Fayetteville City Council recap: April 18, 2023

(Flyer photo, File)

Agenda highlights

Approved:

  • Intent to hire a consultant for a park impact fee study.
  • Rezoning 14.7 acres on Old Wire Road.
  • A new graffiti abatement program.

Denied:

  • An ARPA-funded subrecipient agreement with New Beginnings.
  • Appeals of two denied permits for short-term rentals on Fletcher Avenue.

Held:

  • Amending the city’s water and sewer rates.
  • Allowing AND1 to refurbish and paint the basketball courts at Walker Park.

Listed below are all the items up for approval and links to PDF documents with detailed information on each item of business.

» Download the agenda

Meeting info

A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council began at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, April 18, 2023 inside City Hall in Room 219. The meeting is also available on Zoom and is broadcast live on the city’s YouTube channel.


Roll call

Present: Sonia Harvey, D’Andre Jones, Sarah Moore, Mike Wiederkehr, Mayor Lioneld Jordan, Scott Berna, Sarah Bunch, Teresa Turk, Holly Hertzberg
Absent: None
» View current attendance records


Consent

Consent items are approved in a single, all-inclusive vote unless an item is pulled by a council member at the beginning of the meeting.

1. Approval of the April 4, 2023 City Council meeting minutes.
Pass 8-0

2. Accept funding from HIDTA and budget adjustment (Details): A resolution to approve a Memorandum of Agreement with Washington County to accept funding from the Gulf Coast High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area in the amount of $98,066.00 for the Police Department, and to approve a budget adjustment.
Pass 8-0

3. Purchasing of bunker coats and pants for the Fire Department (Details): A resolution to authorize the purchase of bunker gear coats and pants from Lion Manufacturing through NAFECO, Inc., pursuant to a Sourcewell cooperative purchasing contract, in the amount of $154,439.10 plus applicable taxes and freight charges.
Pass 8-0

4. Interest budget adjustment to 2019 Phase I bonds (Details): A resolution to approve a budget adjustment in the amount of $463,032.00 recognizing interest revenue generated from the sales and use tax capital improvement and refunding bonds series 2019.
Pass 8-0

5. Amend Resolution 35-23 and approve a budget adjustment (Details): A resolution to amend Resolution 35-23 by reducing the amount of reappropriations to the 2023 budget by $3,031,724.00, and to approve a budget adjustment.
Pass 8-0

6. West Side Prairie Habitat Restoration and Management (Details): A resolution to authorize a one-year contract with the Northwest Arkansas Land Trust in the amount of $20,000.00 for habitat restoration and management at the West Side Prairie with an option to renew for five additional one-year terms.
Pass 8-0

7. Park Impact Fee Study (Details): A resolution to express the intent of the City Council to engage a consultant to perform a park impact fee study.
Pass 8-0


Unfinished Business

1. RZN 23-004 (2910 N. Old Wire Rd./Van Scyoc, 255) (Details)

An ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 23-004 located at 2910 N. Old Wire Road in Ward 3 for approximately 14.70 acres from RSF-4, Residential Single-Family, 4 units per acre and R-A, Residential Agriculture to R-A, Residential Agriculture and NC, Neighborhood Conservation.
Pass 7-1

Background:
The property is about 700 feet west of the intersection of Crossover Road and Old Wire Road, and with the exception of one single-family house, the three parcels are undeveloped. The entire property is covered with extensive tree canopy, and the eastern half is part of the streamside protection zone / floodplain & floodway of Niokaska Creek and is largely designated as part of the Enduring Green Network.

The applicant would like to shift the alignment of the existing Residential Agriculture zoning district to follow the boundary of the 100-year flood line, and to rezone the remainder of the property to Neighborhood Conservation.

Staff said the requested zoning district would be compatible with the surrounding context and is consistent with the goals in City Plan 2040. The existing and proposed zoning districts have similar allowable uses, but NC includes urban form setbacks rather than traditional setbacks. Rezoning from RSF-4 to NC would increase the density cap from 32 to 95 units, but future development would still be subject to minimum parking requirements, tree preservation, drainage, and access management standards.

Both city planners and the Planning Commission recommend in favor of the request.

Location:

March 21 Discussion:
During public comment, five people spoke in opposition to the request.

Berna said the council has seen numerous emails and phone calls in opposition to the proposal. He said he’d like to make sure the council takes its time in considering the project given the size of the property.

The council agreed to leave the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue on April 4.

April 4 Discussion:
Berna said he lives near the property and was initially highly concerned about the potential traffic increase a development might cause. However, after studying the application and learning about the traffic history, he’s less hesitant but still a bit torn on a decision.

The council agreed to hold the item on the second reading. The discussion will continue on April 18.

April 18 Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Bunch said there was a good discourse between the neighbors and the developer during the many discussions about this proposal.

Turk said the traffic isn’t as bad as she had assumed, but she still thinks the proposed zoning district is too dense for the area and she’d prefer RSF-8, so she won’t support the ordinance.

Berna said he’s been on the fence about the proposal, mostly because of concerns about increased traffic, but he said after seeing the traffic data and relying on the city planning staff’s recommendation, he’ll support it.

Decision:
The council voted 7-1 to approve the ordinance. Turk voted against.


2. Amend §130.39 Graffiti (Details)

An ordinance to amend §130.39 Graffiti in the Fayetteville Code to create a graffiti abatement program.
Pass 7-0

Background:
This proposal from Councilmember Turk would establish a program that allows city staff to remove graffiti from private property as long as the owner does not want the graffiti, similar to a program already in place in Springdale.

Dec. 6 Discussion:
Turk said she frequently bikes the trails and often notices graffiti. She said she wanted to open up the conversation about how to handle graffiti on private property since the city is not allowed to clean up graffiti unless it’s on public property.

Turk said she likes the language the city attorney drafted except for the sentence that allows a leaseholder or tenant of a property to sign off on the cleaning, and that the owner should probably have the final say.

Harvey said she’d like to table the ordinance to allow time for the Arts Council to discuss the proposal at their next meeting. The council agreed, and tabled the item until Jan. 3, 2023.

Jan. 3 Discussion:
Harvey asked if the council would table this ordinance to allow more time for the Arts Council to discuss the proposal because there was so much business at the panel’s last meeting that they weren’t able to take it up.

Feb. 7 Discussion:
Turk said she’d like to table the ordinance until the next meeting to give the Arts Council more time to discuss the proposal and suggest some possible amendments.

The council agreed. The discussion will continue on Feb. 21.

Feb. 21 Discussion:
Turk said she found out today there are still some concerns from the administration about the constitutionality of the proposal, and while she doesn’t have any specific amendments to suggest now, she’d like to continue to try and solve an offensive graffiti problem she said she’s noticed near Dickson Street.

“That area is getting worse and worse,” Turk said. “We spend lots of money on trails, and yet we have not been able to keep them clean.”

Berna said while there is a problem, it’s a challenge to define what is offensive. “What is offensive to me might not be offensive to someone else,” he said.

Police Chief Mike Reynolds said there is an ebb and flow to graffiti. The department took 31 complaints about graffiti in 2021, but that number was just eight in 2022.

Councilmember Harvey said the Arts Council researched other cities’ graffiti issues, and the findings showed that while there isn’t a connection between graffiti and other types of crime, when graffiti is left uncleaned, it does tend to lead to more graffiti.

There was no public comment.

The council voted 8-0 to table the ordinance until April 18.

April 18 Discussion:
The council amended the ordinance to include changes made since the first proposal:

There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council voted 7-0 to approve the ordinance. Hertzberg’s vote was no audible.


3. An Ordinance to Amend §51.136 Monthly Water Rates and §51.137 Monthly Sewer Rates to Change Water and Sewer Rates: (Details)

An ordinance to amend §51.136 Monthly Water Rates and §51.137 Monthly Sewer Rates to change water and sewer rates as recommended by the cost of service study conducted by Black & Veatch.
Tabled 7-0 until May 16

Background:
This ordinance would make the recommended changes to the city’s water and sewer rates as discussed in the public hearing on tonight’s agenda.

The changes would apply to water and sewer customers who live outside the city limits. Rates would stay the same for those whose addresses are inside the city limits.

July 19 Discussion:
Paul Becker, the city’s chief financial officer, asked that the ordinance be tabled to allow time to meet with Farmington city leaders to negotiate a new contract. He requested the item be held until Dec. 6.

Mayor Jordan said he would also like to table the item to allow time to make some changes to the recommendations.

Dec. 6 Discussion:
Paul Becker, the city’s chief financial officer, asked that the ordinance be tabled to allow more time to negotiate with Farmington city leaders on a new contract. He requested the item be held until March 7, 2023.

March 7 Discussion:
Paul Becker, the city’s chief financial officer, asked that the ordinance be tabled until April 18, 2023. Becker said staff needs more time, partly because they’re still negotiating with Farmington city leaders.

April 18 Discussion:
Paul Becker, the city’s chief financial officer, asked that the ordinance be tabled until May 16, 2023. Becker said staff needs more time with the proposal.


4. ARPA Subrecipient Application – Serve NWA d/b/a New Beginnings (Details)

A resolution to approve and authorize Mayor Jordan to sign an ARPA funded subrecipient agreement with Serve NWA for supportive or affordable housing in the amount of $1,295,000.00 and to approve a budget adjustment.
Fail 3-5

Background:
Councilmember Sarah Moore has suggested approving a subrecipient agreement with Serve NWA d/b/a New Beginnings using $1,295,000 in ARPA funds to provide low-income residents with housing and other needed support.

Discussion:
City staff said they don’t recommend approval of the request, partially because they’re unsure if it complies with ARPA guidelines, but also because they ranked 20 other ARPA applications higher than this particular one, in part because it may only provide housing for six to eight families at a cost of nearly $1.3 million.

During public comment, 19 people spoke in favor of the proposal.

City Attorney Kit Williams said if the council approves the proposal, he’ll need to draft a contract which would then need to be approved by both the New Beginnings board of directors and the City Council at a future meeting.

Paul Becker, the city’s chief financial officer, said it may take a few months to get the agreement in order to ensure the city is complying with the ARPA guidelines.

Councilmember Berna said the question tonight is not whether New Beginnings is deserving of the money or whether homelessness is a valid concern, but instead whether the proposal is feasible or legal.

Bunch said she’s all for taking a calculated risk, especially for something as important as addressing affordable housing, but she has several concerns about the project.

“It’s not that I don’t think it’s worth the risk, but I think I need some more things answered before I can commit,” Bunch said.

Jones asked how many people could possibly be housed. Solomon Burchfield with New Beginnings said over the lifetime of the program, the 6-8 homes could potentially serve up to 30 people.

Turk said she’s not sure the city would even make the cost-benefit requirement, and moved to reduce the funding to $975,000 which could have a better chance of being compliant. Hertzberg seconded. Williams said keeping the amount under $1 million would be much safer.

Berna said he’s struggling with the decision, partly because it does not have the support of city staff, but mostly because of the cost-benefit scenario which may not be helping enough people for the amount of money that’s being proposed.

Bunch moved to table the proposal for six weeks. The motion passed 8-0. The discussion will continue on April 18.

April 18 Discussion:
Staff was asked by the council to provide some alternative options to the proposal that could provide assistance using the same amount of ARPA money.

They came up with a possible rental assistance program that could serve 54 people over 12 months or a transitional housing program that could serve 43-48 people over 12 months:

During public comment, 13 people spoke in favor of the proposal.

The council last month discussed reducing the proposed amount to $975,000, but that idea was not formally proposed. Hertzberg moved to change it to that amount tonight. Turk seconded, and the council voted 8-0 to approve it.

Turk said doesn’t think the current proposal helps enough people for the amount of money being spent, and she would rather see the funds go toward longterm housing for more people possibly through some type of a tiny house community pilot program that could eventually be scaled. “I think we need to be thinking more broadly than what is before us,” Turk said.

Berna said it’s clear the applicant has a sincere intent to help the community, but he won’t be supporting the proposal. He said the shotgun approach the city has been taking to helping unhoused people is not working, and he’s concerned this proposal is not thorough enough to provide the appropriate help for enough people. He said he’s spoken with the applicant both in council meetings and outside City Hall, and that the details of the plan changed each time it was discussed.

“I’m concerned that we’re trying to appropriate money and then formulate a plan later, and I don’t think we can do that with this money,” said Berna. “I don’t think this is the answer and that’s why I can’t support it.”

Bunch said she’s struggled with the proposal because she wants to get the most out of the money, but she doesn’t know if the benefit is high enough to offset the cost. “But I also know there aren’t a lot of options out there, so I keep asking myself ‘Do I just take the chance with this and roll the dice to see if it works?'” Bunch said.

Harvey said the ARPA funding process has brought to light just how big of a need there is for housing people who have no place to live. She said she doesn’t think this proposal is the best use of the money and she’d like to see the city embark on a more broad plan. “I’m not sure this is the most efficient and effective way to help those who need it,” said Harvey.

City Attorney Kit Williams said the city and the council have time to formulate a plan before it’s too late to use the ARPA money.

Wiederkehr said he would be more comfortable earmarking the money for a larger scale plan and he thinks the applicant would be a good person to lead the project.

Turk suggested holding the funds and appropriating them for some type of housing project.

Berna said if the proposal is denied tonight, the council should commit to working toward some type of solution in the near future.

Moore said the council should approve the proposal because the problem only gets worse every day.

Decision:
The council voted 3-5 so the resolution failed. Turk, Berna, Hertzberg, Harvey and Bunch voted against.


New Business

1. Appeal CUP-2023-008: Conditional Use Permit (348 N. Fletcher Ave./Scott, 485) (Details)

A resolution to grant the appeal of Council Members Scott Berna, Sonia Harvey, and D’Andre Jones and approve Conditional Use Permit CUP 2023-008 for a short-term rental at 348 North Fletcher Street.
Fail 1-7

Background:
This item is nearly identical to the next item on the agenda. The two homes are on property that was rezoned in 2020. The property included two single-family homes that have since been removed and replaced with five two-story townhomes that each include two units. The owners of two of the homes want to use them as short-term rental businesses, but the Planning Commission denied those requests, saying that the requests are not in line with the original marketed vision for the property, which was to build affordable housing for long-term residents.

Location:

Discussion:
A person who lives in one of the 10 units said there are only two units with full-time residents. He said he’s spoken to the owners of the other units and they have told him they plan to request a permit for a short-term rental as well. He said he would rather have full-time neighbors than live in a row of short-term rentals.

Three neighbors said they feel like victims of a bait-and-switch scenario because when the developer first requested the rezoning needed to build the units, they told the council the plan was to provide affordable workforce housing and that plan clearly hasn’t been followed.

Another neighbor said she has lived in a similar situation in downtown Bentonville where there were numerous short-term rentals in a neighborhood. She said in a situation like that, the onus is on the residents to keep track of the problems that arise when out-of-town investors are not around to take care of their property. It’s a burden that full-time residents should’ve have to bear, she said.

Another neighbor said issues are already arising such as trash cans being left on the street because there’s nobody around to take them back to the units after they’re emptied.

About a dozen people spoke against the appeal.

One person who owns one of the other homes said the neighborhood is not affordable, and that the market is what dictates pricing.

Harvey asked what powers the council has in this situation other than considering compatibility.

City Attorney Kit Williams said while there have been some compelling arguments against short-term rentals, the council very recently passed a law that allows them to exist as long as the citywide cap of 2% of all units has not yet been reached. He said it might be that the council needs to change that cap or place individual caps on certain neighborhoods, but that can’t be done tonight when there are proposals on the table. Williams said if the council wants to deny a permit for a short-term rental, it needs to show how such an action would be incompatible with the neighborhood.

Wiederkehr said it’s worth considering whether a business operating in a residential neighborhood is a compatible use.

Decision:
The council voted 1-7 to deny the appeal. Hertzberg voted in favor.


2. Appeal CUP-2023-009: Conditional Use Permit (332 N. Fletcher Ave./ETG Shelf 3 LLC, 485) (Details)

A resolution to grant the appeal of Council Members Scott Berna, Holly Hertzberg, and D’Andre Jones and approve Conditional Use Permit CUP 2023-009 for a short-term rental at 332 North Fletcher Street.
Fail 1-7

Background:
This item is nearly identical to the above item on the agenda. The two homes are on property that was rezoned in 2020. The property included two single-family homes that have since been removed and replaced with five two-story townhomes that each include two units. The owners of two of the homes want to use them as short-term rental businesses, but the Planning Commission denied those requests, saying that the requests are not in line with the original marketed vision for the property, which was to build affordable housing for long-term residents.

Location:

Discussion:
Hertzberg said she was disappointed in the previous vote and she hopes the council will grant the appeal for this second item. She said the owners of the homes shouldn’t be held accountable for promises made by the developer who requested a rezoning to build the homes two years ago.

Bunch said when people buy a home, there’s no guarantee that they’ll later be approved for a short-term rental permit. She said it’s unfortunate for the buyer who took the risk and had hopes of converting the home into a business, but the council is not denying anyone’s rights by not granting a conditional use for the property.

Decision:
The council voted 1-7 to deny the appeal. Hertzberg voted in favor.


3. Walker Park basketball court refurbishing and giveaway (Details)

A resolution to approve a proposal by Walmart and AND1 to refurbish and paint the Walker Park basketball courts and host a back-to-school backpack and shoe giveaway, and to approve the recognition of Walmart and And1 for their significant contributions at the refurbished courts.
Tabled 5-4

Background:
Footwear and apparel company AND1, which first became known for its video mixtapes of basketball games at urban courts in the early 1990s, has recently been investing in refurbishing public courts across the country as part of its “Paint the Park” initiative. The projects included community celebrations and have featured performances by athletes as well as giveaways and collaborations with local artists. This item would allow AND1 and Walmart to paint the courts at Walker Park and to host a back-to-school shoe and backpack giveaway at their cost, which is estimated at $200,000. An AND1 logo would be included on the courts, along with a Walmart logo.

This item was originally on the consent portion of the agenda, but Councilmember Sonia Harvey asked that it be placed onto the new business portion of the agenda so that an individual discussion could take place. She said she was hesitant about allowing commercialization in the parks.

Alison Jumper, the city’s director of parks, natural resources and cultural affairs, said the city does have a donor recognition policy to allow acknowledgment for businesses that contribute to parks infrastructure.

For example, Bryce Davis Park in west Fayetteville includes the 3-acre IAMS Dog Park named after a donation from the IAMS pet food brand.

» See our previous story here

Discussion:
Harvey said she’d like the Arts Council to discuss the proposal and make a recommendation before the council votes. She said she considers the mural to be an advertisement and she doesn’t like the idea of marketing in public parks. Moore agreed.

City Attorney said the resolution was written to allow the mayor the discretion to allow the corporate logos or not.

Mayor Jordan said with both IAMS Dog Park and the Rotary recognition at Kessler Mountain Regional Park, he’s inclined to support the resolution, especially because the proposed event will include backpacks and shoes for children.

Berna said the new mural will be a draw to the neighborhood and an asset to the community, and the businesses giving money for the project expect to have at least some recognition for their donation. By waiting, Berna said the council could be opening the door for AND1 to take the project elsewhere.

Bunch said regardless of the donor recognition, the project will benefit the community. For a lot of people, just the backpack and shoe giveaway alone will be a major benefit.

Wiederkehr said it’s a low-risk proposition considering the paint will likely only last a few years. He said the city will get a refurbished court in exchange for temporary logo inside of a mural. “We’re not naming the Walton Arts Center here,” said Wiederkehr.

The council voted 5-4 to table the resolution until May 2. Harvey, Jones, Moore, Turk and Jordan voted to table.


Meeting duration

This meeting lasted 6 hours and 6 minutes, and was adjourned at 11:36 p.m.