Finance & Administration Council Committee - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, everybody. It's 04:00. I'm gonna call today's Finance and Administration Council Committee meeting to order. We do have a long agenda, and there's a MAPC meeting at 05:30, so we're gonna try to go through this as quickly as we can, but make sure we allow enough time for discussion where it needed. So please go ahead and record your attendance.

Next up is approval of minutes from the Finance Committee meeting on Tuesday, November 25.

Move to approve unless there's no change. Second.

Any questions or comments on the minutes as presented? If not, please record your vote on whether or not to approve. Alright, we're gonna move into new business. A lot of these are municipal lien resolutions. I'm just gonna read those by title only. First up is resolution twenty five one seventy one. Resolution by the city council, city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to place a municipal lien on property located at 405 North Rogers, Partial One-one Hundred 40 Four-one Hundred 70 Two-nine Thousand 200 owned by Sky Park Holdings LLC in the amount of $315

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to second for full council. Any questions or comments from anybody in council chambers on this one? Seeing none, please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 172, resolution by city council, city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to place municipal lien on property located at 212 Pecan, Partial 01 Dash 144074 Dash 08400 owned by Skypark Holdings LLC in the amount of $315.

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to say before the full council, any questions or comments on this item from anybody? Seeing none, please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. Council. Resolution 20 five-one 173, resolution by the city council of the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to place municipal property located 215 Pecan Parcel One-one Hundred 40 Four-seventy Four-sixteen Thousand 800 owned by Skypark Holdings LLC in the amount of $315

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to move forward to full council. Any questions or comments on this item? Seeing none, please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. At twenty five, resolution 20 five-one 174, resolution by the city council of City of Johnsonburg, Arkansas to place municipal property located at 823 Parkview, Partial 01 Dash 143251 Dash 00300 owned by Kyle Michael Haney in the amount of $275

Move forward for council. Second.

Motion taken for the full council. Any questions or comments on this item? Please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. Resolution 25,175 resolution by the city council, city of Jonesboro, Arkansas, special municipal land property located 1821 Brookhaven, Partial 01 Dash 143243 Dash 04700 owned by Regents Bank DBA Mortgage in the amount of $315

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion second for full council. Any questions or comments regarding this item? I appreciate your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 176, resolution by the city council of the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas, place municipal property located at 2612 Crawford, Partial 01144002 And 70 Three-two Thousand 300 owned by Randy and Ali Crawford in the amount of $275

Move forward to vote council. Second.

Motion to vote for council. Any questions or comments on this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 177, resolution by the city council, city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to place municipal lien on property located at 314 North Rogers Partial 01 Dash 144172 Dash 10400 owned by Kingdom Assets LLC, the amount of $275.

Move forward to full council. Second.

I'm setting for the full council. Any questions or comments on this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. I sound like a broken record. Alright, next item is Resolution 20 five-one 178.

I will entertain y'all by reading this one in its entirety. Resolution by Jonesboro City Council entered into a contract with Southern States Fire LLC to purchase two Rosenbauer Fire apparatuses for as city Jonesboro Fire Department administration has performed comparative pricing and secured the commitment for a reasonable delivery timeline to facilitate the replacement of thousand and five model 100 foot aerial ladder truck and a twenty eleven model pumper truck within the department and whereas the purchase price of the aerial truck will be $1,558,852 and the pumper truck will be $860,915 for a total cost of $2,419,767 and whereas upon delivery of the new units, replacement replaced units will be sold with of a listing agent if necessary and the resulting sale proceeds being returned to the depreciation fund. And whereas the initial apparatus pricing estimate detailed in the FY 2025 budget has since been reviewed by the power administration, extensive brand and supplier comparisons have resulted in the identification of a similar unit from a different manufacturer at a significant price savings and whereas the city appropriated $625,000 in the 2024 depreciation fund to fund the future purchase and whereas an additional $625,000 funding will be appropriated in the 2025 depreciation fund and whereas City of Waterloo has committed to a two year funding program that includes an annual contribution of $600,000 towards the purchase of these fire trucks, and therefore be resolved by the City Council of City of Jonesboro that Section one of the City of Jonesboro will enter into a purchasing contract with Southern States Fire LLC for two fire apparatus vehicles as described about and in the attached contracts.

Section two that Mayor Harold Copenhagen and City Clerk April Leggett are authorized to execute the necessary documents to effectuate these contributions.

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to move forward to

full council. Any questions or comments on this resolution? Anything from the public or staff in attendance? If not, please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. Alright, back to the municipal liens. Resolution twenty five one seventy nine resolution by the city council of the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas, Place Municipal Lane on property located at 2410 West Matthews, Partial 01 Dash 143143 Dash 01900 owned by Hannah George senior in the amount of $290

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion second forward to full council. Any questions or comments regarding this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution twenty five one eighty resolution by the city council, the city of Johnson, Arkansas, place municipal land on property located at 2412 West Matthews, partials 01Dash143143Dash02500 on by Hannah George Sr. In the amount of $290

Move for full council. Second.

Motion second for the full council. Any questions or comments regarding this item? Please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution twenty five one eighty one, resolution by the city council of City Of Jonesboro, Arkansas, press Municipal Lane on property located at 2005 Bunker Hill, Partial 01 Dash 143231 Dash 09800 owned by Unicorn Investments LLC in the amount of $275

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion second for full council. Any questions or comments regarding this item? Please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 182, resolution by the City Council of City of Jonesboro, Arkansas to place municipal lien on property located at 1312 Roseman, Partial 0 One-one Hundred 40 Three-two 40 Three-eight 500 owned by Smith Brothers Properties LLC in the amount of $275

Move forward to full council. Second.

I'm saying before full council, any questions or comments on this resolution? Alright, please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 183, resolution by the City Council of City of Jonesboro, Arkansas to place municipal lien on property located at 910 Markham, Partial One-one Hundred 40 Three-two 50 One-four Thousand 100 owned by Wilder Seats in the amount of $275

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to floor to full council. Any questions or comments on this item? Please record your vote whether or to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 184, resolution by the City Council, City Of Johnson, Arkansas, place municipal lien on property located 616 East Oak, Partial 0114419117500 by Joyce Scarborough in the amount of $275

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to second for the full council. Any questions or comments on this one? Resolution 20 five-one 185, resolution by the city council of City Of Johnsonville, Arkansas, placed in municipal property located at 5017 Mount Carmel Road, Partial 01 Dash 133013 Dash 01500 owned by Catherine Arterberry in the amount of $365

Move forward to full council.

Second. I'll second forward to full council. Any questions or comments on this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or not the full council. Resolution twenty five thousand one eighty six, resolution by the city council, city of Jonesboro, Arkansas, place municipal lien on property located at 1602, Tanya A partial 01Dash144082Dash0021 0 by Mardicule LLC in the amount of $275

Move forward for council. Second.

Motion taken before for council. The only thing I wanna say on this one is that resolution twenty five one eight six and twenty five-one 187 are related. That's why the next one is for a smaller amount. Any other comments or questions on this one? If not, please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council.

Resolution 20 five-one 187. Resolution by the City Council of the City of Johnson, Arkansas to place municipal lien located at 1602 Tanya B, Partial 0 One-one Hundred 40 Four-eighty Two-two Hundred by Mardicule LLC in the amount of $60

Move forward to full council.

Second. Motion taken before council. Any questions or comments on this one? Please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. We're getting there. Resolution 25188. Resolution by city council, city of Jonesboro, Arkansas place missile lean on property located at 2106 Cotton Partial 01 Dash 144271 Dash 02700 on by McCall Roland in the amount of $275

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to report to full council. Any questions or comments on this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 189, resolution by the city council, city of Jonesboro, Arkansas, place municipal property located at 211 Scott, Partial 0 One-one Hundred 40 Four-one Hundred 70 Two-five Thousand 700 owned by Linda Lou Lambert, the amount of $2.75.

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion second to forward to full council. Any questions or comments on this item? Seeing none, please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution twenty five one ninety resolution by City Council City of Jonesboro, Arkansas, place Municipal Lane on property located at 700 Melody Partial 01 Dash 143244 Dash 27500 by Ignacio and Emily Patino in the amount of $275

Move forward, full council. Second.

Motion seconded for the full council. Any questions or comments on this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or not to forward the full council. Alright, resolution 20 five-one 191, resolution by the city council of the city of Johnson, Arkansas, place municipal lien on property located at 5321 Brody Drive, Partial 01 Dash 144114 Dash 3900 owned by AVHS Arkansas or AR LLC in the amount of $275

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion is second to forward to full council. Any questions or comments on this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or not to forward to full council. Resolution 20 five-one 192. Resolution by the City Council of City of Johnsonburg, Arkansas Place Municipal Lane on property located at 5112 Richardson, Partial 011340331900 by Ashley Michelle Vanguardia in the amount of $315

Move forward to full council. Second.

Second, forward to full council. Any questions or comments on this item? If not, please record your vote on whether or to forward to full council. Resolution twenty five thousand one ninety three. Resolution by the city council of City of Johnsonburg, Arkansas, located at 1507 Range Partial 01 Dash 144194 Dash 16700 owned by ESP Properties LLC in the amount of $275

Move forward for council. Second.

Motion seconded for the full council. Any questions or comments on this item? I'll make

one comment. I'll just say Director Roper, great job and good job code enforcement. Y'all have definitely been hard at work and thank you for keeping the city beautiful. Took the word out

Any other comments on this one? If not, please record your vote on whether or to forward a full council. I'll be happy to know that's the on to resolution twenty five thousand one ninety four, resolution of city council of city of Johnsonville, Arkansas to enter into an agreement with Pickering to provide professional services for Prospect Road multiuse trail, whereas the City of Johnsonville desires to enter into an agreement to provide professional services for the Prospect Road multiuse trail, project, whereas the selection committee has determined that Pickering is the most qualified firm for the project, whereas Pickering has agreed to provide professional services for the Prospect Road Multi Use Trail project as described in the attached agreement. And whereas the funding for the execution of the agreement shall come from the capital improvement revenue bonds budget and compensation shall be paid in accordance with the agreement. Therefore, be it resolved by city council of the City Of Jonesboro, Arkansas that section one, the city of Jonesboro shall enter into an agreement with Pickering to provide professional services for the Prospect Road multiuse trail project.

Section two, the funding for the execution of the agreement come from the capital improvement revenue bonds budget and compensation shall be paid in accordance with the agreement. Section three, the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized by the city council for the city council to execute all documents necessary to actuate the agreement.

Move for the full council. Second.

Motion to support full council. Any questions or comments on this item? Anything from staff or the public in attendance? If not, please record your vote on whether or to forward resolution 25,194 to full council. Alright, resolution 25,195.

Resolution by the city, let me get a drink. Resolution by the Jonesboro City Council to accept an in kind land donation of two acres plus or minus of land valued at $876,000 and authorizing the mayor to enter into an agreement with Blazer Land Holdings LLC. Whereas Blazer Land Holdings LLC wishes to donate approximately two acres of land to the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas and the city of Jonesboro wishes to accept said said donation of property. A copy of the warranty deed, appraisal summary, land donation agreement, and survey map are attached here too. And whereas a property located at or near 6106 Southwest Drive is positioned along a major highway in one of the highest intensity growth areas of the city and would preserve the land for future public safety needs in the area.

And whereas it is the intent of the city to pursue funding to utilize the property for a public safety benefit in the future as detailed in the warranty deed as quote, the aforementioned property shall not be used for any purpose other than fire, police or public safety close quotes. And whereas the donating property has identified the intended qualifying uses if developed to include but not strictly limited to a fire station, short term, severe weather or emergency shelter, police substation or similar public safety benefit facility and whereas no portion of the agreement, warranty deed or offering documents exempt adjacent property from general development codes or a guarantee of development by the city, only that any development of the property other than demolition or maintenance be of a public safety benefit. Whereas if the property is not in funded process of creating a public safety benefit within seven years, the property would return to Blazer Holdings LLC versus a signed representative unless additional legislation between the City of Jonesboro and Blazer Holdings LLC alters the original contract represented in this resolution. Now therefore, be it resolved by the City Council, the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas, the section one, the city of Jonesboro accepts the in kind land donation of approximately two acres from Blazer Land Holdings LLC.

Section two, the city of Jonesboro will abide by the warranty deed, guaranteed wishes of the donating party that any development of property be of a public safety benefit as detailed in the above resolution and attached warranty deed. Section three, the mayor Harold Copenhaver and city clerk April Leggett are hereby authorized by the city council for the city of Jonesboro to execute all documents necessary to effectuate this agreement. The mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized with executing of any and all documents reasonably necessary to acknowledge the donation of Blazer Land Holdings LLC with tax authorities, including but not limited to the Internal Revenue Service.

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion second for the full council. Any questions or comments regarding this item?

Mr. Chairman, got a couple of questions. Go ahead. And Brian, maybe you can speak for the administration. The plans for this area? Do you think we're going to have police fire, which one or both?

Conversations with the donees and also as we kind of look at the growth patterns that have been out in Southwest Jonesboro for quite some time now. What we're going to do, if this is accepted, is pursue funding for probably most immediately some sort of tornado shelter, severe weather shelter. We've looked at some options and actually even talked with some of our federal delegation about what that funding process looks like and how likely that might be. In addition, maybe that is also a tornado shelterfire station or a police substation. There's obviously a lot of people that live out there.

Currently, Valley View Schools is outside of our four minute response time that we strive for in the fire department. And it gives us an opportunity to preserve what's a pretty valuable piece of land in a fast growing area for future use. And right now, there's buildings on it. I'm not just super confident that those could be just immediately turned over into something. I'm sure there's probably some salvageable component to that that might fit into this.

We would need to do some additional studies on that but the fact of the matter that it provides us the opportunity should we choose and should we be able to find funding, guess over the next seven years to be able to build some assets out there that I think will be of a community safety benefit. So there's no guarantee on the table that we're going go out tomorrow and spend $7,000,000 on a building or $2,000,000 on a building. I think we're just thankful for the opportunity to have a chance to preserve this land and kind of do some further research and see if it fits the needs of our long term goals to provide public safety in that area. I think those goals are pretty widely stated in the latest fire report that we have a need out there. Jonesboro continues to grow, I think we're anticipating three or 4,000 additional rooftops out there in just the next three or four years.

And again, this gives us an opportunity to serve those people with the kind of public safety that we strive for. So as far as any information about the actual land beyond just what the city's intent would be or the stipulations, think there's representatives here from Blazer Holdings that could probably answer any of those questions, happy to answer whatever else I can.

Mine was more of what do

you guys see, how we're going to utilize it. How we're going to use police for fire. But I guess we've got to do some more digging to figure out, like you said, there's some buildings out there. I know they're outfitted, they've got water, sewer, etcetera. But does that meet what fire or police would need in terms of, I mean, you'd have to outfeed it for what they need.

Yeah, I mean, I think that it would only be fair if what we consider is that we would probably look at it from a blank slate approach, anything that we could say, which would be great. I mean, there's some good assets on that property, but not being an architect or an engineer or anything like that. I don't know what all is reusable out there. And sometimes it's just easier to start from a clean slate. I suspect that if you're dealing with a safety shelter, you're talking about something from a clean slate anyway. So I would anticipate that barring some surprise that you would talk about removing everything from that property and building something brand new.

Any other questions for Brian while he's up there? Any other comments from staff or the public or?

I'd just like to thank Carol Caldwell for his generous donation to the city. And the whole group. It's appreciated. Thanks guys.

Thanks, John. If there's no further comments or questions, please cast your vote on whether or not to forward resolution 25,195 to full counsel. Next up is resolution twenty five thousand one ninety six. A resolution providing for the adoption of a budget for the city of Johnsonville, Arkansas for the twelve months beginning 01/01/2026 and ending 12/31/2026, appropriating money for each item of expenditure therein provided for and for other purposes. Whereas the City Council has made a comprehensive study and review of the proposed budget submitted by the mayor and whereas it is the finding and conclusion of the city council that the schedules and exhibits of anticipated revenues and expenditures for the calendar year appear to be as accurate as possible for budgetary purposes.

Now therefore be resolved by the City Council of Johnsonburg, Arkansas that section one, this resolution shall be known as the budget resolution for the city of Johnsonburg, Arkansas for the twelve month period beginning 01/01/2026 and ending 12/31/2026. The attached budget incorporated herein as if set out word for word and figure for figure reflects estimated revenues and expenditures as set forth on the succeeding pages. Section two, the respective funds for each item of expenditure proposed in this budget for 2026 are hereby approved and adopted for the operation of the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas by the City Council on this date and can constitute an appropriation of funds which are lawfully applicable to the items contained within the budget. This budget may be altered or revised by action of this governing body and unpledged funds may be subsequently appropriated to another purpose except as prohibited by law, ACA fourteen fifty eight-two zero three A. Section three, the mayor or his duly authorized representative may approve for payment out of funds appropriated by this budget or otherwise approved by the City Council for those purposes or may disapprove any bills, debts, or liabilities exerted as claims against the City, provided, however, that the execution of all contracts and conveyances and lease contracts shall be performed by the mayor and city clerk when authorized by resolution in writing and approved by majority vote of the city council present and participating.

Section four, if any provision of this resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the resolution, which can be given effect without the invalid provision application. And to this end, the provision of this resolution are declared to be severable.

Move forward to full council. Second.

Motion to move forward to full council. Mayor, do you have anything you want to say before I

know, Chairman, if you'd like me to move forward, can make comments or we want, do we have any comments by council members?

Well, mean, I know Steve and I talked earlier this afternoon. I know everybody wasn't able to see the slideshow on Friday. So I'm perfectly fine with Steve going through that again. Think it's always good for the public to see.

And if it's all right with you, Mr. Chair, I'd just like to make a few short statements. Go ahead. All right. Council members and residents of the city of Jonesboro, first of all, I appreciate the opportunity to always sit before you, but more importantly, as we move through a balanced budget and moving on to 2026, one of the key words is going be consistency.

So counsel, you'll find that this budget is consistent with previous budget, a consistent revenue stream that supports consistent reoccurring expenses. So I've asked the finance team to develop a practical plan where a concept of measured utilization I'm sorry. I'm a little out of breath. Just came from City Youth. Measured utilization of reserves will fund only capital infrastructure improvements and not operations.

I also challenge them to hold the budget cycle to consistent operation structure versus expansion of systems and personnel. This will ensure a better utilization of current systems to meet the challenge for each department to provide expanded and more efficient services to the public. You'll notice that there are no new revenue streams and the most impacting expense increase is continuation of the annual salary increases of all employees. While increased costs across the board are inevitable, we requested both a significant system and request from our providers components to manage and hold increases until further evaluation. These will be assessed as timing of contract renewals arrive and perhaps we're going to see what the first quarter results of the new year looks like.

So my letter states additional consideration will be given to budget request after the end of the first quarter and growth trends once they have been gathered. So that's the end

of my initial statements. Dave, would you like to come up?

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity. Rather than than just rewind and press play again, I thought I'd just kind of recap some of our comments from our earlier meeting last Friday. I appreciate that you were calling for a working meeting for the full city council, gave us all the opportunity to see that information. I appreciate our clerk providing not only the budget document as an attachment resolution, but also this PowerPoint here.

And, Cypral, are you going to drive this? Okay, thank you. So from there, we just thought we would just highlight some of the key comments that we made last Friday. As we indicated and the mayor commented in his comments that we do have a balanced budget here. Our total expenditure spend will be about $8,572,000,000 dollars of that or roughly 90% will be in our O and M expenditure category.

We'll have about $1,100,000 in capital improvement expenditures if this budget is approved by City Council next Tuesday, pending your forwarding for their review. Our O and M sales tax revenue, it is simply a reforecast of our 2025 budget. We will end the year at a 1.8% increase in our budget or sales tax revenues compared to the previous year will be about 1,000,000 behind our budget projection when that year concludes. And that will be in the range combined for both city and county just under 40,000,000 or $50,000,000 So we just simply re projected that same revenue stream for 2026 and it will be about a 2.5% budget increase comparing to current year projection. Our salary and benefits, as Mary alluded to, we have a 4% overall increase for all full time employees.

This will consist of our standard 2% annual step increase, which is just a continuation of our 2016 resolution approval of a salary administration plan by this body or the city council body back at that time. So in theory, it will be reaching its tenth calendar year in creation since that date. Additionally, over the past since 2022, we have further provided a cost of living adjustment in each of our budgets since that time. This particular budget cycle, we're projecting a 2% cost of living adjustment, again equating to a total 4% overall increase in salaries for all full time employees. Additionally, in the benefit category, as you all are aware, we initiated in response to fully insured insurance program, medical insurance with the continuing cost of that historically that we did move into a captive program beginning 2025 as we alluded to last week.

We've seen claim activities decrease from $10,000,000 down to $8,000,000 in that program. And so we're certainly pleased with that. You may recall that one of the initial benefits of going from fully insured to self funded is a program of being able to save the administrative costs that would go to the TPA who's administering that plan for us, in this case is Blue Cross Blue Shield. So we were able to save about 13% which immediately went into our captive program as seed money for our claim activity. In addition to that, we have administrative costs all in, it be about 1,000,000 point dollars in total administrative costs, which is consistent with what we were utilizing or doing in our fully insured program.

One benefit of the captive program is we do have other avenues available to us for services, pharmacy spend. We've seen considerable savings in that. We've had roughly 350,000 return of premiums for spend relating to that as well. So all of those are adding to our captive program. We did hear that the market was increasing overall fully insured costs anywhere in the 15% range.

We think it's prudent for us to consider something likewise for our captive program. It will take us a couple of years to see the exact run of activities relative to what goes on in a self funded program. Effectively, we're one year in. We'll be interested to see what that looks like in year or in month fifteen after that period of kicking it off, then we'll also be monitoring that for years two and years three. That's when the revolution or the rotation of that program really takes effect and have a true analysis of comparing how things are going.

We have many things being considered between now and then relative to how we would make our program functioning very well for the city and the cost savings to our participants. And so we're looking forward to introducing some of those to our employees along the way. The last bullet on this page are personnel requests. We did defer those until first quarter twenty twenty six. Again, as Mayor alluded to, we're going to take that period to look at the first quarter results and compare activities relative to our budget in those particular requests that were made. Thank you, Abe.

Mr. Prateek, there's a couple of questions on this first page, you don't mind. And I wanna make sure I say this, I want Keith to print that I think city employees don't do a good job. I think they do a good job. But my questions, so the step raises, the salary adjustments, excuse me, annual step, cost of living, 4% COLA for those who are not eligible for the step or the cost of living.

When we look at those, those are given out as a blanket. There are no metrics as far as I could do a really good job, I could do a needs improvement job and I still get the step increase or my cost of living?

That is correct. All full time employees will receive that total 4% increase.

Have

we considered especially with us looking at first quarter, we're going to defer things to the quarter to make a decision as far as personnel. Have we looked at and I guess what jobs have we looked at maybe to outsource? Are there things that we can outsource that maybe make the jobs more efficient? Have we looked at that as a whole, not just in certain departments, but as a whole?

I expect that that will be part of this first quarter review specifically to look at maybe if the addition of new personnel or the ask or request for that or how we could further support that same ask with outside services or to that effect. So yeah, I think that would be part of that first quarter review as well.

I know if there's about that going especially the last year.

Councilman, if I can, yeah. Councilman had mentioned that earlier and yes, we had started some internal processes because some of them overlap with different departments and so we want to make it the most efficient way we can. But yeah, I think we're seeing the move more to external entities being involved in providing city services because the cost effectiveness is really getting hard for us to control. So yes, those are being made. That's all on this page.

Thank you.

On our second slide here, which we call this page two, overview of appropriations. As you recall, we did issue our franchise fee revenue bond. We'll have some more information on the details of that a little bit later in this presentation. That does afford $17,500,000 in capital improvements, which will occur over the next three budget cycles. You'll recall that that includes construction of an E911 safety center expansion of our South Caraway Road Street and then pedestrian trail connections as well, which have been ongoing of course.

Additionally, we'll have $3,000,000 in a specific appropriation that will be part of 2025 results that is a function of the first event or activity of this new budget. And this is specifically for overlay improvements. And so that is an appropriation there. In addition to that, 250,000 will be appropriated for to further being ADA compliant with sidewalk improvements and that is in response to a lawsuit from several years back that we have continued to provide support relative to that judgment. Dollars 1,100,000.0 of our budget is for recurring capital improvement, miscellaneous drainage improvements, industrial rail activities, the maintenance program out there and then our economic development there as well.

Captive improvement carryover funding, you'll recall that in our monthly financials, we provide a review of this and this is reflected on Page 12 or 13 of our budget packet that you have as well. There's $18,700,000 in total funding that was available for 2025, nearly $6,000,000 of that was spent in 2025 and then $11,100,000 is remaining in that appropriation for future projects. Again, that project detail is listed in the budget binder. We provide a monthly report of that and our monthly financials in there as well. So you can kind of track the activity as it moves along in the calendar year relative to that fund.

Also in addition to that, we are appropriating $4,400,000 for our depreciation fund. This will allow us to acquire 30 vehicle replacement units. Again, this is not an expansion of our fleet, it's a replacement of existing units that probably have been needing replacement for quite some time. 25 of these units will be specific for our police department. And out of that 37, we had a request for 52 fleet unit replacements.

And again, it's a process of monitoring and managing that purchase to accommodate what we think we can appropriate in our budget and that's what this includes here. Very specifically, that's a $2,500,000 for two new fire app aratus units. I think your earlier actions have forwarded that actual purchase on to City Council for their review and approval. This budget includes our second installment toward that purchase, $625,000 this will give us about $1,250,000 of that total spend there. Our very generous partner, City Water and Light has agreed to fund the remaining $1,200,000 over the next two budget cycles.

And Christy Wall shared with me earlier that that first installment has already been received. It's actually settling today as we speak. So we appreciate our partner helping us with this. They have fulfilled their commitment for that first $600,000 request and we know that they will are planning to do that as well in the 2026. So we very much appreciate that.

The very last item here is this $4,400,000 does include maintenance equipment replacement. And again, we go through the same process for our fleet equipment. We do that in a review and analysis of our maintenance equipment to provide that funding as well. Thank you Ms. April.

Mr. Fertig, just real quick on the overlay and street improvements. I guess as a whole looking at different projects, but right now I'll stick to the overlays and street improvements as well as sidewalks. Just how do we prioritize those? Where do you guys come up with? And I guess that's probably a Craig question. But just curious how we prioritize those.

I

thought so, but I'm just trying to make sure I know for sure.

Several years ago, we did a inventory of our walks and of our roadways to get a condition assessment on those, particularly on the roadways. We began a running list about three or four years ago that started out with about 5,000,000 worth of projects that needed detention or roads that need to be overlaid and we've been working our way through those. We get phone calls from people that ask us to specifically look at those roads and we put those on a list to go look at and we weigh those on putting them on the list compared to other roads that we have in our system. But it primarily comes to where street department is spending most of their energy and time. If they're spending a lot of money patching potholes on specific road and they're losing the road then those are ones we prioritize for getting fixed.

So that's kind of the way we do it. We, the engineering street department along with the mayor's office finalize the list that we submit. It's usually in the advertisement that's provided to city council when we do those for the annual bids for the overlay. So you guys get to see those lists of what roads are on there. We can provide the list, the running list that we have right now.

But generally, we had a presentation when we had the inventory done three years ago, four years ago now. He said we should be spending about $3,500,000 a year on overlays. You're going to get about twelve or fifteen years of service life out of roadway and we're still at 1,000,000 to $2,000,000 a year. So we're losing our roads faster than we're putting them back. That's the reality.

So in terms of prioritizing them, truthfully we need more funding for roadways. And the 3,000,000 that's allocated this year is between overlays and roadway improvements. So there's other projects we have on our list that we feel like we need to do for pedestrian crossing at Southwest Drive and South Culverhouse that we're finishing up the permit drawings for that right now. There's some other pedestrian crossing works, roadway works that we have in interplant, traffic calming, speed tables are coming out of that same $3,000,000 So there's other projects, not all just overlays in that $3,000,000 as well. And this coming year, we'll be doing the work patching the roads, relaying the roads that were part of city water lights project for their sanitary sewer project.

So, they will be reimbursing us a percentage of that as well. So, hopefully, we'll get some more money in to help supplement our overlay program this coming year.

You have the same type of list for drainage?

We do. We have a list of drainage projects. The running total is about, if you take out our master plan, it's about 15,000,000 projects that I think this year we have a half 1,000,000 or looks like we will get a half 1,000,000 this year for drainage projects this coming year. So we'll start working through the ones that we can fund with those and just chipping away at at it.

Mr. Chairman, appreciate you letting me have some seconds, some time to talk. I think the overwhelming thing I heard not only now but then also from the meeting on Friday, I mean, I wasn't here but at the same time I went back and watched and I heard some conversation around the impact fees and I know that we aren't discussing that now but at the same time we've got a vast need. Are we how close are we where are we in that process?

Daryl said early next year on the report coming back.

Early next year?

Yeah, like 2026,

yeah. Okay.

You. Go ahead, Steve.

Thank you. This slide here, we again just want to give an overview of our franchise fee revenue bond. Again, you'll recall that we issued that bond at $17,595,000 in par value. Simply that's the amount that will be repaid once all of the principal and interest payments are made. At the conclusion of that final maturity on eightonetwo thousand and fifty five, it does have a prepayment clause for the first seven years.

After that, it could be refinanced, paid off early, that debt could be retired in whatever manner that the city would see fit and this our council would approve relative to that. Our annual debt service which is coming out of our franchise fee revenue is 1,147,100. We are funding that on a monthly basis. And our first payment on that obligation will be in August 2026. So we are already funding it incrementally through year.

Our project appropriation, you'll recall this probably without me having to go through it, but that was $16,000,000 in appropriation. We had $5,500,000 of that for the public safety center, an additional 5,500,000.0 expansion and then $5,000,000 for pedestrian and trail connections. You can see the activities for 2025, we wanted to provide that. We've earned about 260,000 in interest or will have at the conclusion of 2025. We've committed expenditures either spent or committed 1,400,000.0 to these projects and the available funding is about $1,600,000 So that $1,600,000 could be utilized to either expand on these current projects, do similar projects that are in the same categories or simply support cost increase that might be occurring along the way as well.

Item in our budget is Mr. Ronnie director of our E-nine-one center. He also gives oversight of our tornado siren program. We appreciate his work in that. Our siren system is in need of upgrade to digital radio system.

And then the system expansion, he has asked for four additional sirens to cover service area that is currently not within the area of our coverage today. These total expenses are about $260,000 This will go against our $582,000 balance remaining in our restricted revenue replacement fund or formerly we knew it as the ARPA fund. Since we fully satisfied all of our commitments relative to having them committed by the year end 2024, having them spent by 2026. We did use the remaining balance of that funding and put it in our replacement fund, which was permitted by the state and local federal government relief fund and then we were able to do that. So if we do this appropriation which eventually will be approved by city council through resolution approving contract, we would have about 320,000 left in that fund.

So this would be coming back for further evaluation by city council. Our review of our reserve analysis, you can see the total fund balances projected at year end twenty six will total just under $30,000,000 We have just under a $10,000,000 reserve requirement, which again the bottom footnote indicates that represents 15% of our general fund budgeted expenditures. This will leave us with about $20,000,000 in unappropriated reserves. We try to look at this in the reserve categories as to how much coverage each bucket has. One point eight months of coverage will be sustained by our minimum reserve requirement and you can see also that the AML and the Government Finance Officers Association recommends one to two months of coverage.

So we are in that window there. The remaining unappropriated reserves will provide $2,000,000 of coverage and then our total reserve coverage is about three point eight months. The next three slides is just really an overview of revenues and expenditures. I'm not going to go into those details. Again, the only thing I'll point out is the franchise fee revenue is about $1,200,000 less than the previous year budget.

We do know obviously that $1,147,000 represents the payment on our bond. The other thing that you'll notice through these slides is 70 roughly 68% of this revenue comes from sales tax, both the county and the city sales tax. And in our expenditure categories, more than or nearly 60% of that is supporting our public safety sector. And so we show you that as well. And our forecast in specific revenue buckets is looking at the run rate of the current year applying a 2% increase for the next budget year.

So that's basically what you're seeing here relative to these categories. Go ahead, Ms. April, we'll go through these.

Can you say, I'm sorry, Mr. Pibb. You said the run rate is for say that one more time?

What we how we forecast our revenue budget is we look at the run rate of the current year and then we forecast a 2% increase in addition to that.

I guess on the sales tax we state it looks like we had no difference.

And that excludes sales tax.

Okay, all right.

That's all right.

That's excellent That's an

excellent point.

Okay, thank you.

Go ahead Ms. April. Okay, and this is just the slide that basically showing our protection services is about 60% of our budget. That's all of the comments that I have for the committee.

Any other questions or comments from the committee on the budget? Anything else from staff or the public in attendance? If not, please cast your vote on whether or to forward resolution twenty five thousand one ninety six to the council. Alright, next up, resolution 25,197, a resolution by city council city of Jonesboro, Arkansas to amend the salary, city salary administration plan by including updated pay ranges, job titles and grades. Whereas resolution twenty four one eighty four amended the city salary administration plan.

Whereas the need has been identified to amend the city of Jonesboro's current salary administration plan to include pay ranges, job titles and grades consistent with the 2026 budget. Now therefore be it resolved by the city council for the city of Jonesboro, Arkansas the section one attached listing of approved job titles of the salary administration plan is hereby adopted.

Move forward to full council. Second.

I'm just saying forward to

full council. I believe this is just for incorporating the two percent step and the COLA and stuff like that. Any questions or comments on this resolution?

One question real quick, Mr. Chairman. Mayor, I was just looking at since you've got the chief administrative officer, chief operations officer, chief of staff, staff, are you planning to fill that sometime soon or is that a

think those are still

Those are just approved job paddles in the city plan, not funded job paddles. So you'll see all sorts of stuff in there that doesn't exactly exist but they're just titles at some point in time have been created. Okay.

There is no plan to fill it.

Got it, okay. Right, thank you.

Anything else from the committee, staff, Republican attendance on this resolution? If not, please cast your vote on whether or not to forward 25197 to full counsel.

She's not registering. I need each person. There

we go.

There we go.

All right. Now we'll move on to resolution 2500198. This is the last item under new business. A resolution by the Jonesboro City Council to accept an offer and enter into a contract to purchase property and in dual litigation efforts between the City of Jonesboro and Laurel Park LLC, whereas Laurel Park LLC representatives have made an offer to settle ongoing litigation and convey sales of all properties owned by the corporation and any subsidiary entities to the city of Jonesboro for a total of $750,000 whereas a recent appraisal of the property immediately beneath the condemned and demolished Building Lot 4 commonly known as Citizens Bank Tower property appraised at $307,000 or $71 per square foot at 4,320 square feet, whereas the offer includes multiple holdings by Laurel Park LLC at the general location of 100 West Washington outside of the litigating parcel, including Lots 7 And 8 located near the original tower property and whereas the total approximate sum of square feet for the three parcels of land holding by Laurel Park LLC property is 10,100 square feet plus or minus and whereas an agreed and executed purchase contract of all Laurel Property LLC's will result in the termination of any current and future litigation claims by Laurel Park LLC and terminate any lien perfection efforts by the City of Jonesboro and whereas neither Laurel Park LLC or the City of Jonesboro will seek restitution for any legal, procedural or financial injury for past, current or future expenses associated between the two entities or their associates.

Now therefore be resolved by the City Council of the City Of Jonesboro, Arkansas that section one, the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas hereby authorizes the purchase of the property detailed above located at 100 West Washington, Jonesboro, Arkansas at a purchase price of $750,000 Section two, the City of Jonesboro, Laurel Park LLC agreed to end all ongoing litigation. Section three, the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized by the City Council for the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas to execute all documents necessary to effectuate the purchase of this. Property.

Move to forward to full counsel.

Second. Second.

I just want the record to reflect that Mr. Tree had to leave at 05:00. So just wanted that to be in the record. We still have a quorum, we still have four. Anybody from the staff or mayor wanna make a comment on Mr. This before we open the floor

Chair, I think really the main comments here from the mayor's office is that we want to keep the community and city council in full regards of how the process is going as we move forward. Obviously, we invested a tremendous amount of ARPA funding in that lot. And with that, then whenever the opportunity on negotiations would come forth, I made counsel aware that we would bring those opportunities to this committee and hopefully move forward to counsel so that discussion can be moved forward. We do have an offer on the table for what is it, Brian? There are six separate lots in that area and we do have an offer on the table.

This is what this presenting of three of those lots and the individual has made an offer to the city. Brian, if you want to speak a little bit more in particulars on that, feel to do so.

Yeah, as the mayor indicated, we've received an offer and obviously this has been a very public discussion in one way or the other for, I guess, the better part of two decades. So earlier this year, I mean, obviously, we completed the demolition of that property and just felt it was in the public's interest to have just an open conversation here at finance about this offer. Just a point of note, this is a matter of ongoing litigation. So I don't think that that limits what we can or can't talk about here. But I just wanted to put that out there.

Of course, this effort, if approved and moved on to full council and approved by council, end that. Just to clarify one thing that may or may not be clear in the resolution. I think that we all understand that this is only for the Laurel Park Holdings that are on the the improved area here on Main Street. I have no idea if Laurel Park owns property somewhere else in the state but just clarification that that is only we're only offering or we're only being offered to purchase what's in the sales contract, which is those three lots on Main Street or Washington. Some of the things that we, I guess, need to talk about are also for public education and the fact that after the demolition of the building, we put a $3,250,000 lien on the parcel where the tower is.

A lien doesn't mean that you get the property. A lien just means that there's a holding against the property that could be collected at a later date through certain triggers, one of which at the property sales, and you could help recoup some of that funding. The lien is not on the entire property. It's only on the one parcel where the tower was in that parcel. We're estimating that in a recent appraisal to be worth somewhere around $300,000 on the free market, maybe more, maybe less, but I think that's a good ballpark for what that piece of property is worth.

And I do think we've been pretty clear from the council, the city attorney, the mayor that there's probably no path that immediately restores that $3,000,000 was ARPA funding. And I think that we understand that whenever that action was taken, was a public safety measure and it had to be done. It was to reopen Main Street and to remove the public safety issue. As we kind of move forward, I don't think there's a decision that we could possibly make that magically makes all that money pop up. So really we're kind of thinking about what's the best long term solution to recovering that funding and to making that property developable.

And really, when you think about it, I guess there's probably about four different options that we could consider. One would be we just continue our path towards litigation and defending the lane. We're going to incur legal fees during that time. If we win, we place a lien on a piece of property on the parcel where the tower was. And then we deal with it then.

The other would be that we continue the path that we're on and we lose, which is certainly a possibility anytime we're dealing with the court. So then you're, we've got legal expenses. We're possibly having to pay other legal expenses and there's no lien on the property. I think both of those cases are probably months to years of most likely inactivity on that property while that all gets sorted out. It's an option out there.

The other would be we purchase a property then just turn around and sell it to a developer free of a lien and that property gets developed. Most likely. If we want to talk about any type of stipulations that we might put on that, that would be a conversation to have at that time. I do think that we probably got a marketable piece of property, especially if you take the lien off of it. And the fourth would be that we purchase a property and develop it as a city asset.

Whether that be a green space, whether that be any type of holding for whenever that property escalates to a value in which it might merit development. Think that's certainly an option and if we pursue that option then I guess another portion would that be to purchase the rest of the property on that lot and make it a bigger asset. So that's kind of where we're at on this. This is an offer to help start kind of clean up that process that started a really long time ago. I think there's some representatives from Laurel Park here that could probably answer any questions about specifics you have on the offer. But again, got a presentation to see what we wanna do in the future.

I just wanted to say I think that the attorney for Laura Park is available online. He couldn't make it over here today but he's available. I believe the Zoom teams. I don't know where he is. He's somewhere in on the Internet available.

Era, was there anything else you wanna add to this?

I mean I'm here to answer questions if you have them. No. Never mind. He just left. He's no longer online. He's no longer available to answer any questions.

He had to leave at 05:00 also.

He did actually. That was part of the problem. Unless billable hour.

I'll go ahead and open up the floor to the committee if you have

any questions or comments. Mr. Chairman, I do have a question. Brian, they said we had a recent appraisal. I didn't see it attached. Maybe I missed it. But how did they come to $71 per square foot?

Preston King did that appraisal. When we were going through the lien process. I can't remember what exactly that came about for, but we did request an appraisal. I can send that to you. It should be on Legislature somewhere because we used it for some other kind of city action.

Can't remember what it was but I can certainly send that to you. Don't know how that came to a value of $71 I will say that sometimes I guess the most applicable comp is what the property sold for just a few years ago. I think Laurel Park LLC bought that property for somewhere around half $1,000,000 for that parcel. I think altogether for the three parcels they paid somewhere around $920,000 So circumstances are different but I mean I would say that between the appraisal and you know past purchase history of that property I think it gets us in a ballpark and who knows what it actually brings if it's on a private market.

Don't think we'll have our

brand $71 a foot. I mean, I think the most I mean, there's nothing in Jonesboro for that price. I don't even know if there's anything in the state for that price. That's $71 a foot. I could be wrong. Hope you prove me wrong. But at the same time, I just think overpaying for something just because if we're afraid of litigation, I just think that wouldn't be a good use of the public's money.

Mean, I

just mean, just struggle with it. I don't see how I mean, do you all have a reservation that we're going to go to some long drawn out 4,000,000 or $5,000,000 court expenses settlement and all that stuff? I mean what, I just, 71 a foot is just astronomical.

I'll say two things. Number one, apparently the internet kicked Matt out. He's trying to get back in so that he can answer questions. I got a text from him right as they were saying he's gone. And number two, I mean I do expect litigation to be long and drawn out if it occurs. Yes. I mean I think that goes without saying. Nothing moves fast in court anymore. Do we counter?

We've talked to the Mr. Smith property owner as of the last, I guess the last minute as Ms. Leggett can attest to getting this sent in for the agenda. This is the offer that was presented. And to your earlier point, I'm not a price speculator, I'm not an appraiser. All I can go off is the information that we requested off of past sales. So that's the offer on the table and it's the best information I had to provide on if that's an accurate

Let me ask this question. What's the timeline that we would be, is there a deadline, we need an answer back by this day or the offer's off the table?

Understanding, and Matt's here so I'm sure he could speak to that, is that the end

of

the calendar year for tax purposes. But I'll let Matt speak to that. Can you hear

us Yes,

that's correct. Yes, I can. Can y'all hear me? Barely.

You're a little quiet, but we can hear you.

I've never been accused

of that. Maybe on our end, not your end.

Is that better? The phone's closed. We go.

We have you.

Okay. Yeah, it's my understanding that the deal has to close by the end of the year. I think the contract said the closing was, December 29, if I read that correctly, as far as the proposed real estate contract. So yes, it would it would need to close by the end of the year.

Mean, do you think, Carol, do you think there would be a way to, as Brian mentioned, one of the things here is, the big unknown is legal fees. And not just from our side, but if we win or lose, potentially their side. Is there a way to estimate those at all?

No, I mean it depends on how long litigation takes. So there's really no way to estimate those.

I almost wish we had a little bit more information on which

I don't think anybody can estimate the legal fees of what it would take to continue the litigation. I mean they can estimate an hourly rate but nobody can estimate how many hours it's gonna take to get to the conclusion of litigation on both sides.

You're trying to think of I mean, like the year end, I don't know their tax situation, but I'm just trying to go through it in my head, like why do they have to have it done this year?

Mike can answer that. I can't answer that question.

Is there anybody in here that could say why it has to be done this year and can't carry over into next year? I guess just from my perspective, I would like to Yeah, Jerry, I

think some of the do. I this we're was an opportunity for him to to take that. Less money than what he's paid for it and basically pay his legal fees and move on down the road. So this is the least he can take and still not have to have excuse me, have a huge loss.

Thank you for that information.

You bet.

Wait. Real quick. So you mean as far as what he paid, he paid $4.95 then what he's paid as far

as trying to He's paid $4.95 for that light.

Correct. And then you've got two other lights

and that are being

I think he's got about $9.20 in all three lights, plus the legal fees plus lost income.

The $3.60 or whatever, that was just that one partial, right?

$3.00 was Yeah, the one

I mean, it was like he, you know, for one he paid $2.15, then he paid $2.10 for another and $4.95, so it a total of $9.20. So, I mean, from my perspective, the thing that concerns me the most is the unknown legal fees and the unknown if you go to court and you lose, then you're paying.

And that's gonna be an unknown. I mean, there's no way to predict that.

Yeah, that's, I mean, the $7.50 is less than the $9.20 he paid for them.

Just a thought. If you move this on to council, it gives you another week or so to bet it out. You kill it tonight, and, I mean, it is done. Just thoughts. I'm just trying to keep it alive. If you made the comment you wish you had a little bit more information and if you push it down the road just a little bit it might give you an opportunity to get some more of that information.

Other than an estimate on legal fees, because I'm never gonna have the answer to that question.

Well, can just tell you, they won't be cheap.

Well, and honestly, I mean, to me, this is something I wish, I would like the whole council to be able to have input in. I don't think it's us four sitting here. I agree.

I I hear you, just, I think it's because we've also spent money on this. We spent time and money. We spent what, over 3,000,000. I mean, I understand what he's saying. But at the same time we spend money as well. We'd be in this for a lot and I just don't see I don't even think I'm out whether we forward it or not but that's just me. I mean y'all do for yourselves but this is my money, I'm not doing it.

Yeah, I guess my only thought would be I would like for the full council to be able to consider it. I'm not saying I'm in or out either. Just saying

I'm And just

I'll speak to this. I'm on the same fence as Joe's on. I mean, we saw from the legal perspective how this played out in the past with this particular piece of property. And I mean, if we're talking about like this thing going through years and years of motions and discovery and judges chambers and everything else, how much does this add up to? Does 700,000 end up being a discount at this point?

Well I think it's important to note that Laurel Park and Bruce Burroughs legal issue is still not over. It's on appeal. It just doesn't affect this. But parts of it are still on appeal. So you have to factor in even if we were successful or they were, you know, then the appeal as well, which I would anticipate would be coming.

Explain how does it so how could we cleanly purchase this?

Well because it doesn't affect the land. They're still litigating whether money's owed between the two of them. I think Matt can speak to that more but that's my understanding what's still being litigated. Is that correct, Matt?

That's correct.

So it doesn't affect the property itself but they're still in litigation over ultimately the building that once was.

Any other questions from the committee? Any other comments from the public or staff?

Thank you.

Thank you. If not, please cast your vote on whether or not to forward resolution twenty five thousand one ninety eight to full counsel. Show majority of the committee. There's seven on the committee.

Let me look at your roles, I don't remember.

If you think it's We would have

been the only ones to show up, that would still stand, wouldn't it?

Well, I mean, John's no longer here. Right. The rigor would reflect that John's no longer here.

There are seven on the committee. Y'all Yeah. Are asking me to decide, you've gotta give me a minute to look. If y'all think y'all are good, can go ahead. But if you want me to tell you, I gotta look. I wanna look at your rules.

In case you're wondering what we're doing, she's seen it though passed or failed.

Committee rules are different than

The number of people here.

It okay. The rule says that committee a majority of the committee shall be necessary to constitute a quorum to do business The concurring vote of a majority of those attending a meeting providing a quorum is present shall represent the act of the committee. So it passes. Yes.

Resolution twenty five one ninety eight will go to full council. Alright. That was the last item under new business. I'm not aware of any pending items. Are there any updates we need on anything under pending? Does the committee have any other business needed to discuss today? If not, we'll move into this is still finance for those of y'all showing up. We'll move into public comments. This gives a chance for the public to comment on something that was not already discussed on today's finance agenda. Anybody? If not, next item is adjournment.

So moved.

All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Senator, thanks everybody.