Jan 13, 2026 Agenda Committee

GIVING IT TO YOU. SHE THOUGHT YOU NEEDED A NEW ONE. OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND START OUR MEETING.

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:08]

WE'RE GOING TO OPEN OUR MEETING WITH AN INVOCATION BY JUSTICE MCCOY, FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY JUSTICE LEWISON.

IF YOU CAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND? OKAY. LET'S PRAY.

HEAVENLY FATHER, WE THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS DAY. WE THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOU AND WHAT YOU'VE PREPARED AND LAID OUT. DEAR LORD, YOU HAVE ELECTED US AND APPOINTED US TO THIS POSITION AS PART OF YOUR PLAN. AND WE ASK THAT WE WOULD DO YOUR WILL AND, I ASK YOU'D BE WITH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US AND THE ISSUES THAT WE'LL DISCUSS AND THAT WE WILL BE GLEANED, GLEANING A LOT ENLIGHTENED AND MAKE PROGRESS FOR THIS COUNTY.

AND I ASK YOU TO BE WITH ALL OF US AS WE LEAVE HERE WITH SAFETY AND BLESS OUR WEEKS.

IN JESUS NAME WE PRAY. AMEN, AMEN, AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS YOU WERE GOING TO BE TAKING OFF HERE.

THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR STANDING TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR OPENING AND WELCOME EVERYONE TO THE NEW YEAR.

OUR FIRST MEETING OF THE YEAR. AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MISS DAVIS. PRESENT. MISS CAPPS. HERE. MISS LEWISON.

HERE. MISS BLACKWOOD. HERE. PERSON. HERE. MISS MASSEY.

HERE. MISS CURRY. PRESENT. MR. KEITH. YES. MISS WARD IS ABSENT.

MISS YOUNG-BAKER. HERE. MR. ROBINSON. HERE. MR. MCCOY. HERE. MR. STOWERS. PRESENT. MR. ELLIOTT.

HERE. AND [INAUDIBLE]. HERE. 14 PRESENT. 14 PRESENT.

WE CAN DO THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNTY. IS THERE A RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEM FIVE?

[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE.

THOSE OPPOSED OUR MINUTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED FROM OUR LAST MEETING.

[26-I-04 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE DAILY FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026 TO BE CHARGED TO MUNICIPALITIES FOR KEEPING PRISONERS OF MUNICIPALITIES IN THE PULASKI COUNTY REGIONAL DETENTION FACILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE 14-OR-31 AS AMENDED.]

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ ITEM 26-I-04. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE DAILY FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026 TO BE CHARGED TO MUNICIPALITIES FOR KEEPING PRISONERS OF MUNICIPALITIES IN THE PULASKI COUNTY REGIONAL DETENTION FACILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE 14-OR-31, AS AMENDED. JUSTICE MCCOY. MOVE WE SEND THIS TO FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS.

SECOND. THE MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND, AND WE SENT 25-I-04 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE MCCOY WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

THIS IS AN ANNUAL MEASURE WE TAKE UP. IT'S ALL SET BY STATE LAW AND BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY. LEGISLATIVE AUDIT. LEGISLATIVE AUDIT. OKAY.

YEAH. OKAY. JUSTICE STOWERS. THANK YOU, SIR. HUTCH THIS 6974 PER DIEM. IS THAT AN INCREASE FROM WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY? IT'S A DECREASE. WHY DID IT GO DOWN? AND HOW MUCH DID IT GO DOWN AND WHAT DO WE ANTICIPATE.

OH I'M SORRY. ANNUAL IMPACT. YOU'RE GOOD NOW HUTCH.

AND WHAT DO WE ANTICIPATE THE ANNUAL THE DIFFERENCE TO BE.

WELL, IT'S IT WENT DOWN BY ABOUT $3. IT'S BASED ON LEGISLATIVE AUDIT.

GETS A LISTING AND WHAT THE EXPENSES ARE AT THE JAIL.

THEY DO AN AVERAGE THROUGH THERE. WHAT THEY THINK THE OR WHAT THEY GET ON A POPULATION PER DAY.

THEY DO SOME MEASUREMENTS. THEY SEND IT TO AAC AND THEY GIVE US A NUMBER.

I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WENT DOWN. I LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS.

I DON'T NECESSARILY DISAGREE WITH THEIR MATH, BUT THE WAY THE POPULATIONS FIGURED ON A DAILY DEAL I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY CAME UP WITH THAT. DIFFERENT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE EXACTLY, BECAUSE THEN AGAIN, IT'S ALSO GOING TO BE BASED ON WHAT THE POPULATION IS AT THE JAIL. AND IF THE CITIES ARE I MEAN, RIGHT NOW, LIKE LITTLE ROCK IS SIX MONTHS BEHIND.

THE CITY, STAY A COUPLE OF MONTHS BEHIND SOME OF THEM.

SOME OF THEM PAY LIKE CAMMACK VILLAGE. THEY PAY ON TIME BECAUSE THEY REALLY DON'T EVER HARDLY HAVE A BILL.

BUT IT'S A CONTINUAL FIGHT WITH GETTING SOME OF THE CITIES TO PAY.

THEY JUST. THEY STAY BEHIND. SO I HAVE SOME FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS.

[00:05:02]

WHAT CAN WE DO TO REMEDY THAT. AND COULD THAT REMEDY BE TELLING THEM THAT THERE'S NO ROOM IN THE END UNTIL THEY PAY UP. NO, I THINK THE NEXT.

NO I THINK THE NEXT BECAUSE THE PEOPLE YOU HAVE AT THE JAIL ARE THE ONES THAT THE COURTS HAVE SENT THERE.

SO I THINK THE NEXT REMEDY, ACCORDING TO THE JUDGE HYDE AND THE ATTORNEYS, IS PROBABLY A LAWSUIT.

OKAY. SO BASED ON, I GUESS, WHAT I'M LOOKING ASKING AND THAT BECAUSE THIS IS REVENUE.

AND SO IT'S, I REALIZE IT'S GOING DOWN $3 PER DIEM, BUT IF WE LOOKED AT AND YOU DON'T HAVE THESE NUMBERS, I UNDERSTAND RIGHT NOW, BUT WHAT I WOULD ASK IS BY FULL QUORUM COURT IF WE COULD HAVE A GUESSTIMATE OR AN ESTIMATE BASED ON HISTORIC ACCESS OR UTILIZATION OF THE JAIL WHAT THAT WILL WHAT THE REVENUE DIFFERENCE WILL BE.

I CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING. YEAH. YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YEAH. AND LIKE OKAY, SO THIS PAST YEAR WE WERE AT LIKE 70 I FORGET WHAT THE EXACT NUMBER WAS.

IT WENT UP. THEN IT GOES DOWN. NEXT YEAR IT GOES UP AGAIN.

JUST I'LL GO AHEAD AND BET YOU A SWEET TEA FROM MCDONALD'S RIGHT NOW THAT IT GOES UP AGAIN.

I AM VERY INTERESTED IN WHAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHAT THE COUNTY CAN DO TO HOLD ANY MUNICIPALITY, BE IT LITTLE ROCK OR ANY OTHER ACCOUNTABLE ANY OF US.

IF I GOT BEHIND SIX MONTHS ON MY HOUSE PAYMENT THEN I WOULD BE IN A PICKLE, RIGHT? I WOULD THINK YOUR MORTGAGE COMPANY WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

AND SAME HERE. YEAH. IT WOULD BE LIKE USING A HOTEL AND NOT PAYING FOR SIX MONTHS.

RIGHT. YOU WOULD BE EVICTED FROM THAT HOTEL. SO I FROM THE DISCUSSIONS I'VE HAD WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE COUNTY JUDGE, I BELIEVE THAT'S THE NEXT THE NEXT STEP IF THEY DON'T.

NOW, I SAY THAT HERE'S WHAT LITTLE ROCK DID LAST YEAR.

THEY WERE BEHIND LIKE THAT IN JANUARY, FIRST PART OF FEBRUARY.

THEY SENT ONE BIG CHECK. THEY MIGHT DO THAT AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW.

CAN WE ASK THEM IF THAT'S THEIR INTENT? WE COMMUNICATE WITH THEM CONTINUALLY GOING, HEY YOU'RE BEHIND.

AND THAT'S THE RESPONSE WE GET. SO I CAN CALL OVER TOMORROW AND ASK THEM.

BUT I DOUBT THEY'RE GOING TO TELL ME. SO THEY WANT ACCESS TO OUR FACILITY.

BUT THEY WANT NO ACCOUNTABILITY. NO COMMUNICATION IS WHAT I'M HEARING.

AND THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY THEIR BILLS. SO IT WOULD SEEM LIKE.

YEAH, I MEAN, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEM, BUT IT'S THE IMPRESSION I GET.

I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF WHATEVER ACTION, LEGAL OR OTHERWISE, THAT WE NEED TO TAKE TO HOLD THE ABSCONDERS ACCOUNTABLE.

AND YES, IN THIS INSTANCE, I CONSIDER THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK AND [INAUDIBLE].

I YIELD. ANY OTHER? YES. OH, OKAY. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

CAN WE CHARGE INTEREST IF THEY DON'T PAY? NOT AT THIS TIME.

I WAS TOLD BY THE STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTIES THAT THEY ARE PUSHING FOR A BILL THAT WILL ALLOW US TO PAY CHARGE INTEREST AFTER, I THINK, AFTER 30 DAYS. OKAY. BUT RIGHT NOW, NO.

SO WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THAT TO PASS THROUGH THE ARKANSAS COUNTIES.

YES. FIRST. NO. WE IT HAS TO PASS THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE.

BUT IT HAS PASSED THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE. IT HAD TO BE A LAW.

OKAY. NO, IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO IT, I'D HAVE NO PROBLEM CHARGING INTEREST.

OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? HUTCH DO YOU ACTUALLY DO THE BUILDING FOR THE JAIL OR DOES THE JAIL ACTUALLY DO IT THEMSELVES? NO. THE JAIL DOES THE GENTLEMAN JOSEPH, I THINK, DOES A GREAT JOB BECAUSE HE HAS TO GO BACK AND FORTH WITH THE CITIES ON BECAUSE OCCASIONALLY THERE'S A MIX UP. OH, THAT'S NOT MY GUY.

THAT WAS THAT WASN'T LITTLE ROCK THAT WAS NORTH LITTLE ROCK. HE KEEPS ALL THAT STRAIGHT. SO I GET THE CITIES BEING 30 DAYS OR SOMETIMES EVEN 60 BECAUSE OF THAT.

AND THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL. LITTLE ROCK'S USUALLY.

THE WORST. A FEW YEARS AGO, WE DID HAVE ONE CITY THAT DIDN'T PAY ANYTHING ALL YEAR, AND THEN AT THE FIRST OF THE YEAR, WROTE A YEAR'S WORTH OF CHECK. BUT THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH OF A IT REALLY WASN'T THAT BIG OF AN IMPACT.

OKAY. I DON'T KNOW. I HAVE THEORIES ON WHY IT'S THAT WAY, BUT IT'S JUST THEORIES, AND I BETTER KEEP THEM TO MYSELF.

OKAY, ALRIGHT. THAT'S FINE. OKAY. JUSTICE PERSON.

YES. SO. IT'S ON. OKAY? YES. SO. OKAY. I GUESS YOU CAN HEAR ME ANYWAY.

I CAN HEAR YOU. BUT YOU'RE BETTING ON THE SIDE.

YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY YOU. DID YOU TURN IT OFF ON THE.

NO, THAT BUTTON IS NOT CONNECTED. IT'S ON THE.

[00:10:01]

I'M FOR SURE THIS PARTNERSHIP IS NOT NEW. SO HAS THERE BEEN A HISTORY OF LITTLE ROCK WRITING THE ONE BIG CHECK? THERE YOU GO. LAST FEW YEARS. THANK YOU. I'M IN TECHNOLOGY, BUT DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO TURN MY MICROPHONE ON. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

THEY DID THAT LAST YEAR. THEY DID THAT LAST YEAR.

THE YEAR BEFORE THIS. SOMETHING FAMILIAR THAT THEY DO KNOW THE YEAR BEFORE.

AND I'M WORKING OFF MEMORY. THEY WEREN'T QUITE SIX MONTHS BEHIND, YOU KNOW.

AND THEY, KIND OF CAUGHT UP. GOTCHA. RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE THE BIGGEST RECEIVABLE OUT THERE..

BUT THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE. OKAY. GOOD DEAL. SO THIS IS.

I GUESS IT'S NOT FAR FETCHED THAT WE MAY ANTICIPATE A CHECK THIS MONTH, BUT YET.

AND STILL, THEY'RE BEHIND. IT'S ANYTHING'S POSSIBLE.

I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO OUTGUESS WHAT THEY'RE DOING ACROSS THE STREET. GOT IT.

THANK YOU. YEAH, I YIELD. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THERE BEING NONE. AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 26-I-04.

MISS DAVIS. YES. MISS CAPPS. AYE. MISS LEWISON.

YES. MISS BLACKWOOD AYE. MR. PERSON. AYE. MISS MASSEY.

AYE. MISS CURRY. AYE. MR. KEITH. YES. MISS YOUNG-BAKER.

YES. MR. ROBINSON. AYE. MR. MCCOY. YES. MR. STOWERS.

YES. MR. ELLIOT. YES. AND MISS MEDLOCK. AYE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED PLEASE.

SAME PLEASE AMY. DIANNE CURRY ADDED. THANK YOU AS WELL.

THAT WAS 14 AYES. ZERO NAYS. 14 AYES. ZERO NAYS.

WE WILL SEND 26-I-04 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 26-I-06 AN AMENDMENT TO 25-OR-39 AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH CONTINUITY OF DEVELOPMENT,

[26-I-06 AN AMENDMENT TO 25-OR-39, AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH CONTINUITY OF DEVELOPMENT; PROTECT THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CITIZENS; ADOPT A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUSLY ENACTED LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

SECOND. A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 26-I-06 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE DAVIS WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? SURE.

THIS IS JUST A CONTINUATION OF THE MORATORIUM THAT WE ALREADY PASSED.

IT GIVES THE PLANNING BOARD FOUR MORE MONTHS TO COME UP WITH A LAND USE PLAN THAT WE AGREE WITH.

AND THAT'S ALL IT IS. OKAY. JUSTICE STOWERS. THANK YOU, SIR.

I SEE THAT WE HAVE OUR DIRECTOR OF PLANNING THE ESTEEMED MR. MCCLENDON WITH US. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTARY FROM STAFF? IF YOU WOULD APPROACH, PLEASE. AND JUST GIVE US YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS ORDINANCE.

WELL, THERE'S NOTHING NEW. IT'S THE SAME THING THAT WE HAD SIX MONTHS AGO, I GUESS.

AND WITHOUT IT THERE WOULD BE, I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY OPEN SEASON.

THERE WOULD BE NO REGULATION TO PREVENT OR ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE OR POSSIBLY UNACCEPTABLE.

SO IT'S A STATUS QUO FOR WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.

SO STAFF AND THE ADMINISTRATION ARE IN FAVOR OF THIS ORDINANCE? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES. OKAY. WERE YOU FINISHED? JUSTICE STOWERS. YES, SIR. OKAY. JUSTICE CURRY.

YES. I'D LIKE TO ASK, WAS ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO SOME OF THE MAJOR DISCUSSIONS THAT WERE CONCERNED AT OUR, AT OUR PREVIOUS MEETING? WAS ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN BY THE PLANNING BOARD AS TO HOW SOME OF THE SOME OF THE DIS-ENCHANTMENT WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE WRITTEN IN THERE.

WAS ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN BY YOUR GROUP. THE PLANNING BOARD IS STILL THE STAFF AND THE PLANNING BOARD ARE STILL WORKING TO DEVELOP SOMETHING THAT'S COMPATIBLE AND ACCEPTABLE, SO THAT SOMETIME BEFORE THE END OF THE EXPIRATION OF THIS MORATORIUM, THAT WILL HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN WORK WITH.

OKAY. SO IN TWO MONTHS OR WE HAVE. WELL, IT'S A 12 MONTH EXTENSION.

AND THE PLANNING BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY IS TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON A PLAN.

AND ACCORDING TO WHAT I READ IN THE RESOLUTION, I MEAN, IN THE ORDINANCE.

[00:15:03]

OKAY. JUSTICE MASSEY. SO IS IT A FOUR MONTH OR A 12 MONTH? 12 MONTHS? 12 MONTH. SO IT'S 12 MONTHS. OKAY.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? JUSTICE MASSEY. THAT'S IT.

DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? JUSTICE DAVIS? I DID, I MISREAD THAT, I THOUGHT IT WAS FOUR MONTHS.

I DON'T WANT 12 MONTHS. SO I TAKE MY NAME AND I WANT TO.

I DON'T LIKE THAT. NUMBER 12. THE PLANNING BOARD DOES NOT NEED A YEAR TO COME UP WITH A PLAN.

WE HAVE THE GARVER PLAN. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE GARVER PLAN? WE DON'T NEED 12 MORE MONTHS OF A MORATORIUM.

I YIELD. CAN YOU TELL ME? BECAUSE I'M ACTUALLY LOOKING AT ARTICLE FOUR AND IT ACTUALLY SAYS FOUR MONTHS.

SO WHERE ARE WE? WHERE DID I MISS 12? I KNOW.

I GUESS IN PAGE TWO. I GUESS IN PAGE TWO ARTICLE TWO. TWO. IT SAYS 12 MONTHS.

WAS THERE A DISCREPANCY? 12 MONTH EXTENSION. OKAY.

IT'S A 12 MONTH. OKAY. OKAY. SO WHO WERE YOU? DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? I WANT TO TAKE MY NAME OFF OF IT.

AND OR CAN WE MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND IT TO FOUR MONTHS, OR I MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND IT TO FOUR MONTHS? SECOND. OKAY. OKAY, SO A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND.

THAT ITEM 26-I-06 BE AMENDED TO FOUR MONTHS. SO THE DISCUSSION IS NOW ON THE NUMBER OF MONTHS.

SO, JUSTICE CAPPS, IS THAT WHERE YOU WANT IT? IS THAT WHERE YOU WANT IT TO GO? I'LL MAKE A COMMENT ON THE AMENDMENT. SO. OKAY. FOR CLARITY THE MORATORIUM WILL ARTICLE TWO WILL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL FEBRUARY 13TH, 2027, WHICH SHOULD BE APPROXIMATELY A 12 MONTH PERIOD OF TIME.

THE FOUR MONTH REQUEST IS ASKING THAT THE PLANNING BOARD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO US IN FOUR MONTHS, SO THAT WE KNOW WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. HOWEVER, WE HAVE THE FULL YEAR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO GET THIS IN PLACE WITHOUT IT EXPIRING AGAIN. RIGHT. THAT'S MY COMMENT ON THE AMENDMENT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. JUSTICE CAPPS. JUSTICE STOWERS.

YEAH. THANK YOU. SO THANK YOU JUSTICE CAPPS, FOR EXPOUNDING AND KIND OF GIVING MORE CLARITY AS TO. SO WITHIN FOUR MONTHS, WE SHOULD HAVE A RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THE ORDINANCE FROM PPLANNING.

BUT THAT GIVES THE QUORUM COURT SOME TIME TO THEN ABSORB THAT.

AND OBVIOUSLY THERE'LL BE DEBATE, BUT A LOT OF DEBATE AS A RESULT OF THAT.

SO I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THE JUDGE ASKED IN A MEMO BACK IN DECEMBER WAS THAT AFTER THE FIRST OF THE YEAR THAT WE BEGIN HAVING AROUND THE UNINCORPORATED PARTS OF THE COUNTY AND IN ALL AREAS SOME TOWN MEETINGS, IF YOU WOULD? HE DIDN'T CALL THEM THAT. BUT BASICALLY OPPORTUNITY FOR CONSTITUENTS TO COME AND EXPRESS THEIR, OPINIONS AND THEIR VIEWS TO HELP PLANNING AND ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE ABLE TO BRING BACK TO US SOMETHING THAT IS PALATABLE TO THE COMMUNITY AND ALSO ACCOMPLISHES WHAT WE NEED TO ACCOMPLISH AS FAR AS DEVELOPMENT IS CONCERNED.

SO WHEN DO WE PLAN TO START HAVING THOSE MEETINGS? SOON. SOON. WE'RE DISCUSSING IT ALREADY. SO WE ANTICIPATE PROBABLY HAVING THE FIRST ONE IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.

OKAY. OKAY. AND WE'VE GOT A REQUEST. WE'VE GOT A COUPLE REQUESTS.

SO? SO I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE WE KNOW WE HAVE THE REQUEST.

SO I GUESS HERE'S THE DEAL. IT GIVES THE QUORUM COURT 12 MONTHS.

BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE 12 MONTHS. THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN TODAY, WE EXPECT RECOMMENDATIONS OUT OF PLANNING, OUT OF THE OUT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITHIN FOUR MONTHS.

RIGHT. THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE TIME. I KIND OF HOPE IT'S LESS THAN 12 MONTHS, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO BE HERE TO WEIGH IN ON THAT ITEM WHEN IT COMES TO US. YES. SO I AM FINE WITH THE ORDINANCE AS IT IS WRITTEN TODAY.

THE 12 MONTHS IS JUST A CUSHION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY LAPSE OR GAPS IN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.

WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO HAPPEN LIKE WHAT HAPPENED EARLIER.

RIGHT? YOU KNOW, AT THE BEGINNING. ABSOLUTELY.

WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN AGAIN. OKAY. SO I SUPPORT THE ORDINANCE AS IT IS WRITTEN, I YIELD.

[00:20:01]

I JUST SIMPLY WANT TO SAY I AGREE WITH THE OTHER JUSTICES THAT I THINK 12 MONTHS IS A GOOD ENOUGH TIME.

YOU KNOW, I THINK FOUR MONTHS TO DO WHAT THE PLANNING BOARD NEEDS TO DO THAN TO REFER BACK TO US, AND WE MAY HAVE TO REFER IT BACK TO THEM. WHO KNOWS? YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO TAKE PLACE. SO I THINK A YEAR IS IS IS GOOD ENOUGH TIME.

AND IF WE CAN GET IT DONE BEFORE THAT THAT'S GREAT.

I YIELD. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT? JUSTICE DAVIS. JUST THAT THAT MEANS THOSE OF US THAT LIVE IN THE ETJ ARE UNDER THIS MORATORIUM FOR A YEAR LONGER, WHEREAS BEFORE WE IT'S JUST MORE COUNTY RESTRICTIONS THAT WE DO NOT WANT FOR ANOTHER YEAR, POTENTIALLY ANOTHER YEAR, IS ALL I'M SAYING. BUT THE MORE, I'M SORRY.

AND ALSO CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO THEM? YEAH. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE GARVER STUDY? WHY HAS THAT BEEN NOT BROUGHT BACK? RIGHT. WELL, WE STILL HAVE THE GARVER STUDY.

IT'S UP TO THE JUDGE WHEN HE WANTS US TO BRING IT BACK.

WHY IS IT UP TO THE JUDGE? BECAUSE IT IS BECAUSE WE WORK FOR THE JUDGE.

SO NOT THE QUORUM COURT. SO CAN WE BRING THE PLAN BACK? YEAH, I'LL DEFER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON THAT ONE? YEAH, I DON'T KNOW. I JUST DON'T I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THAT PLAN WENT AWAY.

AND THEN Y'ALL'S PLAN CAME UP. SO WHY WAS THERE SUCH A DIFFERENCE IN THE TWO PLANS? I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. TWO PLANS? WELL, THERE'S ONE PLAN. NO, THE PLAN THERE'S THE JUDGE SENT IS NOT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE THAT THE GARVER DID.

THERE'S THE GARVER PLAN. THE PHASE TWO. BECAUSE YOU PASSED THE FIRST ONE.

THE QUORUM COURT PASSED THE FIRST. IT'S ABOUT 60% OF THE COUNTY, I GUESS UNINCORPORATED.

THE LAST 40% IS IN PHASE TWO, SO TO SPEAK. THAT'S WHAT THE GARVER PLANNING STUDY RECOMMENDS.

THERE IS AN AMENDMENT TO THAT, IF THAT'S WHAT WE CHOOSE TO SUBMIT.

SO THERE IS TWO, BUT THERE'S ONE FROM GARVER, ONLY ONE FROM GARVER.

OKAY. AMY, CAN I BRING THAT GARVER PLAN BACK TO THE QUORUM COURT FOR US TO DISCUSS IT? IF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AGREES, AND AND HE CAN HAVE TIME TO TO RESEARCH THAT IF Y'ALL CAN BRING IT BACK YOURSELVES.

SURE. DOES THAT SOUND GOOD? THANK YOU. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

I YIELD. OKAY. I'LL TAKE MY MOTION AWAY SINCE NO ONE WANTS TO DO IT.

WE'LL DO THE YEAR. OKAY. I'LL PULL BACK FOR THAT REASON.

OKAY. SO? SO THE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN PULLED. JUSTICE CAPPS.

AND THEN JUSTICE. I DO JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE COMMENT THAT BASED ON THE PUBLIC FEEDBACK, WHAT WE HEARD WAS WE WANT TO SLOW THIS DOWN AND BE STRATEGIC AND MAKE SURE WE HEAR FROM PEOPLE.

AND THAT WILL TAKE TIME. SO GIVING US FOUR MONTHS TO HAVE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAKE A PLAN.

THEN TIME FOR US TO DO AN ITERATIVE PROCESS. I THINK THIS IS A VERY REASONABLE TIMELINE TO LAY OUT, WITH HOPES THAT WE ARE ABLE TO HEAR FROM INDIVIDUALS WHO LIVE IN THAT AREA, DEVISE A PLAN, AND PASS IT IN SHORTER THAN A 12 MONTH PERIOD.

I YIELD. OKAY. AND I GUESS WE'RE ON TRACK BECAUSE THEY, JUSTICE DAVIS MADE THE AMENDMENT AND SOMEBODY I DON'T KNOW WHO SECOND WHO MADE THE SECOND BECAUSE BOTH OF THEM RESCINDED THEIR MOTION.

SO WE'RE WE'RE STILL IN GOOD ON GOOD GROUND. YES.

OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. JUSTICE PERSON. OKAY. MAKING ME WORK TONIGHT.

THIS IS NEW YEAR. [LAUGHTER] ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL.

WE'RE BACK TO 26-I-06 AS WRITTEN. IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT? JUSTICE BLACKWOOD. I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DID, WHEN WE PASSED THE WATERSHED AND GOT US VERY CLEAN WATER, IT TOOK A VERY LONG TIME, AND WE TOOK YEARS GETTING THAT THING DONE BECAUSE IT NEEDED EVERYBODY NEEDED TO BE HAPPY AND EVERYBODY, WE WANTED EVERYBODY TO BE ON BOARD.

AND WE DIDN'T WANT A LOT OF PEOPLE BEING YOU KNOW, RESENTFUL OF WHAT WE HAD DONE.

AND SO WE WERE VERY, VERY CAUTIOUS. WE WERE VERY DELIBERATE.

AND WE TOOK A VERY LONG TIME. AND WE DID PASS IT.

AND WE HAVE GREAT, GREAT WATER. AND EVERYTHING WORKED OUT WONDERFULLY.

AND SO I, YOU KNOW, I DO KNOW THAT THESE HOW LONG THESE THINGS CAN TAKE, IT'S UNFORTUNATE AND I

[00:25:07]

AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM. AND SO WE'VE GOT TO HAVE EVERYBODY IN THE COUNTY AND MAKE THEM HAPPY AND MAKE THEM FEEL LIKE THEY'RE A PART OF IT.

AND THEN WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, RESPECT EVERYBODY ELSE'S WISHES TOO.

SO I JUST THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY ABOUT THAT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. JUSTICE. THANK YOU, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.

I MEAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 26-I-06, MISS MEDLOCK.

AYE. MR. ELLIOTT. YES. MR. STOWERS. YES. MR. MCCOY.

YES. MR. ROBINSON. AYE. MISS YOUNG-BAKER. YES.

MR. KEITH. YES. MISS CURRY. AYE. MISS MASSEY.

AYE. MR. PERSON. YES. MISS. BLACKWOOD. AYE. MISS BLACKWOOD.

YES. MISS CAPPS. AND MISS DAVIS. PRESENT. OKAY.

YOU HAVE 13 AYES AND ONE VOTING PRESENT. 13 AYES, ONE PRESENT.

WE WILL SEND 26-I-06 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? MOVE TO ADJOURN WITHOUT OBJECTION.

OUR MEETING HAS ADJOURNED. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I MEAN, ANY COMMENTS? I'M GOING TO GET THIS. ARE THERE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS?

[Announcements]

OKAY. BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THAT I NEED TO EMAIL OR ANYTHING.

OKAY. OKAY. JUSTICE STOWERS. YEAH. TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

SO IT WOULD JUST BE NEED TO BE AN ITEM OF DISCUSSION UNLESS THERE WAS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION, ORDINANCE OR A RESOLUTION THAT ACCOMPANIED IT.

WELL, THE ORIGINAL ONE IS WHAT I ASKED FOR. SO IT WOULD BE THE ORIGINAL ITEM BACK ON THAT WAS AN ORDINANCE.

IT WAS PASSED. WE'VE PASSED THE THE LAND USE STUDY.

WE PASSED THE A PIECE OF LAND THAT I THINK WE'LL TALK LATER.

VAN IS GOING TO GIVE US SOME. THE FIRST PHASE OF IT WAS ADOPTED.

THE SECOND WAS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA. IT'S NOT.

IT'S NOT BEEN VOTED ON BY THE QUORUM COURT. WELL, THAT'S NOT TRUE, BECAUSE THE DENSITY FOR THE HOUSING IN THE ETJ WAS LESS ON THAT FIRST ONE THAN IT WAS THE SECOND ONE. SO THAT'S THE PART I'M TALKING ABOUT.

SECOND PART, BUT IT'S THE THE DENSITY IS AN ISSUE. IT'S AN UNDECIDED ISSUE.

THE FIRST PLAN WAS ADOPTED. THE SECOND PART OF IT CONTINUES WHAT THERE WAS THE FIRST TIME, IT JUST WAS PULLED BEFORE IT WAS VOTED ON. BUT THE DENSITY IS AN ISSUE FOR PEOPLE.

WELL, FROM WHAT I SAW, THE DENSITY CHANGED ON TWO SEPARATE ONES.

WELL, THAT'S IF THAT'S BECAUSE. NOT THAT. NOT THE ONE THAT NOT THE PHASE TWO THAT GARVER PRESENTED.

IT'S THE AMENDED VERSION THAT HAS NOT BEEN HEARD, I GUESS IS MAYBE HAS A CHANGE IN THE DENSITY.

YES, THAT'S THE ONE. AND IT DID HAVE A CHANGE IN THE DENSITY.

YEAH. BUT NONE OF THOSE HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY ANYBODY EXCEPT THE PHASE ONE HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING BOARD BY RESOLUTION TO THE QUORUM COURT AND PHASE TWO ALSO. RIGHT. YOU JUST HAVE NOT HEARD IT BECAUSE IT WAS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA.

OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS PHASE TWO OR THE COMPLETION OF THE LAND USE PLAN.

60% OF IT HAS BEEN ADOPTED. I WILL SEND AN EMAIL LATER BECAUSE I DON'T THINK MY MESSAGE IS GETTING ACROSS THAT THE DENSITY NUMBERS WERE DIFFERENT IN THE SAME MAP AREA ON ONE PLAN, AND WAS DIFFERENT FOR THE SECOND ONE.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. GO AHEAD AND SEND AN EMAIL.

I WILL THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.

ANY OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS. AND WE DO HAVE ONE COMMENT AND THEN I'LL LET YOU FINISH.

[Public Comment]

GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. I WANT EACH OF YOU TO ASK YOURSELVES, WHO DO YOU WORK FOR? WHO DO YOU REPRESENT? THIS ORDINANCE. EXCUSE ME.

EMERGENCY ORDINANCE THAT WAS PRESENTED TONIGHT.

HE'S TALKING ABOUT HAVING HOSTING MEETINGS IN THE COMMUNITY.

[00:30:01]

THEY DON'T WANT ZONING. OKAY. THEY DON'T WANT ZONING.

AND AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, AS A REGISTERED VOTER IN PULASKI COUNTY.

ALL OF THIS IS THE CURRENT COUNTY JUDGE, BARRY HYDE, TRYING TO CONTROL PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, THEIR LAND, TRYING TO SEIZE IT. THESE MEETINGS, WE'VE HAD MEETINGS.

WE'VE HAD MEETINGS. WHEN GARVER CAME OUT, THEY HAD MEETINGS.

I WENT TO A COUPLE OF THOSE MEETINGS. THE PEOPLE SPOKE.

THEY DON'T WANT ZONING. THE MEETING IS COMING UP.

AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. IT'S JUST CAMPAIGNING ON TAXPAYERS DOLLARS.

HYDE'S TRYING TO SAVE HIS FACE BECAUSE HE KNOWS HE'S GOT A STRONG OPPONENT.

HE'S AFRAID OF LOSING. HE'S RUNNING AND HE'S CAMPAIGNING ON TAXPAYERS DOLLARS.

AND IT'S NOT RIGHT. IT IS TIME OUT FOR MEETINGS.

IT'S TIME FOR YOU GUYS TO MAKE A DECISION AND DO THE RIGHT THING BY THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES.

ASK YOURSELF, WHO DO YOU WORK FOR? THIS WHOLE BODY NEEDS TO BE REVAMPED.

IN MY OPINION, IT'S UNFAIR FOR SOMEONE WHO DON'T HAVE UNINCORPORATED IN THEIR DISTRICT VOTING ON THIS MATTER.

IT'S NOT RIGHT. ASK YOURSELF, GUYS, WHO ARE YOU WORKING FOR? DO THE RIGHT THING. THE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN.

THEY DON'T WANT ZONING. I'M SORRY. IF THEY WANT TO LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS, THEY WILL MOVE TO THE CITY LIMITS.

IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS, IT NEEDS TO BE LOOSE.

LOOSE REGULATIONS CATERING TO DEVELOPERS. AND IF YOU'RE A DEVELOPER, YOU SHOULDN'T BE VOTING ON THIS ANYWAY.

YOU SHOULD RECUSE YOURSELF. IT'S WRONG. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT WE'LL CLOSE OUT WITH JUSTICE ELLIOT.

I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I WANT TO PRESENT A SMALL GIFT TO THE DEPUTIES THAT COME TO OUR MEETINGS ALL THE TIME, AND THEY'VE BEEN REAL GOOD FOR WHAT I CAN SAY.

AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING THAT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] I GUESS IF Y'ALL WOULD COME UP WHEN THEY COME UP.

AND WHAT WE'D BE DOING AND THIS IS GUILT IS FROM THE WHOLE QUORUM COURT.

YEAH. SO IF Y'ALL WOULD COME UP. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY.

YEAH. I MEAN I CAN'T HARDLY WALK OVER THERE. YEAH.

NO THAT'S FINE. THEY'LL WALK UP OR I'LL HELP THEM.

THEY CAN COME UP I GUESS THEY CAN COME TO YOUR.

YEAH Y'ALL CAN. YEAH. Y'ALL CAN MEET HIM THERE BECAUSE WE HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO CLAIM OUR ATTENTION.

THE MEETING IS. HOLD ON. YEAH. WE'RE ADJOURNED.

YEAH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.