Um, the planning commission held a public hearing per state law and local law on April 13th at 4:30 p.m. No one came to speak. We've yet to receive a public comment on this. It's been on our website um since the noticing started back on March 2nd. So, it's been over a month, almost two months of us uh in com comment period and we've not received anything. Um, this is surrounded by similar uses that they're requesting. It's currently residential estate which is typically a large lot with one single family home on it. Um the surrounding property is agricultural in nature. Their neighbors have a horse and a fence and a barn next to them. The south is agricultural as well. Um and so due to the surrounding land uses it meets. It's compatible and staff recommended approval and then planning commission after the public hearing voted unanimously to recommend to you all to approve um the new zone of agricultural preservation. So,

Larry, are they able to do anything more as an agricultural preservation district? Um, well, I believe the intent is to have chickens um and goats and so that would be the nature-based request. POA land, so they would be That's not in the POA. Yep. Okay. And you can't do that in an RE. No, you can have up to, I think, six chickens. Don't quote me on that. um if you're not within the POA, if you're just subject to our zoning code, but you can't have roosters, you can't have livestock, you can't have goats, you can't have pigs, you can't have anything other than hobby chickens. Okay. In our residential zones. So, are they going to put up a a fence? Well, uh a huge huge barn to raise children.

No, no, that's not been disclosed to us. It's just a fence and then a movable mobile um chicken house. Um but yeah, no no no development plans other than the fence enclosure that's required for livestock um and the hobby chicken house has been disclosed to us. Okay.

Um and this was a discussion too that we had with them, the applicant and the board of zoning adjustment um a couple months back. They were seeking several variances to try and achieve this. Um but after discussing with them and also best practice, you don't want to give a bunch of variances to achieve a use. Um the reasonzoning was discussed and so that's the path they went through and that's that's why they're here. Okay. Uh next one we'll skip G. Next one is H. A resolution authorizing the development of a razorback greenway corridor key place for the city of Bella Vista. Taylor.

Okay. Um, this is part of a large regional project. We've currently completed or just recently completed phase one of the Razerback Greenway corridor plan, which is essentially Bella Vista partnered with Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission as well as the other six cities that the Razerback Greenway runs through. and a regional land use plan was created to activate the Razerback Greenway um with more uses than just recreational. Um so essentially we studied um other infrastructures similar to the Razerback Greenway such as the Atlanta Belt Line amongst others um especially outside of the country as well. um and looked how they activated their shared use paths to bring economic development to the um to the cities that are within them by bringing uh non-residential development, commercial development, act um basically trail oriented or trailside stop development um whether it's smallcale restaurants, smallcale retail, etc. or it's within housing so people can use it as a transportation mode rather than driving. Um, and so that was created and completed and the board of directors, the regional board of directors recently approved and adopted that. Now phase two is where we're at. Um, where each key I or key place that was identified within that regional plan within all seven of the cities are now getting their own plan um through a grant that regional planning commission is receiving. Um, they're overseeing it. We don't we're not any part of the grant or the money side of things. we're just benefiting it benefiting from it through this regional planning grant um that the Walton Family Foundation has invited them to apply for. And so essentially this uh this resolution is required to be given to regional planning in order for them to apply um similar to the others we're going to talk about tonight um to show that Bella Vista supportive of a key place future land use plan being developed for the Razerback Greenway.

And the fun part about Bella Vista versus the other six cities, the other six cities are working with what's already built. Um they've already got the Razerback Greenway. It's been there uh some cities for 10 years where we are at the very beginning and it's being developed. So we actually get to be on the front end of this project rather than the back end and planning around it. Um so we have a unique perspective compared to the other six cities. It's pretty exciting. Um in Bella Vista, they're working. Um should you all show support uh we would be working from the north south. So Bella Vista would be one of the first cities to go and get their key place this year um if you guys approve this resolution. So I put this on consent agenda.

Okay. Is that all right with everyone? Yeah, it's really uh pretty exciting. this company of field operations had done some pretty extensive uh plans have a lot of interesting ideas about how to develop the area around the Razerback Greenway. So I think it's going to be really good for Northwest Arkansas in general. Okay. So we'll put that on consent agenda. The next one is I resolution expressing the willingness of the city of Bell Vista to utilize federal aid transportation alternative program funds otherwise known as TAP.

So this is the exact same project um we sought a resolution from you all last month to apply to regional planning's uh grant uh surface transportation block grant um which is similar to this. They're both federal funds. Both goes through ARDOT. Just our local regional entity gets to um create a selection committee and divide amongst their own funds to uh the local projects. This will it's a much broader application. It's against the whole state. Um so with that said, it's best practice increase your chances, throw your name in the hat more than once. And so that's what we're doing. Um if you apply for a regional planning grant, they always say please make sure you apply for the AROT grant as well. So that way um there's more money. I believe it's it's unlimited this year for TAP. There's not a cap whereas the SCGBA grant that we put in um a few weeks ago with the March resolution, there is a cap and so smaller chance. That's why we want to apply twice. Um but all the numbers are the same. Everything that we talked about last month is the same on this. It's to bring the Blowing Springs Greenway from Metfield Skills Park to Sleepford Lane with a trailside stop parking lot.

Consent agenda. Okay, thank you. Let's see. The next one is uh resolution J expressing the willingness city of Bella Vista to utilize federal aid recreational trails program funds.

So, this one's new. Um the regional planning commission did not have any grant funds for this. We have been targeting um some trail heads that need some TLC. they're having erosion control, runoff, ruting. Um the gravel is basically not staying where it needs to be. It's why we gravel is not best practice for parking standards. Um especially if there's slopes and in Belvisa there's lots of slopes. So we have identified hunting gravity, Tweety Bird, and Snowbird with the um support of the POA uh because we are partnered with them on maintaining some of these. These are licensed um to the public on improving them by uh getting some hard surface asphalt um down, improving the access management, making those safer. Um I'm sure you're aware the Tweety Bird parking lot can be a little sketchy to pull out of sometimes um due to the ruting that is happening and erosion on that. Um so by getting a hard surface there we want to improve the safety access for those leaving and entering as well as um striping ADA and uh putting some water fountains on those three as well. So the overall estimated project amounts are a little over 500,000. So the 80% we'd be requesting from ARDOT or federal funds would be a little over 400,000. And then um we also received a note that there is an interest to provide or support the 20% match by um a local foundation. However, we've not been invited formally like the last one, but they said they are interested in supporting that should we get this grant. So that's all I got on that one.

That's great news. Consent agenda if you ask me. Uh Larry, so is it in an 8020 program? Is that what this is? Okay. Yeah. I also just wanted to thank staff for going after all of this grant money and and staying a breast to this and and doing all these important projects that make our public use areas so much nicer. So, thank you for your work on that. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Taylor. So, we already did K&L. Next one's a resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerk to enter into a contract with Garrett Excavating Inc. at the amount of 9931 per ton for asphalt street resurfacing hot mix overlay and further authorizing the mayor and city clerk to enter into a contract with Vance Brothers LLC in the amount of 313 per square yard for Slurry Seal Streets. Uh Karen or Dan, I got this one. Okay.

Um so yeah, this is our 2026 resurfacing program. Um it was put out for publish for two weeks. We got four total biders. All this information should be in your packets including the biders tab. Uh with the hot mix asphalt application, there was three biders. Garedex being the lowest bidder and one bidder being Vance Brothers for the slurry seal application. Um they're pretty much the only players that usually bid and that's why there's only one. Um with that being said, we suggest awarding bid to Garex for the hotmix asphalt which funding for that was approved by the voters in the bond and approve ants brothers for the slurry seal application funding which was approved in the 2026 operating budget by city council. Yeah, I uh was pretty happy with the uh hot mix, especially because of oil being so high priced. I was worried about how the bids were going to come in. I think we were guesstimating 110 a ton before we gotated.

Yeah. And uh you know, we had this pop and oil, which is a big com. So, I was really thrilled with this. And I do think that Dan and Karen deserve a lot of credit. They went to this new system where they do the whole east side one year and then central the next and west the next. So they're not running all over town so much. And it seems like we've been getting good pricing under that new system. Definitely helps in the mobilization cost. Yeah. So, Larry, um, Garrett excavating, uh, is that a new player in the asphalt paving business? Um, not necessarily new by name. They used to be Decode and they changed to Garrett.

Okay. Um, we did use Garrett. They won the contract in 2023, so they're not new players. Totally. Not totally new. Okay. So, they were Decon before. Deco. Okay. All right. Uh, is there a map that goes along with this paving project to know where the streets are that you're going to pave? No, we have one, but we don't put that out because everything is subject. We don't commit to anything until it's actually on the ground. Wow. Things can change at any given moment. So, we don't want to promise anybody anything

until it's actually on the ground. I guess I'd like to see where where the where the streets are that are being contemplated. Recogniz focusing on central recognizing that recognizing that not all of them will be paved necessarily. Uh and there may be additional ones that you will add to that contract by agreement with your contractor, but I'd like to know where it is that you're proposing to pave. Swing by. Huh? Just swing by. Well, it's the central area is a large area. Swing swing by. We we have it all mapped out at our office. You can come take a look down. All right.

We just don't we don't want to put out any promises due to the fact that it's a nevering fully appreciate that. I recognize that, but keeping it too confidential is not good either. No, it's we have it's fully public. The problem is if they can't get to a particular road, maybe they find a drainage problem, you find something Yeah. And then here the neighbors and then people are mad and are disappointed and and we they're going to say we overpromised and you know not suggesting that we hang it up at city hall. When people call and request information and say their particular street is on our list. We let them know it is on the consideration list. Right.

We cannot promise anything until it's physically been put down. That goes without saying. We can find busted water lines. We can find all kinds of things that end up for one reason or another getting road. You might find that the subgrade is not suitable when you get there or requires a different approach to solving the problem. Correct.

Any more Anna? Um, so I'm looking at the historic bid um, unit pricing summary and it looks like everything is lower on here except for the street striping was the only one that was considerably higher. Why is that higher? That's just how they put out their bid. With these bids, the contractors will play their uh, profits into different line items. So that's why it's it's never consistent number.

Could I ask a question? Sure, Larry. The on your list here that you gave us, uh, overlay, water valves, uh, milled butt joints, and street striping is all under the paving contract, right? Yes. And the only the last one, the slurry seal, that's a separate thing, separate contract. That's the one that's going to Vance Brothers. Correct.

And so what you're what you're trying to explain is that when contractors put a bid together, they will likely play with where they put the money uh in their bid because they may think that this item is going to have extras. And so they may add a few dollars in that item because it will give them a better profit at the end of the work road. Yeah.

Yeah. And when we get these bids, we we do do all the math and we add everything up all the way down the list. It's not just looking at one category, the other who beat who where. It's at the end of the day, what's that best number? As an example, the the bid on the val water valves is 1 cent each. Is that right? Now, what are the other numbers that are in that list? 39 and 50. May I are those other

We're just trying to concentrate on the hot mix overlay. That was that I mean that that pertains to the resolution at hand. Correct. I mean, we're not going over the whole budget for the street department. Both applications. All of this is a part of that contract. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. These are the pieces that they broke out because you have units that you need to measure and pay for and it there may be additional few portions of work. So it's on a per unit basis. So one street may require more paving thickness to balance it out and so you may have more tonnage there and so at the end of the work job you may end up having more tonnage or cut back on street.

It's a it's an eb and flow through the whole process. So, the breakdown of the numbers that you have, can you can you tell us like the hot mix overlay? There's a 9931, a 9970, uh, 10250. Is that the three lowest biders? Is that what that represents? Biders. Those are all three biders that bid this year. So, in in what order? The lowest bid is the first number. Lowest bid is the first number. The lowest bid was Garedex. The second lowest bid was Emory SAP. The third bid was APAC.

But if I were to look at this series of numbers, the per ton cost of 9931 for the hot mix overlay goes with the one cent for the valve boxes goes with the $400 for the milled butt joints. Okay. And I and I didn't I didn't open those. It's in your pocket here. Okay, it'll be this page here, the complete biders tab of who bid what on every single and I didn't have time to go through that in detail. So, so these three numbers are those the first, second, and third bids. Is that what they are? They're just lowest to highest.

So, from the lowest to the highest. the lowest meaning uh Garrett Brothers is the first number in every one and then your second bidder is the next one. Is that right? Here's the here's the grid that helps out any. So it's not it's actually the lowest item price bid. It's the complete total of all the numbers. Yeah. So and if you add up

so the lowest lowest for Garrett X and the complete set of the next lowest bid emryat there's a difference there of just shy $2,800. Yeah. But when I look when I look beat Emryat when I look at Garrett's bid they've got 9931. They're the low bidder. 9931 and I go to the next one and their bid on valves is 3974 which is the middle number. Correct. And then the mil butt joints is 909 which is the middle number and the striping is at 30.

If you look at the very bottom of that column it'll say totals. So just because one is better in one category than the other, they don't I'm not going to have Garedex do the asphalt and Emry Sep do the valve adjustments. Right. You pick the bid based on You pick the bid based on the bottom line number. When you add those up, Garrett X beat out Emry SAP by just shy of $2,800. Yeah. $2,000. Right. Less than 2,000. Well, 2,800. That was close.

About 2794. Yeah, that that's that's not leaving much on the table.

Okay. Any more questions? Well, I do have one. And this does not pertain to the resolution at hand. Yeah, if I could just throw a quick thank you to Dan and Karen back there. Uh Gordon Hollow, I don't know if anybody drives Gordon Hollow daily. Uh Karen and I have been talking back and forth about getting that curve a little safer and they did a fantastic job. I mean, you can see coming around that curb going 40 miles an hour. You can actually see down the trail or close to it. and I just wanted to say thanks. They were really quick and did a great job. Appreciate it.

Okay, thank you for that. Um, okay, we'll move on. The next item is resolution amending the 2026 city budget to approve the addition of 1/ half staff headcount to create a full-time custodial position for the police department. And chief's going to talk about that. So, I want to start off by saying it's not strictly for the police department. It's just going to be housing of the police department. So, I've been working with uh with uh HR on this uh with the mayor a little bit. So what's going to happen is later on this year when the city was a lot smaller a lot of individual employees sort of took on task that normally in a bigger city would be done by a staff let's say a maintenance department in the city okay which we don't have and we're not quite big enough to have our own maintenance department. So what's happening is a couple of one one fire employee is leaving later this year. Uh he specifically does a lot of the contracts, manages the contracts, manages a lot of does a lot of the handyman work around city hall around different departments and and and and lock boxes and things like that for the fire department department as well as a civilian who a lot of folks know who does work for us on the side kind of just because he's he's he's he's kind of bored a lot of times and does a lot of work for us and and you know I think he probably loses money with what he does for us. He just likes to do it. But he's been doing it for years and he's kind of handyman stuff and he's going to retire as well and and kind of quit doing it with when with when this fire employee retires. So, we're going to lose the ability to have sort of a handyman type thing. So, if you folks remember, I think it was a couple years ago when I had a a part-time um uh basically janitorial staff and then uh we made him full-time because then he started going to the library because the library was having the same problem. they didn't have anybody to do

handyman work for them kind of things and triage things and so and so so he's full-time kind of doing stuff for us stuff for the library. Uh and then I have I have a part-time position for a custodian that's not filled right now. So, what we want to do is make that part-time position. I offer a custodian full-time so that custodian can take care of this whole building and do some of the things outside and some of the things that that are our my full-time employee does who who works here and the library. Now, instead, that full-time employee will be sort of a a building management type employee, and he'll do he'll do he'll manage things for us here building wise, like uh triage things to see if he could fix them as a handyman or if we have to call a contractor. Okay. Uh he manages our contracts here as well. Uh that employee will still work with the library, do the same things he's doing, but he's then also going to move and do some work over at uh city hall. uh and and then some of the work at the fire department like their lock boxes and stuff and installation. It's just kind of uh doing some additional things uh for for the city. So So we will have a building maintenance position uh that's housed in the police department that'll do sort of building maintenance here at the library as well as city hall and some work for the fire department. Okay. And then manage all the city contracts like our mowing contracts and the different contracts that the current uh the fire department personnel uh handle. Okay. And then my custodian here will go from halftime to full-time. That's what we're asking for to be able to keep up with the the work that now John is not going to be doing here because he's now doing additional things for city hall. So it's just kind of a shifting of work. And so um that's kind of where we're going because again we're not big enough as a city to have our own sort of maintenance department. So we're kind of trying to house it under the police department because I already had the personnel. And the easiest move would be to make that halftime person full-time. I'm not I'm not asking for extra money right now. I

can absorb that. I believe in my existing budget, I usually have vacancy savings within payroll because, you know, I'm not always fully staffed. Uh and then and then we'll just address it next year when we do the budget for the full-time employee. The extra expense is uh somewhere around $37,000 annually, okay, to make this happen. And we're going to probably get this implemented probably Juneish if it's approved. And so we're talking half the year. So, it'll probably cost somewhere around 20 $21,000, but again, I'll absorb that in my existing my existing budget. Questions? That was a lot. Uh Shay,

I support this and I'm okay with this being on the consent agenda.

Okay, I'll make note of that. Um I would like to give a shout out to uh our HR director, Glenda Kellerman. she saw that these people were retiring and said, "Hey, we need to start planning what we're going to do because a uh a really good part-time uh handyman can be quite valuable." And uh and the employee who's leaving's been with the city for more than 40 years and been a great employee in the fire department. And ironically, some of the people the police chief has been finding uh to help are former firemen. Actually, both are.

So, yeah. So, it's uh I guess police and fire do get along. Anyway, I was just really pleased with the proactive approach by people thinking, hey, this is coming up in a few months. We got to figure out what we're going to do. Yes. I didn't figure this out myself. It was it was Glenda that sort of brought the problem up and then we kind of brainstormed on the best way to resolve it and this is kind of what we came up in the end for now. So we think it's a good it's a good plan and it's it's the easiest plan to to implement because the body is already there or the position is already there. We just have to make it fulltime.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Uh the next resolution is amending the rules of order and procedure of the Bella Vista City Council regarding provisions for council response to public comment. And I think that was this yours, Larry? It was.

Yeah. and and and the rationale really is that it it uh is an unnecessary thing that we comment or put be putting uh be put in the position of having to comment or obligated to. Uh we hear some we hear some sad stories sometimes and uh we hear some difficult occasions being expressed. We need to take those under advisement without having an obligation to respond. And I think it there is no obligation for us to do it now, but this would take it off the agenda. So, uh, Wendy,

so Larry, I thank you for this. Um, I know when this was originally came to the council, um, Steve Burke brought it up to have the council reply initiated and that was because of, if I remember correctly, with the whole stump dump fire situation. People were talking these very sad stories and he felt it was callous just to sit there and nod and keep going. Um, and so the intention was very, very good and I appreciate um, Burke's foresight in that. um when I first started on council that first meeting January 2023, I did have a discussion item to remove public uh our reply to public comment because in that last half of a year or so in 2022, council reply sometimes got a little contentious by some former council members and were borderline just a little aggressive. Maybe it didn't need to be. um that did not go over well with the public. Public did not appreciate Diet was bringing that up, but I do support this. I think that there's a time where we can meet with the people afterwards the meeting and talk to them individually

and I support this. Uh Travis, yeah, I think it's one of the greatest pieces of uh legislation that I know of that um Councilman Burks or former Councilman brought. Uh, I don't support this. If you don't have if you don't feel comfortable saying something or you don't know what to say or then just don't say anything. But I I think taking it away from the other council members is is bad service to to the people that come and speak to us. So, I'm not in favor of this. I don't support this.

Okay. So, it'll uh come up for vote next week at the meeting. We can discuss it some more. Uh, next one is Q. Uh, referring to the planning commission for public hearing and recommendation as zoning code change to permit newly constructed. We skip one. Oh, I'm sorry. A resolution to provide for a study of city participation in the Arkansas Public Employee Retirement System, Apers, for nonuniformed city employees. And this is Travis, I think.

Yes. Yeah. Thanks, mayor. So, um, when I learned that the only option non-uniform city employees have for retirement is a 457b or deferred compensation plan, I thought we could probably do better for our employees. We're a growing city. Um, we're sitting in a $20 million building. We have another $15 million building going up. Can't remember how many millions of dollars the training center cost us. Uh, virtually we buy a new vehicle every month. So, I think it's time we start investing in our personnel. And this is something that I'd like for the city to look into doing. Um, this is a actual pension plan that's available to uh non-uniform public employees. Um, I know the council always likes to ask me, you know, about other cities and their benefits. Um, so I was hopeful that if this gets passed, the city could study that. I'm really not aware of any city in the area that doesn't offer this that's like sized. Um, but I haven't reached out to all of them. I'm just know that most city employees in Northwest Arkansas have this retirement system and there's employees that would be eligible for retirement now here if we had had this. So, um, again, this is just prompting the city to do like a feasibility study basically. Uh Shay,

um I just want to add on that you'd said, you know, we'd be curious about what other cities are doing, but I also just want to make sure that we include like a financial aspect to it as well, which I'm sure it would, but um yeah, it has a study cost as part of it. Yeah, as a part of study. Uh Glenda, did you want to speak? Knowing this was on the agenda, sorry.

So, knowing this was on the agenda, I just did some preliminary investigation and I have a couple pieces of information for everybody that I'll share with you. Um, we can go through it a little bit if you want or you can look at it. We go go through it later, however you prefer to do it. Um, on the top is Thank you.

Okay. Briefly, um, and then you can ask questions or save them for another time. it on the top page. What I did is just evaluated really quickly um the difference between an estimate of what we are contributing to what is our 401A plan. So right now the city has a 457 plan which is the employee contribution towards their retirement fund and then along with that we have a 401A plan which is the employer matching funds. How that plan works is for every dollar the employee puts into the program we match it like their $1, we put $2 in to match. So it's double their contribution. That is true up to 5%. So if you contribute 3% the city will contribute 6% as a match. Um that stops at five. So if you contribute 5% the city will match it with 10%. If you put 8% into the plan, the city will only still put the 10% in as the employer match. So there are funds being set aside for employees um as matching contributions. Um what I did is broke it up down by department. The first section uh to the left of the blue shows what the employer cost per pay period is. And what I did is I took um the first pay period of April just for a sample. And um as you can see the 401A the ER means imper E employer current contribution. So right now that is a real contribution number that we are contributing towards the employees 401A and again when you see the annual total that's based on

that one pay period. Um if everyone were to put the maximum of 5% contribution in that we would match with 10% you'll see it goes up significantly and that is because not everyone puts the total of 5% in. Some people don't even contribute anything towards it. Some people might put 3% instead of five. And then um the last column before the blue line, you'll see what the city would have to pay if we were to move to this um APERS plan because Apers requires a city contribution of 15.32% of every employees um gross earnings. And right now we're stopping with 10% of gross earnings for the max.

Yes. Uh Shay, so this is one month. So the additional spend annually would be just roughly 6.5 million. No, I'm sorry. So if you jump down to the bottom, it shows totals and then pay periods was 26 per year. So the actual increase um would be $547,648

at the max. Um if you know we were contributing the max um additional city spend um using what we are currently yeah apers versus employer max. So right now it's 547 648 based on real contributions. The lower number that 339 is if everyone contributed the maximum amount of 5%. Sorry. So, so, so roughly, um, if it were the 547,000, that's like roughly 2% of our annual budget. Is I know you're not Kim, but yeah, just doing some rough math. I think

25 million or is that about right? Is 25 million about our annual budget? Yeah, that's about right. I think that's right. Yeah. And and just to clarify, it's it's 547,000 additional additional. Okay.

Yes. based on April, the first payroll in April if we annualize that amount as the current contributions. Um, but if we were if everyone were to put the maximum contribution of 5% in and the city had to match 10%, it would be the 339. Um, this second page just gives a little bit of history and some additional information about it. Um Cassie found for me that back in 2012 the city actually considered adding apers and um I don't know all the history of it. wasn't here then, but um from what we could find, it was too expensive at the time to add a because um I don't from what I could read from the information in the newspapers where she found it. Um they actually enha enhanced the employer match up to $2 for every dollar. I don't know if it was just dollar for dollar or what it was before that. Um but they they voted not to proceed with a back then. um papers is not optional once we start it. So if the city decides that is the direction we would go, every employee would have to contribute to it. It works just like ly. So people can't opt out of Apers if the city would decide to to um switch to Apers. Um once the city would decide to go to Apers, we can never back out of it. It's that way forever for the city. Um, and you can see there in point one, um, we're, uh, required to contribute 15.32 of gross pay for anyone working, um, 80 hours or more. Um, which is 9

monthly, which is 960 annually. Um so all the part not all the part-time but most part-time people also um could are part of that program. The mayor's position actually we would contribute 17.32% um of their pay. Employee is required at this time to contribute 6.25% of their gross pay. And I don't think I have that here today but um that is gradually increasing year by year. um as far as what the employee pays and each employee receives one month of credited service for each month they work. The mayor receives two months of service for each month they are mayor. Um this is this is where the benefit probably comes in. Um for those people who've been with other cities they um their apers from another city is credited when they come to our to work at um the city of Bella Vista lot being apers are reciprocal. So that credit also transfers along with employees if they move into different roles. Um the employee is partially vested after five years. Um, the employee can only receive their contributions plus interest if they leave prior to five years of service. Right now with our 457 plan and the matching 401A, everyone's vested 100% immediately. So when they leave the city, if they do, they get their um contributions, the earnings, and the city's matching contributions and all the earnings. Yes. Um, could we maybe get a poll of those who would be eligible for this on on their opinions on it or is that possible or easy?

I I understand that question and I'm always a little hesitant to poll people unless you're really seriously considering doing something because um there get to be a long a lot of strong feelings from people about why are you asking me if you aren't going to do in the first place. Um so I not that I'm not willing to do that. I'd be happy to do it, but I think that's a consideration we need to certainly have. Greg. Okay. Uh, thanks. Um, did you say that every employee would have to they would all be required to contribute like there's no way that Okay. And that's into perpetuity and forever. So, okay.

Yep. um right now and I know nobody likes the idea that 401ks and 457 plans and 401A plans have loans but loan features are available to employees in our current plan. There are no loans available to employees um to take money out for they can get private loans against that from like outside agency that's possible but they can't get a loan through that

um I I know I meet on a committee with with you and we discussed the employees retirement plans. Um and the participation is it around 40% or what was the pred I don't want to quote that but what's the participation in the current plans? I can't tell you that number. I can look it up. Um it's low overall because half of our population are police and fire who already contribute to the loy program. Okay. So if they contribute at all to the 457 plan, they don't get a match from the city. So they get lot B, they contribute to lot B, and then they can contri contribute to the 457 plan.

And you'd have to look at what the percentage is of the non-uniformed rational number. Yes. And we can get that. Yeah, for sure. Um I would what where would you draw the line of pulling the people that would be impacted by this? because I believe that the overwhelming majority of people would support moving to this because it's a phenomenal benefit that we could offer them that we're not. But that's just my opinion. I would love to know the people that are actually working here. So when when could we actually like put out a survey monkey or however you pull the employees. I know you don't want to do it prematurely, but we could do it. The the resolution before the council is to do that is to study it. So that's that's kind of jumping ahead. So

Okay. Awesome. Council has to decide whether it wants to take that step through this.

Yeah, we're talking about studying it. Uh, a couple things uh I wanted to mention. Our the pension plans we have with police and fire are unique and Abrams is also unique in this way. The employer has all the costs they normally have with the pension plan. And when pension plans were initially developed back 1930s, 1940s, the idea was the employer had these costs, but they had the benefit of the employee staying. In this case, the employee can leave and go to anybody else in Arkansas and take their pension with them. So, you have all the costs. The employer has all the costs, but they don't have the benefits you normally have with a defined benefit pension plan because people leave. In fact, I believe right now without looking at the numbers, I think our turnover is higher in police and fire than it is in the other people. Uh I'm perfectly willing to study this, don't get me wrong. Second thing is um our match is 10% and I believe the three largest employers Walmart, JB Hunt and uh Tyson are more around the four or five% varies a little from company to company that maybe around four or five% match. Now you guys would know about the Walmart piece but

6%. Yeah. So the 10% I don't know anybody who has a 10% match except us actually any private company. So we always felt like we're kind of making up for it a little bit that way. And uh uh the other thing is I'm not clear I I don't know if you are Glenda. So what happens if somebody's already been here 10 years? I mean, do we pay some money to do we have to buy how do we buy into the plan or how does that

So on kind of halfway down it says starting Apers. Um there are two options. Number one, the city chooses to begin trekking years of service the date Apers begins. So basically nobody would have any credited service from any point before that time. So everybody would start earning their years of service at that point in time. Um, with that there are no back payments by the city or the employees to pay for their credit to date basically. So if somebody's here already 10 years, which we have several of those people, um, they would start their pension from the date this begins, all their credit. So however many years it takes to retire under this program, this is this is day one for them. it doesn't go back if we choose that as an option. There is also um another option where the city could pay back um for all the years of service for that individual and that individual would also have to pay for their years of service or the city would have to cover that on behalf of the employees. And the person that I talked to at Aper said, "No, no one ever does that because it's terribly expensive." and um they won't even do any kind of estimate for us unless we choose to go with Apers and say we're going to

fund that back to whatever their their hire date was. Um so we don't know how much that would cost. The other thing is for those employees who with who were with the POA, none of that POA time can be counted because that's a private entity. What what happened to the to the retirement funds that the POA had for those employees that rolled into the city? Did that get transferred into the city as a part of their monies? Do you have any? No. I mean, well, we had police and fire that were lop fee and they were participating in lop fee when they were there. Yeah. So, that just continued on and the city

took on those new liabilities and in fact, I think took on some legacy liabilities related to the old old old pension plan. Uh I I think that when we took on non-uniform that you know we we hired some I I think they just began with our with our program of of the two for one up to 10%. I I think I you know they they did not have a pension at the POA. They were they had some sort of a of a 401 4 you know whatever 401k probably in private

they had a 401k plan over there. I would guess, and I don't know this for sure, but I would guess that what they did is that was just their plan and they could choose that to to roll it into some private some other private plan or keep that. They left employment with the POA, so they probably could have rolled it into an IRA because you can do that with any employer that you leave in private sector. So, Mr. Greg, is it fair to ask I know Chief Sims is sliding down in his chair back there, but is is it fair to ask either of the chiefs what their opinions are? They're on lapy. They're on lapy.

Well, I know, but I mean, have you heard grumblings from employees about needing to switch to a new system or that the system that we have in place isn't good or doesn't provide enough, anything like that? This is only for non-uniformed. What? This is only for non-uniformed, right? Well, so it' be for like some non-uniformed employees. Okay. Right. So the police department would have police departmentatch and admin. Larry I can't hear what she's saying. Police.

Yeah. The police department has dispatch and some admin employees. And um really any admin, any planning department, street department, all of those kinds of people. But um the building department would be admin in the fire department. Okay. Well, I'm just asking for the people who would be impacted. I mean, that's you I've heard from several people. They have no interest in us changing it, but those are people who've been here a while. Um well, I mean, because they wouldn't get credit.

When ground zero is the day you start, you've got 10 years invested. I can't imagine saying well oh well you know that doesn't work. So chief came up I I guess if he was going to question well I just didn't know if you had heard that any kind of grumblings or just comments or anything about what the retirement plan I do have a large civilian staff. I have my dispatch and so I do have a large civilian staff and

over the years I've been here I've heard many of them wish that we did have ly okay and so that that has been brought up and so and and and I'll speak from my perspective um you know so when I try to hire people and I try to hire dispatchers rarely do I get dispatchers from other agencies who have ly or I'm sorry who have apers because they don't want to lose their apers because they're going to come here they won't get apers and So I think it does hinder me in hiring some of my dispatch personnel because I can't and the mayor mentioned this like cops you know they'll go from sometimes it's a benefit because I I'll glean officers from other agencies because they can come here they like it better here and they bring their retirement with them and they don't miss anything. Okay I also sometimes lose officers because they'll leave here and they'll take their pension with them. So so it's a give and a take. uh with dispatchers. I I never am able to glean any experienced dispatchers uh from Arkansas because rarely because nobody wants to leave who who currently has apers because they're going to come here and not be able to get apers. So that's just my perspective. I know the finances and that aspect is a difficult thing and that's things you have you folks have to do. But I can speak anecdotally that over the years I've been here I've had many of my dispatch staff specifically because that's majority of them wish we had apers. Go ahead.

Question. So sorry if this is um asked and answered while I was using the restroom, but if an dispatcher had apers or a different municipal um worker had apers, left their city, came here, we didn't have apers, are they able to like when it gets restarted, if we started this, would they lock in back where they were? if they are at year 12 at their old business. Yes. I've known many employees who who've moved around different state jobs, different city jobs that have apers and they take it with them and if they go to a job that doesn't have apers and they go to a job five years later with apers, they're able to restart that time. So yes, that time stays with them in perpetuity. Is that it,

Mayor? Yeah, that's that's all I Travis. Yeah, I was kind of curious if uh Chief Sims had the same because you have some non-uniform staff. Do they have they expressed to you a willingness to participate in Napers? I only have two. Oh, you do? Okay.

I only have two staff members that were on Apers before they come here. And I don't know if they said anything when they were hired here with HR about that concern of not being on Apers or you know the retirement system that we have because that's laid out to them when they're hired on in the process. But I have not had anybody say that that's come here. Why why are we not on a two that come from previous cities that have Apers or the county? So everybody else was either hired without any type of retirement system, they're doing our retirement system or they just they didn't have any retirement system until they come here. So

Shay, um I just wanted to thank you for putting this together and I'll be sure to read it before. That's great. Yeah, we need to take some time to study it.

I don't I'm perfectly willing to look into it. There's another factor with defined benefit pension plans and that is uh that's not what she showed isn't necessarily the whole liability. You have the ris I mean people are a certain age certain experience they get a certain amount of money the employer has the risk of how the stock market does in the matching fund type of situation. This is why all the private entities went to this. We give them 10% and we're done. We have no liability other than that. it's done and they're going to make what they're going to make. So the stock market risk is on the employer in a defined benefit pension plan. Stock market does come for a long time. You still owe X a mega difference how the market does. So there's a a uh a kind of an intrinsic cost and now a lot of our employees have it. Obviously, all the fire and police do and it's a competitive market and it's, you know, if we said, "Gee, I think we won't have that." I imagine it'd be pretty darn hard to hire a policeman or a fireman. Everybody else has it except you. One thing surprised me a little bit. We've had in Taylor's department, we've had some people come to us from cities that have Apers because some people say, "Well, it's kind of hard to hire Apers employees when you don't have Apers." But we have had some people do that.

Yeah. I It's a large pool of that shared risk because it's not just city sharing, right? It's all of APERS have that shared risk. Another thing, um, yeah, it's going to cost money to take care of employees, but it costs money to build this facility, too. We spend the $547,000 is essentially one Tahoe a month basically. I mean, thumb math, right? Easy. just um another thing is that once this person becomes eligible, this is a pension that they'll receive for the rest of their life. So the other one they could spend it all. So this is a a monthly payment that they'll receive until they die. And then I think some of the options you can, you know, you could take a reduced pension in the event that you pass before your spouse or whoever your beneficiary is, then they get a portion of your pension for the rest of their life. So this is a in my opinion this is a phenomenal benefit that we could utilize to attract and retain talented and educated people. Not saying we don't already employ those people, but it's just another thing that we could do to offer it. And I believe hopefully we'll see when they do the study if the council approves it that the majority of the cities in our area are already offering this. So I feel like we're behind. But this all might be a mute point if we do the study and the employees that are going to be subject to this don't want to do it anyways. Anyway,

well, yeah, I appreciate that. It's worth looking into. I think 500,000 is eight taco eight Taho, not one Tahoe. But oh, I guess some observations about it is is that the Apers program I think terminates when you pass away. So, you don't have any money in the bank. Is that correct? In other words, if you retire after 20 years and you live for two years after that, you only get two years of retirement. Is that right? Are you saying they retired and passed away?

No. No. They retired. They retired with some years of service. And so by apers that entitled them to a certain payment because it's years of service and wages. So what would happen is um that individual when they retire makes an election. They elect how much what percentage of their regular monthly income they want which would include a survivor benefit if they chose to or not having a survivor benefit if they choose to. And if they choose a survivor benefit it gets reduced significantly. Personal personal experience.

Typically there's going to be a lot of different choices as to how you how you want to take that money. But years of service is critical, your wage rate is critical, and then how you choose to retire, whether you want a guaranteed benefit to a survivor or not. Um, and and the impact really is substantial uh based on what my experience has been from Wisconsin. I don't I only worked for the municipal government for a short time directly and so my retirement benefit from the state is very small. Okay. Uh, and I would have had probably a better retirement had I paid into a system and earned it because I took could have taken that all with me, added it to another account. So, so there's some some pluses and minuses about that program.

Yeah. If you're going to job hop, it might not be good for you, but if you're going to come work for the city of El Vista and stay here for 20 years, it's phenomenal. Yeah. And and I and I, you know, we can argue that it's that it that it's we really lose some good employees. I don't know that if you look at the employees that Bella Vista has that that you can say that that's true because we have quality employees whether they're the rank and file uh Lafy uniformed or whether they're not and and so well if we have good employees we should reward them with this benefit. Well and we and we do with the incentive of $2 for every dollar you put in. So, you get get to take home 15% a year.

Well, before we get into all the hypotheticals, um we're just trying to figure out if we just want to even pursue a study. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Correct. Yeah. Perfect. Can we put that on consent? Pardon me.

I asked if we could put that on consent. In the spirit of how it's presented, I agree. Um, you know, not to get a whole thing started, but I mean that 6% for somebody, it just depends on what their pay rate is. That 6% might really hit them hard. You know, uh, you're talking about hourly employees and stuff like that. Um, I don't know. I mean, there's a lot to consider. I think it's a good idea. U, I think it's worth the conversation. So, but I was just asking if we could put it on consent. Okay. Some people think we should put it on consent. Yes, I'm sure Travis does.

I'm not I'm not sure. I think we should I think we need to need to vote on that individually. We may all have different opinions by next week. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Good conversation. Uh let's go to Q. Resolution referring to the planning commission for public hearing and recommendation a zoning code change to permit newly constructed electrical meters in the front of a residence if the residence is more than 50 feet from the street right ofway. Travis, this was yours.

Yes, mayor. Thank you. So, basically this is just a small amendment to um the code reform that's been happening. As uh Director Robinson mentioned, this is a live and breathing document. We anticipate making changes. Um this would just make the front plane electric meter um different for a house that's more than 50 ft from the front of the road and I spoke to a couple of people on the planning commission that seemed agreeable to it. I know we have a couple planners in here tonight. Um but anyways, so this would just send that to them for consideration for them to vote on and send a recommendation to us. Okay. What's the rationale for the 50 ft?

Uh because there's several houses that are way farther than than 50 feet. And so it it's uh harder for them to put an electric meter beyond the front plane of their house. Uh you could take the zoning adjustment house that we just got for example. Um I didn't look at where the road was, but you know they have four acres. if the house is on the back of their four acres, you know, they and they needed to put a new electric meter in and you could imagine the cost that it would it would be to put it beyond the front plane of a house for someone like that. Not a ton of properties here in Bella Vista that would meet that, but there are several. And this is not like a Rogers or a Bentonville neighborhood where everything's perfectly parcelled out in a square lot and it's the same for, you know, hundreds of houses. So, um

No, it's it's expense because of the extra distance. Yes. Yeah. Uh, Wendy, does staff have any thoughts or not? It's okay if you don't. I guess

um our zoning code has a free front yard um requirement in align with our comprehensive u plan that we have um to basically preserve the aesthetic um the natural um appearance of Bella Vista. So anything taller than 40 inches cannot be in the front yard. So, if we change this section of code, we'd also have to change that. So, this wouldn't just be a one code change. This would affect other areas of code. Um, just something to be aware of.

Well, I have a question. Do they have to trench? I mean, regardless if it's can they run the power back to the property via pole or do they have to trench it back to the house? I mean, I don't I guess I'm struggling with where the extra expense is because either way, there's going to have to be a meter. And I know you're not presenting this. I'm just say speaking broadly, but either way, you're going to have to have a meter and either way, the wire is either going to go up in the air or in the ground, right? So I mean placement of the box and to what your point is that if the box is taller than that then we're going to have to amend or change other sections of the code to accommodate.

I I can't give you like an exact amount whether it's more expensive. Um but I mean it's it's got to go somewhere. A line's got to connect something at some point regardless of where the pedestal is. I'm just saying it to say it out loud and I just want to make sure that I'm not putting too much into it. Okay.

Which, you know, planning, you know, we try to keep costs, you know, especially in terms of port like housing affordability, but a lot of the decisions that the boards that I work with make actually can't really consider um cost. So like that's not something Yeah. like the BCA couldn't consider cost for the discussion that he was talking about. So my impression from uh attending planning commission meetings is Daniel Ellis is quite concerned about the fact once power company puts the meter in then that line the rest of the way it's run. You can't call 1800 dig and see where the line is. So it's a safety thing that somebody could electrocute themselves.

Yeah. So if the house is more than 50 ft, you've got a really long line where somebody can electrocute themselves. It's even more unsafe. Public safety issue.

I wanted to to just I'm only going to speak up when there's a legal issue and and the legal issue I'm concerned with is that this would undercut if you did this, it would undercut the legal rationale for any restriction because we we had the restriction for safety measures having it in front related to sight distances. the issue the mayor just mentioned and ne neither of those are just because the house is more than 40 feet back those other issues still exist. So I'm I'm a little concerned that that would undercut the rationale for it and and just basically leaving it being an aesthetic choice and which is going to be a problematic rationale. So I just want to I'm not saying you can't. I just want to say that that issue is there legally potentially. So

I have a question. How are um mailboxes, trees, shrubberies, electric poles, light poles, how are those allowed in the front plane of the property because those are more than 40 inches tall? When landscaping is not a structure or a man-made development, um mailboxes are governed by federal regulations.

Yeah, we have to abide by requirements that are outside of our control um to a degree with mailboxes, but we can we can control how close they are to the edge of street and things like that. But um that that's about the extent of where where we go with the mailboxes. Um but essentially I and I do want to if this is a time too I do want to talk about the processes. This is our first one that this council's actually done under the new code with um a planning commission direction. Um but essentially it's and it ties to what I'm about to say is our new code. If you're going to change the zoning or development code, specifically the zoning code, it needs to be tied to the comprehensive plan. So that'll be something else that needs to be prepared as well for this um because in our local code um I think it even says the words it shall not be considered unless it's aligned with the comprehensive 2040 plan um amendments to the zoning text. So um and that was the intent is keeping like I said that was one of the intents is keeping it free. I know the safety um I know Daniel Ellis has mentioned time and again um putting the expectation and responsibility back on the utility rather than our residents of having it attached ultimately to the house so that way they're responsible all the way um to the house for safety measures as well as digging and things like that which of course also as noted you can hire a private company to come out and identify if 811 won't do it. Um so there is a back answer to that but again it goes back to putting the responsibility back on the utility owner. um such as Carol Electric in this instance, but um keeping it free and clear side distance. Most of our lots are back out, which of course if it's a longer driveway, that's not as much of concern. Um keeping it free and clear closer to the road would be more concerned with that, but just my overall concern just making sure it is it is in line with the intent of the comprehensive plan. And so just having a response prepared for that um by the time we take it to planning commission would be really my only and what I mentioned earlier is making sure it doesn't conflict with other sections of

code um comment on that I guess. Uh Shay, I'm good. Thank you. Oh Wendy. Oh okay. She hasn't answered. Okay. Larry, I I I can't support the proposal only from the standpoint of public safety. Uh by placing the meter back where it is supposed to be in our code makes the utility liable for the maintenance and repair of that all the way to the meter. Right. Um say that again. where the meter is set, they're responsible to for maintenance of the line serving that meter

to the meter to the meter utility. So if you put the meter in front of the house, they're responsible all the way for that distance. So the homeowner is not liable for it. Not only that, but if you get a locate, it's going to locate that because that's a part of their system. Yeah, they it's a public safety issue in the end and it really in the long term it's safer for that property owner or a future property owner uh to have it the way we have it in our code closer to the house if not attached to the house reduces that liability. Exactly. Right. What about LP lines, propane lines? Those are also running underneath. Right.

Um we actually don't oversee propane staff can't we can't get involved with propane. Richard wouldn't put your propane tank out 20 feet from the road and run the line all the way back to your house. I mean, yeah, they they run the line to their house from the propane tank. Well, I know they do, but you wouldn't do that normally. I mean, why would you want a big tank in front of your house? For those that want to know the whole liquid propane tank gas code, so that regulates placement of tank. That's true. Related to things like Yeah, there there are a lot of rules for All I was saying is there's there's dangers out there just we we if you

if it's not an electric line, it's something that could blow you up. So there's but it's a property owner cost issue one way or the other. And the long-term benefit is that the electric company is responsible all the way up to the meter to feed it and provide electricity for its per perpetuity. as long as there's somebody living there and that meter is there, they're responsible for that line. And so if you change the location, that makes the homeowner responsible for all of that line. And it also doesn't get located then. So I I I don't see it as a win-win.

Okay. Uh we'll take that up next week. The next one is uh our resolution amending the 2026 city budget to appropriate an additional 37,386 and 13 cents to fund necessary repairs to fire department capital equipment. Fire Chief Sims. Any questions? Is that a fire truck that we're putting a new engine in? No. No, but the reason why we was using that firet truck because that firet truck was getting a new engine put in it, second engine. So, no. So, good thing the good thing about

the good thing about it is this truck h it happened the breakdown happened on a training site, but that truck was in service at the time. It's a 17-y old fire truck, folks. Haven't had a whole lot of issues with it um until now, but um I didn't expect to spend 37 almost $ 38,000 on a on repair. That's why we're amending the budget. So, this was a ladder truck, correct? That's correct. Yeah. The older ladder truck.

It's the only fire truck I have. Well, firef fire truck, not rescue truck. It's not on deaf have the death fluid in it. So, which we try to keep it around as long as we can, folks. But yeah, that's unfortunately that happened. Um, it did happen on a training. Uh, it was in service at the time of the training that was going on and it happened at the training tower. So, which I'm thankful about that. I'm glad it didn't happen on fire scene. Is it an engine problem or pump? It was a ladder.

So, a ladder the um ladder operator that operates ladder up and down and turn turns the turntable. Um, the the pinion inside that gearbox area broke and it jammed everything up. So, that's what we had fixed. So is that operate off the engine transmission then? It operates off the hydraulic off the engine. Yes. Okay. So this is So the engine was running hydraulic system runs off of that which causes the ladder to rotate and go up and down that same truck. We just I understand that. So this is totally different. This is the transmission on the truck. The fire truck.

No, this is a ladder. Rotation the rotates the rotation hydraulic system that works the ladder to rotate it up and down. That's the transmission that it broke the it broke the shaft in the in the box which causes it to lock up. Okay, it's great. The hydraulic system basically. So that's the transmission. No, no, not the transmission. No, the damage rotation. It's like a turret, huh? A turret. Yeah. Turning system. It's not a turn. It's a big gear that turns. I don't know. I got the idea that it was a trans. There's a hydraulic hydraulic system that works at. Okay. And it does run off. The engine's got to be on for it to work. But

and then that that box that causes that to rotate, the shaft inside of it broke and then it caused it to when it broke, it jammed everything up and then it broke the box. I don't know why I had the idea it was a transmission. I'm good with this going on the consent agenda. that. So, so you know, the the repairs have already done and the truck's back in service. So, and we did get the truck back with the engine problem for the second time. So, but this is amending the budget because it was expenses were more than he was anticipating.

Yeah, exactly. I do I do have some funding in my capital that covers expenses like this, but not this to this extent this amount. Especially this early in the year. What was that? He's especially this early in the year. Yeah. Oh, exactly. Yeah. Because you're looking at April and already spending almost $40,000 on truck. So, okay. Thank you. Uh the next So, I have that on consent agenda. You guys can let me know if you change your mind. Next one is discussion items way finding signs and traffic signals planning director Robertson.

We'll try to keep this brief. Um so essentially this is just a open discussion this month um to kind of pick your brains, test your temperature on these two items. One of them is more so related. So, it's more of a heads up that I will be doing this, but due to material um delay with almost everything right now, um I had to use this year's budget to cover last year's project um for wayfinding signs and traffic signals. Traffic signals specifically, I like to have um those in the budget um ready to go in case something happens. Obviously, those are timely matters that need dressed with. if if a light or cabinet needs replaced or the detection wiring goes out, um the sooner I can get those addressed, the better. And so, um that one is one that I would really like to come back to you guys next month for a budget um to replace the 35,000 that I had to spend um this year on last year's project due to our detection wiring um delivery got delayed um by several months and so it actually didn't get delivered till February and didn't get installed till March. Um and then of course they got the bill this month. The other item is more of a temperature check on wayfinding signs. Um so we entered into agreement last year with the POA to replace nine signs. Um we split it half for um between the two entities. And of course due to material delay um the signs did not get finished until early this year. And so this year's budget is going to pay for last year's project because it didn't get done. Um really didn't even start until January. Some of them started in December, I think, late November, but the majority of them were January um in February. Um so that one is where I'm really want to do a temperature check if the city council is interested in continuing to fund those um to do a budget amendment or waiting till next

year. We try to throw around 40,000 every year to replace about um three or four third 10 to 12,000 a piece typically depending on what all needs replaced. If the feet or the footings need replaced or if it's just the sign and the legs um it's a little cheaper, but before I um requested budget amendments on those, I wanted to have an open discussion item with you guys. Any comments or so much how much do you think for the signs? Um so it'll be around 35. So um I would lose the majority of this year's budget on last year's project. I have 40. I had 40 for this year. 35 around 35 will be budget um spent on 2025's signs.

So the traffic signals is 35 and the signs are 35. So it's 70 total that is spent. Yeah. What shape uh when you say wayfinding signs are those maybe the navy and red signs that are Oh, sorry. Yeah. Yes. They're the giant blue signs everywhere. Um it has Bella Vista at the top. It's like a wave. And then it has like Town Center, um Tainer Creek, our major library. This place, it'll have the major um attractions and uh focal points on those.

And and you said generally we try to replace those because I mean just without I'm not trying to bash anyone or anything, but generally I think a lot of them look kind of terrible and some of them have fallen down entirely. Right. So, were they maybe in a state of disrepair for a while before? Well, the ones that I did last year had been like that probably for two to three years. Um, they don't last as long as you would think. Um, but this this year, the contractor that the POA used, since they're the one that handled the actual project, we reimbured them. Um, used different paint, used different materials, and so these should last longer than the original install that we had is what we were told. So,

Anna So, I've seen some of the new ones that went up and I think it's really important that we do keep these updated and maintained because aesthetically for our city, I mean, it really tells anyone that's passing through, anyone that lives here kind of the quality of everything. I think it's a it's a mindset. So, some of the new ones that went up, I feel like I've seen some that are still lying on the ground that have been replaced, right? Like when you're driving along 71 um across from like Dairy Queen where we've got some of the wayfinding ones, are there still some that are on the ground that need to be removed? And is that our responsibility or the POA's responsibility? It would be the contractor um that is hired to do that. They remove the old ones, take them out, and replace them with the new ones.

Okay. Um but yeah, if there's still some If I see any, I'll send them to you. Yeah, send those to me. And then but but my point is I do think it's really important that we continue to replace these as often as possible to keep the aesthetic of our city looking clean and fresh and great. Uh Travis. Yeah. I guess my only initial hesitation to and I I support trails and all things that come with trails. It's obviously people love to come here for our nature and certainly an advocate of that. My only kind of knee-jerk reaction to this is the POA's budget's much larger than ours and they don't have to fund a planning department. They don't have to fund a fire department, a police department, a street department. They're all recreation. So why can't they afford this on their own? These signs are actually our responsibility. They are.

Yeah. And they're actually just being a partner and offering. Well, one they're kind of is what she's saying just they don't want eyes in Belvisa. So they came forward and actually proposed to the street the Are you talking about the street crossing ones or the the wayfinding ones? The giant blue 12 foot wayinding signs. Wayfinding signs. Okay. And sometimes they mention POA things, don't they? Oh yeah. Yeah. Tener Creeks got got some. What happened historically is Walton Foundation wanted all Northwest Arkansas to be uniform and they very generously gave us all these signs but then they said you have to keep them up

and among other things that because they're so gigantic they catch a lot of wind and cars run them over and the sun bleaches them and so and and one of the interesting things happened today. Taylor and I were at a regional meeting and a lady from Cal I've never had anybody do this before. A lady from California said she'd come to uh I think Tanard Creek thought it was great and said, "Man, those wayfinding signs really help me." That's the first time I'd ever heard that. Oh, yeah. So,

so will the budget from last year take care of all of the wayfinding signs that we need to upgrade or repair? So, we got some more this year. care of the nine that we prioritized. There were others that we identified as in disrepair or starting to flake and whatnot, but between the two budgets, we could only afford those nine. So, the POA is on board with uh sharing half that cost with us. No, not for this year. And they've not offered to do that this year. That was only for last year due to the amount. There was a high amount of them that were falling apart. So, do we want if we have their stuff on it, if if their facilities are listed on the signs we're going to do work on, I would say we should then bill them for it as a

I mean, the signs also point to other facilities that are not POA owned. Um, just like in other cities, it's not just Yeah, it's it's not but both collected on there. So if they're not offering to share in that cost, then I would build them bill them a proportional share of how many their facilities are of the cost of the projects listed. Yeah. So um so are you either that or I know you're asking kind of in general, but are you proposing that to amend this year's budget by $70,000? Is that

give or take? basically take the money that I couldn't spend last year and put it back into this year's funds so I could continue working on the ones for 2026 for both traffic lights and wayfinding which again prioritizing the traffic signal budget specifically. Yeah, the traffic is most is that mostly TEC? Um no so traffic engineering consultant is the engineer that does the timing studies. So that's paid out of our operations buzz. That's a reoccurring thing.

Oh okay. TLS is our um our on the ground boots on the ground technicians that go out there anytime that a light is stuck on yellow or stuck on red. Um and then we have another company that manages it from a cloud that watches uh the stoplight timing as well um 247. So

I understand residents get excited when traffic signals aren't working properly. With that said, our timing study for 2026 has recently gone into um effect as of this week and last week. So, if you guys start getting emails, that's why because it's now in the test period. And so, as as it's being applied, um our TEC, our traffic engineer, um is out there watching physically and making adjustments as needed. That typically takes about two weeks. So, um if you get emails this week or next, that's that's probably why. So, we need So, we need to add a uh item to our but our agenda next year, next week. I

I was going to do it next month, but if um if you guys are immuneable to that or the mayor's imunable to that being on the I would ask we do it next month to just as part of the normal course. It's not an emergency. So, I think she's just trying to warm you up to the idea. Uh Anna,

I was just going to say I'm warm. So, yes. Thank you. Okay, we have one more discussion item, short-term rentals. And I included in your packet just a uh a little bit of a calculation. Uh a lot of people weren't around then, so they may not be aware. Um, when we made our short-term rental ordinance and we said uh 600, where that number came from is it was 4% of 15,000. We figured we had 15,000 residences, so 4% is 600. Uh, and there even was some discussion at the time of well maybe we should have it change automatically and we thought no that would be too cumbersome and too hard to do. and uh you know because it's going to be changing constantly. So uh the numbers I have here are the numbers from uh Taylor Roberts and we got as best as possible how many residences there are. We have all the ones on POA water. There's a few on center water. Then we have a pretty good estimate of the wells. So if you took 17,192 multiplied by 4% you got 687. So uh the reason I put this on the discussion item I just kind of wanted to see how people felt about it. I mean we could amend it and make the total 687 instead of 600. We could leave it how it is. We could have a little subcommittee and do a study. Uh the residents attitudes and feelings about this vary as you know. Uh Travis,

uh do you know how many permits are currently spoken for? The latest number I got uh I believe it was 591 last Friday. Taylor said son, right? It really started to go up and 581. 581. Okay. It started to go up lately and people are wondering about the effect of the bike park among other things of 600. Yeah. Right now. Yeah. Shay,

um, forgive my ignorance, but if um, if let's say I have a short-term rental and it's permitted and then I put that house up for sale, would the new owner be grandfathered in or Okay. So, they would have to um, Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. There's even a word for that. Okay, great. Um, uh, okay. Yeah, my my fear would be that if we if we really let this number get out of balance, uh, that we just risk non-compliance um, in our program, which I think would be a difficulty. So, I'm generally supportive of the idea of keeping it at maybe a certain percentage of the homes in the area. Uh, Travis,

just while we're on the topic, I know we've been here a while, but um I would I wouldn't mind seeing a way that somebody could sell their short-term rentals. Somebody that's looking to invest in a short-term rental and them get a license with it. That might prevent some of this cap from needing to change if if they could buy an existing short-term rental knowing that they can actually have a short-term rental. But that's my personal opinion. Well, Taylor tells me that she feels there's already people sitting on these licenses and not using them. And I think if you could sell them to the next person, there'd really be a lot of sitting on them. I mean, people might run out and get one just for the heck of it, thinking, "Oh, might make my house more valuable maybe when I sell it."

Yeah. So, but I appreciate the thought. Anybody else? Craig,

the only thing I think or I would consider um I feel like if it would be like an annual adjustment, you'd almost be poking the bear every single year that you're, you know, you'd have, you know, I wouldn't say an outpouring, but I think there was enough, you know, taxpaying people living here that were fully engaged on either either side of the argument. And you know, I mean, if we had a a three-year review or, you know, just some some cycle that that's predictable that you could either say on the website or whatever that we're we're making adjustments or or something. But I just think if we just kind of drop a bomb in the middle of the year every year, if there's no uh calculable or predictable adjustment, we just need to set that to where we I guess we could do it annually, but I mean we just need to let people know when that adjustment's going to happen, when that's going to be looked at, and you know, I mean, just kind of structure it in a way that that it doesn't seem like well I thought we just added 70 more last two months ago you know I mean those kind of conversations because I think that would be kind of the thing that would come out of it. So

well wasn't it Fatville that was thinking of reducing the number that they had? I think they were they were discussing it. I don't know if they actually implemented it but uh they had a much lower number. They had about 480 and I believe they've hit it and they've had some litigation since then. I don't know if Jason you have any uh last I heard there was the state litigation had been dealt with and then there was a federal litigation which has also been resolved in favor of the city but that's I don't know if they have anything else. I don't think they do but I think but didn't the didn't the Supreme Court remand it back to the lower court to tell them to finish? I I I I don't know

you may know more about that than I do right now. I I think um that was remanded. Uh but I I don't really know for what I don't know. I can't remember everything. I just don't it's laid out. From what I remember, they went to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court said, "Yeah, this is likely unconstitutional." But they remanded it back to the lower court to finish because they never actually finished the process in the lower courts. That's what I read. I don't I don't agree with that. I don't think they said it was likely unconst. But

I do remember them remanding. I I I guess I can't get excited about increasing the number for two reasons. One, it could be cutting into uh any possibilities of us getting a hotel because it would cut into their opportunity by opening the door for expansion of the short-term rentals. 600 is more than I think our neighbors have around the Northwest Arkansas area, I believe, uh capwise. So, I I'm comfortable. We've had a lot of issues with the short-term rentals in terms of noise and all sorts of things. So,

uh, Anna, I think it's important that we do continue to consider the growth and that we have fair opportunities for business and for homeowners. Um, I don't know what the right number is and I don't know what the right time frame is. But I I don't I don't want to shut down the idea of expanding the number of short-term rentals because I my issue is if we have short-term rental licenses out there and they are not utilizing them. So, I would be more in favor of a minimum rental considering a minimum night rental rule so that those that have the license are actually utilizing it because if they're holding on to them and not utilizing it, it's not fair to those that, you know, could be participating. Yeah.

Uh Wendy.

So yeah, absolutely agree that we can should evaluate this. Um and with Craig's comment about making like hey every three years or every few years checking in on it. I don't know if anally is maybe the best idea, but having a period Larry's comment about a possible hotel and maybe limiting us. It's capitalism. So I think a hotel is going to come if it's going to come in. And if that shakes up how STRs function, that's a risk for those owners. They have opportunities to change it over. There's going to be people who like our family purely stays in short-term rentals when we travel. That's best for our family. My family of five, it's way cheaper for me to rent a house than it is to rent two, three hotel rooms. I got a lot of teenagers and a kid who plays tuba and likes to bring with them. And so it'll it'll all shake out. I think be fine. Um, uh, police, uh, Chief Graves, I think, had a a short report he was going to give just on what we've seen. And

so,

enforcement side. So, as you folks are thinking about this, um, I just went back because I knew this was going to be on the agenda and I talked to the mayor and I just went back a year from March, think of March 2025 to March 2026 and try to pull all of I know it's always was when this topic first came up, everybody's worried about the parties and the crime and and this and the impact on the community and really we haven't seen uh what I think was predicted. Um, I look at the calls for service to short-term rentals across the entire city. So, that's 500 581 we said, I believe. Um, and we've had seven um calls related to short-term rental activity. Um, seven calls. And so those range from about uh um two disturbances um which were just people not getting along with each other kind of thing. Um, I think it was uh uh three ordinance violations. I'm sorry, two, three ordinance violations which were like loud parties, loud loud music. Okay. Um, we had a couple uh parking violations which were just what they are, a lot of cars parked. One of those actually was called in by the short-term rental owner. She said, "Hey, I got people there and they've lied to me and they have all this stuff going on." She actually called us and was kind of nice. And then a suspicious activity, which is just what it was, just We said, "Hey, it's kind of weird. A bunch of cars are parked out here. What's going on?" So, we went out and investigated. So, I don't I don't think based on a year and and all the short-term rentals, it's really and and was interesting, too, is is none of those occurred at the same addresses. And so, you know, we always had people come out talking about this this problem home, and we've dealt with problem homes. And so, I think what we're experiencing here, at least anecdotally, when I look at this, is that, you know, issues come up, we deal with them, and then we always end up dealing with the owners. And I think the owners are taking care of the problem. So, I don't see a giant problem. I hate

saying that because people might be listening going, "Oh my gosh, I got a problem in my neighborhood." But we're not getting those reports. Okay? I don't see a giant problem. So, I don't think it's it's unreasonable to just if there's a percentage of short-term rentals you want based on population that that just increases with population. I don't see a big problem on my pers from my perspective. Uh Shay, that was seven calls over 12 months. Yes. Okay. Thank you. That was 12 month period. I'm surprised it's such a small amount.

Well, me, too. I mean, there were other calls, but when I we had a there was no easy way to do. We had to almost go through every call to see what was the call about, and some were just they weren't my garden hood got stolen or something. They weren't related to short-term rental activity. They're related just like any other call that would come from the residents in Bel Vista. Okay. Any more questions? So anyway, this I just wanted to bring it up. There's something we could think about and put on in May if you think it would be prudent or Shay

is is it possible or and I guess this is for Mr. Kelly, but would it make sense to just write it in a way that is a certain percentage of the homes or do we need to always name a specific number? You can do it either way. Okay. You just need to have an objective way to make sure you come up with the calculation so that we know that when we apply that formula we get a number right and so how you come up with the total number of houses how do you how do we know how many total we have right is that based on meters is it based on you know historical data we'll have to find a solid I mean here's a calculation

I mean we've just got to make sure that that's data we have a right to get and we can use into the future and make use of moving on forward to compare. Okay. So, so we could define a way in which we count number of households and then we could just say 4% of that and then then we wouldn't have to revisit it necessarily.

You could you could set a number and say that the council will revisit it every 3 years or you could uh say that there you basically don't have a limit in how you want to structure it as long as it's not arbitrary in how you determine the number. As long as you've got a good reasonable reason, objective reason, then you could do that. Okay, I think that's pretty much everything unless somebody has something else. We'll adjourn and see you next week at 6 pm.