[22-I-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE QUORUM COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY ENCOURAGING THE ARKANSAS GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO PASS MEANINGFUL LEGISLATION TO ENSURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROVIDE RELIEF TO COUNTY JAILS. ]

LEGISLATION TO ENSURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROVIDE RELIEF TO COUNTY JAILS.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD I MOVE THAT WE SEND THIS TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND.

A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND RESOLUTION 22 AND 59 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN OR DO YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT CAN EXPLAIN IT FOR US? ANYONE HERE THAT? I GUESS I'LL FIELD IT.

SO THE RESOLUTION MIRRORS A RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED BY THE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION AND THE JUDGES ASSOCIATION.

IN A NUTSHELL, YOUR PRISONS ARE OVERCROWDED.

OUR COUNTY JAILS ARE OVERCROWDED WITH STATE INMATES THAT WE'RE HOLDING.

SO WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING THE STATE TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO HOUSE THEIR INMATES.

I'M ASSUMING THIS WILL BE ONE OF 75 RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE PASSED LIKE THIS.

AC IS HAS ASKED THE COUNTY COURTS TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, AND THIS WILL GO INTO THEIR LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE.

SO IT'S JUST AN ENCOURAGEMENT.

IT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING IS WE'RE NOT SOMEONE ASKED TODAY, WHY ARE WE BUILDING A NEW JAIL IN THE COUNTY? NO, WE'RE NOT BUILDING A NEW JAIL IN THE COUNTY.

IT'S SIMPLY ENCOURAGING THE STATE TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OR POSSESSION.

I GUESS IT'D BE A WORD OF STATE INMATES THAT ARE BEING HOUSED IN THE COUNTY JAIL.

SO THANK YOU, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, JUSTICE STOWERS.

THANK YOU, MR. KEITH. SO CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM MEANS A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS TO A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

I SUPPORT CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM AS AS IT RELATES TO A PERSON THAT'S CAUGHT THREE DIFFERENT TIMES WITH A PERSONAL AMOUNT OF USE OF CANNABIS.

AND SO BECAUSE IT'S THEIR THIRD TIME AND THIRD STRIKE, THEY'RE OUT THERE SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS IN PRISON.

I BELIEVE THAT DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS, CONSERVATIVES, LIBERALS, MODERATES ACROSS THE BOARD THINK THAT THAT'S EXTREME WHERE WE HAVE A PROBLEM AND PART OF OUR VIOLENT CRIME PROBLEM THAT HAS ESPECIALLY EXASPERATED ITSELF OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS IN LITTLE ROCK ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED AND COMMITTED TO THE

[00:05:04]

PENITENTIARY FOR MULTIPLE YEARS TEN, 20, 30, 50 YEARS, AND YET ARE BEING RELEASED WHEN ONLY ONE SEVENTH.

OF THEIR SENTENCE HAS BEEN SERVED.

SO WHAT HAPPENS? WELL, THEY WERE SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS IN THE PEN FOR MURDER.

THEY COME OUT AFTER THREE YEARS.

THEY GO RIGHT BACK OUT INTO THE LIFE OF CRIME.

I THINK WHAT IT'S MULTIPRONGED HERE IS FAR AS IF AND IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT JUDGE HEID AND MARK WHITMORE AND OTHERS AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE PRESENTED TO THE STATE AND TO THE LEGISLATORS AT THE STATE.

I THINK YOU HEARD THEM SENDING A CLEAR AND A LOUD MESSAGE THAT, YES, WE ALL SUPPORT CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM, BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THAT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NONVIOLENT OFFENDERS AND WHEN WHEN WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE BECAUSE OF A LACK OF SPACE IN THE STATE SYSTEM THAT WE'RE HAVING TO RELEASE FOLKS WHEN THEY'VE ONLY SERVED ONE SEVENTH OF THEIR SENTENCE.

AND THEY AND THEY KNOW THAT THAT'S A PROBLEM AND IT'S NOT A COUNTY PROBLEM.

IT'S A STATE PROBLEM.

AND THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS TO DEAL WITH IT.

AND THE INCOMING GOVERNOR NEEDS TO DEAL WITH IT.

SO I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION.

THERE IS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THIS THOUGHT PROCESS ACROSS I WOULDN'T SAY ACROSS THE BOARD, BUT THERE IS A SYNCH, CERTAINLY A CONSENSUS TO THIS REGARD THAT'S BIPARTISAN IN THE LEGISLATURE AND BEYOND.

AND SO I VERY MUCH SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION THAT BASICALLY RESTATES WHAT JUDGE HYDE IN THE AAC SAID IN A MANNER OF SPEAKING TO THE STATE, TO THE LEGISLATURE, TO THE INCOMING GOVERNOR AT THEIR PRESS CONFERENCE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. AND WITH THAT, I YIELD.

THANK YOU, MR. KEITH. THANK YOU.

JUSTICE TOWERS, JUST TWO QUICK THINGS.

AMY, IF YOU LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT JUSTICE GREEN AND JUSTICE MCMULLEN HAVE ARRIVED AND I'M JUST CURIOUS, JUSTIN, OR MAYBE EVEN ADAM, WHEN WE'RE CALLING ON AND I UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THIS RESOLUTION, WHAT TYPE OF STUDY HAS BEEN DONE TO WHAT TYPE OF TYPE OF INFORMATION HAS BEEN CORRECT, COLLECTED TO SAY THAT.

SO WE HAD AN EVALUATION DONE THROUGH THE JCC A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO IN 2017, AND I THINK.

THEY CONCLUDED THAT SOMETHING IN THE RANGE OF 25 TO 30% OF THE INMATES IN THE COUNTY JAIL WERE STATE INMATES THAT WERE EITHER WAITING TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OR WERE SERVING OUT A LARGE PORTION OF THEIR SENTENCE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.

A LITTLE PIECE OF HISTORY WHEN THE COUNTY PRIOR TO THIS COUNTY JAIL, THE ORIGINAL COUNTY JAIL, HELD ABOUT 200 INMATES.

AND AT THE SAME TIME, THEY WERE STILL HOLDING 25 TO 30% OF THEIR INMATES WERE STATE HOLDS.

SO NOTHING HAS CHANGED WITH THAT.

SO STATISTICALLY SPEAKING, WE KNOW THAT THESE GUYS ARE GENERALLY GOING TO BE MORE VIOLENT OFFENDERS.

THEY'RE BEING HOUSED IN A COUNTY JAIL AND WE'RE GETTING REIMBURSED AS WELL AT A MUCH LOWER RATE.

SO THEY ARE VERY PRISONERS THAT WE'RE STUCK WITH.

AND THEN THEY'RE SAYING, HEY, LOOK, I KNOW IT COSTS $70 A DAY TO HOUSE THEM.

HERE'S $40.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE KNOW ON THAT.

AND THAT'S REALLY ALL WE'RE DOING IS ENCOURAGING THE STATE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY OF THESE INMATES, PROVIDE THE PRISON SPACE, PROVIDE THE STAFF, PROVIDE THE COUNSELING AND THE WRAPAROUND SERVICES THAT THEY NEED.

AND THAT'S ALL THIS IS THAT'S ALL IT'S DOING.

IT'S NOT MANDATING ANYTHING.

THIS WILL BE ONE RESOLUTION IN A STACK OF 75 THAT THE LEGISLATURE WILL CONSIDER OR NOT.

RIGHT. AND I GUESS THAT THAT WAS MY CONCERN, IS THAT WE'RE ENCOURAGING THE STATE TO GET THEIR PRISONERS OUT OF THE COUNTY JAIL.

BUT ACTUALLY, IF IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, IT'S ACTUALLY INDIVIDUALS THAT'S BEING RELEASED OUT OF PRISONS THAT'S ACTUALLY COMING OUT AND RE-OFFENDING.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW ONE WOULD AFFECT THE OTHER.

IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT'S ONLY SERVING A PORTION AND THEY'RE BEING RELEASED BACK INTO PULASKI COUNTY AND NOT ALL OFFENDERS IN THE PLASTIC JAIL ARE FROM PULASKI COUNTY.

YEAH, BUT THEY'RE OFTENTIMES RELEASED BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY.

SO THAT IS AN ISSUE AND ALSO, WHEN YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT STATISTICS, AGAIN, THE STUDY THAT WAS DONE IN 2017 FOR JAILS TO OPERATE SAFELY AND

[00:10:03]

THIS IS NOTHING NEW. THIS WAS PART OF THE ASSESSMENT IN 1990.

80% CAPACITY IS HOW YOU RUN A JAIL SAFELY.

AND THIS RUNS AT CAPACITY AND HAS RUN CAPACITY FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS IN THIS JAIL IN THE PREVIOUS ONE.

SO THAT CREATES A DANGEROUS SITUATION, NOT ONLY FOR LOW LEVEL OFFENDERS, BUT ALSO THE STAFF.

RIGHT. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

AND I'LL COME BACK TO YOU PHIL.

JUSTICE GREEN. I SEE YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO ASK IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT THAT THAT WE COULD APPEAL TO THE STATE BECAUSE.

AND IF SOMEBODY CAN DO A STUDY ON IT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT MOST OF THE I THINK A BIG PROBLEM IS THAT THEY ARE LETTING SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THERE FOR SMALL DRUG OFFENSES ARE SPENDING MORE TIME IN THERE THAN MURDERERS, BECAUSE SOME OF THESE MURDERERS THAT GO OUT, THEY KILL, THEY GO IN THERE AND STAY A COUPLE OF YEARS AND THEY'RE OUT IN TWO YEARS.

THEY'RE BACK ON THE STREETS. AND PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THERE FOR DRUG OFFENSES, THEY'RE IN THERE A LONG TIME.

IS THERE SOMEBODY WHO CAN DO A STUDY ON THAT? I'M SURE WE CAN GET THE STATISTICS ON WHO'S SERVING WHAT.

WE REALLY NEED TO GET SOME STATISTICS ON THAT.

I MEAN, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT VIOLENT OFFENDERS, YOU'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT MURDERS.

YOU MAY JUST BE TALKING ABOUT ANYONE THAT'S A VIOLENT OFFENDER, A RAPIST, A CHILD SEX OFFENDER WHO ARE BEING RELEASED AFTER SERVING A PORTION OF THE TIME BACK INTO OUR COMMUNITY. BUT I KNOW OF A LOT OF MURDERERS WHO HAVE COMMITTED MURDERS.

WELL, AND THEY GO IN, I'M SURE WE CAN FOR MANY YEARS AND THEY GET OUT.

THEY'RE OUT IN A YEAR OR TWO AND THEN THEY GET OUT AND MURDER AGAIN.

RIGHT. AND ONE OF THE THINGS, TOO, WITH WITH THE OVERCROWDING IS THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING ABLE TO THEY DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO GET THE COUNSELING AND SERVICES THAT THEY SHOULD GET WHILE THEY'RE SERVING THEIR SENTENCE.

SO IF THEY'RE GETTING ABBREVIATED SENTENCES, THEY MAY NOT BE GETTING THOSE SERVICES, THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG AND LIFE SKILLS AND ALL OF THAT.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF PROBLEMS WHEN YOU HAVE THE OVERCROWDING, NOT JUST IN THE COUNTY JAIL, BUT IN THE STATE FACILITIES AS WELL.

SO IT'S AN ENCOURAGEMENT.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO SEE WHAT I CAN DIG UP AS FAR AS DATA, BUT I'M WITH YOU.

I SURE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME STATISTICS ON THAT.

YES, MA'AM. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

YES. WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY IS THIS BILL REALLY IS JUST CONCERNED ABOUT MOVING THEIR PRISONERS INTO THEIR JAIL.

THIS BILL ISN'T ADDRESSING THE PROBLEMS. AND, MY GOD, WE HAVE A LOT OF THEM AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS THEM AND THEY NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN ANOTHER AMENDMENT, IN ANOTHER RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE, BECAUSE WE HAVE A TON OF THEM. WELL, YEAH.

AND THIS IS AN ORDINANCE OR A RESOLUTION TO JUST GET THEIR PRISONERS BACK INTO THEIR YOU ROUGHLY HAVE ABOUT 3500 STATE INMATES THAT ARE BACKED UP IN YOUR COUNTY JAILS ON ANY GIVEN DAY.

THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

AND THIS IS NOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE HAVE PROGRAMS OR DON'T HAVE PROGRAMS OR THIS OR THAT AND THAT IS A PROBLEM.

AND I AM ALL FOR ALL THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE GOT TO ADDRESS, BECAUSE THAT'S MY BIGGEST ISSUE.

AND I'M ALWAYS FIGHTING FOR SOME KIND OF PROGRAM THAT WE NEED TO GET DONE OVER THERE.

BUT THE THING ABOUT THIS ONE IS, IS JUST TO GET THEIR PRISONERS IN THEIR JAILS.

IT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

IT'S FAIRLY SIMPLE CUT AND DRY SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE SO MUCH OVERCROWDING IN OUR JAILS.

RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JOSEPH.

JOSEPH STYLES. I WANTED TO SAY TO SAY TO WHAT MISS GREENE SAID WHILE AGO, AND I WANT TO ADD ON TO WHAT MR. KEITH AND MR. BLAGG SAID.

AND THIS ACTUALLY PLAYS INTO WHAT MY COLLEAGUE JUST MENTIONED.

AND IF I'M WRONG, I WOULD INVITE THE SHERIFF TO COME AND CORRECT ME AND I'LL TAKE THAT CORRECTION.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE ARE TRADING OUT FOLKS WHO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED TO THE PENITENTIARY, OUT OF CIRCUIT COURT, OUT OF FEDERAL COURT, INTO THE STATE PENITENTIARY SYSTEM.

AND THE CURRENT SHERIFF ADMINISTRATION IS TRADING THEM OUT FOR FOLKS WHO THIS GROUP THAT'S ONLY SERVED MAYBE A SEVENTH OF THEIR CAPITAL CRIME SENTENCE INTO SOME KIND OF A REHAB PROGRAM.

THAT'S NOT THE PURPOSE OF A COUNTY JAIL.

AND IF THAT IS CORRECT, IF THAT IS CORRECT, AND IF THAT IS HAPPENING AND IF WE ARE TRADING OUT STATE PRISONERS, THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED.

IN COURT AND SENTENCED TO TIME IN THE STATE PENITENTIARY.

AND WE'RE TRADING THEM OUT WITH THE STATE FOR FOLKS WHO HAVE SERVED THEIR SENTENCE AND CERTAINLY NOT EVEN CLOSE TO ALL OF THEIR SENTENCE, BUT BRINGING THEM INTO OUR COUNTY JAIL HERE IN PULASKI COUNTY, WHICH IS I KNOW THERE ARE 75 OF US, 75 COUNTIES, I'M TALKING ABOUT PULASKI COUNTY, AND WE'RE BRINGING THEM INTO OUR COUNTY JAIL TO, QUOTE UNQUOTE, REHABILITATE THEM BEFORE THEY'RE LET BACK OUT ON THE STREET.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE LET BACK OUT ON THE STREET HERE IN PULASKI COUNTY.

[00:15:01]

THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM, AND THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT WHOLEHEARTEDLY THIS RESOLUTION.

I YIELD. DID YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN IT? I THINK YOU GOT IT ALL.

I'M SURE THAT'S A CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER TIME.

IT REALLY DOESN'T HAVE.

WHAT THIS IS TRYING TO DO IS.

RIGHT. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THAT'S FINE. JUSTICE MCMULLEN.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU SAID THAT'S A CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER TIME YOU'RE REFERRING TO.

YEAH, I DON'T HAVE ANY STATISTICS OR NUMBERS OR WHAT THE SWAP FOR PRISONERS THAT ARE COMING OFF OF OR 90 DAY RELEASE OR PAROLED OUT.

THAT'S REALLY THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS RESOLUTION IS NECESSARILY ABOUT.

MY UNDERSTANDING THAT MAY BE A CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER DAY WITH THE SHERIFF TO ASK HIM ABOUT HIS PROGRAMING.

BUT THAT'S REALLY WHAT THIS IS ABOUT, IS SAYING, HEY, WE HAVE TOO MANY STATE INMATES BACK UP IN OUR COUNTY JAILS.

IT'S COSTLY TO THE COUNTY BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO REIMBURSE A PORTION OF THOSE FUNDS.

SO WE'RE EATING THE COST ON THAT FUNDS THAT WE COULD BE USING FOR OTHER THINGS LIKE YOUTH PROGRAMING, COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAMING.

BUT WE'RE LOSING MONEY ON THESE INMATES.

SO NOT ONLY IS A FINANCIAL PROBLEM, YOU HAVE A SAFETY ISSUE WITHIN YOUR JAILS.

AND IF THEY'RE GETTING RELEASED EARLY BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM TO HOLD THEM, THEY'RE GOING.

RIGHT. BUT THEY'RE JUST BASICALLY THEY CALL IT SHOWER AND SHOWER OUT.

YOU GO IN AND YOU COME RIGHT BACK OUT.

SO WITHOUT THE BED SPACE AVAILABLE, WE CAN'T ACTUALLY ADDRESS THOSE LOW LEVEL OFFENDERS THAT MAYBE NEED TO SPEND THE WEEKEND IN THERE AND OR WHATEVER.

BUT IT'S ABOUT SPACE AND THE COUNTY AND THE STATE PROVIDING THE SPACE TO HOLD THOSE STATE INMATES.

I UNDERSTAND IT'S JUST THAT THE OPTICS, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE OPTICS OF IT.

YOU KNOW, THERE ARE PEOPLE, I'M SURE, WOULD LOOK AT THIS AND AND THINK THAT, WELL, WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE SUGGESTING THAT THEY GO TO PRISON, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT.

WE WANT TO SPEND OUR MONEY. AND WE HAVE THE COUNTY HAS BEEN SPENDING THE MONEY ON ALL THESE OTHER PROGRAMS. I UNDERSTAND. IT'S THE OPTICS OF IT.

JUST AS WHEN I VOTE AGAINST SOMETHING THAT I YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, IN OTHER WORDS, THAT I STRONGLY.

YOU KNOW, HAVE A PASSION AGAINST DOING.

AND IT'S THE OPTICS OF ME VOTING AGAINST THAT OTHERS FEEL, WELL, NO, IT'S GOING TO LOOK BAD.

THIS, TOO, WOULD LOOK BAD IN THAT SENSE BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T STUDY IT ENOUGH.

IN OTHER WORDS, WE GET THE YOU KNOW, WE'LL GLEAM OVER SOMETHING.

NOW, I'M GOING TO ASK A FEW QUESTIONS.

FIRST OF ALL, I SEE THE SIGNATURES WHO ARE ON HERE.

AND I'M GOING TO SAY THAT I HEAR A VERY STRONG CASE FROM MR. STOWERS, AND I'M LOOKING AT A FEW OTHER SIGNATURES.

AND I'M WONDERING, YOU KNOW, TO WHOM HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO? HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO SOMEONE? JUSTICE MCMULLEN, MAY I INTERRUPT YOU? WHAT RESOLUTION ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SIGNATURES.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT RESOLUTION YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO YOU'RE STILL ON 59? MS. MCMULLEN, I HONESTLY, I HAVE NOT HAD A SINGLE SOLITARY DISCUSSION WITH ANYBODY ABOUT THIS.

I HAD SENT OUT AN EMAIL WITH A VERY BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THE RESOLUTION DID, AND THERE'S BEEN NO COMMUNICATION ABOUT IT.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU WOULD HAVE CALLED ME ABOUT IT.

OKAY, THEN YOU'RE ANSWERING MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SURE.

DID IT SOUND FOR SOME REASON AS THOUGH I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT 59? IS THAT NOT THE LEGISLATION WHERE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT SIGNATURES? AND I WAS LOOKING FOR SIGNATURES BECAUSE IT'S NOT ANY ON HERE.

OH, YOU SPONSORS.

OKAY. I'M SORRY.

OKAY. I APOLOGIZE.

YOU SAID OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. THAT'S OKAY.

IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME AND I'M SURE IT WON'T BE THE LAST.

YOU ALWAYS HAVE, MY LOVE.

BUT ANYWAY, I'M GOING TO SIMPLY SAY THAT.

SO I'M LOOKING AT JUSTICE IS ELLIOTT HERE? I'M ALSO LOOKING AT LEWISON AND MASSEY.

AND I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH ANYONE OR HAVE YOU SPOKEN WITH ANYONE ABOUT THIS? I JUST NEED A YES AND NO.

SO CAN I HAVE A YES OR NO ON THIS? FROM MY. I THINK I ALREADY ANSWERED THAT QUESTION.

I DIDN'T SIT THERE AND TALK TO ANYBODY ABOUT IT.

I GAVE A SIMPLE EMAIL OUT.

I DIDN'T CALL PEOPLE AND SAY, HEY, I KNOW YOU DIDN'T, BUT THEY MAY HAVE CALLED SOMEONE.

OH, I DON'T KNOW WHO THEY TALKED TO.

THERE WAS A WHOLE OK THEN, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT THEY HAVEN'T.

I'M THINKING THEN PERHAPS, MAYBE WHAT'S WRONG? I'M ASSUMING THAT THEY HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO ANYONE.

YOU SAID THAT YOU HAVE NEVER SPOKEN TO ANYONE, BUT I ASKED THEM.

JUSTICE MULLEN.

THERE WAS A NOT A PRESS CONFERENCE.

THERE WAS A PRESENTATION THAT WAS GOING TO MAKE.

THERE WAS A BIG ARTICLE IN THE NEWSPAPER.

I MEAN. OKAY, THEN, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

YOU'VE ANSWERED MY QUESTION AND THE SILENCE HAS ALSO ANSWERED MY QUESTION.

[00:20:01]

SO I'M WONDERING IF THERE AND LIKE I SAID, STOWERS YOU HAVE.

JUSTICE MCMULLEN I'LL ASK THAT YOU YOU SPEAK TO ME AND IF I MAY INTERRUPT YOU JUST ONE MOMENT IF ADAM, CAN I ASK YOU, BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE GETTING THIS I THINK WE'RE GETTING THIS ALL MIXED UP.

HAVE WE GONE DOWN THE WRONG PATH, ADAM, WITH THIS? BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS JUST A RESOLUTION ASKING FOR COUNTY, FOR INMATES TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THE COUNTY JAIL AND SENT TO PRISON. THIS IS A RESOLUTION IS AN EXPRESSION OF THE COUNTY'S OPINION.

THAT'S IT. REQUESTING SOME.

HOLD ON.

RIGHT, HOLD ON.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE ADAM IS CLARIFYING.

YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, MS. MCMULLEN, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT CLARIFICATION HERE AND THIS RESOLUTION.

ASK THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO DEDICATE SOME OF THE FUNDS THAT IT HAS TO ALLEVIATE THE BACKUP OF STATE INMATES INTO COUNTY JAILS, AND PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THIS IS THE PULASKI COUNTY QUORUM COURT, PARTICULARLY INTO THE PULASKI COUNTY JAIL.

RIGHT. AND IT'S NOT DEALING WITH PRISON REFORM.

NONE OF THAT. ALL THIS ASKING.

SO I THINK TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONTEXT OF WHAT I'VE HEARD, I WILL SUGGEST THAT THIS RESOLUTION MAY BE A IT'S A YES AND CONVERSATION.

IN ORDER FOR THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND IT IS A SYSTEM IN ORDER FOR THE SYSTEM TO WORK, THERE HAVE TO BE ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO HOUSE THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED AND SENTENCED INTO INCARCERATION.

IF THERE AREN'T ADEQUATE RESOURCES AT THE STATE LEVEL, THAT BACK UP RESULTS IN THEM SPENDING THEIR TIME IN THE COUNTY JAIL, WHICH IS NOT DESIGNED THE ENTIRE THE PURPOSE OF THE COUNTY JAIL IS NOT TO INCARCERATE AND REHABILITATE STATE INMATES.

IT IS TO HOUSE COUNTY INMATES THAT ARE EITHER PRETRIAL TO WAITING FOR A TRIAL OR SERVING OUT SENTENCES, TYPICALLY FOR MISDEMEANORS.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE POPULATION OF THE COUNTY JAIL, WE'RE HOLDING A DIFFERENT TYPE OF EXCUSE ME, A DIFFERENT TYPE OF POPULATION.

ABSOLUTELY. OKAY.

AND I JUST NEEDED TO GET CLARIFICATION.

MS. MCMULLEN. SO THE MIC IS STILL YOURS.

YOU STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO SPEAK, PLEASE.

RIGHT THERE. SURE.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS CLEAR IN THE BEGINNING.

AT LEAST IT WAS TO ME.

ARE YOU GOING TO SPEAK ON THE RESOLUTION? ARE WE GOING TO NOW? I'VE SAID WHAT I WANT TO SAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I'M PUZZLED BY THE INTERRUPTION.

OK AND I THINK THAT I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO SAY THAT.

WELL, OKAY. THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THAT. YES, GO AHEAD.

YES. AND IF, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SOME.

[INAUDIBLE] JUSTICE MASSEY?.

GO AHEAD.

JUSTICE MCMULLEN.

EXCUSE ME. MAY I SPEAK PLEASE. YOU SAID YOU WAS YOU SAID YOU WERE FINISHED JUSTICE MCMULLEN YES, YOU DID.

JUSTICE MCMULLEN.

I DO NOT REMEMBER SAYING THAT.

THAT I WAS FINISHED.

I WAS SPEAKING.

THANK YOU. AM I ALLOWED TO CONTINUE? ABSOLUTELY. JUSTICE MCMULLEN.

THANK YOU. AND AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, I WAS WONDERING ACTUALLY WHAT I WAS THINKING OF WAS SUGGESTING PERHAPS THAT AND I THINK IT HAS SOME VERY GOOD POINTS, FINE POINTS TO IT, BUT I WOULD FEEL BETTER IF I WERE TO SPEAK WITH SOMEONE WHO IS MORE INVOLVED IN THIS.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT PERHAPS WE, YOU KNOW, PUT IT ON HOLD.

AND IF, YOU KNOW, TO GIVE US JUST A LITTLE MORE TIME TO MAKE A FEW INQUIRIES.

AND NOW THAT IS MY POSITION THAT WE WOULD PUT IT ON HOLD, WHATEVER THE CORRECT TERMINOLOGY IS ON THAT.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE THAT AS A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT THEN I'M NOT SO SURE OF THE CORRECT TERMINOLOGY.

AND THE REASON THAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT IS THAT I HAVE BEEN OUT OF TOWN AND I EVEN MADE IT LATE TO THIS MEETING.

I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE REALLY TO INQUIRE ABOUT THIS, AND I'VE SPOKEN TO OTHERS AND THEY HAVEN'T EITHER.

AND AGAIN, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE AN INQUIRY.

IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH MAYBE PERHAPS ONE PERSON ON THE QUORUM COURT HAS.

OK. NO. SO YOU'RE MAKING A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS OR WHAT IS YOUR MOTION? I WOULD LIKE TO AND I'M GOING TO SAY NOT, I GUESS, INDEFINITELY UNTIL OUR NEXT QUORUM COURT MEETING, IF WE CAN HOLD IT AND UNTIL OUR NEXT QUORUM COURT MEETING, OR EITHER OUR NEXT AGENDA MEETING AND PUT IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA.

[00:25:02]

SO SHE'S MAKING A MOTION.

[INAUDIBLE]. I WOULD SUGGEST THE.

I'M SORRY. AGENDA.

OUR NEXT AGENDA MEETING.

OKAY. SO SHE'S MADE A MOTION, SO WE'VE GOT TO GET A SECOND.

AND IT FAILS FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

LET'S. AND I'VE TRIED.

THANK YOU, JUSTICE MASSEY.

THANK YOU. IN REGARDS TO THIS, MY SPEAKER ON, IN REGARDS TO THIS RESOLUTION, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PULASKI COUNTY HAS DEALT WITH FOR YEARS.

FOR YEARS, MANY OF MY CONSTITUENTS, MANY OF THEM ARE ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE ARE HOUSING STATE INMATES THAT SHOULD BE IN THE STATE, IN THE STATE'S JURISDICTION, NOT IN PULASKI COUNTY.

IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THEM GOING.

SENDING THEM OFF TO PRISON.

I MEAN, RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE ALREADY INCARCERATED.

SO WHETHER THEY'RE IN PULASKI COUNTY OR THE STATE, THEY'RE INCARCERATED.

SO THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE.

BUT WHAT WOULD CHANGE IS IF THEY WERE WITH THE STATE, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP MANY OF OUR FUNDS AS OPPOSED TO SPENDING $70 A DAY.

AND ONLY GETTING 40 A DAY.

AND I MEAN, IT'S JUST KIND OF OBVIOUS.

AND LIKE I SAID, MANY OF MY CONSTITUENTS ARE AWARE OF THIS.

YOU'RE GOING TO ALWAYS HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO UP ABREAST OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

I'M NOT GOING TO STOP DOING MY JOB AND MY DUE DILIGENCE BECAUSE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.

IF YOU ASK ME A QUESTION, I WILL GLADLY EXPLAIN IT TO YOU.

IN REGARDS TO THIS.

THIS IS JUST SIMPLY SAYING THAT WE NEED TO GET THESE PRISONERS OUT OF OUR YOU KNOW, OUT OF THE COUNTY JAIL.

IT'S EXPENSIVE.

I MEAN.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE.

WOULD NEED TO BE SAID IN HOW ELSE? WHAT ELSE IS THERE TO LOOK AT AND DISSECT IN REGARDS TO THIS? AND I MEAN, AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT SPEAKING UP, BUT I'M SPEAKING UP NOW.

I MEAN, MY NAME IS ON HERE AND I'M NOT SILENT ABOUT ANYTHING THAT I'M SAYING.

AND LIKE I SAID, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MY DISTRICT HAS BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT FOR YEARS, FOR YEARS AND YEARS EVEN BEFORE I BECAME A JP.

THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A CONCERN.

IT'S. OKAY. SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

JUSTICE MCMULLIN.

OH, YES. IT DOES SOUND QUITE IMPLICIT, JUSTIN AND YOU EXPLAINED THAT FOR US ALREADY.

WOULD YOU MIND EXPLAINING ONCE AGAIN HOW THAT FUNDING WOULD COME ABOUT? IT'S A FUNDING ISSUE.

SO THAT FUNDING FOR WHAT? AND SO THAT THERE WOULD BE ROOM AVAILABLE.

I THINK ADAM EXPLAINED THAT THEY'RE ENCOURAGING THE STATE AS WELL TO USE ARPA FUNDS TO MAKE THAT BED SPACE AND STAFFING AND SERVICES AVAILABLE.

SO THAT'S PART OF THE RESOLUTION IS THAT IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO THIS, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE THE BED SPACE, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE THE STAFF AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE THE PROGRAMING AND SERVICES THAT THEY NEED WHILE THEY'RE INCARCERATED SO THAT WHEN THEY GET OUT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF NOT RE-OFFENDING.

AND YOU SAY TO USE ARPA FUNDS, ARPA FUNDS, THE STATE'S ARPA FUNDS, I'LL CORRECT THAT AND SAY EXISTING SURPLUS.

OKAY. OKAY.

SO THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

EXISTING SURPLUS AND ARPA IS WHAT ARPA IS YOUR.

YEAH. RECOVERY FUNDS.

ARKANSAS RECOVERY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO THAT'S SIMPLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO IN ORDER TO TO DO THIS.

JUST HELP SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.

THANK YOU. EASY PEASY.

JUSTICE MASSEY I'M MET.

JUSTICE MEDLOCK I'M SORRY.

QUESTION OKAY.

WELL, AS WE HAVE IT, THAT IS NOT DEBATABLE.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON? OH, ON THE QUESTION. I'M SORRY.

ASK A CLARIFYING YES.

AND SO WE'RE NOT VOTING YES OR NO RIGHT NOW ON 2259, WE'RE VOTING YES OR NO ON THE CALL TO QUESTION.

ON THE CALL THE QUESTION BECAUSE SHE CALLED THE QUESTION BEFORE.

YEAH. SO WE'VE GOT TO DISPENSE OF THAT.

THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT.

SO EVERYBODY KNOW WE'RE CALLING WE'RE VOTING ON THE QUESTION THAT REPRESENTATIVE STACEY, JUST AS MATLOCK CALL.

ALL RIGHT. MR. REID. MISS LEWISON.

MISS BLACKWOOD. MISS MCMULLEN.

MISS MASSEY, AYE.

MR. KEITH. YES.

MS. GREENE. MR. ROBINSON, AYE. MR. MCCOY. YES.

MR. STOWERS. YES.

MR. ELLIOTT. AND MISS MEDLOCK, AYE.

11 AYES AND ONE ABSTENTION.

[00:30:01]

OH, 11 AYES, ONE ABSTENTION.

WE HAVE CALLED THE QUESTION.

SO WE'LL GO HEAD RIGHT INTO THE VOTE ON 22 I 59 AND VOTE UP OR DOWN.

AMY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MS. GREEN, AYE. MR. KEITH. YES. MS. MASSEY, AYE. MS. BLACK. I'M SORRY.

MS. MCMULLEN, AYE. MS. BLACKWOOD, AYE. MS. LEWISON AND MR. REED. 12 TO 0.

12 TO ZERO. WE WILL SEND RESOLUTION 22 I 59 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ ORDINANCE 22 I 57, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 21 OR 46 2022 ANNUAL BUDGET PULASKI COUNTY ARKANSAS

[22-I-57 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 21-OR-46 (2022 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS FROM THE SPAY NEUTER FUND INTO THE COMPTROLLER’S SPAY NEUTER DEPARTMENT.]

TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS FROM THE SPAY NEUTER FUND INTO THE COMPTROLLER SPAY NEUTER DEPARTMENT.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD I MOVE THAT WE SEND THIS TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND, A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 22 I 57 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'S FROM THERE? NO. THIS IS JUST MOVING MONEY OVER.

JUST I THINK IT'S JUST APPROPRIATIONS THAT ARE MOVING OVER TO THE FUND.

I THINK THE BEST WAY TO DESCRIBE IT WOULD BE THAT IT'S MOVING THE GIVE FIVE FUNDS OVER INTO A FUND THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY BE UTILIZED.

YEAH, I THINK IT'S JUST MOVING THEM OVER.

OKAY. JUSTICE ROBINSON WELL, THAT WAS MY QUESTION.

IF IT WAS THAT VOLUNTEER FUND THAT WAS BEING MOVED OVER.

YEAH.

IT IS, YES.

OKAY. NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL, MR. REED? MS. LEWISON YES.

MS. BLACKWOOD, AYE.

MS. MCMULLEN. YES.

MS. MASSEY. MR. KEITH. YES. MS. GREENE. MR. ROBINSON. MR. MCCOY. YES.

MR. STOWERS.

YES. MR. ELLIOTT, YES AND MS. MEDLOCK.

12 TO 0. 12 TO ZERO.

WE WILL SEND 22 I 57 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 22 I 58 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 17 OR 12 PULASKI COUNTY PERSONNEL POLICY TO UPDATE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE BENEFITS

[22-I-58 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 17-OR-12 (PULASKI COUNTY PERSONNEL POLICY) TO UPDATE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE BENEFITS FOR COUNTY EMPLOYEES. ]

FOR COUNTY EMPLOYEES JUSTICE ELLIOTT.

I LOST THEM HERE.

I'M SORRY. HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

MOVE FOR ADOPTION.

I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO SET UP AN ADOPTION.

NO EMOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 22 OR 58 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE ELLIOTT WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN WHAT YOU LIKE TO HAVE SOMEONE EXPLAIN FOR YOU? YOU'RE ADAM.

GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD EVENING.

THIS ORDINANCE SIMPLY MAKES THEM.

AMENDMENTS TO THE PERSONNEL POLICY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL LAWS AND PRACTICES.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS.

AMY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THANK YOU. MS. MEDLOCK, AYE. MR. ELLIOTT, YES. MR. STOWERS. YES.

MR. MCCAULEY. YES.

MR. ROBINSON, AYE.

MS. GREENE, AYE. MR. KEITH. YES. MS. MASSEY, AYE. MS. MCMULLEN, AYE. MS. BLACKWOOD. MS. LEWISON, YES. AND MR. REID. YES. 12 TO 0.

A VOTE OF 12 TO 0.

WE WILL SEND 22 I 58 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 22.

[22-I-60 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 09-OR-28 (THE SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) AS AMENDED AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

16. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE ZERO NINE OR 28 THE SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, AS AMENDED AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES JUSTICE REED.

MOTION TO TAKE TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT FOR A DO PASS.

SECOND.

A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 22 I 60 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE REID, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? YEAH, IT'S JUST RE-WRITING SOME OF THE SUBDIVISION RULES TO MAKE NOTIFICATION.

BETTER ON PEOPLE AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT SO MORE PEOPLE CAN BE NOTIFIED.

IT'S NOT EXACTLY WHAT ALL THE CONSTITUENTS WANTED, BUT THEY COMPROMISED.

AND THIS IS WHAT THEY CAME UP WITH.

OKAY. GOT SOME QUESTIONS.

SO WE'LL START OFF WITH JUSTICE ROBINSON.

THANK YOU. I BELIEVE VAN IS HERE AND I'D LIKE VAN TO COME UP AND KIND OF GIVE.

[INAUDIBLE]. A POOR VAN.

TO GIVE A CLIFFSNOTES VERSION OF WHAT EVERYTHING IS.

I BELIEVE THE LAST TIME THIS BEFORE US, I SPOKE ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I SAW, AND SO THEY SENT IT BACK TO THE

[00:35:07]

PLANNING BOARD. AND THIS IS KIND OF THE NEGOTIATION THAT THEY CAME UP WITH.

AND FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN AND READ, I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD COMPROMISE.

BUT I'D LIKE VAN TO KIND OF HIT THE HIGHLIGHTS FOR EVERYBODY.

OKAY. [INAUDIBLE].

YES. THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN THROUGH THE MILL, AS YOU RECALL, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN HERE BEFORE.

BUT IT WENT BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND ALL THE PARTIES GOT TOGETHER AND TALKED ABOUT IT.

AND THERE WERE SOME AGREEMENT ON WHAT TO DO AND HOW TO DO IT.

AND THE GIST OF THIS PROPOSAL IS THE AMENDMENT IS SUPERIOR TO WHAT WE HAD BEFORE IN TERMS OF NOTIFICATION OF WHAT REALLY WILL BE ANY LARGE DEVELOPMENT, MEANING SUBDIVISIONS OF TEN ACRES, TEN LOTS OR MORE, OR ANY VARIANCES OF THE FLOOD ORDINANCE OR THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE THAT MAY COME BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.

SO THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT IS IMPROVED IN THE SENSE THAT THE SIGNAGE IS A FOUR BY FOUR, PROPOSED FOUR BY FOUR FOOT SIGN OUT BY THE STREET. SO PEOPLE WILL SEE IT AND HAVE THE BASIC INFORMATION ON THE SIGN.

THERE'S THREE WAYS THAT PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE NOTIFICATION.

THEY CAN WALK AROUND AND HAVE PEOPLE SIGN IT.

THEY CAN ASK FOR THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE THEM WITH A LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN IN THIS CASE, IT'S 500 FEET. SO THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT BEFORE WE ONLY HAD A NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AND ACROSS THE STREET NOW IT'S 500 FEET IN ALL DIRECTIONS FROM THE PROPERTY.

SO IT'S A SIGNIFICANTLY MORE PEOPLE WILL BE NOTIFIED.

SO THE THREE WAYS THEY CAN DO IT AND WALK AROUND WITH A PETITION, HAVE PEOPLE SIGN OR GO TO AN ABSTRACT COMPANY, THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT TO GET THE NOTIFICATION, TO GET THE PEOPLE, THE LIST OF PEOPLE TO NOTIFY.

OR THEY CAN ASK THE PLANNING STAFF TO PROVIDE A LIST WHICH WE'LL DO FOR FREE.

SO IT'S UP TO THEM.

SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF WAYS PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO GET THE INFORMATION NECESSARY TO NOTIFY THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THERE'S THE OLD REQUIREMENT WAS ONLY LIKE SIX DAYS.

WE HAVE A SHORT TURNAROUND ON A PLANNING BOARD.

IT'S A 30 DAY FILING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MONTH, AT THE END OF THE MONTH OR SO, TOWARDS THE END OF THE MONTH, THE SAME DAY THE QUORUM COURT OF THE FOURTH TUESDAY, WE HAVE OUR MEETING. SO IT'S A SHORT TURNAROUND.

BEFORE IT WAS SIX DAYS, NOW IT'S 15 DAYS.

SO WE'VE DEFINITELY THE NOTIFICATION WILL PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO BE ON IT, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY FILE SOMETHING, THEY HAVE TO BE READY TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE NOTIFICATION NECESSARY FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS OR THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND THEN THEY HAVE TO GIVE US A SIX DAY WINDOW.

FINALLY, THERE WAS ONE THING THAT WE CHANGED TO THAT WE CHANGED THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY EXCLUSION, WHICH IT'S SOMETHING THAT YALL DON'T SEE, BUT IT'S THE FAMILY EXCLUSION IS WHAT I CALL SUBDIVISION LITE.

IT'S A WAY FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO PASS PROPERTY ON TO THEIR IMMEDIATE RELATIVES WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ALL THE EXPENSE AND THE REQUIREMENT.

SO FAMILY EXCLUSION WAS KIND OF LISTED AS A VARIANCE BEFORE OR IN THE VARIANCE SECTION.

SO WE REMOVED THAT SO THAT THE FAMILY EXCLUSION PARTICIPANTS OR APPLICANTS WON'T HAVE TO DO THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.

SO THAT'S A LOT, BUT THAT'S THE GIST AND THE LONG AND THE SHORT OF IT, I THINK.

OKAY. AARON, DID YOU HAVE.

NO, THANK YOU. VAN. I YIELD.

OKAY? THANK YOU.

JUSTICE STOWERS. I JUST WANTED TO RECOGNIZE THAT FORMER PLANNING COMMISSIONER CHRISTIE EHNES IS WITH US THIS EVENING.

THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT SHE HAD A PASSION FOR, TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WAS IMPLEMENTED.

AND CHRISTI, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND FOR YOUR DEDICATION TO THIS CAUSE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, JUSTICE STOWERS.

THANK YOU, VAN. IF THERE AREN'T ANY MORE QUESTIONS.

AMY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MR. REED, YES. MS. LEWISON. YES.

MS.. BLACKWOOD, AYE. MS. MCMULLEN. YES.

MS. MASSEY\, AYE. MR. KEITH. YES. MS. GREENE, AYE.

MR. ROBINSON, AYE. MR. MCCOY. YES.

[INAUDIBLE]. IT'S 12 TO 0.

I WITH AN ADDITION.

EXCUSE ME. CAN I BE ADDED?

[00:40:01]

YES, MA'AM. JUSTICE MCMULLEN.

AMY WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED AS A SPONSOR.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO, 22 BY VOTER, TWELVE, ZERO 22 I 60 WILL BE SENT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 22 I 61 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 21 OH 46 2022 ANNUAL BUDGET PULASKI COUNTY ARKANSAS TO

[22-I-61 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 21-OR-46 (2022 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE REIMBURSEMENT FUNDS FOR THE CRISIS STABILIZATION UNIT.]

RECOGNIZE AN APPROPRIATE REIMBURSEMENT FUNDS FOR THE CRISIS STABILIZATION UNIT JUSTICE MCCOY MOTION.

WE ADOPT THIS AND THIS TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT SECOND MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND AND WE SEND 22 I 61 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE MCCOY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN THIS IS TYPICAL ORDINANCE WE DO ON A MONTHLY BASIS.

REPLENISHING THE FUNDS THERE AT THE CRISIS STABILIZATION UNIT WOULD APPRECIATE A GOOD VOTE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NO QUESTIONS, NO COMMENTS.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 22 I 61? MS. MEDLOCK, AYE.

MR. ELLIOTT. MR. STOWERS YES.

MR. MCCOY. YES.

MR. ROBINSON, AYE. MS. GREENE, AYE. MR. KEITH. YES. MS. MASSEY AYE. MS. MCMULLEN AYE. MS. BLACKWOOD, MS. LEWISON, YES AND MR. REED.

12 TO 0. 12 TO 0.

WE WILL SEND 22 I 61 TO THE FULL COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 22 I 62 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 21 OR 46 2022 ANNUAL BUDGET PULASKI COUNTY ARKANSAS TO RECOGNIZE AND

[22-I-62 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 21-OR-46 (2022 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS INTO THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY’S OFFICE AND SHERIFF’S ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT.]

APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS AND TO THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE SHERIFF'S ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT.

JUSTICE MASSEY YES, I MOVE THAT WE SEND THIS TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A RECOMMENDED DUE PASS.

I SECOND THAT MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND.

THAT WE SEND 22 I 62 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A RECOMMENDED DO PASS.

JUSTICE MASSEY WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? IT IS A GRANT AND IF THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT CAN EXPOUND ON THIS, I THINK JUSTIN'S GOING.

SO, YEAH. SO THE STATE USES SOME FUNDS TO CREATE A STIPEND FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

SO I THINK IT'S A $5,000 STIPEND FOR ALL QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INVESTIGATORS.

SO THIS IS GOING TO GO DIRECTLY TO YOUR ENFORCEMENT STAFF AND SOME INVESTIGATORS AND THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO THAT'S IT.

NO IMPACT ON THE GENERAL FUND.

GIVE THEM A LITTLE MONEY IN THEIR POCKET.

THANK YOU, JUSTIN. THANK YOU.