Fayetteville City Council recap: Oct. 17, 2023

Council action

Approved

• A water damage claim on Sharon Street.
• The annual millage levy.
• Two requests to seek property condemnations for planned projects.
• Establishing a youth advisory committee.
• Three property vacation requests.
• Appealing a denied permit for a short-term rental on Oliver Avenue.
• A proposal from 7 Hills for use of the city’s remaining $1.63 million in ARPA funds.
• Purchasing batting cages for the Gary Hampton softball complex.
• An agreement for a 10-foot trail along Wedington Drive from Steamboat Drive to Salem Road
• An amendment to a landscaping contract to include removal trash from unsanctioned camps.
• A federal Justice Assistance Grant for law enforcement training, equipment and supplies for Fayetteville, Springdale and Washington County.

Held or tabled

• Razing and removing a structure on Wyman Road.
• Hiring a full-time employee in the City Clerk’s office.
• Approving a land sale agreement for a new downtown hotel.
• Rezoning 0.22 acres on Willow Avenue.

» Download the agenda (PDF)

Background:
Staff said this item was brought to the attention of the city through an anonymous complaint. A staff memo states that upon inspection, it was discovered the property includes a structure that is on the verge of collapse, with a non-functioning roof, collapsing walls and a crumbling foundation.

Staff said the owner mentioned bringing the home back into compliance in October 2021, and was given time to address the issues. The owner applied for a building permit for the work in December 2021, but never paid the fee for the permit, so on May 31, 2022 the permit was voided. Recent inspections show that no repair attempts have been made, according to city documents.

» See photos in the agenda packet

Location:

July 5 Discussion:
The homeowner’s daughter spoke and said they have a plan to get her father out of the house and replace the house with a prefabricated home. They said they need at least until the end of the summer before they can get the plan together.

Scroggin said he’s OK with allowing some more time, but not too much more since the home seems to be on the verge of collapse.

City Attorney Kit Williams said he is concerned about any lengthy delays on this decision because the building safety department has determined that the house is very near collapsing.

The council agreed to allow another 30 days before a decision, and voted 8-0 to table until Aug. 2.

Aug. 2 Discussion:
The homeowner’s daughter said more time is needed to get the home into compliance. They said significant progress has been made on the property, and their father has moved out so there is no longer any danger to him. They asked the council for 60 more days for her family to work on the property, which could include razing the home themselves.

Councilmember Scroggin said he hopes the council will agree to give the family more time.

Councilmember Bunch said she’s concerned for the safety of the family if they’re demolishing a home with the utilities still turned on. The homeowner’s daughter said the utilities are set to be disconnected tomorrow.

The council agreed to table the item until the Oct. 4 meeting.

Oct. 4 Discussion:
City staff said a demo permit was issued for the property. Some of the work was completed, but much of the structure still stands.

Here are some photos taken this morning (10/04/22):

The owner’s daughter said they’re done all the work with the most basic tools, and they plan to continue working until the home is razed. They asked for another 120 days to complete the demolition.

One person spoke in favor of allowing another 120 days for demolition.

Scroggin said he’s worried about what would happen if the home fell while someone was inside working on it without proper heavy equipment, but it seems like a risk the family is willing to take. He asked if the city would be liable for any injuries sustained on the property. City Attorney Kit Williams said there wouldn’t be much liability, if any. Scroggin said he’d be in favor of allowing more time. Bunch agreed.

Wiederkehr said the lien put on a property that’s razed is not collected immediately, but is usually only sought when the property is sold. He said he just wants the family to understand that if the project becomes too much to handle, they don’t have to worry about paying back a lien to the city for a while.

The owner’s daughter said the reason they’d like to avoid a lien is because they hope to take out a loan on the property, and that is another trigger for paying back a lien.

Turk asked for a staff update after 60 days.

The council tabled the resolution for 120 days. The discussion will continue on Feb. 7, 2023.

Feb. 7 Discussion:
The owner’s daughter said they need another four months to complete the work because removing the roof has proved to be a larger job than anticipated.

Two people spoke during public comment and said they hope the council will grant the applicant more time.

Turk and Bunch said they are willing to give the applicant another four months, but this might be the last time they can support an extension.

Berna said if the applicant would contact him, he will personally provide some equipment that could help speed up the process.

The council voted 8-0 to table the item until June 20.

June 20 Discussion:
City staff said all three structures have been razed and are in the process of being removed. The property needs to be brought back to a buildable state before the issue can be marked as resolved.

The property owner’s daughter thanked several council members for helping the family through the process, including some who personally paid for dumpsters. She said there’s some small debris that needs to be removed, along with the concrete foundation. She estimated that another six weeks is needed to complete the job.

Councilmember Berna said he’d like to table for four months because he plans to use his grounds crew to take care of the remaining work, and they will be busy mowing lawns for the remainder of the summer.

The council voted 8-0 to table the item until Oct. 17.

Oct. 17 Discussion:
Staff said they visited the site today and the structure is fully razed. There are piles of debris left on the site, but those should soon be removed in about five weeks, the applicant said.

Staff recommended tabling the item indefinitely.

Decision:
The council voted 7-0 to table the item indefinitely.

Background:
This item would authorize a payment to Misty Simpson for water damage that occurred at 2425 E. Sharon St. after a 36-inch city water main broke in September 2021 causing substantial amounts of flooding and damage to the neighborhood and to the Simpson residence.

Staff said partial payments have previously been made to Simpson, Privacy Fence Inc., A Clean-Cut Lawn Care, Stanley Steemer, and Hall Engineering in the amount of $19,961.77 for loss of personal belongings, flooring and ductwork cleaning, structural investigation, fence replacement, and landscaping services. The total repair amount Simpson is requesting, excluding those repairs already paid by the city, is $97,938.31.

Aug. 15 Discussion:
Councilmember Berna said he visited the home and it’s “amazing” how much damage occurred from the flooding incident. He asked City Attorney Kit Williams about the homeowner’s claim that a contractor who has already been paid by the city may have performed some improper work that caused further damage which isn’t accounted for in the city’s proposed payment of $50,000.

Williams said he needs to look at that contact to determine whether the city may be entitled to any claim for that alleged damage which could then be transferred to the homeowner if a lawsuit is successful.

Moore suggested passing the resolution tonight and then exploring options for retrieving more money for the homeowner if it’s available.

Turk asked whether it would be appropriate to amend the city’s code which limits a damage claim. Williams cautioned against that, and said historically, the higher the amount of money available, the higher the damage claims the city receives, which means water and sewer rates would have to be raised city-wide to pay for those higher claims.

Berna suggested tabling the resolution before awarding any money to consider increasing the city’s damage claim amount.

Hertzberg said while she would like to give as much money as is needed in this particular case, the only way that is possible is if the council increases the damage claim limit which, like Williams said, could lead to monthly rate increases for all of the city’s water and sewer customers.

Turk said she’d like to look into whether the city can use ARPA funds to help the homeowner as a way to avoid changing city code.

The council voted 7-0 to table until Oct. 17.

Oct. 17 Discussion:
Now that an ordinance has been passed (on Sept. 19) to raise the payout limits to $100,000, this item is back for consideration. The city has already paid about $19,000 and the claimant has requested another $97,000. Staff is recommending paying the claimant the full $100,000 allowable by law (minus what has already been paid). the council amended the resolution to include the new, larger amount.

Discussion:
The council voted 7-0 to approve the resolution.

Background:
Each year the council must approve an ordinance to renew the levy of ad valorem taxes on real and personal property within the city. It’s the same amount that was proposed and approved last year.

Oct. 3 Discussion:
Paul Becker, the city’s chief financial officer, said he’s waiting on an answer from the County Assessor on whether the city is getting a roll-back. He requested the item not be passed tonight to give him time to get an answer from the county.

The council left the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue on Oct. 17.

Oct. 17 Discussion:
City staff said a rollback is needed after talking to the County Assessor. The reduction would come from the General Fund operations rate, which would be 2.2 instead of 2.3. The total millage would be 6.7 instead of 6.8.

The rates are:
2.2 mills for General Fund operations
0.4 mills for the Firemen’s Pension and Relief Fund
0.4 mills for the Policemen’s Pension and Relief Fund
2.5 mills for Fayetteville Public Library operations
1.2 mills for the Fayetteville Public Library expansion
Total = 6.7 mills

Decision:
The council approved the resolution by a vote of 7-0.

Background:
City staff said 12 of 13 properties have been acquired that are essential for the Highway 71B Corridor Project, which involves various enhancements like roadway modifications, utility relocation, sidewalk/trail installation, transit system accommodations, and more. Staff said while efforts to negotiate with the final property owner are ongoing to avoid condemnation, acquiring the land’s right of way is crucial to prevent construction delays, as it’s one of the last properties needed for the project. The acquisition involves 2,101 square feet of utility easement and 200 square feet of right of way.

Location:

Discussion:
Staff said they spoke with the applicant today and might have made some progress, but they’re still seeking approval to move forward in case negotiations are not successful.

Decision:
The council voted 7-0 to approve the resolution.

Background:
This item would authorize the City Attorney to pursue condemnation and order of possession for the 28 remaining easements needed for the West Transmission water main project, which involves the construction of a 48-inch waterline to connect Fayetteville to a new water distribution point established by Beaver Water District. Staff said the connection is vital for maintaining clean water supply within the city and surrounding areas. Construction is slated to begin in late 2024.

Property owners and compensation amounts:

1. BFT Rental, LLC – $112,180.00
2. Ross D. Odom Revocable Trust – $125,000.00
3. TBB Land Holdings, LLC – $141,700.00
4. Spring Branch Holdings, LLC – $1,850.00
5. Russel B. & Esther P. Rogers – $65,300.00
6. Four Horn Properties, LLC – $26,650.00
7. Wildcat Creek Farms, LLC – $81,400.00
8. Solomon Properties, LLC – $23,450.00
9. C L George & Sons – $35,000.00
10. One Twelve, LLC – Potts Family, LLC – $200.00
11. lmdale Lake, LLC – $77,660.00
12. Phillip D. Hays – $137,550.00
13. Cynthia Donohew, Danny G. Hurlbut, Melissa Pruitt & Jeffrey Hurlbut – $43,000.00
14. Kent Bird Detmer – $97,750.00
15. Fellowship Bible Church of Northwest Arkansas – $24,140.00
16. One Twelve Village, LLC – $238,050.00
17. Willow Bend Optionco, LLC – $107,150.00
18. Fayetteville School District #1 – $47,000.00
19. Charles Andrew Cassat 2014 Revocable Trust – $87,000.00
20. Benny Moore Revocable Trust – $19,750.00
21. Aaron Ray & Cristina Harris – $51,100.00
22. Scott & Belinda Musgrave – $90,350.00
23. James & Patricia Galloway – $3,400.00
24. James Paul & Shawna Galloway – $6,720.00
25. Dennis W. & Eva M. Moser – $8,100.00
26. Jason M. Thomas & Jennifer A. Olivero Sanchez – $42,600.00
27. Brigitte L. Farris – $2,050.00
28. Bobby J. Chandler Revocable Trust; Juanita F. Chandler Revocable Trust – $41,025.00

Discussion:
Staff said some of the properties are nearing settlement.

City Attorney Kit Williams said 10 from the above list were settled today, but a few negotiations have stalled at the moment so the recommendation is to move forward with a new, smaller list.

Decision:
The council amended the resolution and voted 7-0 to approve it.

Background:
Staff said as the city has grown both technologically and in population, the City Clerk’s office has seen an increasing demand for transparency and information access. To meet this demand, a dedicated position is being requested to manage information requests, handle boards, committees, and commissions applications, and support the City Council’s Nominating Committee. It’s the first and only request for additional staffing in the past four years.

Discussion:
City Clerk Treasurer Kara Paxton said the position she requested was not included by city staff as part of the most recent standard procedural proposal for new hirings. Paxton said she was told that her requested position wasn’t just denied, but was categorized as “zero-consideration,” so she’s bringing it forward herself.

Turk asked why there’s no budget adjustment included for the potential hiring. Paxton said her department wanted to bring the item to the council first for approval before asking for a budget adjustment needed for the hire.

Paul Becker, the city’s chief financial officer, said 33 new positions were requested from various departments and only 10 were approved because of budgetary reasons. He said Paxton’s request was analyzed, but the Mayor’s Office did not choose the request as one that would be included for further presentation.

Wiederkehr said he has deep respect for Paxton and her staff, but he doesn’t like being pulled into what appears to be a political debate between the City Clerk’s office and the Mayor’s office over a hiring decision. Bunch agreed, and said if the City Clerk’s office isn’t being treated fairly, that’s an issue that needs to be dealt with, but not during a City Council meeting.

Berna said the request feels more like a want than a need, and he’s disappointed to have been brought into this argument.

Jones said the request seems reasonable and he’ll likely support it.

Mayor Jordan said he had about $1 million to spend when considering all 33 of the position requests, which isn’t nearly enough to fund them all. He said there were many positions he wishes he could’ve approved, but it just wasn’t possible. He said the Fire Department, for example, requested 12 positions and only received two.

Wiederkehr said he hopes his previous comments didn’t seem disrespectful. He said he would prefer position requests come through the standard procedure, so if asked to vote tonight, he can’t support it.

Moore said if Wiederkehr is suggesting tabling the item, she’d like to discuss this specific request during the normal budget cycle next month. Turk suggested tabling the item indefinitely and carve out a few minutes during the budget meeting to discuss it.

Paxton said she’s fine with that, even if it’s not brought back this year and is completely removed.

“There’s always the 2024 budget,” she said.

Decision:
The council voted 7-0 to table the item indefinitely.

Background:
Council Member D’Andre Jones is sponsoring this ordinance to establish the Fayetteville Youth Advisory Council to bring fresh ideas and youth perspectives into local decision-making.

The council would consist of eight members who are residents of the city and are actively enrolled in a public or private high school in grades 9-12. One member would be a City Council member appointed by the mayor. Members would serve a two-year term unless grade 12 is completed during the term, at which time the position would be declared vacant.

The group would hold at least one regular meeting per month during the school year, with the option to meet more often as needed or desired.

The council’s duties and responsibilities would be to:

1. Evaluate and review problems facing youth in the city.
2. Facilitate neighborhood meetings with youth to discuss problems, needs and suggested improvements for our community.
3. Meet regularly with the Mayor’s representative and the appointed City Council member to share ideas and discuss issues, concerns and needed improvements.
4. Attend, if desired, City Council meetings and participate in vision and goal sessions.
5. Present recommendations to the City Council and Mayor on important public projects and programs affecting the youth of Fayetteville.
6. Assist in planning youth/recreation activities.
7. Evaluate and advise the City Council and Mayor on issues forwarded to the Fayetteville Youth Advisory Council for advice.

Discussion:
Jones said he’d like for this proposal to be discussed by Kalvin Larson, a 17-year-old Fayetteville resident.

Larson said he got the idea for a youth council after realizing that a community and its decision makers could benefit from youth perspectives, and that youth could benefit from being introduced to the local decision-making process.

Turk asked if Larson had considered reducing the meeting amounts to less than once per month because it’s a big ask for a council member that already has a heavy load from all the committees they’re required to be a part of besides City Council. Larson said he hopes things like that can be worked out on a trial-and-error basis.

Bunch said she likes the idea, and it could be good for youth who are looking to fulfill their community service requirements.

Wiederkehr said it would be a great way to engage people, but it wouldn’t come without a cost in the way of use of city property for meetings, possible recording of meetings, keeping minutes, etc.

Moore agreed, but said she thinks the return on investment would be worth it.

During public comment, several people spoke in favor of the proposal.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it.

Background:
This item is the next step in a plan to build a new downtown hotel across from the Walton Arts Center. The council last year voted 7-1 to approve a letter of intent with Reindl Properties for the hotel, which would sit next to the Upper Ramble where a civic plaza is planned across from the arts center.

This item would authorize the mayor to sell 0.5 acres of city land for the project to Reindl for $1,247,455.

The city in 2021 began an RFP process to find a development partner for a building that voters were shown on the southern end of the plaza. The RFP asked for a 14,000-square-foot building footprint with a height limit of seven stories and three primary facades with an overall aesthetic that compliments the surrounding area.

Negotiations later began with Fayetteville developer Brian Reindl, who owns the Metro District building just south of the civic plaza where Cork & Keg, Rolando’s Restaurante and several other businesses are located.

The City Council’s letter of intent specified that Reindl must start construction on the new building within 12 months of the completion of the new civic plaza.

The new plaza would replace the 290-space parking lot across from the arts center. To accommodate parking, a new parking deck is being built across the street. Construction of the plaza will begin once the new parking deck is completed.

Location:

Discussion:
City Attorney Kit Williams said there are a few contractual details he’d like to iron out before this item is approved.

City staff said since the last meeting, the developer has agreed to provide a 65-space valet parking area on property they own nearby at South Gregg Avenue and Center Street. Also, the hotel’s room count has been reduced from 135 rooms to somewhere between 110-115 rooms.

Carl Kernodle, Reindl’s development partner, said the plan is to find a soft brand hotel partner for the project.

During public comment, six people spoke in favor of the proposal.

Moore said this is an opportunity the city likely won’t have again. Jones agreed, and said it’s time to move forward with the plan.

Turk said the council should hold the item until the next meeting to allow more time for the public to look over the proposal. That would be three weeks from tonight.

Williams suggested using the next seven days to iron out some contract details he’d like to see added, and then schedule a special council meeting next week. Paxton said special meetings are a major burden on her office and on city staff, and asked the council to not call a special meeting.

Berna said last year he was against this project because there wasn’t enough parking allocated for the amount of rooms the hotel had planned. After seeing the new plan, he is more comfortable with it. However, he said with some contractual details still needing to be dealt with, he’s not ready to vote tonight.

Wiederkehr said he has no doubt that the council can come to an agreement, but getting all the details in place is important.

Bunch said she’d be fine voting tonight, but she knows that won’t happen.

The council voted 6-1 to table the item until the next meeting on Nov. 7. Jones voted against.

City staff recommend approval of the request. The Planning Commission does not hear these types of requests.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it.

Background:
The property is west of Shiloh Drive in north Fayetteville, just south of the Northwest Arkansas Mall. The east side of the property in question was recently redeveloped with an office and retail space. A large multi-family project with approximately 200 units was recently approved for the 6-acre portion of the site to the west. The applicant proposes to vacate three separate utility easements to develop an approved large site improvement plan for multi-family housing.

City staff recommend approval of the request. The Planning Commission does not hear these types of requests.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it.

Background:
The property is in south Fayetteville and contains two separate parcels that are owned by the Fayetteville Housing Authority. The site is developed with two three-family structures that are non-conforming since the property is zoned NC, Neighborhood Conservation, a single-family residential district. A quit claim deed was filed in 1995 to close an existing 10-foot alley through the center of the property and a 20-foot street right-of-way along the eastern property line, but neither were formally vacated by the council. The applicant proposes to vacate 0.054 acres of right-of-way that currently makes up a 20-foot wide alley right-of-way along the eastern property line.

Both the Planning Commission and city staff recommend approval of the request.

Location:

Discussion:
While the proposal before the council is recommended by the Planning Commission and city staff, it’s not what the applicant has requested.

The recommendation is to vacate only the area under the building, but the applicant has asked for a full vacation of the entire right-of-way. A third option, staff said, would be to vacate the western half of the right-of-way.

Wiederkehr said he’s inclined to support the third option as a compromise, but asked for more council comment. Hertzberg said she’d prefer to do what the applicant is asking, which would be a vacation of the entire right-of-way. Turk agreed with Hertzberg.

Staff said in order to do that, the council would need to amend the ordinance to remove Condition 2 in Section 3. The council voted 7-0 to amend the ordinance as suggested.

Decision:
The council voted 7-0 to approve the amended ordinance.

Background:
The property is located in south Fayetteville, one lot north of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard on the east side of Willow Avenue. It is currently developed with a single-family home. Prior to 2008, the subject property and most others in the immediate vicinity were zoned RMF-24, Residential Multi- Family, 24 Units per Acre. With the adoption of the Walker Park Neighborhood Master Plan that year, the property was rezoned to NC, Neighborhood Conservation.

Both the Planning Commission and city staff recommend approval of the request.

Location:

Discussion:
A resident asked why the council is considering this when it is within the boundaries that have been suggested for a new Black historic district.

Several council members said with no district in place and no official proposal even available to consider, it wouldn’t be fair to a property owner within those boundaries to have their rezoning request blocked.

The council agreed to hold the item on the first reading for further consideration. The discussion will continue on Nov. 7.

Background:
The property is located about 200 feet west of Razorback Stadium. It contains a 4-bedroom house and a 1-bedroom accessory dwelling unit.

The owner applied for a permit for a short-term rental, but was denied by the Planning Commission on Sept. 11. Before that, staff said multiple code cases had been opened for the property. From a staff report: A business license was denied on July 21, 2022 due to incomplete information. Initial zoning violations were opened on April 27 and May 1, 2023 for operating the main structure and ADU without a business license. A notice of violation was sent to the applicant with instructions to cease operations until a business license was received. A duplicate zoning violation was issued on August 7, 2023 for continuing to operate the short-term rentals in violation of the ordinance and the applicant confirmed that the listings were taken down on August 7, 2023 in an email to staff the following day.

City staff said the property does not have adequate parking to operate a short-term rental, so they are also recommending denial of the permit.

Location:

Discussion:
Bunch, Berna and Jones all supported the appeal. They said the applicant was confused throughout the process and they felt like their application deserves more consideration.

Turk said the people who live in the neighborhood agree that the applicants are good neighbors, but they’re concerned about the growing number of short-term rentals in the area.

Decision:
The council voted 6-1 to approve the appeal. Moore voted against.

Background:
The council previously asked the city to issue a request for proposals about using the city’s remaining $1.63 million in ARPA funds for some type of innovative solution to the city’s housing problem.

Two requests were received, one from Flintlock Landscape, Architecture + Building and another from 7 Hills Homeless Center.

Flintlock’s proposal includes four options:

1. Building 12 townhouses on South Street to be used as affordable rentals.
2. Purchasing four duplexes on Spruce Street that Flintlock would own and manage as affordable rentals.
3. Same as #1, but adds money for street improvements that would allow for the construction of nine tiny homes to be sold at an affordable price with no property taxes.
4. Similar to #2, but instead of selling the nine homes, they would be used as affordable rentals.

The 7 Hills proposal calls for converting some of 7 Hills’ dorms to an overnight shelter that could help transition people into permanent housing. It also calls for buying two triplexes and then renovating them, and building an outdoor community area for people who are ready to move out of the New Beginnings transitional housing facility. It also calls for partnering with several other organizations to help continue existing initiatives, like a street outreach homelessness program, a program to find landlords willing to take home vouchers from people experiencing homelessness, and the Salvation Army’s Pathway of Hope program. Finally, the proposal calls for making infrastructure changes to local churches that want to provide shelters for people experiencing homelessness.

Discussion:
Staff said there are problems with both proposals related to the allowable use of ARPA funds, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be resolved by reallocating funds. For example, the 7 Hills proposal calls for spending some of the funds on landscaping and hydroponics, but those wouldn’t be allowed.

Another issue, staff said, is that these programs would have to be funded as reimbursements. In other words, the city cannot write a check to either group and have them dole out funds. Each group would need to have the $1.63 million on hand to implement the programs, and then be reimbursed by the city for each and every receipt needed for all elements of the programs.

Staff also said per federal regulations, they would be required to present two other comparative options to the Treasury for dealing with housing issues, so they put together a rental assistance program and a transitional housing program that they could present if the council chooses the 7 Hills program or Flintlock program (see below).

Berna said the Flintlock proposal is very creative, but he’d be more comfortable with the 7 Hills proposal because of its collaborative efforts.

Hertzberg agreed, and said the 7 Hills proposal meets the most immediate need, especially with colder weather approaching.

Several people spoke in favor of the 7 Hills proposal.

Decision:
The council voted 7-0 to amend the resolution to include 7 Hills and then voted 7-0 to approve it.