City Council - Regular Meeting

I didn't give you It is um 6:30 in the evening. I'd like to call this public hearing to order. Not city council at this time. Uh I'd like Michelle to come forward. There you are. Yes,

public hearing on a fund grant fund park grant application we would like to put in and Michelle's going to talk to us about it.

Yes, this is a good grant opportunity that we it are limited on essentially because it's only for populations less than 7500. So obviously our time will be limited on this one. And it is also just it's a $100,000 grant. It is not a matching grant. So, that's not money then that comes out of our pocket as well. Um, it's my understanding is real estate tax that'll go towards um parks and and whatnot. Typically, I think most of them end up being playgrounds and things like that. Our playground here gets used quite frequently um and is really desperately in need of some updating. Um the swings are not standard size and so they need to be replaced because they're not to size anymore. You know, things change and um so just trying to change with it and get something a little better for this neighborhood right here within on you know on this side of the tracks most of these housing developments right here can walk to it and I think that's where it gets a lot of use. So I think that would be

good. I open the floor for any comments about the park and the grant application. Yeah. Is all you're going to do is the uh all-incclusive play. Is all you're going to do the all-inclusive playground or is this the pickle ball? Is it going in the gym? No, this pretty much sums up our money that we would have for this is just the playground right here at city hall. So, behind us right here. Um those kinds of things will be separate. We can apply again for it. But um this one it pretty much

it cost us nothing. This is all grant money that you up to 100,000. So that's where we're trying to stay. Now it's it shows a little less on estimated cost, but we also have admin fees and things like that. So we will get to that 100,000, but it's it's not out of our pocket. So it's out of theirs. Grant money works for me. when you say out of theirs, who's theirs? The outdoor recreation heritage. It's a long acronym. Um, but it's the fun part, Graham. My um my understanding essentially is it's a real estate tax that's then turned around and um I don't remember how many they do, but yeah.

Real estate tax from where? From our state. The state, sorry. Yeah. This project. Yeah. It's the same one that does the matching grant that we did for the ballpark parks and Heritage Arkansas Parks and Heritage.

I'm sorry for messing their name up. I do that a lot. But it's a it's a the same one that did the matching grant for for that. It's just a different different grant that they offer. like I said that we're limited on because it eventually we will get to 7,500 people pretty quickly. So any comments born against? If not, thank you. I'll consider this public hearing portion closed at this time at 6:34 and we'll move right into our city council meeting. Mr. Hall, would you give us a blessing, please?

Heavenly Father, we thank you for our city. We thank you for the opportunity to live here, to enjoy the fruits of what's being done in our community through all the those who serve our community. We thank you for each one of our city and the residents here. We just pray Lord that you would bless this meeting as we go through it. Uh would you be glorified in our life, in our conversation? We pray in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. And please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Before we call, I'd like to thank everybody for attending our first meet meeting in this new facility. Um, a lot of hard work and air went into it. We had a nice ribbon cutting yesterday. Thanks for those who attend to to attend. With that in mind, would you call the role, please? Council member Hall here. Council member Chapman here. Council member McMahon here. Council member Hefner here. Council member Brook here. And council member Rubble here. And we have a quorum. I'd like to introduce to begin with before we get started on the regular items. Representative Jim Wooden sir is attending today. Hey, if you'd like to come up and say a few words or

Let me uh congratulate y'all on the first meeting. I wanted to be here. I was here when you got the first stoplight and and and but I but 50 I was thinking driving down 52 years ago. It was October. I moved out on Cucker Lane down on Whipper at the very end. And uh Ward's come a long ways. We we had a hard time counting 500 people, much less 6,000 to be the second city, second largest city in Lo County. But I'm just thrilled to death for you to have this new facility and and the and the uh commitment that the mayor and the council has to recreation and improvement and uh the uh improvement of the council facility that you had. I attended the other one, some of you may remember, and uh it was uh it was nice, but this is a tremendous asset to your community and for your people, and I appreciate being here and I'm here to help you any time. Glad I know about the grant and uh we'll certainly support that thing. I believe u we have I have to sign a letter going along with the request. We'll take care of that. But it's great to be here with you. I've got another appointment I've got to go to. I want to stay a few minutes, but I wanted to be here for the first meeting. Thank you.

Thank you, Representative Wharton. We appreciate your kind words. Thank you.

With that, um, we'll continue on with our our regular council meeting. And first on the agenda is the review and approval of the council meeting minutes for July 15th. I'd entertain a motion to approve as presented. Motion. Have a second. Second. Any comments? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Next is the July 28th council meeting. I'd entertain a motion to approve as presented. Motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. And a second. All those any comment? All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Also pres presented to you were the department reports financials. Had a chance to review them. I'd entertain a motion to approve uh both the um department reports and financials. Motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. Any comments? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Any

oppose? Motion carries. Next on the planning commission is there. Good evening. Uh we have a few things tonight for y'all to look at. Um first we have a variance that uh for the width of a street um because they're building a a neighborhood behind two existing homes and the street in between them does not meet the standard setbacks. Correct. Isn't that

what happened was they reversed the building on on on I'll put it up here. Uh building on lot number one. They reversed the building and built it in the setback area. What the variance is is to allow for a um instead of a 25 foot setback down to 20 foot in that area. That future street will go further out. This is off of um Markham Markhamm

and uh the future streets will be of course the uh the setbacks will be correct. It was either take five foot off each side or take 10t off one side and the house would be closer to the to the road than really needed to be. So uh this was an unfortunate mistake on their part and uh required a variance which which the uh planning commission has approved. Right. Um so they we approved that. Um but also there was a replat of the lots to to show the reduced setbacks. So that we would need uh don't we need action from them for the replat? No. Okay. That's your authority.

Okay. Well, we approved that as well. Uh next uh we have um a final plat for Oakland Grove uh phase 4. Uh we didn't have any issue with it. It it went right along with the um preliminary plat that they submitted to us that we approved. So we approved that as well. This is just a addition of phase four, I believe it is, uh for Oakland Grove. All all the infrastructure is already put in and it's it's but against an existing road. So council, I needed a motion and approval for uh the final plat for Oakland Grove phase 4. Is there any variances to this? There is not. No.

How wide are these roads? What roads? The ones they're within those are already established. Okay. It's just the white area, the little 1339. Yeah. That's facing stage coach, right? Motion. Okay. We have a motion. Second. We have a second. Any further comment? All those in favor say I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Okay. This last one is a final plot for Moonlight Meadows phase one. Uh we do we did approve it in a special meeting um and we recommend uh conditions set by the mayor as far as the lift uh station that will be put in. and it's contingent upon uh the council approving it and then the agreement for the signature that one-year warranty period of Moonlight Meadows wastewater lift station within the subdivision along with the modifications to Moon Road lift station will not begin until all modifications are complete and the Moonlight Meadows lift station and Moon Road modifications are operational. council, the uh developer and the uh engineer are here. But what this amounts to is everything's in place for final plan except there this is if you remember this was the public private uh partnership we did for an enlarged lift station that's not complete yet and therefore the uh the taking the moon road lift station down and doing all that is not complete. This contingency which we've run through attorneys and um the developers has agreed to sign is a an agreement with us that the warranty period for the lift station infrastructure and the moon the moon lift station uh and the movement of the generator and everything like that will not uh take effect until it's operational. This allows them to go ahead and with the legalities of the final plat, but of course there would be no building permits let until we get to that point either. So it's our recommendation and the developer has agreed to the same this condition.

So if they can't do anything until it's done, why are we doing this now? From a legal standpoint from them on on uh financing and things like that, they need a final approval. Yeah, they have to have a final plat on file to be able to finance the project. Um, one thing that I will add that wasn't in here. Um, the planning commission was uh asking questions about the size of the lift station and we were impressed that they're it's not only going to um take care of this whole neighborhood once it's complete, but it would have an additional 800 homes that it would be able to to take care of as well for future growth in that area. So, we thought that that was pretty impressive that they're taking that on.

The plan is well, the Moon Road lift station will come offline. It'll just be a a pit, but we're also taking off the uh Emily Circle lift station and I believe one other potential lift station to eliminate those, make them gravity flow. So, and then like I said, another 800 houses can go on this lift station. So, we looked for the future and the council agreed on the private partner partnerships. So,

how on the future development of Moonlight Meadows, how many homes more homes going to go into that? There's a total of 550 homes in in Moonlight Metals. But as we continue to u progress down Moon Road, we're look we were looking for the future and even out um uh um Cockerboro and Brewer area could flow back into it. So what I'm asking so that 550 homes that doesn't include additional 800 homes you say can go station. Right. It'll it'll cover all of those plus an additional

council. With that, I'd entertain a motion to approve a final plan as presented with the contingency. I like the motion. A motion second. Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Entertain a motion to approve the um uh planning commission report as presented by Miss Nixon. Motion a second. Second. Second. All those in favor say I. Any oppose? Thank you, ma'am. Thank you.

Okay, getting into old business. The uh update on the 50 acre lease on Highway 31. I did enter into a lease, a 5-year lease with the uh adjoining property uh for hay and they've already taken care of a lot of things uh for the the price that you all the $15 per acre that we agreed upon. The 404 east prop second property really been no action taken on it. Um we had used it to to do the installs for the cameras for for the police cars. It needs to do some cleaning up before we put that on the market, but we'll work on that. New business. First on the agenda is Zealous Trash Services contract expires one October. Uh the current contract length is three years. Uh they are here. Yes. Um to discuss whatever um it is our recommendation that we continue with Zeal Trash Service and offer them an additional three-year extension. Any discussion? I have a question about the uh limb pickup. Was there one in July? Did I I didn't see one on the uh water bill.

It's charged every month. No, I'm talking about a pickup, right? A scheduled pickup. I thought we were doing it like every three months, a quarter. We I don't understand what you mean. You didn't see it on the water bill. It's usually posted on the water bill the date it's going to be done. Okay. Well, that's what it has been. January and April, March. No, we'll make sure it gets posted on that. It may have been knocked off because we needed room for something else. The very little stuff we put on that little card. Okay. So, is there a schedule then? Mhm. What is the schedule? I don't have in front of me, but it's every three months. Okay. Do you know it?

Okay. Come on up. It's the last week of January, April, July, and October. Okay. The last week. We start on Monday. We work our way through. I just didn't know it was the last week. Yeah. I just saw it on the water bill the two times and I didn't see it. Yes. The last couple times. Okay. Well, you don't get you don't have anything to do with the water bell. Okay. Motion kind question. Sure. Um, did I understand correctly, no rate increase? Correct. No rate increase. I'll set.

Okay. We have a motion to second to extend the U contract for another three years with Zealous Trash Service. Any further comment? Any public comment? You do a great job. Thank you. We try. We have a good a very good crew. You do. Thank you. with comments. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, Michelle. Michelle wants to tell us about a new program that she'd like to bring in in play. A lot of stuff. Um, this has been on the table for a while now. Radar screen.

Yeah. So, but I actually have a contact that they install. So they fix Burns Park and you know they actually do this for I think it's Friends of Disc Golf is what their name is Mr. Preston Cowan. Um and so we are looking to do potentially a a disc golf course start with nine holes. We have enough property for that. Um I've it's one of the things that public has come to me about. I mean, even just running to the store if with my whatever on and people know, hey, what about disc golf? So, it's been something that's been brought to my attention. Um, and of course, those are things we absolutely want to try to do for especially if the public wants it. So, this is something that's just on on the radar. Um, it it's not a huge um huge project. I wouldn't consider I mean, it's it's less than the mayor's spending. I think it was 5,000 for just the baskets and everything. Um that the only thing it didn't include was the concrete. They come and put everything in for free and um it's all included in that. So it's just something that I'm trying to work on and just wanted to get input on.

Where would this be? At the ballpark. So Okay. out of the way of soccer. So the back side of so we have the the two fields um and then the parking lot on the other side of that. So on the back side essentially of the concession stand following along where the tree line is. We'd clear out a little bit and um and put it in there. How many holes you going to have?

I think if we start with nine, the property itself can hold that. Um, if they can kind of get us another path as they're going and they help do layout and everything, um, I I can safely say nine for sure. If they can get some more in there, that'd be great. But safely nine for 5,000. Yep. Basically, this was a uh just a littleformational for all. Yeah. I know this is coming is what we're working on. um one of the budget next year. Yeah, that's just for the baskets, right?

Yes, the baskets and the TE's. Um another option is then sponsors. um kind of like any golf course does or you know I'm sure others have done it for disc golf too but sponsor a whole and and essentially we could not be out of pocket a whole lot if we could present something and get some sponsors to sponsor a whole or multiple multiple of them I don't they want any questions well thank Okay. Thank you.

Next on the agenda is ordinance 202516. Would you read the title, please? An ordinance establishing policy concerning providing city utilities to subdivisions outside the city limits award, declaring an emergency, and for other purposes. council, if you'll remember, state legislation did away with, and Representative Wooden's over there saying, did away with extra territorial jurisdiction by all cities. What this ordinance does is set how we um handle that going forward. Uh basically if a subdivision wants to come forward now, if they're if they're continuous with city limits, uh they're going to have to get annexed in before we will provide utilities. If they're not connected to the city and they still want our our utilities, they're going to have to sign a a letter of agreement on annexation and construction and build the roads and infrastructure and everything according to our standards in order to get utilities, city utilities. If they choose not to do that, we have the right not to provide city utilities to them. So, this um this sets the um the rules for that. And um I did ask for an emergency clause because I think we need to go forward. This is now in effect. As of August 5th, we have no more jurisdiction outside the city limits for planning or development. I'll open the floor for discussion.

So, all of these uh would be required to go through the planning commission and go through the whole process like any other subdivision in the city. More likely if one came forward it it might not go to the planning commission right at first has to come to us and and and go through the process but yeah it'll be a process to them through them to us. Yes. Yeah. Because the annexation will have to come through us anyway. Yes sir. So the ones that we're already providing service to they won't have to be grandfathered in. Oh yes sir.

Fortunately we didn't get caught up. Some cities get caught up with an issue where a preliminary plat was approved outside the city limits within the ETJ and now they want to have a final plaque like we did tonight. But they don't have the authority to approve a final plaque because they don't have authority out there anymore. So there is a big time legal dilemma right there. But any um public comment hearing none. Okay. I still have questions. Sure. Okay. So that's um water and sewer. Yes. Um and right now we just do water. No, we do sewer a lot of times on outside city limits too. Only if they ask for it or

it's been put in down on stage coach. All of that area down there all has a sewer from us. Okay. But they were within one mile. So eventually they would come contingent and be brought in. This puts a procedure ahead of if if well we don't have any authority out there unless we get this authority. Um will they be buying the uh wireless meters? Oh yes. Oh yeah. If if they agree to to build a subdivision to our standards, water, waste water. Yeah. That'll all be just money. Exactly.

Yes, sir. All the all the subdivision rules will come into effect when they don't get the utilities. Mhm. Just trying to figure out how to make some money off. Any more discussion? I entertain a motion to put ordinance number 2025 up for its first reading. Motion. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Any comments? Roll call, please. Council member Hall, yes. Council member Chapman, yes. Council member McMen, yes. Council member Hefner, yes. Council member Brook, yes.

And council member Rubble, yes. Orders 202516 is approved on first reading. Council, I'd entertain a motion to suspend the rules for second or third reading. Motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. We have a second. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Council entertain a motion to approve adopt ordinance number 202516. Motion. Second. A motion second. Roll call, please. Council member Chapman. Yes. Council member McMahon. Yes. Council member Hefner, yes. Council member Brook,

yes. Council member Rubble, yes. And Council Member Hall, yes. Orders 202516 is approved, adopted. I'd entertain a motion for an emergency clause, please. Motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. And we have a second. Roll call, please. Council member McMahon, yes. Council member Hefner, yes. Council member Brooke, no. Council member Rubble, yes. Council member Hall, yes. Council member Chapman,

yes. 5 to one, yes. Orders 202516 has been approved with the emergency clause. move effect immediately. Thank you, council. Next on the agenda is ordinance 202517. If you'll read the title, please.

An ordinance authorizing the Ward Fire Department to charge for fire responses and other emergency responses outside the city limits of Ward. Council, if you remember, we talked about this some time ago about our inability to raise fire dues. And I had an attorney general opinion that I requested and got back that stated that the cities of first class do not have the authority to uh do fire dues outside their city limits uh and stated a bunch of other ordinances or state laws that that basically do not allow it. Um this and I know this doesn't need to be pushed through tonight all the way. This needs to be the start of this. We need to develop a process as outlined in this ordinance to which we charge for fire calls outside our city limits uh within our fire district. We don't collect dues and state law allows us to do that. I'd open the floor for discussion. Early early on in discussing when you were introducing this, you said there was state laws that said we couldn't provide protection outside.

No, no, no. We we can provide protection outside uh the city limits. It's it's ability to uh collect fire dues. You know, forever we've been collecting $50 in voluntary fire dues. The question of fact, how do we what authority do we have to even ask for fire dues? And there is no authority for us to do that as a municipal uh fire department of a city of first class. Volunteer fire department, cnenc butler bill and all those are covered by law that they can do fire dues. Municipal fire departments that we are one we cannot.

So what's the authority that we have to collect if they don't pay? There is a law um 1453102 authorizes organized fire department uh of a city that combats and there's a definition for combats a fire beyond corporate limits to take reasonable efforts for 9 days to collect 100% of expendable resources and the city use respond and if you read in the ordinance further it talks about all the different fires we might encounter and what forms and sources of reimbursement such as the equipment the fire trucks and whatever will be FEMA rates because that's what we should be using and the volunteers are per whatever they're getting paid by ordinance and extended resources such as we had a truck fire and and chief can contest to this. We had a a truck fire in Black Oak that's not in the city limits and that we had to use five gallons of foam on that. We should have the ability to recoup that that those funds and we don't right now. Uh I did the math on that one. We've done some some trial billing on that and I think that was $300 some odd dollars uh that we could go against the insurance company, not the individual necessarily unless they don't have insurance. Same thing with um a house fire. Uh we'll go against their insurance company. They don't have insurance then we go against them. The caveat to this also is we can do this for 90 days and then we have to make decision where we're going to go collection action. something we work out with the city attorney whether we're going to do collection action for the full amount or there's a portion of the law that allows us to send a bill to the county and the county pays us but they only pay us up to a maximum of $200 that needs to be changed but please

another question who is who's on the payroll for this billing you know who's going to who's the who's going to be in charge of sending out all these bills and keeping up with who paid fire department will have to work that out internally whether it's it's they'll be initiated with the fire department to the reporting system and potentially they could be sending out the bills and and given a copy to the finance department who will track it or the finance department's going to send out invoices. That is what we'll have to work out at a later date. You had mentioned once about contacting the county judge about us getting on um some taxes, real estate taxes or

that's still in the process and if that comes through then this will go away. Uh but we got to get this process going. We have discussed there's and I've been in several discussions with the association of uh Arkansas Countyy's attorney about this very thing. Uh, and there are procedures that the county has to do in order to get us tax revenue. It could be is that they create a fire department or a a ward um volunteer fire district in the county, rename it, and contract with us to provide fire protection. And they collect the dues and pay us the dues that they collect. That's one possibility. The other possibility is they can do some things to uh put it on property tax, but that's something the county has to do. Um, and looking right now, we need to work on what we can do right now. And yes, if the county changes and able to either collect on on parcels or some other means, then we wouldn't do this.

I'm all about recouping cost and stuff. I just don't want to see this turn into a profit generator. Is there any way we can get a schedule of fees or possible fees?

Oh, sure. FEMA. I can send you a copy of the FEMA's for the vehicles and the u you know the the expendables the foam whatever the foam cost is right then I think I think the ordinance says current cost includes shipping and delivery charges and taxes. We're not trying to you know we're not doing a 10% search charge or anything like that. Uh we're, you know, the the vehicle charges are minimal in truth by FEMA rules. Same thing when we have a disaster and we get reimbursement, we have to use FEMA rules. It just makes sense to use the same rules for this kind of action. I agree with Rob except I I I recognize the cost of equipment is so astronomical, right?

You know, BB just bought a fire truck for 1.3 or something like that. I mean, it's just so much to cost. So, I understand that we need to do something. The biggest thing is we're not getting we're we're providing fire protection out in the county for free for free for the most part. Now, we do have some people who voluntarily send in their 50 bucks every year and that's about $6,000. Well, I did a I did a report on a house fire, trailer house fire, about $3,000 for that one fire. So, not that we're trying to make money, right?

We're trying to get paid for what the what we provide in the county that we don't Some in the county, someone at the corner court says, "Well, you get tax money." No, we don't get tax money in the county for fire service. We get city tax money and we provide. The other alternative all this, if we want to do this, is this body can say, "Okay, we're no longer fighting fires outside city limits unless it's a mutual aid agreement or an automatic aid agreement. We're not going to be primary response at all." What's that look like, Tony? As far as if you were to if we were just say that we're city limits only, what is that going to look like as far as call volume or

well it's in general? What's I mean what's that going to look like? What what dangers is you in your mind and opinion? What dangers and citizens isn't a good name, you know, but occupants of the fire district. What what is that going to look like if we cut it out? If you cut it out like he was talking about, um it's going to actually it'll make an impact because you have other fire departments that are taking on they'll have to take on more than what they already had. Um and they're all vi volunteer, right?

Well, yes. Yes, ma'am. And we're all too. And that that's that's the thing is and um but as far as like the mayor's saying something like that would be something we'd really have to call volumewise 90 I'd say 85% of our calls are in the city limits. Um but so but the thing with the other departments around are is they are not they're not city limit fire departments. They're they're township or they're just they just have a fire. So they they get fire dues from the county. Yes, sir. They get the tax Well, they also Yeah. Yeah. Another thing when and it seems

it seems to me that if we restrict it to the city limits until the county makes a decision kind of forces their hand to make the decision that they need to make. Yeah, we don't want to do that quite yet because that do they come into the city? Who is that? They uh area ones the other mutual aid. Yes, ma'am. Sure. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Yeah, if we call for them, they'll they come here automatically come, right? We've got an automatic and a mutual aid agreement. Um automatic is they automatically get paid out. Uh but we all have mutual aid agreements through well all county. Well and that could be I mean you could combat that with mutual automatic mutual aid from BB as well. They're a city city limit fire or cab.

Right. And we've responded to cabb to to man stations while they fight a big fire. Right. That happens. This um this ordinance like I said it's a It doesn't be fasttracked at all. We need to get it going though. Chief and we identify on the back. Uh I think what it is it's um doesn't take effect until uh January 1st. And any uh fire dues that are still on the books for 2026, we will refund those program. I'll make a motion to approve it on its first reading. But I'd like to look at

Sure. look at what it's what it would entail to have city department. Well, I would like to push the uh fire dues. And if they pay them, they're not charged. But if they don't pay them, then they're charged. We can't do fire dues. You can't do B not fired do. There's no way to get like volunteer. No money. No. Okay. I mean, people can volunteer and send money to fire. outside. Fire D was not in city limits. That's the point. But I'm talking about outside of city limits. They can't do fire during a volunteer fire department, right? We're not a volunteer fire department.

But on the other side of this coin is if we restrict it to the city only and you mutual aid to Butlerville, we're donating that money too that we go out there with. So, so we're not getting re not recouping any cost on mutual aid to any other surrounding departments.

Well, section four of the of the ordinance says fire and other emergency responses outside city limits as outlined in the automatic and mutual aid agreements will not be charged to anyone or anyone's insurance except if requested by the fire department in charge. they may want us to go ahead plus any initial response to the fire district in here that we're the initial because a department doesn't doesn't answer their call and the county or excuse me the dispatch in turn says ward you got to go out then we're going to charge so and even in their area

does anybody know what Cabbat does because they have all the Carrington and all that past the liquor stores and stuff which is obviously not in their city limits how do they how do they handle they just donate it Does anybody pretty much from what I understand they donate it? I mean that's that's like of a gray area between everybody over there. Um they really have a huge population. They they are their department does not sign automatic or mutual aid agreements with anybody in L County. So I mean they'll come if you ask them but they won't sign agreements. So

what's your thoughts? I I I really hadn't got any thoughts on this what we're actually discussing right now. Uh because well, I mean there's there's different ways that me and the mayor have discussed on trying to work this out and this is one of them of trying to do this, but we're we're just trying to recoup. I go 3831 junction for a fire and I take two engines out there and that's $60. They don't pay right. Understand?

You got the diesel and then you on top of that you've got the volunteers that we're paying uh per call. So I mean we're not we're not recouping anything when we leave outside the city limits. And that medical calls are is is another one. Medical calls is a different discussion for Yeah. Yeah. Well, I second the motion, but Chief, I had a quick question. Yes, sir. How far out does the fire district go? So, we cover 25 square miles out in the county. Give me a moment. Its up to Mountain Springs, right, Austin, Butlerville, and BB, right?

Yes, sir. Yeah. So we go to 3831 junction. Anything to the left hand side on 38 all the way out to 31. Anything left from 38 to White County line. And we go all the way out 319 all the way sunset. Sunset. Yeah. Almost. It's like three blocks from Mount Springs Fire Station. So we cover a pretty good size area. I say I can find it. Oh, there we are.

And you mentioned the insurance and I think that like most homeowners insurance if you aren't in an area you pay a higher rate for your home insurance for that type of coverage. So yeah, if you don't have a fire Yeah. Will that will that hurt our ISO rating if we restrict it to the city? If we restricted to the city, sir, I think it's not it's not going to hurt it. Uh right now we're considered a three and 3X, which a 3X is a nine out in the county. Uh any unless you're 1,000 ft from a fire hydrant out in the county, then you're considered a 3X. So

hang on to come up correctly.

Ah, there we are. Okay, let me do this. All right, there's the W fire department district and this if I superimpose the city limits on top of it. That's what we're talking about. And this Austin do what? We don't help Austin. We help. That doesn't have anything to do with any of the charges though. But

and I It's actually This is from a brief I gave y'all last year. Voluntary fire dues from 2019 was 9,000. announced down to an estimated as that time in 2024 7,800. Also, the problem is is when new subdivisions are built in the county, it adds addresses. We don't get notified. Mhm. So, we don't know. We wouldn't know to send a bill if we consider a bill.

Right. Well, I make a motion we put this on the first reading, but I'm going to be honest. I'm kind of leading towards restricting it to the city limits to let the county figure it out. Okay, I got a motion. Is that the right one? And couple seconds. Any further discussion? Any public comment? Hearing? None. Roll call, please. Council member Hefner? Yes. Council member Brook? No. Council member Rubble? Yes. Council member Hall? Yes. Council member Chapman.

Yes. And council member McMahon. Yes. Orders 20257 has been approved on its first reading. We'll excuse me. We'll move this forward to next month. Thanks, Chief. Next on the agenda is ordinance 202518. If you read title, please. An ordinance repealing and replacing ordinance uh 2022-02, an ordinance establishing a procedure for the purchasing, sale, or exchange of property in the city of Ward and for other purposes.

Council, I brought this to you a time or two about raising my authority to um spend. I'm bringing this to you separating from general funds and water and wastewater funds. Just a week or two ago, we had to had a special meeting to approve a pump that was $1,300. I only have a $10,000 spending authority. Took a minute to do that special meeting. Um pumps are not cheap anymore at all. Uh $10,000 is too low for the water wastewater side of house. the general side house you want to keep it 10,000 I got a problem with that the water wastewater we really need to raise this my opinion and I open the floor for discussion

how did you arrive at the 40 40 um 49 $42,000 that's that's state law on that that's that's if you look there's a blank in section two I didn't put I didn't put a mount in there the 42 two is the state limit now that we have to go out for bids. Any discussion? As a city council member, my sole job is money. So, I think we need to keep this as it is. And I do not mind doing special meetings. I think I've showed up for most of them.

I don't mind special meetings either. I'm just thinking that uh in event of a true emergency uh well anyway well in the event of a true emergency you would probably do it and ask for forgiveness later. True, but I'd rather have the authority to do it up front. Legislative audit gets a little testy when you uh do things out of the uh that you're not supposed to do emergency or otherwise. you can get by with it. But, uh, anyway, like I said, I didn't I didn't put an amount down there because I didn't know if you wanted to do anything or set an amount.

How much were you thinking? I was thinking 25,000 minimum. That gets most of the current pumps. Uh, some are much higher than that and it's would be out of out of the range anyway. I remember having a conversation with during a council meeting with Bruce saying that there was several we kept several pumps that were emergency pumps. Yeah, we still had them down on them too. Unfortunately, Bruce is not here.

I think I make a motion that we table this until Bruce is here and we could ask him more specific questions. Got a motion at table. A second. A motion to second at table. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. Any oppose? Opposed. Okay. Roll call, please. Council member Brook, no. Council member Rubble, no. Council member Hall, yes. Council member Chapman, yes. Council member McMahon, yes. Council member Hefner,

no. We have tie three. We're going to vote in affirmative table this the next month. All right. Next on the agenda is ordinance 202519. You read title, please. An ordinance repealing and replacing ordinance 2002-02 establishing a general penalty where no specific penalty is provided or where adopted by reference declaring an emergency and for other purposes

with the city. I figured you'd ask me this one. So, council, we have lots of ordinances that have their own penalties in those ordinances, such as no building permit. There's a fine stated in there. If you're warned for not having a building permit, and then you get a ticket for that, it's $100 or whatever it is. We have a lot of ordinances that don't have a fine amount in them, and they're not, more specifically, they're not entered in context or our criminal justice system. So, somebody I can't remember what was the most recent one that came up last month that that kind you tripped us into doing this.

Yes. Well, there was one several months ago that the girls in the clerk's office have been trying to get entered into context for over six months and we can't get it entered. And if it's not in there, we can't enter codes to properly issue a citation. In fact, we're getting close to being past our one-year limit to even charge this. I don't even remember what that one was either, but the most recent one was I can't remember what it was now,

but it didn't have it's an ordinance violation. We have an ordinance that the the alleged defendant is in violation of, but there's no penalty. And we have a lot of ordinances like that that don't have a specific penalty. So, this is a catchall that says if we have an ordinance violation, it's going to fall under this and it's going to be x number of dollars or whatever the whatever the council decides the penalty should be. But just a general catchall violation ordinance and we had one 2002 two 02 we had one. This cleans up that ordinance. There was some uh state law that was not correct site. I believe

there was one where a guy was installing water heaters, right? and uh rental properties with no plumbing permit and we didn't have a specific fine for that I believe is one of them. This is just a catch all. The state has has a fine for that already though. Say again. State has a fine for that already though. Yeah, but the state wasn't involved in my Right. We sent letters and there really was anything we could do. I think the UDO takes care of that particular type instance. Now they will,

but at the time we didn't have anything. Um, and I'm sorry. I wish I could remember the one that came up most recently. I don't know if it involved. Was it wasn't animals, was it? No, cuz we have animal. I don't know if I'd call if I can find it or not. I'm not objecting to the the premise. I think it's um I think it's something we need to do. I I do object to the the fee schedule. I think that's a little excessive for um minor violations uh within the city.

I take no position on the fee schedule. It's just a matter of getting something on the books. Whatever this council decides on that it's well and if you read it says shall not exceed. Yes. Yeah. The final penalty shall not exceed. Right. So the judge would have the ability to set the fine. Yeah. Up to and if you had an egregious Yeah. individual. That's up to the judge and that's not our So yeah. So that's this is not $1,000 for each fine. That's what I'm doing. I said no no no no no. This is shall not exceed. Hold my breath. So I got $1,000.

No sir. No sir. Now, there are some like for example the failure to vacate statute or ordinance rather is a $10 and every day is a new charge which we don't ever do that but technically if somebody fails to vacate after notice on a 10-day criminal which Arkansas is the only state in the country that still does criminal evictions which were ruled unconstitutional in Plaskkey and Perry counties but they hadn't been ruled unconstitutional in the other 73 counties. Uh but but nonetheless, if you had a rental property, you could come in and file an affidavit every single day and it' be a different charge every day. I don't like catchalls.

We have to have we have to have it. We have to have because context, which is the the computer system and program and and the uh court office mandated by the state, you got to have fines on all your ordinances. And this is the catchall for those that don't. So yeah, we have an ordinance with no fine. We might as well delete or repeal the ordinance. Well, 98% of our ordinances are covered by state law or state statute at some point. So why don't we mirror whatever the state statute is? Is there a fine in that state statute? Every state statute that's a criminal act has a fine registered to it if it's a misdemeanor,

right? But if it's a violation, it does not necessarily. It's up to the city to set that. But if it's a a criminal misdemeanor, then yeah, it's got class A, B, C, right? Unclassified. But like, do we have a Did we pass the noise ordinance? We did. Okay. That's not a state criminal statute. So, it would be a test to decide what the violation of that would be. I think we did.

Yeah. I think you just bring I'm council member Heer. I don't like the coverall. If we have an ordinance that don't have a fee, bring the ordinance back up and we'll put one on there. That way it'll be a set amount. Won't be a just a up to the judge type thing to do. It'll be a set amount just what it's going to be type thing. Just bring the ordinance back up. Heavens knows we have all these other ordinances that we vote on anyway. So I don't see why a few more is going to hurt. So it just be more of a hit mayor's time write them or you write them. Don't really matter who writes them. Get them up here. Let's go on.

But at the same time, if you put not to exceed $1,000, that kind of puts it on whoever our district judge is to say, you know, hundred bucks or 75 or 25 plus court cost, whatever. But I think $1,000 is a little excessive on a first defense like this ordinance is that whenever you want to, right? So, um I mean I'd probably be all right with starting at 250 on the first defense and up to the fourth you may get to a thousand. What if we did 250 just for question if we had an ordinance that that was higher than that and I don't know if we do or not which takes presidents

the ordinance that the ordinance that specifically has a yeah that specifically has a penalty punishment in it would would take this would only apply to ordinances that didn't have okay a line item penalty in them 10 years ago I had to pay $100 for a loose Well, I'd hate to have to pay a thousand. No, that's that's not the the minimum or the standard. That was I think the way this was written, not to a seed. So, judge could say $1. Yeah. You know, that's up to the judge. You can lower the maximum, right? To ensure that it doesn't go that high.

That's kind of what I'm getting at. I hate to see a, you know, m first offense being, you know, not to exceed $1,000. I think first fence should 250 and then step up the four spots from there. One thing that comes up on the court end a lot and I don't have uh anything to use as a tool is say you know a young kid comes in here or maybe a military member or service member whatever his first defense he's probation eligible and it's a speeding ticket. Say he's going 55 and a 35. Sometimes what we'll do is convert that to an ordinance violation, a civil penalty, civil penalty.

Then I just have to make up a price. It's not in context. It's that we probably I don't know if this way we should be doing it or not, but if I had a catchall ordinance, we can say we're going to convert that to an ordinance violation, you know, and it doesn't go on their driver's record. They're still probation eligible. Well, I'll make a motion to start first offense 250 and then step up from there with the fourth offense being not to exceed a thousand. I like a hundred better because it might be something like a loose dog. Again, the judge has the ability to to set higher ruins. Why are you putting it so low in I do not like leaving things up to a person they might have had a bad day. The judge. Yes. You think it's funny?

I do think it's funny because we're talking about a guy that can put you in jail for a year for for speeding down the highway. I second the motion. All right. All right. The motion was, if I'm not mistaken, Rob, was your motion 250? Tell me again. First offense not to exceed 250 and then you can step up to the fourth offense not to exceed a,000. So So what's the uh

So 250, 500, 750 or whatever. cuz I believe that if we're going to take the time to write all these ordinances that we got that we have every council meeting, there's got to be some kind of penalty to them. I'm try to look through an email to see if I can figure out what we were talking about to got this started.

I think it shows four and both of them not all all four of them say not to exceed $1,000. Steve was looking at it when I think the f the number one should say 250 for the first offense. Number two should say 500 for a second offense and uh number three should say 750 for a third offense and a th000 for the fourth and every sub that word past that. Yeah. Instead of saying a,000 to 4,000,000 for the fourth.

Yeah. Okay. Um, I'm going to strike. Well, okay. First of all, let's let's do this. We got we got a motion and we got a second on the table for these changes. All right. Everybody understand the changes? Okay. All those in favor of the changes say I. Any oppose? Oppose. Okay, we got five to one. Is that right?

Okay. Four to two. for the changes. Okay. I entertain a motion to put ordinance 202519 without an emergency clause with the changes that have been approved on its first reading. Motion second. We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. Council member Rubble. Yes. Council member Hall. Yes. Council member Chapman. Yes. Council member McMahon. Yes. Council member Hefner.

No. Council member Brook. No. Orders 202519 passes 4 to two on its first reading. We'll bring it up next month for a second reading. Thank you, council. Next on agenda is ordinance 202520. If you'll read the uh title, please. An ordinance adopting the unified development ordinance, the future land use map and the official zoning map for the city of Ward, Arkansas, amending the city of Ward municipal code for other purposes.

Council, this has been a long time in the making. This has been a three-year process. uh and we finally got through to this uh council or the uh staff has gone line by line. Planning commission has gone line by line. We've had uh public hearings uh for people to provide input to it. What I'd like to do is um open the floor for discussion here. Now I entertain a motion to put orders 2025. This is a this is a a three-month process. We don't need to fasttrack at all. Quick question. and what constitutes a minor procedural change.

Uh that'll be probably a a title or something like that and it' be up to the mayor and in working with the planning commission. Is there a reason that says without the council's approval? I mean

well if it's minor we don't need to bring back here. We had uh uh I think the uh police manual and a few others have the same language just administrative or of course it can say uh the concurrence of the planning commission and uh briefing of the council after the I'll make a motion. Uh I'd like to change section six to uh at least notify the council of any changes.

I'll second that. Okay. Okay. So, it'll read uh mayors are authorized to make minor change to the EDO with concurrence concurrence of the planning commission and briefing of the council after the fact. Okay. So, we have a motion and a second on the table for that change. All those in favor say I. Any oppose? All right. I got adding to that. So, we can back up a second. Okay.

So, do we need to put how many days we want when we want to be notified so it ain't like three months down the road. Oh, yeah. We changed that. So, after the fact at the at the next Okay. So, make a motion to modify. Motion to modify. Second. A motion to modify that last or uh change. You good? Are we are we modifying the motions that we just made? Okay. Okay. Stay with us. We're there.

All right. So, we have we have a motion on the table to modify the motion that we had previously. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Okay. Now, I'd entertain a motion to approve for it first reading a 202520. Motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. Okay. Roll call, please. Council member Hall, yes. Council member Chapman, yes. Council member McMon, yes. Council member Hefner, no. Council member Brooke, yes. Council member Rubble, yes. Okay.

Orders 202520 has been approved on its first reading. We'll bring it next month for a second reading. Next on the agenda is ordinance 202521. Read the title, please. An ordinance amending ordinance 2025-5 establishing parking rules for the city of Ward, Arkansas concerning vehicles exceeding one ton and semi-trailt type vehicles establishing penalties and for other purposes.

Council, this was brought to my attention. I've seen it too. A lot of cities, especially over in Oakland Grove, for whatever reason, a lot of u dump trucks and large commercial vehicles parked on the streets. Um, our current parking and regulations doesn't address this. So, I bring this to your attention uh for consideration. I have an issue.

Okay. So on the screen here it says vehicles it's seating one tons and semi-trailt type vehicles but in the ordinance it says one tons and greater and I don't know how long y'all lived in Arkansas but there's a lot of duly trucks that live in Ward Arkansas and well I mean my truck's a one ton so um it doesn't make sense for that one ton I mean it it needs to be exceeding eating a one ton in both areas. On the ordinance says it says one tons and greater one ton or heavier

or something to that effect. One ton doesn't need to be included in this because this is Arkansas people have one ton trucks. Wait, should it say heavier than one ton? greater than just probably just follow the uh the heading. Chris, what do you think? Yeah, just exceeding one ton. One ton. Yeah, I mean you can follow this heading here. Vehicles exceeding the one ton. Mhm. Cuz but the ordinance that was that we got in the packet Sure. was was different than what this heading is.

We can make it match the heading. Make that a motion to uh motion to change. Second. Okay. We have a motion to change the wording in the ordinance to match the heading. Make sure it says exceeding one ton. Is that correct? Yes. All those f say I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Entertain a motion to approve ordinance 202521 for its first reading. Motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. Okay. Roll call, please. Council member Chapman, yes. Council member McMahon, yes. Council member Hefner,

yes. Council member Brooke, yes. Council member Rubble, yes. And council member Hall. Yes. Okay. Ordinance 2025 21's been approved for his first reading. Well, and for next month, I want everybody to think about a time period for citizens such as

such as Jim Bob over here that's got cows just on the outside of the town here that's in the city limits. He went to the sail barn and sold cows last night. Didn't have time to get rid of his trailer, but he's got his trailer still hooked up to his one ton duly that falls under this deal. We need we need a time period on when it's like you know we can have it overnight or you know something but we are paying attention if it's consecutive overnights because I think that's what's happened a lot too is in neighborhoods.

Well we just need to come up with a time period for it. You know if the guy comes home he drives dump truck and he comes home for lunch stops by the house and get a bologn sandwich. We don't need somebody giving him a ticket because he got a dump truck parked there. Well, part of the problem is the dump trucks that are on our city streets are causing damage, too. I mean, I understand that as well. Yeah. A lot of it is not construction. They are parking in front of their house. But I mean, there's still there's got work on something there. All right. What is your suggestion for a time period? I would spitball 24 hours, I guess.

Okay. We'll work it in. bring it up next month. All right. Order 202522 is our next one. Retitle, please. Long agenda tonight.

An ordinance implementing the city of Ward policy on public access, declaring an emergency, repealing and replacing city of Ward resolution 2024-18, and for other purposes. council, we're experienc more and more first amendment auditors coming into uh our city hall. And while we have a resolution that outlined public area access all approved and we have things posted, one comment by one of the individual was it's not law so they can't enforce it. Other word it is a law. So changing this to a law gives us the ability. We had an first a uh a guy near the other day came into Bruce's office with his camera going and and doing whatever they do. And I asked him to leave because it says public, you know, limited access and you know you're not supposed to be in here. Well, first of all, he says the door is wide open and therefore he can go in, which is not true according to municipal attorneys. But second, he made a comment later on that there's no the sign doesn't have a law stating, so it's not it's not law. Well, he's correct. It was a resolution and resolutions are not law. This puts some teeth into this if we need to enforce something.

Well, there's already several state statutes that cover this. The first two that come to mind are criminal trespass because it is posted a restricted area which is covered under Arkansas law and there's also obstruction of governmental operations that specifically covers this because this is a government building. So I think this ordinance is really kind of redundant when we have state statute already in place and a resolution saying to post them in those areas. So whether it's posted on that sign or not, I mean I can say that that no posted sign on on Mr. Wooten's property over there doesn't have a line have a a law written on the bottom of it either, but it still doesn't give me authorization to go onto his property. Private property versus public property.

I mean, you're you're tomatoes and oranges on this. I mean, in response to that, the state has come out and said when it comes to first amendment auditors that you have to have a sign telling people where they can and cannot go, right? And we do have by resolution. and we do have but there's no penalty for that under state law. So the city by doing a resolution basically has a sign that says is it suggestion that you don't come in here. There's not a hard and fast the auditor was correct in this in this instance. So the attorney general has has suggested that the obstruction of governmental operation but he's not obstructing anything.

He is standing going past that sign that is obstruction. not obstructing anything. And under current resolutions, we can't remove him. We cannot. If there was ordinance, we could. Well, if he's not obstructing anything, why bother removing him? If he's on security of the water department records, is it an area that it's follow? It's like mayor's office, water department, those types of things where you have a little higher level of of security. This is He said he wasn't doing anything. He's in a public building not doing nothing. Yes. So the Supreme Court has ruled that just because it's public building doesn't mean you get to go anywhere you want. You can you can limit access to things. So you say he's not obstructing anything. He's not doing anything

in that instance. He's just standing there. So what is the issue? He can see records. He can see things that might be on Bruce's desk. How are you going to see records whenever they're put up behind closed doors or behind a window? Especially the water office. They're behind. In this issue, the door was open. Not in the water office. It wasn't. He went in the water office, too. It's open. It's unlocked. You can't see him in the water office. What? I filmed right there. Yeah, you can't. I went in there the other day and you can I can see what they're working on right there. What I'm getting at is I I get that's don't restrict him at all. You know what I mean? like

saying this has been going on for years and I've seen obstruction of governmental operations which falls under that exact statute by going past that line because you're obstructing governmental operations because they're telling you to leave after you passed it that this ordinance is redundant. This has been going on for years now and every jurisdiction around uses obstruction of governmental operations or criminal trespass because he passed that sign that specifically states that they're not supposed to be in there. I do know the municipal league advised not using that statue for first amendment auditors. Yeah. And like the attorney said to use it.

This isn't what I came up with, what the mayor come up with. This is what our municipal league attorneys came up with. We're just asking to turn I thought we were covered with what we already had and mun municipal league. We sent them the the information. Did we send the video? Right. Made it available. Yes. And they said you need to make this an ordinance. So that's who we pay insurance wise to tell us these things. Misdemeanor. Is there a fine on this one? Say again. It's a violation misdemeanor on conviction. So it was it goes back to the general I didn't write it so I don't know what what's in there.

The penalty is just a misdemeanor. It goes back whatever the judge deems appropriate according to the ordinance 202519 which hasn't passed either. So that's the general if it's deemed to be a misdemeanor that means it's covered by state law. I didn't write does it say misdemeanor? Yeah it does. Well, it'd be an ordinance violation. That would that wouldn't be that couldn't be a misdemeanor if it was an ordinance violation. Okay. Yeah. Any person in violation of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor because it's covered by state statute. Did misuse write that? No, I did. You're reviewing it.

Okay. I I would say you can't make it a misdemeanor if it's an ordinance violation. To be a misdemeanor, it's got to be a violation of a criminal statute in title five and it can't be trespassed because they can be in the building. But if they go past that sign, it's posted if it's posted as a law. Not there. But it's not posted as law. It's posted as a resolution. So he's right. It's a policy. Ward's not the first one to go through this policy, right?

And I'm pretty sure the other cities already have these ordinances. We just over here, just across the county line over here, we had this not too long ago when we dumped the fell on his head because he violated that state law and pushed past two officers to go into a room. He violated state law, criminal trespass and obstruction of governmental operations. It was governmental operations because he was in a government building and halted their progress through their daily activities by doing his first amendment audit. All of this is covered under state statute.

Different scenario, different situation. I'm not saying I mean I'm sure you're perfectly correct. This guy wasn't halting anything. Just standing there videotaping past a point where he wasn't supposed to be. And once again, that's why we referred to the municipal league to get their opinion. I didn't come up with this. I didn't say, "Hey, this is what we ought to do." The municipal league attorneys said, "This is what you need to do." I I think it just adds another tool in the toolbox. Mhm. In in this situation, gives you another option. That's my opinion.

He he that particular one didn't do this, but he threatened to do it when he went in the water office that he was just going to stay there till closing time. Yes, he did. Second time he No, but then he left. But you know that's arguably uncomfortable. Well, if he'd have stayed in the water office and we have a oneperson policy in the water, then nobody else come in there. Nobody else could come in. Can you not post the state law on these signs?

I don't know what state law there is that says you can't go past a sign in a government building. I I don't I don't personally please that would be that our judge would convict him of criminal trespass under that if he stand now if he was obstructing doing something like you're talking about then yeah I think you you have a right to uh charge obstruction of government operations also think that by putting the ordinance and putting the ordinance on number on the signs it puts more teeth into the to the sign itself. Take away the argument he used the other day, right? That he was correct about, right? He said is not codified, but if we're making this an ordinance that it it will be codified.

That's right. Well, you could change the sign to say the title five and see if that stops them. Well, I'd make a motion. Uh, first off, section three, we need to change that from misdemeanor. If it's just going by the ordinance,

we need to reward section three. Yep. And then after rewarding, I would make a motion to approve. I won't say, you know, I'm not saying that something doesn't have to be done. What I'm saying is we put ordinance after ordinance after ordinance after ordinance that's redundant by state law here all the time and is just at some point you know we have to refer back to what's already written instead of just repetitating we okay being repetitive

I think under the first minute auditors stuff that we've been getting information on we had to do local ordinances And I think it does definitely make a little difference. So let let's use uh Rob your example. Say we had a sign that said uh you can't come in here restricted access and you put the criminal trespass statute down there. And we had to get rough and arrest the guy. And of course it's all on film. He's been filming it and he's going to have body cam and whatnot. And he gets an attorney and they start bringing in First Amendment stuff because he was allowed to be in the building. He was allowed to film and he crossed this line. And the judge says, "I don't think this fits the statute for criminal trespassing, but it definitely would have fit the statute would have fit the ordinance violation if we said, hey, we have ordinance that says if you see a sign that says you can't go past this line in our building, then then there's a fine. It's a $100 or whatever." Just I I think it makes it more clear. I think the municipal league is is uh correct on this is this is a very specialized set of situations where people are doing this. They're coming in trying to get a ride.

Yeah. They're just agitating baiting somebody into making some crazy response and nobody wants to be on TV tossing some guy out of the water office, you know, getting physical with you. If this if this will make them not go in there, then I think it's worth it. mitigates the situation. Yeah. All right. We have a motion on the board to approve uh orders 202522 first reading with us u rewarding uh which we can bring back next month. Rewarding section three on a penalty. So I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second.

We have a second. Roll call, please. Council member McMen. Yes. Council member Hefner. No. Council member Brook. First reading. Yes. Council member Rubble. Yes. Council member Hall. Yes. And Council Member Chapman.

Yes. Okay. Orders number two 202522 is approved on its first reading and we'll bring it back next month for second reading with uh changes to section three. Next on the agenda is resolutions. Great title for resolution 202526. A resolution authorizing the mayor and/or city clerk of the city of Ward to enter into a contract to purchase one 2025 Dodge Durango police pursuit vehicle from Red River Dodge in Hebrew Springs, Arkansas.

Council, if you remember, we had a vehicle that was hit by a deer or a deer hit a vehicle, whichever. Uh that vehicle had been previously salvaged because of hail. Uh so it's it's not worth a lot as it is. We have an opportunity. We have the funds available to replace it with a new one. What vehicle being replaced to that? What chief? What year is that vehicle going on up? 2014, I think. No, that's not right.

First off, she read it as 25. It's actually a 26 mile. I haven't changed it yet. Yeah. I mean, uh, it's it's one of the old Ford patrol units. Uh, it's a 2015 and it's got a 120,000 miles on it and it didn't hit a deer. It was actually involved in a hit and run on a pursuit. My apologies. That's right. You're That's fine. We've had so many. It's hard to keep them straight. Had one hit the side of a vehicle, a deer. So, are all the other purchased ones that we've done this year? Are all of them on the road yet? I've got one that's just about finished being built and then answer your question. Yes,

we don't have a motion yet. So, I don't know if you want to go ahead and proceed with questions, but I do have a couple questions. Go ahead. I, you know, I'm I'm very supportive, chief, of you and the department. That's I mean that's uh I mean it's obviously that's who I am but I I do have some reservations about the build cost and I brought this to the last meeting and I I had uh today went through our last build and our last build was uh $7,500 for parts and $3,000 for installation which brings it almost 50% less than this one. Now, that does not include the radio system, which is uh going to be I don't know. It's a lot more expensive than our radio system would be.

I actually have not read this. I don't know what numbers put in there. Well, it's the same money we had last time. $20,000. I couldn't tell you. It's going to be a I can't reuse the cages or the console because it's a different type vehicle. Yeah, we just bought new ones and I we installed all new equipment with name brand products. Um, and so like I said, it's less than $11,000. So I don't, you know, and I I again, I'm supportive. I just don't I just feel like nine eight or $9,000 is a lot of money. Sure, it is. Yeah. And I'm not trying to question, you know, how you guys are doing it or what you're doing, but it there's um there's something not not

Well, that never could be changed. That's easy. Well, I and I have no problem putting this off if you want to and I will get you exact numbers of the equipment we're putting in now. Yeah. Uh light bars I'm not reusing cuz they're antiquated. Yeah. Um we're going to a new um control box system which actually controls everything in the car. Uh it allows us to after one hour it shuts everything down after one hour of inactivity. Right. Uh that helps keep me from having to buy batteries all the time. Yeah.

Um that system is expensive. Um you know, some of the lights I'll be able to reuse. Some I won't cuz they won't fit. Yeah. We used all new equipment on ours. It was all new buy. So the radio systems I'm not going to have to buy this time. Okay. I'll just pull them out of the wreck car and repurpose them. Yeah. Uh, you know, last quote I got on just one mobile radio was $6,000. Yeah, I was going to say that's that was the question I had because we didn't we didn't do that either. We didn't buy radio.

No. So, no. The he and I actually didn't talk about that part. We just used the old ordinance. No, it's not going to cost full 20 because I'm not going to have to buy a $6,000 radio. I've already got it in a wreck car. I'm going to pull it. Uh, that's the A- Winds, you know. I keep the high band system in there for backup. I'm going to reuse that one. So, there's quite a bit of savings. I won't have to get a new computer because I've already got one. So, no, it won't cost the full 20. What's your suggestion?

Uh, probably the price of the car, and I'm guessing about 9 to 10 by the time we buy the cages and the consoles and pay the installer. Okay. I'd make that motion and that I mean if that's what he's gonna ask for 10,000 I I would I I don't have a problem going to 11 if that's what you need. I mean it's just I didn't 20 is just excessive. I mean to me 20 was up to 20. I mean whatever that was that was the whole purpose up to I'm going to put a bunch of So is what do you want? It's your motion. Do you want to do 10 11? What are you going to do? Uh let's do more. I I'll do it over the intercom. Yeah. Let's go ahead and make make the motion to go to 11. Okay. So, and and approval of the resolution.

Yes. Okay. So, we got a motion to first of all motion to go to 11,000. Got a second for that. Second. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Okay. Now, now make a motion to approve resolution 202526. Yes, I make that motion. We have a motion to approve. We have a second. Second. We have a second. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. We'll move forward. Chief, thanks. When is the other one going to be on the street?

Uh, right now I'm waiting on We had an issue with the incar cameras and believe me, I'm not the computer expert, but they sent me 12 mm camera instead of a 4 mm. So, I'm having to wait on them to get me a 4 millimeter so we can get that finalized and make sure everything works. I'm hoping next two 3 weeks I'll have it here. So, do we have any officers that are sharing vehicles? No, I have spare car but it's getting a lot of miles on it. But no two traveling the other day together at

a new officer but um I just didn't want to see people having to slip seat cars. No, I don't not at all. I just don't want to have to fix that wreck one. Currently I have no spire because of this. All right. Thank you chief. Yes sir. All right. Resolution 202527. You read title please. A resolution setting term limits for the ward water advisory committee.

Council of your mayor. We set the ward water advisory committee based off of act 605 and in a motion several times ago and I think it says it in here. Uh we we set the uh limits. We never did it by resolution. This sets the limits uh term limits by name. Very simple. I entertain a motion to approve resolution 202527. I make a motion. A motion. Do we have a second? Second. All those in favor say I. Opposed. All approved. And those in the public, if I have brought something that I haven't asked you to speak on and you'd like to speak up.

We will. Yes, you will. All right. Resolution 202528. Title, please. A resolution reappointing Ward City Council member McMman to the Ward Water and Wastewater Advisory Committee and appointing same as chairman. Motion. Second. I got a question. Do you still want it? I don't care. I said if anyone else would like to take it, I'm fine with that. But if not, I'll I'm fine.

Okay. With the question, I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Next on the agenda is um resolution 202528. It says 29 28. Let me interject if that's okay. I' I'd like to say uh publicly I think we we need to say thank you for the the getting started. I mean we got started and so I that's the reason I feel like she needed to continue because she's just getting ground laid on it. So yeah, thank you. I can I say something during this time?

Yes. I feel like the only thing is about the committee and I think I speak for all of them is we kind of ran into a wall of like what exactly the committee is for. Um I think that initially we tried really hard to make sure that everyone that was a member of the committee was more educated on how the water department worked um how the bills were done, how things were split up, how to answer public questions. And then um from that point really our hands are kind of tied. there's not a whole lot um that we're kind of allowed to do is how I kind of feel. And um and the committee itself is literally just set up because of a a law. And so there's like you're talking about things having teeth in it. This has no teeth in it at all. So we're not meeting again until the fall. I feel like that we did some additional things because we were helping review and just looking at stuff and asking questions. And so I think it kind of spurred some things to happen within um admin and Courtney has done a great job of stepping up and helping do some of that stuff of things that we caught attention with. But other than that I I mean it's kind of one of those things which we found out too later we don't have to meet monthly. We had been meeting monthly. Um, and so yeah,

I'd like to say something is since we went to the radio read meters, I've not had to answer a single AG complaint from the water department on rates or billing or anything like that this entire fiscal year since since Janu since last year 2024. So that's a good thing.

I agree with you. I feel like too the only thing that the committee has been able to do is be like well we've got two right here. They're great about responding to people asking questions because they have more knowledge about it now. So, I mean, the only thing that I would even think about moving forward on the committee is if we could do some type of education classes, you know, maybe that's what we do is that we use it to educate the community and have some um public meetings where we could kind of share what we've learned and answer questions as layman instead of, you know, real technical answers because there were some things we were getting information back. I'm like, "Yeah, I don't know what that means." Um the man over there, he he knows all the water stuff. So I was just like, you want to take the spot because you know every everything about it. But

I think that the the communication was one of the most important aspects of that. I mean being able to say to the community, this is why we're still seeing it on Facebook obviously, but you're going to have your Facebook warriors, but I mean we're still seeing people continually complaining about the cost. So maybe more publication or something,

right? Well, to that end, um the state did not provide us any and refused to provide any guidance on this. Just set the committee up. That's it. So, we we wrote a uh a resolution on this, if you remember, outlining what their duties, responsibilities are, and they have done good things. They have opened our eyes on a few things, and uh we worked together with them, and uh it's a it's a it's a good committee. Um, but there she's right. There's not a whole lot of teeth as an advisory committee and the the law is very specific on that. It's an advisory committee has no authority whatsoever to make any changes. All right. Moving forward, uh, resolution 2025 29. Retitle, please.

A resolution reappointing Jack BS to the Ward Water Advisory Committee. Well, because we had a term limits, you know, Jack Bo's time was up and Jack has agreed to stay on. So, this resolution reappoints him to this advisory committee. With that, I'd entertain a motion to approve. Motion motion. We have a second. Second. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Next on agenda is motion a resolution 202530, a resolution authorizing the mayor or city clerk to apply for a fun park grant through the Arkansas Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism. There's the name of it. I make a motion. Okay. Second.

We have a motion, a second to approve resolution 202530. Uh, any comment? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Rocking along. President 202531 time a resolution authorizing the mayor or city clerk to move additional general funds to parks and recreation. We uh ran into a situation we needed some additional funds moved into this uh she gets $10,000 a month and so we u we need to move have moved actually $10,000 uh to into her account. We just need approval for it. What was that for? We ran there.

The month of July, we had I'm sorry. The month of July, we had three payrolls. And so it the way we space out her yearly annual transfer through months. It just it didn't timing was not right. So we needed to move some funds to make sure her payrolls were covered. You understand? Right. Next year we have three months of three. Yes, we do. So budget time we will be when we don't have pay insurance. Yes. Yes. It's true. So motion second. Any comment? All those in favor say I. I. Motion carries. Resolution 202532. Read title, please.

A resolution authorizing the use of a separate checking account for Arkansas Natural Resources Division grant fund. Council, as we progress through the uh the vacuum system rehab, uh we have approval for the $759,000 grant, excuse me, loan for an ANRD. We we don't we haven't formally accepted, but we have to create a we have to open up a checking account now for that, even though we may or may not be using that later. I'm completely against this loan.

Well, we're not there to say that yet. So, well, I'm going to say it cuz I'm we have the tanks and everything else that we're spending money on. I think that's vacuum system is a want and not a need because it's not creating any problem. So, I think it's time to do this. We're going to have that discussion when that time comes. Okay. I to continue on with this process. I need an authorization to open up a checking account.

When are we going to come to a final decision on that? Once we get bids in, when we get bids in to see what the total cost is going to be and what uh what a we can afford in house or b we need to uh get on the loan. We by law we can up to the day we close on that loan we can turn it down. So we have opportunity once we get the bids and find out what it's going to cost what we can pay on. ANRC will also determine if we do have to do any rate increases that time and that's what we'll talk about. When uh when are we going to put out for bids?

Lawn is working on it. We have sent out the easements. We had a lot of difficulty with department of health on getting this approved through them uh for what they're wanting to do. We've since uh a week or two ago sent out easement letters asking people to give us an easement on a map for us to do this project getting those back in. It's a process. It's a horrible process. What's the closing date on the loan? We don't have a closing date on the loan yet because we don't have

you know and we I think we're most of us are all in agreement on I you know I've done a little more looking into things. I I mean, I already see that we have close to $10 million in loans for the water department already. And obviously, this is why our bills are so high because we haven't we have so much debt. Um, and I just don't understand why we need to go ahead and proceed if we're not going to accept it. I mean, I don't think the council is in support of that. I think we need to proceed with the money that's available to us if we in the end determine that we need to use X amount from not the full amount but maybe at 200,000 or something and I'm just throwing a a figure in the wind that we may need to borrow from ANRC ANRD but we can't make that decision till we get all the facts.

Is there any statute or law requiring us to maintain a certain balance in regards to our funds? Don't there's a certain law requires a balance. We have to put X amount back every month into a um I can't remember the name. Depreciation fund. Thank you. So right now So right now with the depreciation fund and cash on hand, we have $5.7 million and we're looking to borrow $700,000. I don't I wouldn't do that in my house, but I don't.

Well, again, that's it. it's available to us. And when we get to that point where we make that decision, we'll look at, you know, now we're having to spend uh upwards of 400,000 on this tank project of which we've got an own or a grant app in right now to help pay for $200,000. But this is 792,000 over 20 years.

Well, yeah. Over 20 years plus the 500,000 grant that we got from ADC. I'm not understand why we if we're if nobody's in agreeance for this loan at this time, why we have to open a bank account for it is where what we're hung up on. Why we have to authorize a separate checking account for a loan that we don't know if we're going to take or not because we don't know if we're going to take it or any portion of it. But to continue with this process, this is what they need. Now, what you got to if you open the account, is there going to be a ser zero balance in it or I think we probably have to put $100 in just to open it up.

I just I I can't make sense of it. Why you have to have account open for for it before they'll tell you whether or not you I mean, I just none of this makes sense to me. So, if somebody's got a way to make it make sense, please. Well, ANRD's assumption is that we're going to take the loan, but we have the heard all my life what assume means, but I get that, but that's the way the process is. Well, I don't think we're planning on taking the loan. So, you just want to scrap the entire project. I just don't think that time is

how you going to pay for the project. We don't know exactly. When we get that point, we decide how much money you want to use from uh reserves. That's when we need to make that decision. So, you're saying it could it could exceed the $1.2 million for 52 houses to get taken off this thing? Good. Who knows anymore? Wow.

But this is something that's a want. It's not a need. Bruce has sat here multiple times and told us that it's functioning properly that we're just want to take this vacuum system off that we don't need to. So, I mean, I just I can't see borrowing any sum of money for a want when we already know we got over $400,000 that we're going to have to spend to replace to fix water tanks. It just doesn't make good financial sense in my mind. So, I don't know why we're why we would need a bank account with $100 in it to to move forward with borrowing $800,000. I'd like to make a comment.

Come on up. Don Waymax Citizen Award. I'd like to ask a question of all the council people here. Has any of you taken a tour of that U vacuum facility? Yes, I worked it. You worked it? What about the rest of you? Do you have one? Excuse I was my house was on one but no it's still on vacuum. I don't think so. I just grab it around. No, she's not on vacuum anymore. Okay. How many residences are on vacuum? This would take 52 houses and one apartment complex off.

So roughly 80 citizens for roughly $800,000 over 20 years. Do we know have we done environmental impact study on it? Have we talked to the Bruce about this? We're not required to do an environmental impact study by mean if it fails. If what fails? The vacuum station. Vacuum station. That's a humongous issue of that that pump. That's a $50,000 pump sitting out there and it's rock long. We've had to replace we we fact is we replace it with our spare. We don't have a spare right now because we're in the process of this. Why spend $50,000 on a on a pump that I may not need later on? Maybe you guys should take a tour of it. But there

elected officials $50,000 is a lot cheaper than 800,000. I know. I've taken a tour of it. I've seen it. The fire chief over they used to have to have a backhoe to get things in and out of it. He built a track. I'm not I'm just saying we should uh take a look at it. Maybe you should take a tour of it. I took a tour of it. How come elected officials can't take a tour of it? Taking it offline also is would be more efficient than what we're doing now. The vacuum system is antiquated and it was

it is antiquated. But I get your point though. I mean I understand I'm not being argumentative but maybe you should take a tour of educate yourselves a little more on on it and see. I'm just saying that I don't believe that the time is right for it. I just don't think everything's lining up with everything else that we got to spend. I don't see going in debt another $800,000 on a want. That's not a requirement right now. That if it does go down that we can fix it for $50,000 versus taking $800,000 out in a 20-year loan. And I think that we would also say, Mr. Wik, that um we already receiving a lot of grief about the cost of water in our city and sewage

and and thereby we're automatically we we already discussed it. It's going to probably have to it would have to increase to pay that debt. Yes. And I understand that for 50 52 houses, you know. And it's not so much whether or not to do it, but alone, Mike. We don't want the loan, right? I don't want any higher water bills either, but I'm just concerned if if it does go down, what are the repercussions of that? Severe. Does anybody remember what the percentage was the for the increase on that? Was it something like 18 or to 22% increase? I think it was 18%.

And that was just a suggestion. Again, we would and we've raised a rate since then already and they would have to do a rate study determine where we'd have to go depending how much we borrow. Mhm. Whether total or a lesser amount. I don't want a lot of debt either, but I, you know, we had a we in violation. We didn't have a license. You know, all I'm asking is, do we know the full repercussions if we don't do something? I mean, you got repercussions over 6,000 citizens and, you know, 7,900 and some change paying for Mhm.

for the ones that are on this vacuum system. I mean that I mean I ain't got to get a calculator out to tell you that that makes good sense at the end of the day that we're going to need the whole $759,000 but we might determine that we need some of it. I think the problem I think the issue is this. I'm not saying that they won't be taking off the vacuum time in the future. However, at this time right now, I don't think it's feasible for us to do so. And and even if we did, there's no reason we couldn't um if we had to come to the place where we have to do it, we could pay for that. I mean, we got over five million in account.

That's what I'm trying to say. I can't justify borrowing money, right? And I don't want higher water bills either, but I want y'all to clarify water bill versus sewer because that confuses everybody all the time because it's not our water, it's the sewer that we're talking about and it's all in the same bill. But that was one of the things that we discussed that really gets people fired up, but it's because they're they get separate bills at other locations. They get one for their sewer and one for their water. So, it confuses people. So, when you say that,

maybe we should have Bruce clarify it and get down in the weeds for everybody because I agree. I'm not saying I'm not for it. I'm just I just know I've been in my past experiences things get brushed over and you're not fully educated on it and then something happens and then you wind up having more money and find some bad publicity. I think the fear of the council though um Don to answer you is like we have gone at like everyone's complaint that we're in debt for all the sewer system that we have and that we built it

earlier than we needed it. And so that makes everybody and what Rob's pointing out is being fiscally responsible. And the same thing with chapter we've got, you know, money back that we don't want to take any more loans out because that kind of puts us we're just trapped then, right? And I'm glad you're watching the money because I don't like high I don't like high bills either, you know. I'm just saying be good to check it all out. Cross the tees and dot the eyes. Don't leave a stone unturned. You mentioned a 1.5 million possibly. How much money do we have available?

According to our finance report, we have 5.1 that includes depreciation funds, which this ought to be to me would be a depreciation. Mayor, the uh of course we got a $500,000 grant. Is there a time limit on that? No. uh through ADC, they've, you know, they stay on top of them and they've told them this this process takes a long time because all the hoops you have to jump jump through besides getting a checking account or not uh getting a Department of Health to approve your plans and the uh this checking account, is there a time limit on that? Does it have to be today or can we

They requested it. It is that's we maybe schedule a like Mr. way back saying a tour so everybody can take a look at it with you go out to the vacuum place anytime you want according to that new ordinance

um well you're city council members that's a different story that's a different story u you said that the just clarify you said that the wastewater was built sooner than it should have been or what did No, like when we when that was like the whole thing the new the system thei gosh the system that we have like the when we started doing all that some of that stuff happened like early like we knew it was coming but everyone felt like oh we spent all this money when we didn't have the people the everyone to support it.

Does that make sense? Because like you and I talked about this when we talked about loans like it's confusing because when people think again this is like layman terms when people think of loans and they think oh this is how much the loan payment is and now we've added more people on it. Oh the loan should go down. It should go down because more people are paying on it but everything is fixed on those rates. Right.

Um and I I feel like a lot the public doesn't understand that. Most people don't understand that. I didn't understand that. that didn't make sense to me. It felt like if our city is growing then more people are paying on this debt so everybody has a lower portion. So, um, knowing that, I'm like, we need to pay attention to when we get ourselves into these situations because we're all set on that. It's not going to decrease like you said over years. It's going to stay at that rate and stay high. That's all I meant by that.

A lot of discussion council. Um, and I think a lot of confusion. Um, I'd like to table this. I think easily I can table it for another month for this checking account, but I want to bring Bruce back to give us a better understanding of the need or want or desire to get rid of this vacuum system that uh we've been labored with for years. Does it work better now? Yeah, it works better because we took a lot of houses off previously with uh grants and things. So, it does work better now. So, I'd like to bring that back. How how much I mean I'm just thinking made no sense at all. Maybe if we've used grant money to take people take people off in the past, why couldn't we use the 500,000 to reduce what we have now? Oh, well because it wasn't provided for that. It's just like restricted funds. It was provided for this project.

And so if that project goes away, I can't use because I did ask that question about using that 500,000 to offset the pay the uh tank project and was told no that this was for this project. Use it for this project or you don't use it at all. Well, could you use it for the same project just at a reduced scope? No. No. Because it was it was it was uh uh applied for for this entire project. Was that applied for without a cost? I'm sorry. Was that applied was this grant applied for without a cost? How much was going to be to take

No, we had we had engineer estimates of $1.2 million. Okay. But you said you said bond is going out and getting estimates again. Well, they have to have a bid. I mean the estimates are one thing. Bid process is a whole different story. So is there a way that we can see what bids come in? Then maybe we'll have a better picture of what we need to do. That's exactly what I'm saying. Once the bids come in, then we'll sit down with our our monies and say, "Okay, we can take out just figures $500,000 out of our own money and borrow $200,000 from them if we don't want to drive our reserves down a little further." But if we think we can absorb the whole time thing, then we absorb the whole thing. But how long will it take for the bids to come in?

We didn't go out for bids yet. So, we don't need to set this checking count up or anything like that until the bids come in. I'm just telling you what ANRD ANRD asked for was a checking account to move funds into when it's appropriate. And again, we don't up till the day that we close, we if we decide to take all of it and then all of a sudden got a bunch of money or whatever we decide to not take it before we close, we don't have to take it. You're just wanting options. I think we should just wait till bids come in, then we'll have a better picture of what we need to do.

Well, we That's true. Well, for the whole picture. That's very true. The council, you want to table this checking account thing until next month? Make a motion we table till next month. All right. Have a second. Second. We have a second. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Okay. We'll bring Bruce in and others. I All right. Uh, last resolution for tonight. Resolution 202533. Hey, read title, please. A resolution authorizing the mayor and/or city clerk to enter into a contract with utility associates, Inc. for additional cameras for the police department.

Council, this is the same company and system and dubtales everything that we do with the body cam incar cam. This will be into the U back room, the breathalyzer room and interview room. Yes, this would just get rid of the system I've got that's starting to fail and put everything on the same recording and search system that the body cam and car cams are on. I think more to the point when building a case. This ties directly into everything. Yes, the cost is $39,684. I talked to them today. We'll figure out if we need to pay it up front or we can we can pay over 5year lease period. I have a question. Yes, ma'am.

The interview room and the breath analyzer, are they in the same room? Can they not be put in the same room? No, ma'am. Oh, okay. No, ma'am. So, just two rooms is what you're needing. How often are they used? I mean, I don't ever come to jail, so Well, hope you never do. The goal is they use them, but that's a secure location. You're not welcome. Well, the interview room is one of those locations you don't want to go into, but I mean, it's hard to say how often it's used. I'm just curious. It's not a matter of how we use it. It's the need to be there when we need it. You know, it's

I'm just curious. And this is an opportunity for me to ask questions once a month, maybe more, maybe once a week, just depending on what kind of cases come in. Uh the the for lack of a better term the BAC room, the blood alcohol content testing room. They used it last night. May not get another one to go in there for 3 weeks. Been times we've got three in one night. I We would hope we'd have none, but that's not going to happen. Well, you know, I'll give you anything. I just like to ask questions.

No, you're fine. I'm not just trying to answer your question the best I can. Um, yeah, it's not something you can just schedule. It just when it happens, it happens. Um, and actually the one I got last night, uh, Homeland Security put a detainer on it because his visa expired 3 years ago. So, Chief, I'm I'm very supportive of it. I think we need it. Um, did we check with did we we obviously we didn't get bids because it's under the amount but I mean do no we but we didn't get bids one for that but we've also got because it ties into current supplier so I make a motion or we don't need a motion. Yeah, we need a motion. It's a motion. There you go.

Motion to approve resolution 33 202533 and a second. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. All right. Thanks folks. Yes sir.

I have some additional information. I'm sorry, I should have had this earlier, but uh I was texting with the deputy clerk about the general ordinance violation issue, and she reminded me of what the the older one was. The most recent one was something about a subdivision, and that didn't really strike any bells with me, but the older one was a stop work order that we had a stop, we had put a stop work order on somebody that was doing some uh construction that was not permitted and didn't have a violation in that particular ordinance. I believe we brought that back to council like you suggested and did put it in, then sent it to Context. By the time Context got it entered where we could actually issue the citation and the fine, our one year to prosecute had passed. So therefore, we decided, boy, it sure would be a good idea if we just had a general thing in that we could get through context. And that way, if any of this ever came up again, we could fall back on the general ordinance violation until context approved our current one. and or

that may make a little more sense than or or until the council can add it to the existing ordinance. Yeah. And see that was only like a one month delay maybe, right? But getting in context took months. Every statute has a discretion to it. There's always a minimum or a maximum on every statute in a book.

All right. Next on the agenda is my mayor's report. Walk through very quickly. Starts for uh sidebar project. We're waiting on permission to bid. Uh we have all the easements we need, the rideways we need. We just need to get some utilities moved now. Some u um uh broadband stuff. Uh SARS 5 side project. We're still waiting for our not to approve the 90% drawing for scope. Six has been submitted. Don't know anything about it yet. The wastewater rehab, we've talked about that at nauseium tonight. Uh the tank rehab project will begin on or about September 15th. We are going to send out a mass mailing in the card form that we did on the uh notifications of the violation. We're going to send out a mass mailing to everybody tell them that this project's coming. Uh it will cause water pressures to go down and these are the tanks that be affected. We have very bold letters that it will not affect the tank, you know, the quality of the water. You can still cook on it, bathe in it, whole nine yards. Can we also add to that that a grant funded this completely?

No, because it hasn't been approved yet. Oh, yeah. That that grant has not been approved yet. Oh, I thought it had. No, sir.

No. Um, overlay of Milm Cross and Campbell starts on August 26th. Uh, street a project we still submitted. We be December before we hear about that. LED replacement project has been submitted. the ADA upgrade. There has been a grant put in for ADA acre to the uh this entrance here, the main entrance and the and the restrooms that you all approved. That's been put in. The HVAC update project we put in some time ago. Uh we did get a $489,000 project. Uh we did get $249,000 approved by the Arkansas Small Cities and Counties project. We're waiting on the energy office to approve the $200,000 to go with this. And if all said and done, if we get that, we'll only be out $30,000. So, we are working as best we can. Body uh vehicle cam is complete for the most part. There's been some issues, but uh flock camera live feeds. We're still waiting deployment in October. The EV and EV chargers when we did the bid opening on the EV vehicles, only one bid is a Ford F-150 for Red River Dodge for $57,000. and they tried to put a Mustang Mach E as an SUV.

It is it's not an SUV that would be work for us. So, I rejected those bids, but I have we can go out to individual dealers and and get bids and not go through the bidding process. We can wave it at the time. So, I'd like a motion to allow us to allow me to go to individual dealers and ask for quotes and bids. uh for two SUV type vehicles. Is this the purpose of this? That's do we have a need for electric vehicles and electric vehicle chargers? Um or is this a want? Sure, it's a want, but it's available. We get we get uh we have um uh grant money to go against this.

How much grant money? $10,000 each vehicle. Uh $7,500 for the uh Chargers. Okay. So, $10,000 per vehicle and they're $60,000 vehicles. Again, the calculator ain't working. I will tell you this, in my opinion, if we turn down money, we have possibility of looking the other way next time we ask for money. I mean, if you go to the Dollar General down here and they got tomatoes on sale for $2 a bunch and you buy 30 of them, have you saved any money? No, you didn't. So, $10,000 on 60,000 and you got to, you know, you got to spend another 50 to get to 10. It doesn't make much sense.

Yep. We decided we wanted this some time ago and that's why the council approved it. You're just asking for a motion to seek bids. Mhm. I'll make that motion. Have a motion to allow me to start seeking some bids individually from dealers. Do I have a second? Second. Is used allowed? No, actually it has to be new. And full electric can be hybrid. So a motion to second. All those in favor say I. Any opposed? Opposed. Roll call, please. Council member Hefner, no. Council member Brook, no. Council member Rubble, no.

Council member Hall, yes. Council member Chapman, yes. Council member Mcmitten, yes. 3 to three. I'll vote in affirmative to continue. The EV charges of this are still being evaluated. I did evaluate the blink in EV charging system for $6,600. It looks like a good deal. It did not include installation. So, we're going to have to look different on that one also, but I'll bring that back. That concludes my mayor's report tonight. Uh, we have a comment.

You're up. Please come state your name and uh where you live and what you want to talk to us about. We got basically basically three minutes. Okay.

Okay. Thank y'all. I'm John Yarro. Live on Weatherwood. Uh I just like to mention my wife has a property up in BB, but they don't have a I guess ordinance to move yard car uh a car that's parked in a yard. So her neighbor decided to just park her car next to her house that's not operable. and uh we're having just difficulty selling it. So, you know, with those facts, I just wrote down like, you know, you got reduced net worth, harder to secure, uh, second mortgage, um, refinance with no equity, financial losses when selling, the overall desiraability of the neighborhood, and then also you'll lose, uh, assess value, your loss in value in property taxes, which helps y'all to secure loans at a cheaper rate, what y'all are talking about, higher interest rate loans right now. So, I just like to make a statement on, you know, getting uh ordinance passed where you can't park your car in your front yard.

So, that's the bottom line is is that you want us to consider an ordinance banning parking in in in front yards. Yes. Pretty much. Is this a inoperable car or is that is that what you is that what I heard? Yeah. If it's a not in operation or a certain amount of days if it is in operation. Yeah. Oh, okay. Yeah, we have that already in place for Okay. Not part not specifically parking on a yard, but interoperable vehicles is is as an ordinance already. Okay. For that they can park in the front yard though. Yeah. Okay. I mean, we Yeah. discourage it, but Yeah. There's nothing that says we can't.

Okay. All right. We'll we'll staff that. Okay. We'll stamp that up and see. All right. Hi. So, I'm Mrs. Yarro. Okay.

So, just to add along to what he was saying to you guys, um I was hoping to address more the issue of the daily street parking on Weatherwood. It's really not a road design for that. There's really not spacing or lines for that. Um it's definitely I have observed and experienced some issues that has come along with that. Uh, for one, it's particularly difficult when that street parking is on both sides of the road. It's making it very difficult when you're trying to weave in and out, uh, especially during the morning when we're leaving to go to work and the evening when we're coming back and there's several people coming in and out of those driveways on Weatherwood. The houses are very close in proximity to each other. So, it's um, a lot of residents in there and people coming and going. Um, in particular, I was in a small collision on that road due to people's line of sight and difficulty in the tight quarters in there. Um, I'm particularly concerned about the children that we have playing on that road. It's making it difficult as a driver coming in and coming out to scan the yards and the sidewalks to see if there's pets, people, walkers, bikers, and particularly small children darting in and out in there. Uh, I'm also concerned about the emergency vehicles. I would be interested to see what the waste pickup couple had to say about if they run into trouble with that. I particularly had to wait one day leaving for work when the great people were doing a great job picking up our trash, but there was no room for maneuvering between street parking, waste pickup, and people coming and going. So, um um in particular, I would just like to see maybe some sort of code if there's not one already. If there is, maybe an enforcement if there's not, maybe establishing something. Uh I guess the hope is that people would just use their driveways. That's what they're there for. I mean,

is wood a curbed road? It is. It is. And I saw that ordinance that said if it's curbed that they could do it, but that's still not fixing the problem of that ordinance also suggest in that ordinance that people stagger their parking, which they don't always do. And in particular backing out when the person's on the street right behind me,

that's difficult. They have um brick mailboxes all along in there, which look nice, but they're tall and they make a big box and another obstacle in your vision. So, it's just kind of compounding issues down up and down that road with that. So, maybe we could maybe the council could think about that when you're thinking about the one tons and the different vehicles in particular. There is also street parked vehicles that don't even have a license plate on them. I know that there's one there for sure that I've seen when walking. So, I don't know, maybe someone would feel like picking that up and going in there and trying to clean that up for the safety and health of of the folks that live down there and also for our property values as my husband was talking to you about. It it kind of does look a little bit lowerass when people are just parked in the yards on the street and everywhere. So, but well, I thank you for listening to us.

Thank you for your time and our concerns for that. We appreciate it. Thank you. Can I make a council have any do you have any anything to add to tonight's meeting? All right. Yes. So, all these wants and stuff we got, I got a need I want to talk about. All right.

So, we just bought vehicles for the police department. We seem to be doing that quite a bit here lately, but not for a want, but for needs. But we got a fire chief that drive the vehicle that he drives. I don't know how in the world it's still running. You listen to him go down the road. It rattles like a like a old log wagon. He crosses railroad tracks over here sound like the front end's going to fall out from under it. Why have we not seen anything to replace the fire chief's vehicle? That vehicle that he is in is the one that Randy Staley had when he was the fire chief. No. No. Yes, it is. that Dodge truck.

We we got the fire chief a new vehicle some years ago and and he felt it better used by basically the squad to make initial responses. So he took the squad vehicle make it his own which is older vehicle on his own. Uh so but uh you know when a fire chief I mean I get that but when a fire chief uh comes to me and we'll talk about it we'll talk about it. That's more of a need than a want. Cool. All right. Anything else? There being no announcement on this uh announcements. Planning Commission August 25th. Our next city council meeting September 26th, excuse me, September 16th. And with that, I'd entertain a motion to

adjourn. A motion. Second. We are journ. Thank you very much, council. And it was a great meeting. Yes. I know. You're right.