Quorum Court - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. Welcome to the Washington County Cororum Court meeting for the January 2026. Uh I appreciate everybody being here. Welcome. Welcome to my colleagues. With that, we'd like to call the meeting to order and welcome you with a prayer and pledge. If you will stand with me. [clears throat] Dear heavenly father, we come to you tonight for your guidance and your hand upon us as we make decisions for Washington County. I want us to recognize that we are presented with many challenges as one of the more populous counties of in Arkansas and we need your guidance. We need your hands. Open our hearts. Open our ears. Let us make the right decisions even though they may be hard. And tonight I want to read from Matthew 7:es 13 and 14 when it says enter through the narrow gate for wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction and many enter through it but small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find it. Dear Lord help us find the and help us navigate the narrow gate not only for ourselves but most importantly for every citizen of Washington County. I ask these things in Jesus name. Amen. Amen.

Will you join me in the pledge? I pledge algiance 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. [clears throat] Thank you. And with that, we'll move on to the adoption of the agenda. Motions with regard to the agenda. Motion second. Justice. Thank you. Judge, I'd like to make a motion to adopt the agenda. I have a motion to adopt the agenda by Justice Seeki and a second by Justice Dean. All those in favor?

Those opposed. The agenda has been adopted. Are there any preliminary motions this evening? Justice Dean? Uh, thank you, judge. I'd like to make a motion that all ordinances and resolutions be read by title only. I have a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions by title only by Justice Dean. I believe I heard Justice Limmy. All for the second. All those in favor.

Those opposed. Ordinances and resolutions will be read by title only tonight. Next up is the citizens comment period. We have a 15minute public comment period with a limit of three minutes per person tonight. Come forward. Please state your name and where you live in Washington County and we'll share your views. Thank you. Sir, you're going to have to do me a favor and hit that button on the bottom right there on that microphone. Just you're live. Yes, sir.

All right. Thank you. Corn court. Name is David Vault, 4459 East Wyman Road. I'm here to report that I've listened to all the Christmas songs nowhere in any of the secular or religious songs I got to hear blasted over my treetops to ignore the law for Christmas. To shove aside code and rules you take an oath to uphold. The Steuart Family Christmas Lights Amusement Park is an LLC operated for profit in the middle of a peaceful neighborhood without a conditional use permit on an industrial scale. As a justice in Washington County, I implore you, if you have not read or understand the code of conditional use permits, go have a meeting with Sam, read the code, and then reread it. Not being highly in tune and aware of this code is like having a disease and not knowing anything about it. Conditional use permits and the lack of enforcements of CUP code on businesses operating inside the counties on peaceful hamlets in peaceful hamlets is a disease spreading across the county. It's not just my situation. Thousands of vehicles crowd in uh crowd in the dark and the whining Wyman road. They stop to observe the lights even before they ever disembark off the road. This is due to the horrendous interest in entrance and exits. It's here where the Steuart family business gives me the gift of not only fearing for my wife and I's safety, but now also every holiday I get the gift of fearing for my 16-year-old daughter will get into an accident or worse, lose her life just feet from her home on the holidays. This is why you need to know the code. You need to understand that even under the cloak of Jesus Christ's birth is a business operating illegally, endangering the majority for a gain of a

minority. When the time arrives for this board to vote, please pass ordinance that follows the code that holds the business to the code. The multiple LLC's operated at 4279 Wyman are not and will not ever comply with conditional use permitting. Thank you. I hope you all have a good night. I do want to say that I do leave early from these, but I do continue to watch. I have to get back to my family. So, I appreciate the YouTube posting. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Public comments.

Good afternoon. My name is Fred Gully and um as a member of Washington County, I'd like to take the time to speak in support of Gully Ranch. Um I appreciate you all for what you do and and serving as well as those of you who've taken the time to come out and see the property. Um the last time I was in front of you all, um I was really excited about this project and still am. I feel that it meets as well as exceeds the requirements for a CUP. Um the last time we were here um we happily complied and reduced the capacity by a third from 300 down to 200 and we still stand behind that. I hope each of you all received the letter that was shared with you stating that I will maintain the road in accordance to engineering standards that comply with local county regulations and rules. And I'm happy about that. And furthermore, from last time, as I continue to listen to public comment and want to try to be a good citizen of Washington County as well as a good neighbor, um, with good conscious honestly, I looked at the cabins and although that's not what we're discussing in the CUP and they met all requirements as far as the setbacks, in good faith and conscious, I can't allow for any of my friends, family, or guests to even be near. So, I have decided to move those and eat the cost that I've already done. So, the cabins will not be anywhere near any of my neighbors and I am complying to that as well. So, um I'm trying to do everything I can to meet the letter of the law. I also want to state since the last time no neighbor in my vicinity has reached out to myself or any of my party. There was one individual from the neighborhood and I don't know if she wants to be spoken to by name but she reached out to have a dialogue and we spent three hours at the public library and although we may have not agreed upon it I think we found we had a lot more in common than we had as differences and I learned a lot about genealogy and the history of black oak and is a very special community that I

look to be able to share with others in this event space. Um, additionally I have seen consultant on regenerative farming. So I have brought out an individual that has over 15 years in regenerative grazing. And when you're out at this venue, you'll be able to see actual cowboys on horses moving cattle because what I've learned and I've spent a good time is that if you rotate the uh animals on the on the actual uh landscape, you can have higher yield and is a much better crop for your animals. So, I'm really trying to dig into agriculture and this event venue is a way to bring people out so that we can educate them, so that we can teach them. And in addition, last time the Girl Scouts, they came up and brought they've already reached out and they're trying to find a time where they can come out to the property and we can work through ways in which we can educate them. So, I am extremely extremely excited about this project and I feel that it meets the conditions and I hope you all will see that as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Public comments.

Hello.

Hello. My name is Cameron Walker, citizen of Washington County. I'm from Fagville, born and raised. I've known Fred in Gully Ranch for a good while. Um, not here to talk about our relationship. It's not here to talk about the actual ranch part. Um, Fred came up with this idea, a dream that he had about going out and getting a horse ranch. He told me a crazy idea one day. We started building a farm over off his parents' property uh off of Weddington. Cool thing. We started getting into horses. Nothing new. Crazy idea from a good friend. You know, we end up we've been riding horses for four and a half, five years now, I'd say. Good. Wow. Me, we're both former athletes. I knew nothing about horses, but I can do a lot of stuff with it. But not only would Goie Ranch be great for, you know, the benefit of a lot of things to this community. Just think of giving someone a dream, a dream that they have for their self. You know, I see a lot of people up here. I respect y'all for being here. Thank you for coming out to see it. But you can see he's trying to fit the prophet for the book and the mold that he needs to. And for the neighbors, understand that change is different. Sometimes it hurts. Sometimes it looks different than that you do. But it's good for people who have the right heart to do things. So I hope that everybody makes a great decision on this, listens to what they have to say. I've personally walked over pretty [clears throat] much the whole land. I've seen the road built. I've walked the whole land. I promise you, I've built the trails with him that he's done. If anybody has anybody, you know, he knows anything about this property, I can tell you it's going to be beautiful. So, if you come and let this happen, it's going to be great to for the

community. My son loves going to Uncle Fred, you know. So, thank you.

Thank you, sir. Public comments. Hi, my name is Andrew Stargaze. I don't usually do stuff like this, so I'm a little nervous to be honest with you. Um, but I'm in here to in support of Gully Ranch. Uh, I'm born and raised Rogers, Arkansas. Um, I've lived in Rogers, Fateville, Springdale, Bella Vista. Uh, I I owned property out by the uh the airport, 10 acres for a few years. Um, one thing that is true about Northwest Arkansas is the beauty of the nature of Northwest Arkansas. Um, I've watched the population develop from, you know, at the Pinnacle Hills Mall was empty and just farm fields and now it's it's developed in what it has today. I've seen a lot of change and a lot of growth. And one thing that I've seen in this community is how much more more there is. Yes, there's more buildings, there's more people, but I see uh more diversity of culture, more more diversity of mind, more progress. And um this project specifically um is an opportunity for people who normally live in the city to experience the beauty of nature who may not have the ability to. Um by providing services like this provides people that ability. Um you know not everybody can afford to purchase such large tracks of land and own them outright. So to have some type of service or some type of opportunity to use that whether it's through um a wedding or through a camping site or whatever it may be interacting with nature and preserving it so that you can experience it while still living within the city of of of Northwest Arkansas as a whole. Um so yeah, I support the uh

this this opportunity. I I think he's followed every uh law whether it's local law or engineering to do it the correct way. I think he will continue to do that. Um yeah, so I'm just here to share my support. Thank you. Thanks, sir. Public comments.

Just a second. Yep, there you go. [clears throat] Yeah.

My name is Carrie Stalls. I live at 18563 Durham McCord. I um uh have friends and family that live on Black Oak Road. I travel Black Oak Road six days a week for work and church. Uh and I am concerned about the impact that the cup will have on our community. I'm concerned about the hazards that the increased traffic is going to pose to our farmers. Um there's agricultural equipment. We have a lot of bicyclists that travel this road every day and multiple times a week. I will pass um these two-lane roads. Yes, they've been repaved and I don't know if Mr. Goalie had anything to do with how quickly that was done this past year and it's appreciated. Um but the roads are still dangerous. There's a lot of curves. My husband and I just this week were coming around a curve and there's a bike of cyclists at dusk coming up a curve and very poor visibility. So, um that plus the livestock um wildlife that's out there. There's a lot of deer accidents and things like that. Um the cup is not compatible with the surrounding rural neighborhoods. There's a lot of single family farms uh and homes. Um, I also think that that this is going to infringe upon the neighbors rights to enjoy their quiet and in their own properties. Um, so there were and even this time there were several people who've noticed or have mentioned that um this Gully Ranch is a place where special needs children could come and uh encounter animals and horses. Mr. Gully can do that without this cup. he can do that with the property that he's got. He doesn't have to have this event center to be able to do that. So, I would like to encourage you to vote no.

Thank you. Public comments.

We should be close to the 15. So, I So, I move I think we have eight people still online. I move we extend the U by 24 [clears throat] minutes. I have a motion to extend by 24 minutes by Justice Lines. Do I have a second by Justice Washington? All those in favor? Those opposed? The totality will be 24 minutes. Now, sorry for that interruption, ma'am. Go ahead.

No worries. Thank you. Hello, my name is Raina and I am here in support of my friend's project at Gully Ranch. I believe it is a smart use of rural land that keeps the character of this land intact. It keeps the area feeling like what it is currently, which is rural, open, and agricultural. Most of the property is staying agricultural. Only a small place is being developed for this barn or event space. I know traffic is a concern, as we just heard, but this isn't daily use. It is occasional events. The traffic is predictable. The private drive currently meets county standards. And honestly, it's going to have less of an impact than if this were a subdivision, bringing permanent density and daily traffic. This project also supports local businesses and creates jobs without asking the county for new infrastructure. It generates tax revenue and it doesn't add a burden to our services. And from what I understand, the storm water, the erosion control, and the environmental protection have all been addressed. My friend has every permit already approved, septic, ATQ, all of it. So, he's done the work. This feels like exactly what a conditional use permit is for. Responsible development that fits the land and benefits the community without sprawling out. I support it and I hope you will, too. Thank you for listening.

Thank you. Public comments. Good evening. My name is Ka and I work in real estate locally. I'm supporting Goalie Ranch based on how the project is structured and how it fits the land. The majority of the property will remain agriculture and open like Reena say stated with only a small portion being developed. In my experience, the approach does more to preserve the rural character of Washington County than a residential subdivision would. From a traffic standpoint, this is a limited use project with planned activity rather than a daily congestion. The access meets county standards and the overall traffic again impacts appears significantly lower than what residential development typically brings. From a real estate perspective, I don't see this project having a negative impact on a surround on the surrounding property values. The quality and high-end nature of the proposed structures are an important factor and in my experience, well-designed projects like this only tend to complement the area. There is also an economic benefit. The project supports local vendors, creates jobs, and generates tax revenue without requiring new infrastructure or adding pressure to county services. Exactly like how Rena stated. For those reasons, I support approval of Gully Ranch. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Public comments.

Hello. Uh my name is Toya Gully. Um I live on Parkside Drive in Fyville and thank you all for the opportunity to speak today. Um I wanted to start by acknowledging that throughout this process there's been no shortage of opposition voices. They've been persistent and loud. Uh but volume alone is not evidence and repetition does not make something true. Every factual concern that has been raised, traffic, noise, land use, safety has already been reviewed, studied, and validated through the proper channels. this project was already unanimously approved because it met every requirement placed before it. Um what seems to be happening now is that fear and speculation are being amplified just because it's consistently being repeated. During the last meeting in December, uh one of the justices um shared that she was being bombarded with the claims from opposition that she um so much that she began to believe them until she went to the land herself. when she saw the property firsthand, she realized how inaccurate many of those claims were. Growth in this area is inevitable. We are in Walmart country. Um, so the question is not whether growth will happen, but how it will happen. Gully Ranch is not about overdevelopment, it's about preservation with purpose. This project maintains open space and protects the natural landscape. Instead of subdividing the land or selling it off, Fred is choosing to steward it thoughtfully and responsibly. Um, in our family, Fred's my brother, um, we were raised to believe that meeting the minimum is not enough. There's always an opportunity and a responsibility to do more. Fred has carried that mindset into every aspect of this project. He has not only met every rule and regulation required of him, he has demonstrated time and again a willingness to go above and beyond. This is Fred's home, his literal living

space, and he is choosing to open it to the community. Not to create noise pollution, not to increase traffic, not to disrupt neighbors, but to give back to the place that shaped him. The vision for Gully Ranch is rooted in connection and community benefit. So, I have just one request tonight. As you consider this condition use permanent permanent, I ask that you weigh the facts more heavily than the noise. Compliance has been demonstrated, safeguards are in place, and intentions have been made clear. And lastly, I just ask that you remember that just because one side is louder, it does not mean that they are right. Thank you for your time and your consideration. Thank you. Public comments.

Good evening. My name is Carolyn Brewer and I'm here to support the Gully Ranch. I um I've gone out to Gully Ranch. When my kids come here, they're city kids. They love to go out to Gully Ranch and see the horses. That's the only opportunity that they have because they live in the city and it's called Brick City. We go out to to uh Frag Gully's Ranch and it's peaceful and it's beautiful and I look forward to it. We're we're bringing out our church group for retreat in their new facility. And I have not seen a thug, nor have I seen a gang. But I have seen since I used to go out there. I don't go out there anymore because I've been intimidated by uh the thing that's flying in the air watching everything you do. People going up and down the side. I'm like, "Oh my god, is this where are we? Are we not in Fedville? Are we not in the land of the free, the land of opportunity? What's going on? He has all permits. He has done everything. Dotted all his eyes, crossed all his tees. He's done everything that everybody has asked of him. So, I'm here to support a dream. Please do not be a dream killer. I support the Gully Ranch. Thank you. Public comments.

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Shannon Hinton. I live at 10392 South Harris Road. I am across the street from the event center. Um, just two points I want to make. As I listen to everybody talk and those who are for the ranch, have you noticed that no one lives in the black oak community that is for the ranch, the ones who are against the ranch will are living in the community and will be highly affected by this. I am um remember I was at the last one and uh just the peace pond said well if it's if it's just for horses and ranch and girl scouts and nature and and that kind of thing well why do you need a licensed bartender can you not do the licensed bartending this is what this is the stuff and he said no he had to have a licensed bartender so I you know I don't think that's where the money to run this nature is going to come from it's going to come from the events that occur at the event center and I because I just don't think Girl Scouts need a bartender for some reason. The other thing is is I would like to point out that the people in this community did not know Fred Gooey when he was a child. I don't know him. I didn't even know he was a Razerback a long time ago. I did not realize this. All I can judge his character is how he has acted since he has come to our community. His character does not represent an upstanding citizen that's being represented here. He has he has sued my neighbor. He has called deputy sheriffs to come over and to drive around their circle driveway spying on them. And it's extremely

uncomfortable. And the only reason why this is happening is because of Fred Gooley. Now, before I've had, you know, issues if you try to call a deputy, it takes an hour and a half to get there. Now, there are deputies all over the place. They're parked at Black Oak Baptist Church. They're parked over there by the uh volunteer um fire department. They're just spotted all over the place. We never used to have that before. I wonder why that is. Thank you very much. Public comments.

Hello everyone. My name is Wendy Harrington. I think I know everybody here. Um it's good to see you again. I am just here to let everyone know I will be on the ballot um on March 3rd. And so get out there, meet your candidates. Um I have practiced here for 20 years. And in those 20 years, I've handled v virtually every type of case that the bench that I'm running for will cover. Um, I'm out giving people a name and a face so that you know somebody when you get to that ballot in March. Right now, I represent every single taxpayer in the state of Arkansas. I am fighting to get our taxes returned that were used for um, bribing politicians and I'm the only candidate that can tell you that that I already represent you. Um, I'm also tracking a cross country coach. Get out there, look me up on social media, look up my website, find out who I am, and whatever you do, vote in March. Love your vote. Thanks. public comments.

Thank you. I want to be respectful of your time. Um, Justice Pon, can you pass these to everybody for me?

Thank you. My name is Emily Rainwater. I live at 10480 South Harris Road. And I want to try to expedite this. That's why I want you to have this to look at while we're continuing our meeting. Quickly, I want to touch on the financial harm that I reiterated at our last meeting. All neighbors who voiced concerns about the project have been told that if we don't like it, we can just move. While the rate market continues to improve, we're not at the lowest point that we were during the time that 90% or more of our neighbors have lived on Black Oak or neighboring areas. Should they be forced to move, we're looking at rate increases between 2 and 3%, which would increase their monthly budget $1,000 or more. Next, the Gully Ranch CUP is written for a wedding venue, but the majority of those speaking in favor continue to reiterate the passion for Mr. Gully's heart to serve disabled children and youth organizations such as the Girl Scouts. I am urging you to please take into consideration the safety of these children in our community. Currently, there are eight level three high-risk registered sex offenders and 12 level two moderate risk registered sex offenders in proximity to this project. That map is outlined in the packet I've brought you today. Um, a few examples. There's currently one level three registered sex offender who lives 1.1 driving miles from the project and a level two sex offender.7 miles from the project. I say driving miles because if you look at that map I've provided, the wooded area is less than one walking mile distance. Now, I'm not a licensed attorney, but I was raised by a mother who owned and operated one of the biggest inhome childcare facilities in Washington County for 20 plus years. I sincerely hope that the board asks the following questions before considering any further movement with the CUP. Number one, are you advertising or intending to host children's camps like we've heard in previous meetings? Number two, if minors are the target market for your horse camps, venue usage for retreats, etc., What is the security plan, including check-in and checkout procedures, coordinating with the

sheriff, active shooter training, staffing, etc. Three, what's the expected law enforcement response for events involving minors? Four, what's the safety protocol for the accessible alcohol at the events that are scheduled in proximity to the events where minors are also on the schedule? And last, have you confirmed with the state whether any of the planned uses require the state childare licensing? Thank you so much. Thank you. Public comments.

My name is Scott Webb. Me and my wife is Trisha Webb. We live at 15750 East Black Oak Road. We also own the farm next to it, which is 15860 East Black Oak Road. We own approximately over half a mile on Black Oak Road from the top of the hill all the way down through the valley. Um, Black Oak Road, the landing borders Mr. Gully on both sides, east and west of his road, Mr. Gully's property and access the whole back of the north of my back of my property, too. So, I've get it on all corners. Uh, Mr. Gully's property is accessed on the back north. We built our dream home, built our property, and escaped from the city traffic, noise lights, and quality rural agriculture life. Growing our family, training our dogs, fishing, and maintaining the land under certain zoning rules. Those uses are protected for the past three or four years. Mr. abilities dream of being a cowboy and a horseman. We're completely compatible with the lifestyle and the provided a rural area way that we live within our community. We maintain the neighborly relationship. However, when the last year that all changed when working towards a wedding venue or event center or uh began, let's be clear, this hearing, this is this is nothing about the ranch. It's currently use is about deciding whether the use of the land should be permitted change via conditional use permit. This is bigger than the purpose of the event center and five rural uh rental units, primary wedding units. This is about repeating

vehicle traffic, lights, traveling noise, lights, and late night gatherings and increase activity that would destroy the rural place and peace that we sought after. At the last quar meeting, Mr. goalie made it really clear to the Black Oak community he was the he was not his first priority was us. Having 100 to 200 people leaving the wedding venue or event center after alcohol being served would be detrimental to the public safety and general welfare of the Black Oak community. Some say this dispute won't be that big of a deal. But in conditional use permit guar granted, there is nothing to limit the or being caused of to me and my family. Furthermore, granting a conditional use permit today would allow future owners to expand commercial use on the property if he decides to sell. decision you make to all commercial use on the land will stay that way forever.

That's your time. I appreciate it, sir. Public comments.

I'm Ken Sherman. Um, I turned 86 yesterday. I'm getting old and uh you might need to cut me a little slack here. I don't know. I'm a member of the Black Oak Gun Club. I'm retired. I go to club four or five days a week. I saw Mr. Go at his gate one day. Stopped to visit. He told me he seemed like a nice guy. I thought so. He told me he wanted to bring kids out to teach and ride horses. I thought it's a great idea. You can do that now. Don't need a condition. Used to do that. The issue before you is the devastating effect this wedding video will have on Scott Webb's family. Why concerns not only Black community but all residents of rural Washington County. This product is a half mile from Black Oak Road. It's only accessible by almost a quarter mile road through Scott Webb's property. It's only access. His property, his home property is merely south of the project site. He owns a property on both sides of the access road. Like most real Arcananda, Scott bought his property and built his dream home there to escape the site to escape the lights, noise, and traffic in the city to enjoy the real Ozark way of life. If you approve this project, this will no longer be their dream home, and they will not enjoy their real Ozark way of life. Saturday afternoon, instead of watching deer in their front yard, Scott and his family watch a wedding caravan. Dy vans and over 100 cars drive a gravel road by their house. Later that afternoon, same cars make a return trip by their house. You driven on gravel road, you know how they tire, pick up, gravel, and sling around the wheel wells. It's not a quiet trip. Saturday night still to enjoy the

solitude of Ozark night. They watch a wedding parade with vehicles more than half a mile by their house. Only now they have the noise and the lights of over 200 vehicles. After 10:00 at night, instead of peace and quiet, these re have leave the wedding venue again travelers grow about their house, celebrating the gr and groom, destroying the dream of peace and quiet that Scott dreamed he would have when he bought the property. You know the constitution United States the state of Arkansas says men have an inherent right of acquiring possessing protecting property and reputation of pursuing their own happiness. It also says that power is inherent to the people and that government this government is instituted for protection, security and benefit. When you accepted your office, you took an oath to support our constitution. If you approve this project, this wedding intrus would be repeat over countless weekends with thousands of cars.

Thank you, sir. That's your time. It's expired. I apologize. Public comments. [clears throat] Hello. My name is Louise Buchanan. I live in West Fork, Arkansas. formerly from Mina, Arkansas. I just retired after 50 years of service to Sweptco. And when I moved up here in 1992, 30 years ago, I put my six-month-old son in a daycare center in Fagatville. At the same time, the Gully family moved here from Ashdown and put who I call little Fred, Freddy, my other son, in that same daycare. So, those babies have known each other since they were six months old and they've been best friends for all these years. And I know this is a personal reference that we didn't normally even um take at SWEPCO because, you know, when you have a personal reference, it's going to be the good stuff. But Freddy is the good stuff. They've been best friends their whole lives. Even though Freddy went to school in Fagetville, Dylan went to school in West Fork. They spent nights with each other at each other's homes. We bought them the little electric jeeps that they would take to each other's homes and ride around in the yard racing with each other. They played soccer together. They played basketball together. Freddy was one of Dylan's groomsmen at his wedding a few years ago. And he loves Dylan's children, my grandchildren, as if they were his own. They've been to his farm. They call him Farmer Fred. and they named one of the horses. It's a family thing with us. Even though Freddy has had, yes, a successful career with basketball and with businesses, his dream was always to have a ranch. From the time he was a little boy, he came to my house dressed like a cowboy. He always wanted to be a

cowboy and have horses. That's always been his dream. A few years ago when he bought the property, he reached out to my daughter-in-law, my son's wife, who is a doctor of occupational therapy here in Northwest Arkansas to see if she would be interested in helping him with horse therapy for children because we know horse therapy is a good thing for for children who have different um issues. Um, I just want to say that yes, I know Freddy Gully. To say I know Freddy Gully is an understatement, but he had a dream his whole life. And I can tell you that he's always been a visionary. He's always cared about the underdog. And unless he was against him on the basketball court, then he might not have cared about him so much. but he cares about people and he wants to do something for this group. Um, and I can tell you that his everything he does he's meticulous about. Whether it's been his business, whether it's his horses, his farm, his own personal appearance.

Thank you, ma'am. That's time expired. And that public comment time has now expired for the 24 minutes extension. With that, we're going to move forward. Justice Koger. Yes. Thank you. I would like to suspend the rules to allow the three people who were in line time to speak. I need an exact time extension. It's not a matter. Three time three nine minutes. Nine minutes. I have a motion to extend public comment by 9 minutes. Second by Justice Evelyn Rio Stafford. All those in favor? Those opposed? We

have nine minutes. Hey guys, my name is Joanna Hudgins and I live at 15161 Black Oak Road. I'd like to offer a couple of reminders. First, we're not here to talk about Mr. Goalie operating a ranch. Many people have touched on this. The current zoning allow allows for agricultural purposes. The item being voted on here is the event space, the conditional use permit. I'm not sure if you've noticed, one lady already said it, but most of the people in favor of the project will not be impacted daily by the event space. They don't live in Black Oak Community. They live elsewhere. The second thing that I'd like to remind you of is that approving the conditional use permit appeases one member of the Black Oak community, but it's also a vote viol violating the zoning protections of the majority of the community. A lady asked you earlier to not be a dream killer. Well, I have good news. You don't have to be a dream killer. No one mentioned or voting no allows Mr. Gully to continue his dream of operating a cattle or a horse ranch. No one has said his dream was to own a wedding venue. That's the question that's being voted upon. However, if you vote to approve the conditional use per permit, the dreams of many within the community whose dream it is to live in a rural community will be killed. So, as an elected official, it is your duty to uphold the protections of the majority of those impacted by the vote. And today, the majority of those that live in the community are asking you to vote no to the conditional use permit. Thank you.

Thank you. Public comments.

Hi, I'm Andrea Grigg. I've never spoke publicly and I don't want to now. Um, I've never I met Fred tonight. I'm born and raised in FA or born in Favville, raised in South Arkansas and I've been back for 20 years. I found out about this project on are we dating the same guy Facebook because Fred's neighbor was digging up dirt on him and she straight up said, "I'm his neighbor and I don't agree with what he's doing." this has turned into a witch hunt. The portion of his land that will be an event center versus the to overall total portion of his land is a very small percentage. I've asked the neighbors multiple times on social media what negative effects the other event centers in Northwest Arkansas have on their local their uh community, their neighbors. What are the negative effects that currently currently cause problems for the event centers we have? Nobody's answered that. They're just against it. They're digging up dirt. They're going to every Facebook page they can and running his dame through the mud. I've yet to hear him sling mud at any of these people one time. And I that's all I have to say. I just think it's become a witch hunt and it's really gross.

Thank you. Public comments.

Okay. My name is Tammy Michelle Perry and I'm reading this letter on behalf of Tommy Davis who submitted this letter to the Coron. Good afternoon, court, county officials. My name is Tommy Davis and I'm a resident of Washington County. I'm writing in support of a fair objective and review of the appeal of Mr. Gully's conditional use permit. I understand the challenges that you are facing make in making a highly charged and complicated decision. Property rights and land use decisions should be evaluated based on the applicable law, the evidence presented, and the specific proposal before the quorum court. I want to raise a concern about some of the opposition comments respectfully. While I do not believe they were intentionally discriminatory, several remarks relied on generalized fears or assumptions about people rather than identifiable codebased impacts of the development itself. When decisions are influ influenced by speculation or subjective concerns about the who might use a property rather than what the project actually allows under the law, it risk unequal treatment and undermines confidence in a neutral process. I respectfully ask you JPS to focus on whether the the development complies with the governing standards and to apply those standards consistently to all property owners. that consistency is essential to fairness and the integrity of this proceeding. I appreciate your willingness to consider my thoughts related to this request. Best regards on on behalf of her absence, Tommy Davis. Thank you.

Thank you. Public comments.

Hi, I'm Rebecca Cider, 10923 South White House Road. Um, I just wanted to see I'm I'm probably going to need about 10 minutes. What anybody um support me in that? No. Okay. Um, five minutes. You have three and the timer's running. Okay. Okay. Um, well,

I have a I have a guys, we're in the middle of what's legally a p legal proceeding and I have a real problem with people handing things out to these justices at the meeting. You know what I So I I I I this is up to you ladies and gentlemen here but these materials that are getting handed out planning has not seen the you I mean you guys are accepting information now that's way outside of this process. Justice Dennis.

Thank you, Judge. And yes, we're way out of way out of bounds on this. And the reason being, if you read your agenda, we're in the first part of the agenda after citizen comments of 15 minutes. Those those comments are for the other people that have to come in and discuss or say something other than just one thing that's going on. And so the time for the review of the uh an ordinance ratifying a conditional use permit for the Gully Ranch is item number nine. And so we're on item number five. And when you're supposed to discuss this is on item number nine, not now. They've been very kindly to everybody allowing you to have a whole lot more minutes, but we're going to turn around and give you more minutes here in a few minutes. So, let us do our work and let the people who are here for the county come and report about the hot check. If you can read it out there, the hot check that's that attorney is sitting here waiting for y'all to finish your personal comments.

Okay. About the Gully Ranch, which is going to come up in a few minutes. Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't understand that we would have another time to talk. So, I won't Let's Let's Yeah, let's try to move on. We have 2 minutes and 18 seconds left. and I'd rather do it. I'd rather do it in the time that's appropriate. So, if y'all just hold on to those folders, I'll get back to you. That's if when they move the ordinance, there'll be another public comment period. I want everybody to be comfortable with that. Thank you. Okay, just a second. Here you go, Justice.

Thank you for your indulgence, Judge Dickens. Point of clarification, if I can have one. All presentations from opposition to Gully Ranch and in favor of Gully Ranch have been made and therefore no other presentations are going to be made. Am I correct on that or are additional presentations going to be made on the second reading?

So I want to clarify that I operate under your rules as chair. I do my best. I consider the presentations made during the CUP appeal process that happened at the last meeting. I find it problematic to take on new information, but counselor probably has a much more a much better handle on that because ladies and gentlemen, we understand that if these get contentious, we end up in court. And so what I really worry about and I'll let counselor is now we have one side presenting information that the other side has never seen. And I we're not a court of law, but please counselor please comment on this. And if I can say we haven't had the opportunity to look at it or Miss Cassie, thank you.

So under state law, you've elected to sit as an administrative appeal from the planning board. And when you did so and you created the corn court created its rules, it basically said that it would sit and hear just as the planning board hears. The only difference is when it comes to an ordinance, you have to have three separate readings. The planning board can hear something one night, vote, and then it's done with the planning board. But when we get to the ordinance part of it, this body, because it's a legislative act, has to hear it three times under under state law. As far as the appeal is concerned, you should only hear that one time because you are mimicking what it is that the planning board is doing. So once those presentations are made and we have rules about what can be submitted and people can submit things, but they have to be submitted for that appeal and for those appeal presentations. They can then be submitted to you afterwards. uh people can send stuff to you, but as far as presentations are concerned, it needs to be limited to the actual appeal presentations that are made. We have moved on from that. And so my advice to you would be not to allow any more presentations on this and then just move forward with the legislative uh part of the ordinance.

Thank you. Thank you, counselor. That helped. I'm already ready to move on. Is that correct? We're going to move on. Item number six is approval of the minutes. You had two sets of minutes in your packet. Uh the regular quorum court meeting from December 18th and the special quorum court meeting from December 22nd. Are there any corrections to the minutes? Seeing none, I will entertain a motion to accept the minutes. I have a motion to accept the minutes by Justice Eki. I heard second by Justice Dennis. All those in favor?

Those opposed? The minutes have been accepted. With that, we're going to move on to item number seven, which is the county judges report. Uh, first off, I want to thank the staff. The Washington County Extension Office rotates their clubs and they bring us refreshments each meeting tonight. And tonight was provided by the Butterfield Extension Homemakers. Thank you very much to the Washington County Extension Office for everything you do and specifically to the Butterfield Extension Homemakers tonight uh for all that you've provided. Um, what I also say is uh the sausage balls garnered extra um compliments this evening. [laughter] So, if you want to make these people happy, sausage balls, this is the key to their heart, [laughter] right? Um, the disposal report is in your packet. Very, uh, a couple different ones. We've started doing those actual court orders. If you have any questions about that, please reach out to my office or the associated department that disposed of it. Um, under state law, I am obligated to tell you nor I would also tell you anyways that we received the completed 2023 audit of Washington County from the state legis legislative audit. Um, I'm required to notify you of that. You were each as members of the Washington County quorum court sent a physical packet uh through the mail and so you should have those to review. If you have any questions about that, please let us know or reach out. Uh I want to go over a little bit about little bit of a controversy over the last couple weeks about the burn ban. Uh I want to let everyone know what goes into that. While that is a very inconvenient decision that we have to make as the county, what I want you to know is that's a very easy decision for me to make with the information that's provided to me by Director John Luther and the Department of Emergency Management. We work very closely with um close allies in that US Forestry, the National Weather Service in Tulsa, and then also all of our rural firefighters across the county. And what I want to say is the county gets no benefit from instituting a burn ban other than safety. That's the only thing

that we consider. And so, um, we have not received the prec precipitation that we should have over the last few weeks. And so, until further notice, the burn ban will stand. I just wanted you to know that we review that daily. I review it with the team with their scientific data. and we will remove that as fast as we can. Um the silver lining in that weather is the drier and warmer weathers that our road department has been out doing some tree trimming and some um fall maintenance that's extended on into the winter. And so a little bit of a silver lining there. I want to share that I had the chance to go last Saturday to the Marian chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution here in Washington County to discuss our historical courthouse and some of the events we have there. I just want to highlight those women and the incredible work that they do and then also that they are um very dedicated to the history of this county and also have a special um heart for the World War I memorial mural in our historic courthouse. And uh we got to talk about that and celebrate that mural's history. If you have not seen that mural or their historic courthouse, I'd welcome you to tour through that building and look through it. It's a beautiful building u and one of our great great assets here. I've had the chance to speak to two teen leadership classes this week um from our different cities all around the county and what I'd say is what a great um opportunity for our youth to learn about civics and our government. I appreciate the chambers of commerce for putting that on and of course always appreciate the young men and women um the talented young men and women who are coming through the school systems here in Washington County and all their dedication. I also had the chance to um meet with uh Mayor Hutchkins in Lincoln and his chief of staff, Justin Harin Hopper, the other day and tour the new Lincoln community building. I'm a little bit behind on that. That building's been uh presented to the public of Lincoln for a few months now. What a great asset to the city of Lincoln. Hats off to Mayor Hutchkins and his team for really bringing that community together uh and restoring a building. I mean, rebuilding

a building, but as much as they can, keeping the historic nature of it. The front entrance is the original flag stone. They reused it. It's just a beautiful building and I I uh I suggest you go by and look at it in the city of Lincoln. Many of our cities, all of our growing cities around the county have some very exciting things going on. Uh I would like to say also that the county courouses, just a little PSA, will be closed Monday in the observance of the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. Um so we will not be here. Um, also finally, um, we have an item tonight, uh, a resolution to support our agricultural producers in Washington County. I'd like I'd love to see maybe a unanimous vote on that to show support to those men and women who are suffering so much. Um, I did not have the opportunity to go um to spend the evening with you here this evening, but today there was a meeting in Westville, Oklahoma. Um, I believe the attorney general of Oklahoma, who seems to be the problematic pawn in this so far, uh, was there. I was so disappointed not to be able to go to that meeting that my responsibilities carried me here. But I cannot wait to hear an update from our producers if anything material came out of that meeting. But I think we can make a strong statement in support of them uh tonight. Really quickly, Councelor Lester would like to make a comment about the O'Brien readymix appeal. Councelor Lester.

So there were some questions asked and I want to clarify for all of you. the O'Brien ready mix, as you know, you you tabled or you postponed until this meeting. However, immediately following that meeting, maybe even that night or the next morning, I was notified by the attorneys for both sides. And both attorneys had conflicts with tonight's meeting time. And so, as such, I've gotten with them and tried to figure out a time that is uh agreeable to both parties so that everybody that needs to be there can be there. Um, I apologize. I think I sent this out in an email to you. If you all want to handle this differently in the future, let us know. But we just try to make we try to make this as convenient for for everyone without having to wait until a cornort meeting comes up for you to make a decision. And so as such, um, we have we and we have there's a time constraint on this because we have to send notices out to notify the people that are are in that required notification area. So much time before the meeting. Uh the date that everyone came back and agreed on would be the most beneficial of of many dates that I sent out. The first agreeable date was February the 12th. And so we went ahead with that date. And I saw an email from Director Atta because this isn't on my calendar, but that happens to be the next planning board meeting. It was not intentional. Um I I don't I don't keep up with the planning board calendar and I didn't consult with them. I was just trying to help attorneys find dates. I know how that is. So that hearing will will occur after immediately following the planning board hearing or planning board meeting that happens on February the 12th. And so I think what we need here now to officially do that is uh someone to make a motion to postpone that to the fe to February 12th following the planning board meeting. Uh the notices are already in process of going out. So all of that is fine, but that just gets us procedurally where we need to be in order to do that.

Just a sec. Thank you, Judge. Since I'm the one who made the motion to table it, I'd like to make a motion that we move the appeal hearing of the O'Brien readym mix to February 12th. Second after the planning board meeting. I have a motion to move to February 12th immediately following the planning board meeting by Justice Seeki, a second by Justice Pawn. All those in favor? Those opposed?

Justice Koger. Well, I wanted to comment on that, but uh the reason I wrote that letter about O'Brien, Mr. Lester, and everyone is because this court voted for it to be on this date, and no one has the authority to remove it. Only the court can do that. And so, you said to let you know if we had problems with it or something. And I just want you to know, that's why I objected because I didn't I thought anything once we said it as a as a legislative body, it should be on the agenda. And that was a that was an oversight with the preparation of the agenda leaving that off. I think Mr. Allen knew that we had immediately started talking about the fact that we weren't going to be able to do it. And so in in his thought process and and we just didn't catch that we didn't put it on here. We also didn't want to confuse people and have a bunch of people show up just to let them know that we're moving. But I understand that was that was not intentional. It was an oversight. Um and so that and and then that's it. Justice Lenn

just a quick question. Can we move county services that same night? Okay. Thank you. Without further ado, by state statute, I believe we're required um to hear an update on the hot check fee account. And uh tonight we have the honor of having prosecuting attorney Brandon Carter here with us. PA Carter.

Judge Justice. As I sat there in the audience, I found myself, I guess, disappointed that everybody here wasn't here to hear the hot check report. So, um, I'm required by under Arkansas law annually to update the quorum court on the status of the prosecuting attorney's hot check fund. I am here to report to you that there are still an extreme minority of people among us that write checks. Um, at the beginning of last year, uh, at the end of 2024 rather, uh, the balance was $13,7441. Uh in 2025, the prosecutor's office took in just a little over $5,000 in hot check fees. That's down a couple of thousand dollar as I predicted from the previous year. Um that totals uh about $19,000. Uh the expenditures this last year, uh the bulk of it was $7,47127. That's in utilities. That's all cell phones. If you'll recall, I transferred a good deal of money to the county general fund to pay for our cell phones and we moved those to the county budget. Uh the travel expenses are for our hot check coordinator to go to the annual training. That was about $1,700. Uh office supplies are almost entirely the software uh that we run our hot check program off of and um the checks we write back to the vendors when we collect their checks and the stationary and the envelopes we send it in. Uh so our total expenses this year were $11,353 leaving us with a balance of $7,54824. I'm required as well to present you with a budget for this calendar year 2026. Uh that's on the second page of your packet. Um we have we have projected about $2,000 in revenue this year. That's probably below. We we generally estimate low. Um I believe it'll be lower than this year if you follow uh trends. Uh we have budgeted $1,000 for supplies, those being checks, $1,000 for software. And attached the last page is the prosecutor's policy on waving the

fee in certain situations. I'll entertain any questions if there are any from the justices. Questions for PA Carter? Thank you all. Report submitted. Thank you, sir. [clears throat] With that, we're going to move on to the unfinished business portion of the agenda. Item number nine. Councelor, will you read that by title only? Item nine is an ordinance ratifying a conditional use permit for Gully Ranch CUP. This ordinance is on its second reading. Justice Eki.

Um, thank you, Judge. I'd like to make a motion that we suspend the rules and move this on to its third and final reading. I have a motion to suspend the rules and move it to the third and final reading by Justice Seki. I heard second by Justice Hires. Wait, wait, wait. Am I correct in saying third and final or is it the second? Third and final. Third and final. This is it's third and final. Okay. Thank you. Uh with that motion by Justice Eki, second by Justice Hires. All those in favor? I. Those opposed. Mr. Allen, will you please call a roll? Justice Lions. Yes, sir. Yes. Justice Eckie. Yes. Yes. Justice Dean? No, sir. No. Justice Washington? Yes.

Yes. Justice Koger. Yes. Yes. Justice Dennis. Yes. Yes. Justice Hires. Yes. Justice Rio Stafford. Yes. Justice Lemming. Yes. Justice Ricker. No. Justice Pond. No. Justice Bruns. No. Justice Wilson. Yes. Yes. Justice Mingill. Yes. Yes. Justice River Lopez. Yes. Yes. That motion passes. Councelor, will you read this ordinance for a third and final time? An ordinance ratifying a conditional use permit for Gully Ranch CUP. Just a sec. I'd like to make a motion, judge, to pass ordinance number nine.

I have a motion to pass ordinance number nine. Second by Justice Washington. Sorry. I had a motion to pass item number nine by Justice Ekki, second by Justice Washington. With that further discussion, Justice Koger. Yes. Thank you very much, Judge. I would like I heard what Mr. Lester just said and I appreciate that. But I would like to I'm making a motion to suspend the rules to allow each side on the Gully Ranch 15 additional minutes so that we can hear from them any more information they might have any rebuttal and I think we should hear what they have to say and they should be allowed to present it. So I make that motion. Thank you.

I [snorts] have a motion to suspend the rules and allot each side 15 minutes in the goalie ranch. motion by Justice Koger and that's going to die for like a second. Back to the main motion. We had a motion to pass item number nine by Justice Eky, second by Justice Hires. Further discussion. I'm so sorry. Was that Justice Washington? I I was a I was a motion behind. I think I'm going to make myself some notes so I don't get in any more trouble. Second by Justice uh Washington. Further discussion? Seeing none, public comments on item number nine. Oh, I'm so sorry, Justice Dennis.

This uh this relates to Thank you, Judge. First, uh this relates to a little bit, but at the same time, it's not direct to them. I wanted to know from our county county attorney if he knows uh and this is personal a little bit for me because everybody knows I own a a wedding venue, but when someone comes to my wedding venue and I tell them no alcohol, but they still serve alcohol out in the parking lot or whatever and they get drunk and they go and drive. Who is responsible for that? Am I responsible by law or is the couple who had it or is the individual who drank it? Mr. Dennis JP Dennis I would I don't feel comfortable giving that's legal advice and while you as a JP is my client you as a private business owner is not and so I I think you should I would like to refrain from offering any advice in that at this time. Okay. Uh well, that that's a concern of mine. I'll just speak to it myself if I may. I think I can. Can I?

Sure.

Okay. Uh you know, it's a big it's a big thing in the wedding view or wedding venue business on who's responsible. And I worry about it and I'm a very small wedding venue that pretty much does church weddings, not venue weddings. and I tell them no alcohol, but at the same time, I've seen it happen when I'm not there. And so I worry about which way it's going to be. And so my question for you is this. And my next question is this. Later on, if we say two months from now, we pass a ordinance that says something, we come up with an idea of who's responsible or we say that we make an ordinance about drinking.

Will you cue your mic? Justice lines. Justice lines. Thank you. I apologize. I I really don't see the relevance of this with the motion on the floor. Will you will you continue but try to make it was just conversation. I'll just save it for later then. Justice Bruns.

Thank you, sir. Um I've I've had two concerns. Number one, I I'll just say that I think Mr. Gully um who's a great guy um and he has got a very good um idea of a a nice venue. I get that with the exception of um there's there's two areas that scare me being a retired policeman. Uh both of them are scaring me. Kind of tails off of the alcohol. Um and you know if he's willing to go ahead and let alcohol be served who controls, is he going to have somebody there? And should this CUP um say that he has to have somebody paid to be there uh to control an actual drunk from getting out on the highway? And uh that that's one of my concerns. Uh, and the second concern I have, um, is that, uh, I went out there to the facility. Uh, I didn't drive up the drive because I didn't have permission to do so, but um, I drove around and as you go down this big hill um, you know, people get they get they get their speed up when they go down that hill and you just do that automatically. And what scares me is that you got lots of people wanting to turn left into that

facility because that's how they got to enter it. And when they have to turn left and you've got a line of cars, you're an accident waiting for a place to happen there. And they we've already heard they got bicycles, they got kids, they've got all this stuff and this CUP has not addressed having Mr. Gully put in a third lane where he could have a passing lane, whatever safety. I'm not a um a person that could tell you how far back it'd have to go, but I think there should be um a lane where it is safe for people to be able to pull into that middle lane and then also uh the folks be able to pass on the right. uh and get through without having an accident cuz it scares me to death. I mean, you go out there and look at it and you tell me that's not the case. That's uh it's it's very much the an issue and I'd like to see this board put I don't know how you do it, Mr. Lester. Whether we do it amendment maybe too late, I don't know. Uh but somehow um have some kind of regulation on if they're going to allow alcohol

to have some security there and them pay for it and then having a lane to be able to pass safely so somebody doesn't get hurt. because we're setting ourselves [snorts] up for I don't know if we're setting up this group. I'm just saying we're setting ourselves up as Washington County citizens having a bunch of wrecks out there. If in fact they have an event and you know you get 50 people at an event, 50 people wanting to turn in, you're going to be clear back up that heel and people are going to come flying over that hill and it it could be a major danger. So anyway, so um how do how would we handle that, Mr. Lester? Do we ask for an amendment? Is it too late? Is it

counselor? You would have to you would need to make a motion to add a um condition. Okay. To the to the to the permit and then we'd have to vote it in. That's correct. Okay. Can we do that at this juncture? It's your pleasure to amend anything. Okay. Well, I'd like to make that motion. We're going to need you to specifically word it for us, though. We're going to need your help with that part. [clears throat] Let me get my law degree out here real quick. Um, it's your motion. I mean, it's your amendment. I don't [snorts]

Yeah. First off, I'd like to say if there's going to be alcohol allowed that uh one of the stipulations, one of the uh cont um continued use C cups should say that they have to provide security from the time the event starts to the time the event's over. Okay, that's a motion. That's motion number one. We want to read it back to you real quick. Can we take them up separately? And we want to read it back to you so that you can get the We know we want to get the exact language. This is very technical.

Yeah. [clears throat] Okay. So, I have a motion to add a condition that if alcohol is served, security must be provided from the time the event starts until the event ends. Correct. Motion.

Motion by Justice Brun, second by Justice Koger. Any discussion on the amendment? I know we got we all got our mics cued. If you if you could just show a hand if you just want to discuss the amendment first. I want to try I think I've explained this before. This keeps track of the order the mics ring in. Now I mess that up sometimes. I'm not perfect but what I you would like. So Justice Washington.

Thank you uh Judge. I am really trying hard to understand what this fascination is with the serving of alcohol. Number one, everybody doesn't drink. Number two, everybody doesn't drink to get drunk. And in all of the years that I've been on this court, I have never ever heard us as a body try to put all of these restrictions on someone getting a cup. I mean, we're saying, first of all, we were like, well, don't serve alcohol. We don't do that to other applicants for CUPs. Then it's like, well, if you're going to serve alcohol, then you need to have security. We don't do that to other applicants of cups. Then it's like, well, if they're going to be driving, then the applicant needs to be responsible for putting a third lane. Like, we don't do that. So, I don't understand the logic. I I'm really trying to understand why this particular cup that some of us feel that we have the right to make all of these additional conditions when the planning board didn't say that it needed a third lane. If they had said that, it would have been in the original CUP. So, I I just hope that we just vote this down and just move on and get this passed tonight.

Discussion on the amendment. Justice Rio Stafford, I've accidentally cued your mic, so that's fertuitous for me. I go ahead. [clears throat] Thank you. Uh I would like to hear from the applicant or one of his representatives whether uh this uh additional condition would even be acceptable to him. Can we bring one of them up to hear that since we did that with the previous two conditions that we added?

I will ask if the applicant would like to answer those questions. You are not obligated. Not obligated. Just a second. Now it's cube. Go ahead.

Okay. Thank you. I'm Vicky Bronson. Um, whoever has any kind of event center or any other business where they serve alcohol has to have a licensed bartender there. that's controlled by the Arkansas regulatory body that governs who can serve alcohol and who can't serve alcohol and goalie Ranch will comply with those requirements and we are not going to agree to additional requirements that no one else has to abide by. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you ma'am.

Um I think that we I agree with JP Washington. I feel like we may be putting ourselves into risky legal territory. Our county attorney may have an opinion on that. If we put a condition on this that we don't put on any other event center that we've uh put given a cup to in the past in this county. Uh I I'm very I feel very nervous about that from a legal standpoint. Back to discussion on the amendment. Justice Hires, let me get you queued up here. Justice Hires.

Thank you, Judge. Um, I just want to echo what my colleagues have said. We have listened to several C since I've been on this court since 2018. This is the first time we've ever tried to stop someone from serving alcohol or adding conditions to this. And to me, that is the definition of arbitrary and capriccious. And this is dangerous territory. Will not a vote for this. Thank Further discussion on the amendment. Justice Wilson.

Thank you, Judge. Um I I would concur with some statements that have been made. Uh I appreciate what JP Bruns has said because uh he he he's making a plea for responsibility and whether we have the right to endorse that or add it to a CUP, that is a question. And I know that in the past uh there's always been some question about whether we ought to be adding very many conditions to a CUP to begin with. And so based upon that, it's hard for me to to endorse an extra idea. And also if if there was a discussion about um an extra lane in the road or what have you, I don't know that it would be the responsibility of the quorum court or of the person who operates a venue, but it would be uh county roads that should handle that to begin with. I mean, I'm not saying that the we should all urge responsibility, but what authority do we have to start uh stipulating specifically what that responsibility is supposed to look like? So, I think I just think we ought to be careful. Thank you. Comments on the discussion on the amendment. Anyone else? Justice. Justice. Thank you, judge. The way I understand special event centers is that it's not Mr. Gully who is going to be serving the alcohol. If somebody comes in and says we are having a business meeting and after the business meeting we are going to serve a choice of beer and wine then it is the people that are renting the cent's responsibility

to have someone licensed and security for the event. Not Mr. Gully. He has nothing to do with that. So if they want to and every event that I have been to, weddings, businesses, retreats, it is not the event center, it is up to the person who is renting the space. And so to put all of these conditions on Mr. Gully is capricious. And we can't do that. We are treading on a lawsuit. He is just renting it. I have been to several weddings where you don't have cars lined up trying to turn in. I think we need to have confidence in our own citizens that they know how to drive out in dirt roads in gravel roads and they're going to this event. They know that. And we think they're irresponsible drunkards going to an event. and I think more highly of our citizens than that and I hope that we not pass this amendment. Thank you,

Councelor Lester. So, I just as your attorney, I want to give you some legal warning and and and try to steer this a little bit better for you. we start getting into some really weird areas of the law where we start putting um conditions on ourselves as the as the legislative body. And I' I've said that to you numerous times. Um not that they're not good ideas, that's just not necessarily the legislative function. U we are in a very odd area when we talk about conditional use permits in Washington County and the state. Um later next month I'll be arguing in front of the Arkansas Supreme Court on behalf of the county on a case that we've had going on for several years as it relates to this idea of conditional use permits and some confusion that has caused in our our appellet courts and specifically our Supreme Court who now have requested oral arguments on this. And so maybe we get some some more silver some sort of silver lining when it comes to that. However, um my advice to you is there are, and I've read them to you before, there are seven criteria that you are to consider when you're making a decision whether or not to approve or deny a request for a conditional use permit. My advice would be to stick to that. Um, if you don't feel, for example, that the roads are adequate, well, that would be a great I mean that that's absolutely well within your purview and and I would I would advise you to vote against something that you felt like the roads are not adequate. Uh, another part of this has to do with the health and safety of the individuals in the area. If you feel that something's going on and therefore making the safety of the residents and people in that area uh cause you to call that into question, then I'd advise you to vote against it.

Um I don't think that adding additional conditions is going to be beneficial and it certainly will present us with some legal um hurdles that may be difficult for us to to overcome uh just based on the fact that you are you're performing a legislative function and that starts getting into administrative function. The other thing is we don't have any rules when it comes to how we regulate alcohol sales. We've always relied on uh the state's regulations for that. Um just like we do with people that drive drunk. I mean that that's up to law enforcement. Those are the people that handle that. Uh so I would I would urge this body to kind of look at these seven factors and really try to stick more to those um when you're making a decision. going forward on on this CU or any other and it it's not because anybody has a opinion is wrong or bad. It become it just becomes more complicated for us. So thank you

with that. Are we ready for the question? Justice Koger. Justice Koger. Thank Thank you. I'd like to comment on the amendment. Now I just want to say that in the past I have seen this group these JPS this legislative body uh come up and make conditions for cups. I remember I can't remember which one it was but we even adjourned the meeting so that JP lines and some of the others met up there with the applicant and came up with conditions. So that has been done. I just want to put that out there. Thank you.

All right. Now it's time to move the question of Justice Pond. Um Paul during this discussion about this amendment u several comments made well is this fair to Mr. Gully. Um and I'm unsure whether it's fair to Mr. gully or not. But I I think what we've we've forgotten in this discussion is one of the things that we're responsible for is the uh you what's suitable suitable for certain neighborhoods, certain areas, certain communities, and what's not or what might be safe in it. This is a farming community and I'm not I'm not here to make a a conditional use at a condition that there be no alcohol served. I had hopes and prayers after my conversation in my visit with Mr. Gully that he might recognize that uh it would his event center would be more suitable in this particular neighborhood uh with by not allowing alcoholic beverages at his facility. Uh that's I'm not sure that's discriminatory. Well, I'm I'm a property rights advocate. It's his property. I I had hopes that he would be free to uh put

that on that condition on there for himself, much like Mr. Dennis, I'll use him for an example, has done at his facility. Um, and actually I made a promise to Mr. Gully that if he removed the use of alcohol from his facility, his event center, that I would vote to approve it. He might trick me and decide to go ahead and do that and then I'd be voting for his facility. But it's doesn't have anything to do with Mr. Gully. We're talking about what fits in that neighborhood. This neighborhood that's been chosen, it's a beautiful a quiet rural area. A lot of agriculture, a lot of slowm moving uh agriculture equipment moves up and down that road. If you drive out there, you'll see them parked along the road. And so anyway, I'm I'm I'm sorry that that hasn't happened and and I don't believe I can see to vote for Mr. Bruns's his condition to add this to add this to Mr. Go should have been done before now should have been done through the planning board. the road department.

Anyway, point of order, justice, you're gonna wrap up. I'm done now. Okay. Thank you. Are we ready for this question? Yes. For the question of the amendment, I have a motion to amend by Justice Bruns to add the requirement for for security from open to close of the event. Second by Justice Koker. All those in favor? All those opposed? That motion fails. Mr. Justice Bruns, would you like to add your second amendment?

The um second amendment was to add an extra lane to make it safe for coming down that hill. Um and let's uh we just want the we need the exact language. He's scribing it down so that we can make sure it's right for the record. So, if you could just give us the exact language first, that would be helpful for counselor. Okay. What What do you have? Nothing. Not much so far. We'd like to if you give us the opportunity. Well, uh I did say about

we have motion to require an additional lane so far. Yes. To be provided for by the event person, owner, whatever you want to call them. We would like for you to choose that term for he would go with counselor suggests applicant. Okay. [snorts and clears throat] for safe passage. And I believe that would be in a south direction coming down the hill.

I just I just want to remind you just a second. Let councelor repeat that back. So we just want to make sure we have this exact. This is very consequential. Councelor motion to require an additional lane to be provided for by the applicant for safe passage in the south or the southern direction. Southbound.

Southbound. Okay. That's a motion by Justice Bruns. Does it have a second? That'll die for lack of second. Would you still like the floor, sir? Um, the only reason I was asking for both of these um is because Mr. Gully, Justice Washington, would you cue your mic? We have a point of order, Justice Burns. Okay, Justice Washington, since this motion uh filed uh I'm sorry, failed for lack of a second, there should not be any discussion about it. I tend to agree with Justice Wash and Justice Burns.

All right. Thank you. I'm going back to the original queue of mics now. So, if you have questions about that, Justice Vladimir Vladimir Rivera Lopez, I'm sorry, man. I got I'm getting tired.

No worries. No worries. Thank you. Thank you, Judge. Um, council, I I do have a question. Uh, again, going back to the criteria that you would recommend that we consider as we make this decision. Uh I know that one of them is whether or not uh the development of a certain property would be injurous to the enjoyment of other properties in that vicinity. Um when we we discuss enjoyment that's a little tacit. I was just hoping for some direction on like is that does that change is it changing the character of the place that they live? Is it uh what exactly should I consider in the term enjoyment? You're talking about um the requirement that you have that says uh will not be detrimental or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare.

Yes, I believe that. No, no, I'm sorry. Conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the surrounding area for the purposes already permitted. Correct. That is correct. So that would be the use that the enjoyment being the ability for you to utilize your land for the purpose for which it's already permitted. And that would be detrimental or injurious to surrounding neighbors to use their property as a residential agricultural use. Correct. Okay. Um I don't have any further questions at this moment, but that was uh something that I was considering. Thank you. Justice Koger.

Yes. Thank you, Judge. Um so I'm not going to go into all the detail that I did last time, but I do want to speak to why I'm voting the way I am. And I want to thank Mr. Lester. I appreciate him reminding us of what the criteria is that we're supposed to consider when we're considering whether to approve or deny any cup. The first one I want to address is adequate public roads, drainage, utilities, emergency access. Black Oak Road is a narrow rural two-lane road not designed for recurring event traffic approaching 200 or more guests. I believe that that emergency access will be constrained by road width, dust, night conditions, and traffic surges during events. Second is compatibility with surrounding area. I do not believe there's any way that this event is compatible with the surrounding area. Uh protection of public health, safety, and welfare. Large gatherings combined with alcohol service on rural roads create foreseeable safety risk. uh no injury to neighboring property or crowd enjoy enjoyment of their property. We've heard neighbors credibly testify to loss of quiet enjoyment due to events, traffic, dust, lighting, and proximity to the event. These impacts materially interfere with residential use. Uh orderly development of the area that was not met. approval would introduce commercial intensity into a rural area and set president for similar similar uses undermining undermining predictable land use patterns relied upon by the residents. And I just want to say that when I think about our ordinance for zoning that we have, I I consider that kind of like a contract or an agreement that we have with the rural residents of Washington County that they should be able to rely upon us to depend on us to consider

what's in the ordinance that we're supposed to consider and not to consider other things that are outside that. Um that's all I have. Thank you, Justice Rio Stafford.

Thank you, Judge. Um, I have two things. One, I want to explain the last vote I just made and also the next vote I'm going to make. Um, so first, uh, why I voted to go ahead and move this to the third reading. Uh over the New Year's holiday, I got a phone call uh from a neighbor uh of the proposed Gully Ranch um who asked me if I would be willing to uh hold off on the third reading of this ordinance um while they worked out a deal with Mr. Fred Gully's attorney. Uh and I said, "Sure, if the two sides are working out some sort of deal, I'm fine with that." As of yesterday, I had no indication at all uh that any talks or discussions or anything like that had taken place. Uh and so I felt that okay, that that hasn't happened. And so the request for me to vote to hold off on a third reading, you know, there's been no action. Um the vote that I'm going to make tonight um at the last meeting, Mr. Gully, uh I brought forward two additional conditions. Um I spoke to Mr. Gully about them beforehand before that meeting um and he agreed to them um if if he if we felt that that was necessary. One was to me very significant. uh we agreed to uh put an additional condition on this venue to go from uh a maximum of 300 people per event which is the capacity of the venue. Uh Mr. Gully agreed to self-limit uh and have that written into the conditions to go down to 200 people per event. And to me that's very significant. It's cutting the it's cutting everything by a third. it's cutting the the number of folks, the

number of cars, the amount of everything. Um, he also agreed to uh uh to a condition to maintain the private road and and submit a road maintenance plan. Um, and we voted in both those conditions. To me, that number one does two things. To me, it signals to me uh that Mr. Gully is operating in good faith. he's not trying to push the boundaries uh of this venue to the maximum that it could possibly be. Um and that he's he's willing to make compromises. And I think that's what this whole situation um you know needs is a compromise. And Mr. Gully has made his compromise. He's already uh agreed to conditions that he didn't necessarily have to agree to. And to me that shows very good faith. The other uh thing that that does is that I think that this puts it in line with other event venues that we have approved in the past for conditional use permits. And I I talked about a couple of them at the last meeting. One of them that I think is the closest uh was one that we approved in 2015. I wasn't on this body yet, but some other folks were uh which was Friie Farms that was also built to a capacity of 300 people. actually I think technically 299 but close enough. Um they originally agreed to self-limit themselves to 175 people uh at that venue and after six years of really no complaints from the neighbors or neighborhood um they asked if they could raise that limit uh back up to their full capacity of 299. That was back in 2021. Have we heard anything about that venue? Any complaints? Any like have neighbors been filling our

inbox up with with concerns about problems? I haven't heard any since my five years on the quorum court. Um the other one was the Grand Willow Springs. I don't know the exact capacity of that event, but it's a 5,500 foot wedding chapel and 11,500 foot reception hall. That's big. That's really big. Uh in their final LSD that they applied for in February 2024, they said they were going to have a maximum count of 120 visitors per event. That is significantly smaller, I'm positive, than what that venue can hold. Um and so I think that Mr. Gully's uh like good faith acceptance of our condition that we imposed at the last quorum court meeting puts this in line with those other event venues that we have approved. Now, one one thing that is different is that both of those venues were on dirt county roads. This uh venue is not on a dirt county road. This is off of a paved county road. In fact, it's like one of the nicest county roads that we have. It's not only paved, but it's striped. There aren't very many roads in our county, uh, county roads that are striped. Um, and so I think that is an additional thing that we need to I take in consideration in terms of one of going back to the seven things that we have to consider, which is adequate roads. Um, you know, I when we last year when we were looking at uh overhauling our planning and zoning ordinance and we're looking at uh putting commercial zoning in by right um you know, one of the things that I had in my mind was uh you know, we want to put commercial zoning by right along state highways. Um, and uh, you know, I was I had very kind of

like sort of a rigid idea of that in my mind. And I think that the details of this application and the concrete plant that we're going to hear next month have given me pause and have given me some things to think about uh and that we probably need to discuss as we consider in the future whether to have commercial zoning by ride in a county where to put it whether to continue with the CU process that takes context into account because this is six miles off of a state highway but we got to consider the condition of that county road as well. Um, and so I think that that has, you know, I think those are things we need to consider going forward as we look at are we going to have commercial zoning? What's that going to look like? Are we going to continue our C process? I think that this what I would call a, you know, kind of outside what we what at least I was originally thinking um has really changed my mind about a lot of things. Um, and I'm going to be voting in favor of this. Thank you.

Any further discussion by the group? Seeing none, any public comments? Oh, sorry, Justice Washington.

Thank you, [clears throat] um, Judge Deakons. So, a lot of the things that I was going to say has already been said by my colleagues, so I appreciate that. I won't belabor those points, but one of the things that keeps coming up a lot is about the the quiet enjoyment of the properties. And it is baffling to me how the same people that want quiet enjoyment are perfectly okay with guns being shot and all of that. And the only reason I know this is because I was tagged in videos on Yeah. Everybody's laughing, but I but we were tagged in videos on social media of these things. And so it's like the enjoyment goes both ways. And I think that we're missing that here. Um JP Rio Stafford just said something that was a very that was very poignant to me. Everything that we've asked the applicant to do, he's agreed to. If I were in his sit if if I were the applicant, I don't know that I would agree to decrease the capacity by a third. I don't know that I would do that. I don't know that I would agree to some of these things. But everything that we're asking him to do, he's demonstrating that he really is operating in good faith, which leads me to believe that if there were something to come up and the people in the community talk to him about it, he would probably be agreeable with those things. Um, and so it's like there's this picture being painted that, okay, we live here, it's our way or it's the highway, but then he's potentially missing out on revenue and all of these other things to make sure that this is harmonious to make sure that this is compatible with that area. So, I guys, I'm just hoping we can just give this a good vote tonight. I get that there are a lot of emotional things that are being said. I get that this is not my neighborhood. I don't live in it. I get all of that. But when we look at this

objectively, what we see here is that we have an applicant who really is operating in good faith. We have an applicant that I believe will do the right thing. But I do think that it does take compromise on the parts of everyone that is involved. It is not fair for one group of people to say it's our way or the highway. That's that's not right either. And I guess just in the same way that it wasn't fair for him um that that that is why he made the decision to decrease the capacity by a third. I believe that there can be a wedding venue in that area that can be harmonious if everybody decides that it is going to be harmonious. If you're looking for problems, I promise you will find problems. If you're looking for solutions, I guarantee you you will find solutions. And that's what I'm asking both parties on both sides of this issue to look for solutions. And I'm asking us as a court to not make up all these scenarios. You know, we don't know that people are going to be drunk. We don't know that there could be an accident. We don't know those things, but let's be solutionsoriented. The CUP has already been approved by the planning board. Uh we trust their expertise. Let's go ahead and just give this a good vote. Thank you. With that, Justice Wilson.

Thank you, Judge. I I just want to say um I know we're winding up getting ready to to hear from the public again. Um I just want to say in the spirit of transparency that I've I've wrestled with this a lot. I guess it's because I've honestly tried to look at both sides of this. And I wanted to say uh looking [clears throat] down the road, I wanted to say this for the benefit of u the citizens who have come to speak to this and the ones who are they got a lot of emotion wrapped up in the issue and I understand that appreciate it and respect it. Um, I wanted to say that um, if this u permit is passed this evening, uh, to those who are opposed, my guess is it's not going to turn out as bad as your worst fears might be. Only reason I say that is because usually things that we dread, if you want to know how it's going to turn out, you you can take the worst case scenario and imagine that or the best case scenario. It's usually somewhere in the middle. It's not usually as bad as you might have feared. Uh but whether it's passed or not, uh looking down the road, one of my concerns for our constituents is um [clears throat] I would hope we'd have a lot of good neighbors working together. Uh no matter what a decision is from us, I I know that there's been a lawsuit out there. I don't go to Facebook for my source of information, but I know there's been some messy things on Facebook about this issue. Uh we've had some things that have been said or suggested uh that is good information. People have made good points and then there's been some nasty things said too. So I my hope is that well on the quorum court we don't reconcile disputes between neighbors. That's not really our role. Uh, but we

want the best for everybody who lives in Washington County. Uh, I what I'm going to say is people are going to have to be neighbors whether they want to or not, no matter how we vote here. And I wanted to say that for the benefit of those who are really vested in this and I appreciate their input. Thank you. Thank you, sir. With that, we'll move to public comments. Any public comments this evening? Public comments are 12 minutes total, three minutes per individual. Please state your name, where you're from.

Sherry Maine, 15451 Riches Road, Fagetville. I [clears throat] don't live in this area, but as a strong advocate for the planning rules and changes, I had to I had to come up and say something. Uh what JP Washington said earlier was right on it was on target. Um I I want to mention to each one of you 15 sitting on this horseshoe that will be voting on this that um you some of you may not been sitting at the time when Terry Presley was denied a cup um in 2016 for an event center in Greenland and it planning board approved it but Gorm court denied it. Presley appealed the cup denial and it was overturned by the Arkansas Court of Appeals on March 6, 2019. It's now operating as White River Landing in Greenland. Um I read that case and there was a lot of the same issues with this um that that kind of go along with that particular cup. Um, and the reason I'm bringing this up is is because you have to look at what's in front of you, the facts. Um, I know it's a hard job and the facts are presented. The only thing I can see that wasn't done was a traffic study. Um, in the Presley case, there was a traffic study done um on the guest in number leaving and entering and exiting the venue. Um, but I do want to mention there are several uh event venues in Washington County. Ponderosa Mountain Venue in Greenland, Stone Chapel at Matt Farm and Highway 45 East in Fagatville, the Haven north of Weir Weir Road in Fagatville, White River Landing I already mentioned in Greenland, Florence Farms

[clears throat] northwest Arkansas which is out on 16 East in Elkins. The Grand at Willow Springs in Prairie Grove. Plenty woods venue in Elkins. The barn at the Springs in Springdale. The Winslow which is in Winslow, Arkansas. And the barn at Hat Creek, which is in Summers, Arkansas. Now, I'm not for sure if all of these have a cup. They're fairly new venues, so if they don't have one, they should have one. Um, I'm just saying you have to be fair and equitable to everyone that comes and applies for a cup. Um, and if you meet the criteria that's at hand, um, I I think um, you're hardressed to have a a case there if it's appealed and and gone on to the court of appeals. Uh, and like I said, the only thing I would rent would mention is just that a traffic study. I did have someone say something about the traffic. So, has a study been done and is the county speed limit adequate for that particular road?

Thank you, Miss Maine. Public comments. Thanks for letting me speak. Um I just wanted to um introduce myself as um I am the person that did reach out to Mr. Gully to talk and we did have a very productive discussion the first time we met. Um now will you please move closer to that mic? We have some uh auditory issues when it comes up this way in the room. Makes helps us hear better.

Okay. Okay. So, um, in the spirit of trying to, uh, research with him and really talk about what it's like to live in these hills because they're very hard to build in. And and I know because I've been doing it for three years. I've built my own house by hand in those hills. And I know what it's like to dig septic and I know what it's like to have water coming down at you and and what it takes to get it right. And yet, it it takes a lot of experience. And so what I wanted to share with you is that, you know, I I reached out to him because I wanted him to come to my property and see some of the things that I've been doing um to show him. And he at that point he he didn't want to come. He didn't want to learn those things. And I'm very concerned. So I I spent the last two weeks doing a lot of research based on something that you said um uh Justice Safford. You asked, "Is this a gully? Is it really a drainage gully?" And the truth is it is. It's a hundred-year flood plane of water that comes through that property. And it concerns me for the safety. And I sent all of you an email this morning that has videos of what that hundred-year flood plane looks like coming through those mountains. It is no joke and I'm very concerned that he's putting buildings there and uh I'm concerned for the safety. So, I looked further and I asked the office of the state geologist to do a study on this property because we've all been very concerned about um you know, people said from the very beginning it floods from the bottom. So, um I asked her to do a landslide study because out there that the soil is very unstable. It's built on shale. It's not built on carsted land. It's different and it collapses very easily. And she stated that when that this land, this particular land is at very high risk for landslide to begin with. And then when you put all of these structures on the top of a slope, you're talking about seven buildings and then the water weight of um the septic tanks plus a commercial septic which changes the chemistry of the soil and it liquefies the clay and drops the slope. Okay? And

this is a very dangerous situation that we're talking about putting guests in. And I want you guys to know that the state geologist, I sent you guys the report, that's what in the packet that I gave you. She wrote me this report to share with you because she's very concerned and I please I I do hope that you heed that and I do believe we missed the point from the very beginning as far as what we asked of Mr. Gully to begin with. I think that we should have asked for geological studies. You're coming out to an area that has not been built before on before. And I I believe that we need to make sure that we um do do geological studies, have geoengineers out there because I'm telling you, if you move that big boulder the way you do it in the city, you're going to have a landslide. So I I really hope um for Mr. Gully's sake, I don't want him to lose that.

Public comments. [clears throat]

Hello, my name is Jacob White. I live at 15582 East Black Oak Road. Uh, I had a nice pretty PowerPoint to show y'all, but I don't think I'm going to get the opportunity to do that. So, you're lucky you get spared that opportunity. Um, so one of my PowerPoint slides was a map showing every the location of all the local neighbors who are opposed. This is not one or two neighbors opposed. This is nearly unanimous local opposition from the local area. I think that goes to factor four to compatibility. you're hearing from normal Washington County residents that live in the Black Oak community that they don't think this is appropriate. That's the that's factor number four. Uh you know, there's a lot of a lot of conversation about other event venues. I ask you this, do any of those other event venues have a driveway, a private road that nearly surrounds one other neighbor? Do any other these do any of these other event venues have three flood basin catchments put in? They obviously know that runoff is an issue because there's three of these basins that are being uh that are required in this permit. Uh okay, so there was this conversation about whether or not the cabins are part of the conditional use. Y'all remember that last time, right? They've agreed that we just we're just hearing this today. They're going to move the cabins. I foyed the planning file since the last meeting. There is an email from Brandon Weiss, the uh the engineer with Bates. Now, y'all remember Bates came up here and said, "Hey, we just put the cabins in this application, so you know the full vision. It's not part of the conditional use." I I don't know if y'all remember being told that, but you were told that. His email says, "I just want to double check one thing for you. Quote, the driveway, parking lot, event center, and cabins come out to 5 acres items directly used for the cop." I I'm a lawyer. That's an admission, right? That's a legal admission that the

cabins, the use of the cabins is part of the cup. So, if you don't consider these cabins, that that email is going to be in court, right? You have to consider the cabins and their use as part of the conditional use. Planning condition number 11 prepared by staff. Quote, "The proposed five rental cabins are intended to serve the event center visitors, part of the conditional use." You got good legal advice last time from your council. The zoning requires one acre per single family residential. This parcel is five acres with six cabins. It is. Anyone can look at this cup application. I know what they're going to say. They're going to say, "Well, we're changing it to six acres." But in a mortgage filed in September of this last year, they described the parcel as five acres. So, what they're telling their financing partners is this parcel with the cabins actually only has five acres. Six six homes, five acres. All right, I know I'm running out of time. I do want to talk about one of the conditions uh the maintenance agreement on the road.

Mr. White, that is time public comments. [clears throat]

Hello again. There's been a lot of speculation about things. Okay, sorry. There's been a lot of speculation and conjecture about things that could happen out there, but there hasn't really been any facts. And the experts who design septic tanks and drainage have already provided permits for the septics. We already have the permit from ADQ. They are engineers in those departments determine what's adequate for drainage. Not the neighbors, not me, not Mr. Goalie. We have engineers doing that. There's been a concern raised about the fact that there's three ponds. He could have one pond if he wanted to. He chose to do this as a design feature. As the engineers told you at the last meeting, it's going to be beautiful. There will be waterfalls coming from one pond to another. Has nothing to do with the fact that there's a drainage issue. All of this is professionally engineered to make sure there's not a drainage issue. And it Mr. goalie has shown that he's willing to compromise as he's done here at this meeting. Nobody that's opposed to this project has approached us offering any kind of solution. Asking us to make any concession that we haven't already asked. It's either it's don't do it at all is what they want. And and that's not what we're here for. And I want to talk about this uh the cabins being part of the cup. They are part of the largescale development plan. That's different than the CUP and he already has approval for his largescale development and he will have to come back and talk to somebody at the planning board about moving the cabins. But you can't convert an already legal use to something that has to have a condition just because it's on the same drawing. And I looked at the CUP or excuse me, the staff report this afternoon before I

came here and it specifically says that those cabins could be used in conjunction with the event center or separately. He's allowed to have cabins on his property. And the issue of whether it's 5 acres, 6 acres, he can parcel it out however he wants to. He could build 69 houses out there if he wanted to. He'd obviously have to get septic permits, but he has 69 acres. he could build 69 houses. Instead, he's trying to build five tiny little cabins in a event center that's 3,700 3,375 square ft, which is smaller than the neighbor's house. You've seen the design. We had it in our PowerPoint. It's a beautiful building. It's not going to be an eyesore. This is going to be a beautiful place where people can go and have experience with nature. And I understand people are saying he could have a ranch anyway. Well, we we're applying for conditional use permit so we can have an event center that will include agricultural use primarily on the land. This is just a small part of it. And

thank you, ma'am. That's time. And that's our total of 12 minutes pending a motion.

I have a motion to suspend the rules and add three minutes of public comment time by Justice Pawn. Second by Justice Rivera Lopez. Come forward. Oh, I'm sorry. All those in favor,

those opposed, come forward, sir. [clears throat] Thank you for the additional minutes. My name is Harold Davis. I live at 10457 South Harris Road. Um, our property uh comes up just almost to his backyard of what Mr. Gully is wanting to do. Um, you know, everyone out there has a dream and and I applaud Mr. Gully for being a visionary, but I also am a visionary. Everyone out there is a visionary. However, we did seek an area with an agricultural zoning because that was the vision we had. to tell you a little about myself. Um, I'm a wartime veteran, operated in a war zone. Um, I I was uh nearby. I can't tell you exactly where, but very close uh to the the Beirut Marine Barracks bombing. We lost over 240 men at that. The largest loss of military of a marine life since Errolima. So with that said, I came into the workforce believing in America and we have dreams and our dream was to live in the country outside of city limits. And though we don't have the vast amounts of money some people have, we gave it everything we had. Most people out in our community gave it everything to live out there. People that uh that live out in the country, you may not realize this, it

cost us a great deal of money to live out in the country. To live in a small country home for what it costs it in extra insurance, wear and tear on our vehicles. We made great sacrifice to do this. Uh we could have lived in a McMansion in the middle of Fagatville if we wanted to for the same amount of money, but we chose to live a very simple life. And the majority of our neighbors want a simple life that this does not uh this doesn't jive with. Um people that don't live out there. They they they live in in the city, but they they want to come out to our area and and ride horses and drink and have parties. And you know, you can call it anything you want, but we've got a community center right there, the Black Oak Baptist Church. So, we have a community, we have a community center, and we are doing quite well. We we chose to live out there for a reason. Thank you, sir. That's time expired. I appreciate it. With that, we're going to take up the question. I have a motion pages. I have a motion to pass item number nine by Justice Seki and I had a second by Justice Washington. Mr. Allen, will you please call the role?

Justice Lions, no. Justice Eki, yes. Justice Dean, no. Justice Washington, yes. Justice Koger, no. Justice Dennis, yes. Justice Hires, yes. Justice Rio Stafford, yes. Yes. Justice Lemming, no. Justice Ricker, no. Justice Pond, no. No. Justice Bruns, no. No. Justice Wilson, no. No. Justice Massenill. Yes. Yes. Justice Rivera Lopez. No.

Item nine fails. Pending objection, I'd like to take a 10-minute break. Let's take a recess. Oh yeah. Oh yeah. probably out there.

No. We're at Washington.

I don't know. I don't know about you be I'll be there.

Thank you. Yeah.

Yes, sir. Sam2. Okay, I'll Sam.

Oh yeah.

Two minutes. We're going to try to get restarted in two minutes.

30 seconds. 30 second warning. All right, with that we're going to bring the meeting back to order. Appreciate everyone. Um, with that we're on to item number 10. Counselor, will you read that by title only? Item 10 is a resolution of the Washington County Corum Court expressing support for poultry producers in the Illinois River watershed and urging a return to good faith negotiations.

Justice Ricker. Motion to pass. Motion. I have a motion to pass item number 10 by Justice Ricker. I heard second by Justice Limming. [laughter] Dennis. Denn. Okay. Somebody own up to it. Second by his district. Second. Very, that's very cordial. Justice Dennis, I heard second by Justice Limming. Further discussion on this item. Justice Limming.

Well, when I was on the way up here, I wanted to go to that meeting that you didn't get to go to, and I didn't either because I was out of town, but uh I talked to a few guys that was there. and uh on record that attorney general had made the statement that all farmers was doing what they needed to be doing to protect the watershed. But he did also make a comment in the fact that uh that Simmons Foods had put a bunch of signs of political signs over there trying to I guess bash him and he said they're going to pay for all of that. That's that's just his comments he made today at that meeting. So, I hope we can all the farmers are doing their part and we just we just need to keep pushing this to get this thing put behind us and I did hear that Georgia's Foods come up with a settlement too today on their behalf of it. So, but anyway, we need to pass it. Thank you,

Justice Rivera Lopez.

Uh I I would like to parrot some of the sentiments that were made uh by my fellow justice here. Um, you know, there's there's a saying that goes, when when two elephants fight, only the grass suffers. And as as we look out at this, you know, whether it be from our poultry processors or the attorney general, I would ask that we not let our farmers become collateral for whatever dispute that they're having. Um, ultimately, I know the plight of these farmers. I don't believe it's a plight that's far too uh different from my mother's plight or the plight of so many of my constituents who go to work every day and do their their part. uh and you know they hang on the promise of someone else and they bury their hopes um that things will continue so long as they do their hard work and I would implore all parties involved uh to return to good faith and um again like I said not allow these farmers to be collateral to whatever they're they're posturing for. Thank you Judge

Justice Pond. My [clears throat] compliments to Georgees for coming to the bargaining table and and having an agreement with the with the folks over in Oklahoma. I think it's a a real good show of of leadership and uh they've helped their they've helped their growers uh out of the fire. They're probably still in the frying pan, but they're out of the fire for for this at this time. Thank you, Justice Rio Stafford.

Thank you, Judge. I wrote something for this tonight. Um, I am supporting this resolution because it is about two resources that we have to protect. Our local farmers and our watershed. Both of them matter to Washington County's economy. And in both cases, once they're gone, they're gone. We can't sit by and watch a farming industry get destroyed that supports families across our county. Some of these farms have been in local families for generations. Just as important, we have to protect the Illinois River watershed. It waters the crops in this county. It provides drinking water for Sylum Springs and Taloqua. It's used for fishing and kayaking. And there are six wastewater treatment plants that rely on it. It's critical infrastructure. Just like an interstate, we would never let an interstate crumble. If we let the river go to pot, clean water gets more expensive for everybody. But what has ma what has made this ongoing court case and this sudden decision so heartbreaking is the uncertainty that it has brought to our local farmers who are not even part of it. Our farmers are getting squeezed on both sides. Stuck between a rock and a hard place. Big government on one side and big corporations on the other side. Many of the growers will tell you that in practice they're told what to do and how to do it by the corporations that they sell to. And now the people with the least control and the least leverage are carrying the heaviest burden of this whole fight. And that's why I think it's important for us to speak up and help give them some leverage. The two sides, the government and the corporations need to come together just like this resolution says, talk to each other and work something out. Our farmers deserve credit for making major long-term progress in cutting the phosphorus in the watershed. Right now, they're not getting credit for that progress. Even

as our region has grown, we've been heading in the right direction and that matters. But instead of taking those goodfaith efforts into account, that progress has been ignored and these farmers are being punished the same as if they'd made no progress. That's why I support this resolution. agreements based on science and a push for the parties to start talking in good faith like it sounds like George's has with the attorney general in Oklahoma. We've seen ourselves in the last few months how a federal court case can drag on, be expensive, and create uncertainty for everyone. I believe the two sides in this case can come to a solution that protects the river and protects our farm families. I'll be voting yes on this.

Thank you, Justice Rafford. Any further discussion by the board, the body? Any public comments on item number 10? Seeing none, we'll take up the question. I have a motion to pass by Justice Ricker, second by Justice Limming. Mr. Allen, please call the role. Justice Lions, yes. Justice Ekki, yes. Justice Dean, yes. Justice Washington, yes. Justice Koger, yes. Justice Dennis, yes. Justice Hires, yes. Justice Rio Stafford, yes. Justice Lemming, yes. Justice Ricker, yes. Justice Pond, yes. Justice Bruns, yes. Justice Wilson,

yes. Justice Massenill, yes. Justice Rivera Lopez, yes. That item passes unanimously. I appreciate each and every one of you. That's a very good statement for our our uh our producers. Justice Bruns, I'm I'm so sorry, but could we get this broom above 40 degrees by any chance? I'm about freeze to death. Okay, I yield. Okay. [laughter]

Council, will you please read item number 11 by title only? Item 11 is a resolution certifying local government endorsement of packaging specialties incorporated to participate in the taxback program as authorized by Arkansas code annotated section 15-4-270 2706D of the consolidated incentive act of 2023. Justice Rio Stafford. Thank you, Judge. Uh, this business is located in my JP district and I move to approve this resolution. Seconds. Okay. Justice lines, will you yield?

I have a motion to pass by Justice Rio Stafford and a second by Justice Seki. Any further discussion on this item? Any public comments on item number 11? Seeing none, we'll take up the question. I have a motion to pass item number 11 by Justice Rio Stafford and a second by Justice Eki. Mr. Allen, will you please call the role? Justice Lions. Yes, sir. Yes. Justice Eckie. Yes. Justice Dean. Yes, sir. Yes. Justice Washington. Yes. Justice Koger. Yes. Justice Dennis. Yes. Justice Hires. Yes. Justice Rio Stafford. Yes. Justice Lemming. Yes. Justice Ricker. Yes. Justice Pond. Yes. Justice Bruns.

Yes. Justice Wilson. Yes. Justice Massenill. Yes. Yes. Justice Rivera Lopez. Yes. Yes. Item number 11 passes. Item number 12. Councelor, you read that by title only. A resolution affirming that a property in the unincorporated portion of the county creates unsanitary conditions and may be abated. Justice Lions. Thank you, Judge. I move we pass item.

A lot of competition for the seconds tonight. I'll know. I have a motion to pass by Justice Lions and a second by Justice Dean. Any [clears throat] further discussion by the body? Justice Lming? I think this is a real good ideal and I think we need to do more of this in the coming future because we've got we've got a lot of stuff that needs attention.

Uh I I believe this is a process that has seemed to work so far. I want to appreciate Justice Lions for being open to this for like kind of the first run through of this, but as your justices come up with concerns, please let us know and we'll carry this forward just like we've done this one. Any further discussion by the body? Justice Burns. I just would like to ask beg um whatever I need to do for us to remember Kenneth Price Road that has been an issue for 11 years.

I appreciate that. I think the main difference this building's vacant. I want the justices to remember if it is a resident, if it is a doicile, that is a completely different op that's a completely different that's a different issue, Justice Burns. So, I appreciate your patience with that issue. We would love to discuss that with you because each one of these will be factbased, case by case. Well, there's a lot of things we can do with that one to uh make it better for the rest. I appreciate that and I think tonight we'll stick with this item. Okay. Thank you. Further discussion by the body. Any public comments on item number 12? Seeing none, we'll take up the question. I have a motion passed by Justice Lion, second by Justice Dean. Mr. Mr. Allen, please call the role.

Justice Lions, yes, sir. Yes. Justice Ekki, yes. Justice Dean, yes, sir. Yes. Justice Washington, yes. Justice Koger, yes. Yes. Justice Dennis, yes. Justice Hires, yes. Justice Rio Stafford, yes. Justice Lemming, yes. Justice Ricker, yes. Justice Pond, yes. Yes. Justice Bruns, yes. Justice Wilson, yes. Justice Massingill. Yes. Yes. Justice Rivera Lopez. Yes, sir. Yes. Item number 12 passes. Item number 13 is the consent agenda. Councelor, will you read each of those items by title only?

Item 13.1 is an ordinance recognizing and appropriating additional revenue in the amount of $30,000 $30,678.93 in the county library budget for 2026. Item 13.2 2 is an ordinance anticipating and appropriating additional revenue in the amount of $82,951 in the drug court grant fund uh budget for 2026 and other matters pertaining there too. Item 13.3 is an ordinance amending the DEM budget for 2026. Item 13.4 4 is an ordinance recognizing and appropriating additional revenue in the amount of $5,885 in the circuit court for budget for 2025.

Justice Lions, I move we pass the consent agenda. I have a motion to pass the consent agenda by Justice Lions, second by Justice Dean. He's not really on it again. I'm sorry. Second by Justice Dean. Any discussion on the consent agenda by the body? Any public comments on the consent agenda? Seeing none, we'll take up the question. I have a motion to pass the consent agenda by Justice Lions, second by Justice Dean. Mr. Allen, please call the role. Justice Lions, yes, sir. Yes. Justice Ekki, yes. Justice Dean, yes, sir. Yes. Justice Washington, yes. Yes. Justice Koger, yes. Justice Dennis, yes. Justice Hires, yes. Justice Rio Stafford, yes. Justice Lemming,

yes. Justice Ricker. Yes. Yes. Justice Pond. Yes. Justice Bruns. Yes. Justice Wilson. Yes. Justice Massingill. Yes. Yes. Justice Rivera Lopez. Yes, sir. Yes. The consent agenda passes. We had both county services and finance and budget committees. Those pack those uh reports are in your packet. With that, we'll be adjourned.