May 12, 2026 Agenda Committee

A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 26I32 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? OKAY, THIS IS A RESOLUTION FOR THE STANDARD MEETING.

LET'S SEE.

WAIT A MINUTE.

NO, WAIT A MINUTE.

THIS IS A RESOLUTION FOR THE HIGH-INTENSITY DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY IN THE...

UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF PULASKI COUNTY.

HANG ON HERE.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS TO GET SOME REGULATION FOR THE COUNTY SO THAT WE CAN BE RESPONSIBLE WITH OUR GROWTH, PROTECT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE.

KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DOING.

THIS IS NOT ANTI-TECHNOLOGY.

THIS IS JUST TO BE PROTECTIVE OF THE TAXPAYERS AND RATE PAYERS.

AND SO THIS IS A RESOLUTION THAT STATES THAT IN ACTING AT THE QUORUM COURT IS TO AUTHORIZE THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES, INCLUDING THAT WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS, YOU KNOW, SINCE WE DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS IN OUR COUNTY.

SO THAT'S WHAT IT'S ABOUT.

AND IF ANYBODY WANTS TO COME UP AND TALK ABOUT THIS RESOLUTION, I THINK WE DO HAVE WENDELL GRIFFIN HERE AND HE CAN COME UP AND SPEAK ON IT IF HE WOULD LIKE.

JUST FOR THE RECORD, JUDGE GRIFFIN, YOU CAN COME UP, PLEASE.

AMY, LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT JUSTICE MEDLOCK IS HERE.

AND JUST A REMINDER THAT EVERYONE'S LIGHT IS ON, SO I'M GOING TO BE PAYING ATTENTION TO AS BEST I CAN.

GO AHEAD, JUDGE GRIFFIN.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIRMAN.

MY NAME IS WENDELL GRIFFIN.

I'M A RESIDENT OF PLACID COUNTY.

AND GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE QUORUM COURT.

THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU IS A RESOLUTION THAT EXPLAINS THAT HIGH-INTENSITY DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE, HIDI, ARE.

THE KIND OF INDUSTRIAL USES THAT BY VIRTUE OF THEIR IMPACTS SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS HEAVY INDUSTRY AND EXPLAINS WHY.

BECAUSE OF THE IMPACTS BASED UPON ELECTRICAL DEMAND, WATER

[00:05:01]

USAGE, THERMAL...

AS WELL AS NOISE IMPACTS, AS WELL AS THE FIRE RESPONSE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES IMPACTS THAT GO ALONG WITH THEM, THEY ARE NOT THE TYPICAL COMMERCIAL USE.

AT A 10 MEGAWATT LEVEL, YOU'RE DEALING WITH A FACILITY THAT WOULD HAVE ELECTRICAL USAGE EQUAL TO THE EQUIVALENT OF BETWEEN 7,500 AND 10,000 RESIDENTIAL HOUSEHOLDS.

AT 100 MEGAWATT, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ELECTRICAL DEMAND OF A COMMUNITY, A CITY.

THEREFORE, THIS IS NOT ONE USAGE, ONE 100 MEGAWATT INSTITUTION, IS NOT WHAT YOU CALL THE TYPICAL COMMERCIAL USAGE.

THE FIRE AND THERMAL ISSUES ARE VERY CLEAR.

THE ELECTRICAL DEMAND IS HIGH.

ALSO, THESE ARE OFTEN LOCATED OUTSIDE.

THE TYPICAL FIRE RESPONSE AREAS AND BECAUSE OF THAT THESE IMPACTS WOULD APPLY.

I'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION YOU MAY HAVE.

YES SIR OKAY WERE YOU WERE YOU FINISHED JUSTICE BLACKWOOD? OKAY JUSTICE STOWERS.

IT SEEMS THAT WE HAVE A FOR US THIS EVENING SEVERAL PIECES OF COMPLEX PLANNING LEGISLATION WITHOUT THE COUNTY'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION EVER HAVING WEIGHED IN VETTED HEARINGS OR PROVIDER RECOMMENDATIONS WITH PUBLIC POLICY OF THIS MAGNITUDE THAT WILL IMPACT GENERATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HERE IN PULASKI COUNTY IS A HUGE COMPONENT OF THAT SO WITH PUBLIC POLICY OF THIS MAGNITUDE, I BELIEVE IT'S IMPERATIVE, IT'S IMPORTANT, IT'S VITAL THAT THIS BODY GET IT RIGHT, THAT WE LEAN ON THE EXPERTISE OF THE PROFESSIONALS IN OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THAT IS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF PLANNING, TO ASSIST THE QUORUM COURT BY DIRECTION IN MAKING DECISIONS.

THEREFORE, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, AND ANYBODY WHO'S READ THE AGENDA KNOWS THAT THERE'S TWO RESOLUTIONS AND THREE ORDINANCES CONNECTED TO THIS.

THEREFORE, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REFER THIS ITEM AS WELL AS THE FOUR ACCOMPANYING PIECES OF LEGISLATION BEFORE US THIS EVENING.

REGARDING DATA CENTERS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR STUDY, VETTING, PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND ULTIMATELY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE QUORUM COURT.

THIS SEEMS TO BE A ROUNDABOUT WAY OF CREATING ZONING IN PULASKI COUNTY, AT LEAST WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED, WHERE NONE CURRENTLY EXIST.

WHICH I BELIEVE WOULD BE THE PROVERBIAL CAMEL'S NOSE UNDER THE TENT AS THE FIRST STEP TO CREATING ZONING IN PULASKI COUNTY WHERE NONE EXIST TODAY.

SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT IS MY MOTION, IS THAT GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY OF THIS, THAT WE SEND IT TO OUR PROFESSIONALS.

OUR PROFESSIONALS ARE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

JUDGE GRIFFIN, THANK YOU.

YEAH, OKAY.

SO A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE ACTUALLY REFER RESOLUTIONS 32 AND 33.

YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THAT.

WE'RE GOING TO, I'M JUST STATING THE MOTION AND THEN WE'LL GET A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THE MERITS OF THE MOTION.

AM I CORRECT, JUSTIN? CORRECT.

IS THAT DEBATABLE, JUSTIN? OKAY, SO WE'RE...

WHICH ONE DID YOU PULL? RESOLUTIONS 32 AND 33.

AND THEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ORDINANCE...

MAKE SURE I GET THIS RIGHT.

WHAT ORDINANCES ARE YOU SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT? 30, 31, 34.

30, 31, 34.

YES, 31, 34, AND 30.

ONE 34 ON THE ORDINANCES ON THE

[00:10:01]

RESOLUTIONS THAT'S THE TWO SO YES SO WE GOT RESOLUTIONS 32 AND 33 ORDINANCES UH 30 31 AND 34 ARE WE CORRECT OKAY SO 30 WE SCRATCHED 30 SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 31 AND 34 CORRECT OKAY UH SO A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE WE PULL OR THAT WE REFER BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 32 AND 33 ALONG WITH UM ORDINANCE 31 AND 34.

AND IT WAS SECONDED YEAH AND IT WAS SECONDED BY JUSTICE MCCOY. JUSTICE MCCOY DID YOU HAVE A STATE... YEAH JUST JUST A QUICK COMMENT. SO, I THINK JUST LIKE YOU ALL WE RECEIVED OUR PACKETS THURSDAY AFTERNOON ELECTRONICALLY. I GOT MINE IN THE MAIL. I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE SATURDAY OR WHATEVER.

SO THESE ARE SOME DEFINITELY WEIGHTY ITEMS. I FEEL LIKE FOLKS WITHIN THE COUNTY, AFOREMENTIONED MY COLLEAGUES, BUT PROBABLY OTHERS NEED TO BE INVOLVED AS WELL.

SO I THINK THE CART IS MOVING A LITTLE BIT TOO FAST FOR EVERYONE TO KEEP UP.

I'M INTERESTED IN ALSO SOME OF THE PROTECTIONS AS WELL, BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE SEEN SOME THINGS HERE RECENTLY THAT GIVE ME CONCERN ON A STATE LEVEL.

AND SO I AM INTERESTED IN THIS SOME AND LOOK FORWARD TO GOOD DIALOGUE, WEALTH AT ALL, AND STRATEGIC PROCESSES AND HOW WE ADOPT THESE ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS AS WELL.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT IT.

OKAY, ABSOLUTELY.

OKAY, JUSTICE MCCOY.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD. YES, IF THESE ARE REFERRED OVER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

HOW LONG DO YOU WANT THAT? ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE A STIPULATION ON LENGTH OF TIME THAT THIS HAS TO GO THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION? AND, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU GOING TO? MR. KEITH, AM I RECOGNIZED? YEAH, GO AHEAD, YES, BECAUSE YOU'LL BE IN THERE.

I DON'T NORMALLY DO BACK AND FORTH.

BUT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF THE RECORD, BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND.

IS THERE A TIME LIMIT? WELL, LET ME ASK THE QUESTION.

IS THERE GOING TO BE A TIME STIPULATION THAT WE'RE PUTTING, A DISPOSITION THAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THE PLAN COMMISSION OR ARE WE JUST GOING TO SEND IT BACK AND ALLOW THEM TO VET IT BASED ON THEIR SCHEDULE? OR HAVE WE EVEN CONSIDERED THAT? WELL, YOU'RE ASKING ME BECAUSE I MADE THE MOTION, SO I'LL GIVE YOU MY ANSWER.

IF WE AS A BODY DESIRE...

TO PLACE A, LET'S SAY, THREE, FIVE, SIX, WHATEVER MONTH.

I THINK ANYTHING LESS THAN SIX MONTHS IS TOO SHORT OF A TIME PERIOD BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SCHEDULE THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR CONSTITUENTS TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS.

SO I WOULD BE FINE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION BRINGING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BODY WITHIN FOUR TO SIX MONTHS.

DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD? WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW IS, DOES ANYONE KNOW WHEN THE BUILDING STARTS ON THIS, THE NEW DATA CENTERS? WHICH ONE? NOW.

WHICH ONE? THE DATA CENTER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

YOU'VE GOT THE PORT AND YOU'VE GOT THE DATA CENTERS.

RIGHT, THAT'S THE DATA CENTERS.

SO WE DON'T HAVE SOME INFORMATION THAT.

THESE WERE EMERGENCY ORDINANCES, SO I ASSUMED...

RIGHT, THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE BUILT FAIRLY SOON, AND THAT WAS THE CONCERN, IS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO GO INTO PRODUCTION FAIRLY SOON.

SO, IF WE LABEL THEM EMERGENCY, THEN JUSTIN, DID WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN THEY WERE GOING TO BE BUILT, OR THEY WERE GOING TO START BUILDING? OKAY.

MR. HEATH, DID I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR? WELL, JULIE, ACTUALLY, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD HAD THE FLOOR.

SHE ASKED A QUESTION, AND I'M GOING TO LET HER FINISH.

OKAY, I SEE SOMEONE IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM.

PLEASE COME UP AND TELL US WHEN THESE ARE GOING TO BE.

IT WOULD BE GREAT.

JIM CRANOR, PULASKI COUNTY PLANNING.

SO MY OFFICE IS THE ONE THAT IS REVIEWING THE AVEO DATA CENTER ON 145TH STREET.

THE APPLICANT STILL HAS A COUPLE OF ITEMS TO PROVIDE STAFF BEFORE WE CAN ISSUE THEIR GO-AHEAD.

AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION WILL BE

[00:15:01]

SUBSTANTIAL DOWN THE ROAD, SIX MONTHS OR SO.

OKAY, OKAY, OKAY.

NOW ONCE THEY GET THEIR CLEARANCE FROM ADQ TO...

TO CLEAR AND GRUB THE SITE, THEY WILL PROBABLY START THAT HERE IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS OR SO.

DID THAT? YEAH, BECAUSE THAT WAS MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS IF THEY GET IN THERE AND THEY START BUILDING AND THEY START CREATING THESE CENTERS AND WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN ANYTHING PASSED TO HELP PROTECT US AND PROTECT THE CONSTITUENTS ON.

OKAY, ALL RIGHT.

YOU KNOW, AND THE RATE PAYERS, SO THAT THIS WON'T FALL BACK ON THE RATE PAYERS, AND SO THAT THIS, YOU KNOW, WE NEED SOME COST RECOVERY, WE NEED SOME ALL OF THAT KIND OF STUFF THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT, AND IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THAT AND THEY'RE ALREADY BUILDING IT, THAT WAS MY BIGGEST CONCERN.

IF WE WAIT SIX MONTHS, THEY'RE ALREADY IN PROGRESS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

OKAY, THAT'S FINE.

OKAY, THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ARE YOU YIELDING, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD? IS THAT IT? YES.

OKAY, JUSTICE DAVIS.

IS IT POSSIBLE, I KNOW IN FERNDALE WE HAD LIKE THAT ONE YEAR...

MORATORIUM.

CAN WE DO THAT RIGHT NOW TO PROTECT THAT AREA FOR THE SIX MONTHS UNTIL THE PLANNING BOARD IS ABLE TO ESTABLISH QUALIFICATIONS? WHO ARE YOU ASKING THAT? WHO DO YOU WANT TO ASK THAT QUESTION? OH, I GUESS PLANNING.

OKAY, PLANNING.

SO THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN ON THE BOOK SINCE OCTOBER OF 2024.

I HAVE ONE OF MY CONCERNS WHEN I READ THESE ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IS THE APPLICABILITY TO A APPLICATION THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED.

SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS COULD BE RETROACTIVELY APPLIED TO A PROJECT THAT'S ALREADY IN THE WORKS.

COUNTY ATTORNEY? AND THE ANSWER IS NO, IT CANNOT.

SO IN LARGE PART, THAT SHIP HAS ALREADY SAILED.

AND THAT'S MY BIGGEST FEAR IS THAT ONCE THESE DATA CENTERS GET PUT IN, ONCE YOU HAVE...

THEM USING ALL THE WATER, ONCE YOU HAVE THEM USING ALL OF OUR ELECTRICITY AND RUNNING OUR ELECTRICAL GRID, AND ONCE YOU HAVE THEM CHARGING THE CONSTITUENTS FOR ALL OF THIS, THEN THAT'S GOING TO BE OUR BIGGEST PROBLEM.

I THINK I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR.

HOLD ON.

I HATE TO CUT YOU OFF, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD, BUT JUSTICE DAVIS HAD THE FLOOR.

OH, I'M SO SORRY.

I'M SO SORRY.

WE'RE GOING TO GET THROUGH THIS.

I APPRECIATE IT, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

JUST GIVE ME A MOMENT.

ARE YOU 100% SURE ON THAT? BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN THE BILLBOARDS WENT IN, I WAS TOLD AS LONG AS THERE WAS NO DIRT MOVED, THAT WE WERE ABLE TO STOP THEM.

CORRECT.

I THINK THE THEORY IS THAT THEY'LL HAVE DIRT MOVED ON THIS PROJECT THAT Y'ALL ARE DISCUSSING BY THE TIME YOU WERE EVEN ABLE TO PASS THIS.

WHAT IF WE DO AN EMERGENCY TO HAVE A PROTECTION FOR SIX MONTHS? THEN IT WOULD BE PROTECTED, CORRECT? YOU DO THAT.

CAN I GUESS WE MIGHT NEED AN EMERGENCY MEETING? WE'VE DONE IT BEFORE FOR THE BILLBOARDS.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE COULDN'T DO IT AGAIN FOR THIS.

OKAY, I'LL HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT.

OKAY, PLEASE DO.

SO SO WHAT IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, EVEN THE ORDINANCES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO THAT'S BEFORE US TONIGHT, THEY DON'T APPLY TO THE APPLICATIONS THAT WERE SUBMITTED IN OCTOBER 2024.

IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? THAT'S CORRECT.

DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? JUSTICE DAVIS? I YIELD.

YOU PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED MOST OF MY QUESTIONS.

JUSTICE MASSEY.

WHAT WE PASSED TONIGHT, IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO STOP IN REGARDS TO THE DATA CENTERS THAT ARE ABOUT TO BREAK GROUND OR WHAT HAVE YOU? WILL THIS STOP WHAT THEY'RE DOING? NO, MA'AM.

IT WILL NOT STOP IT.

SO HAVING SAID THAT...

WHY WOULD WE RUSH AND PUT SOMETHING THROUGH THAT NEEDS TO GO TO PLANNING? LIKE I SAID, I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE DATA CENTERS, AND I WANT TO SEE THEM STOPPED.

BUT IT APPEARS AS IF THAT SHIP HAS ALREADY SAILED. I YIELD.

[00:20:05]

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. HOLD ON. I'M GONNA GO BACK TO JUSTICE STOWERS BECAUSE JUSTICE STOWERS HE, JUSTICE STOWERS YOU'VE GOT IT. THANK YOU, SIR.

I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION ON MY MOTION WHICH IS THAT WE WE REFER THIS ITEM AS WELL AS THE FOUR ACCOMPANYING PIECES OF LEGISLATION RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES BEFORE US THIS EVENING REGARDING DATA CENTERS TO THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND TO THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR STUDY VETTING PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ULTIMATELY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE QUORUM COURT. I'M CALLING THE QUESTION. OKAY. SO EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT THAT MEANS, RIGHT? HE'S CALLING THE QUESTION SO THAT MEANS, THERE IS NO MORE DISCUSSION, DEBATE ON WHETHER WE'LL SEND THIS BACK OR SEND THIS OVER TO PLANNING.

EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO VOTE ON, RIGHT? I'M STILL LOOKING FOR TIME FRAMES.

NO, NO, NO, REMEMBER, WE'RE ENDING THE DISCUSSION.

THEN WE'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND...

VOTE ON WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO SEND IT BACK SO ALL WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS DECIDING WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO END THE DISCUSSION AND WE'LL IF UP AND DOWN THEN WE DECIDE WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO SEND THIS OVER TO PLANNING SO ALL WE'RE DOING IS VOTING TO END THE DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM. ON THESE ITEMS, EVERYBODY'S CLEAR? YES. AMY WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MS. DAVIS. NO. MS. CAPPS. NO MS. LEWISON? NO.

MISS YOUNG-BAKER? NO.

MR. ROBINSON? NO.

MR. MCCOY? NO.

OKAY, 13 NOS AND ONE AYE.

AND MISS MEDLOCK? NO.

WE WILL PICK UP, WE'LL RESUME OUR DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER TO SEND THESE ITEMS OVER TO PLANNING.

SO 13-0 IS ONE AYE.

SO I THINK I SAW, I THINK JUSTICE CAPPS, I THINK I SAW YOU.

SO I'M GOING TO GET TO YOU.

I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS FOR MR. CRANOR OR IF THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIR IS HERE.

I DON'T SEE HIM.

CAN WE HAVE ANYBODY FROM PLANNING TELL US WHAT THEY FEEL IS A REASONABLE TIMELINE, THE SHORTEST TIMELINE THAT WE COULD HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS, MOVE FORWARD ON THIS? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

WE HAD ACTUALLY POSSIBLY CONSIDERED PUTTING THIS ITEM ON THIS MAY AGENDA FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.

COMPONENTS LIKE NOTIFYING SCHOOL BOARDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT YOU HAVE TO DO WHEN WHEN AN ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED WHEN IT'S PRESENTED AT THE PLANNING BOARD BUT WE COULD PROBABLY GO AHEAD AND PUT IT ON THIS MONTH'S AGENDA. YOU SHOULD. REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW THE DISCUSSION. IT REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW THE DISCUSSION GOES AT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS, WHETHER WE CAN DO IT IN FOUR TO SIX MONTHS.

I MEAN, I WOULD THINK WE COULD, BUT, YOU KNOW, ONCE THE LAYERS OF THE ONION ARE PEELED BACK, YOU NEVER KNOW.

FORGIVE ME, I DON'T TOTALLY UNDERSTAND HOW YOU ALL FUNCTION QUITE AS WELL.

SO IF IT GOES BEFORE YOUR PLANNING COMMISSION, ARE THERE EMERGENT ORDINANCES AT PLANNING COMMISSION, OR ARE THEY ALWAYS OVER? THREE-MONTH PERIOD.

THE PLANNING BOARD WOULD ADOPT A RESOLUTION THAT WOULD COME TO Y'ALL TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE.

SURE, OKAY.

AND SO WOULD IT BE REASONABLE TO THINK THAT YOU COULD PUT IT ON YOUR AGENDA, HAVE A COUPLE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, AND HAVE SOMETHING BEFORE US IN THREE MONTHS? POSSIBLY, YES.

I MEAN, THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, I MEAN, THAT INVOLVES SCHEDULING, FACILITIES.

I MEAN, I WAS...

ANTICIPATING THAT THESE MEETINGS WILL BE HELD IN THIS FACILITY.

WE'D HAVE TO GET SOME INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITIES ON HOW THEY WANT TO MEET, IF THEY WANT TO MEET.

AND WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE THESE MEETINGS IN THE EVENING FOR FULL ENGAGEMENT? YES.

NOW I'M CURIOUS IF THE APPLICATION WAS MADE OR IT BECAME, I GUESS, IF THE PLANNING BECAME AWARE OF THIS OCTOBER OF 24.

THANK YOU. I YIELD.

WHY HAS NOTHING BEEN DONE OR HAS SOMETHING BEEN DONE THAT WE WERE NOT MADE AWARE OF? THIS FALLS

[00:25:01]

UNDER A SITE PLAN REVIEW, AN ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW.

THIS WOULD NOT GO TO THE PLANNING BOARD UNLESS THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A VARIANCE OR A WAIVER OF SOME KIND, RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION, SETBACKS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO SINCE I'VE BEEN AT THE COUNTY IN 2010, ANY SITE PLAN REVIEW THAT HAS NOT REQUESTED A VARIANCE HAS BEEN DONE AT STAFF LEVEL.

AND I GUESS NO SENSE OF URGENCY OR THE POTENTIAL FOR IT TO CAUSE CONCERN FOR CONSTITUENTS THAT WOULDN'T RISE TO THE OCCASION OF SENDING IT TO AT LEAST MAKING, AND I'M ASSUMING NOBODY ELSE ON THE QUORUM COURT WAS MADE AWARE OF THE URGENCY BECAUSE ALL OF A SUDDEN IT HAS APPEARED.

BECAUSE I WASN'T AWARE OF THE URGENCY.

BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST ME TALKING OUT LOUD.

OKAY, I'M GOING TO GET TO YOU.

SO IF YOU'LL STAND, LET ME SEE.

I'VE GOT JUSTICE MCCOY.

SO SPEAKING ON THE MOTION, DO YOU, MR. CRANOR, THINK IT TO BE PRUDENT TO LET THIS GO THROUGH SOME NORMAL PROPER CHANNELS LIKE TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION? THAT'S TYPICALLY THE WAY THESE ORDINANCES SHOULD.

ARE YOU RESOLVED? OKAY.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD, I GOT YOUR NAME DOWN.

DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT ON THE MATTER? MY COMMENT, LET'S SEE.

I THOUGHT MAYBE THAT THEY ANSWERED IT, BUT I WAS THINKING THAT IF YOU SAID THAT THEY ALREADY BROKE GROUND AND THAT THESE WOULD NOT EVEN APPLY.

WE HAVE NOT BROKEN GROUND YET.

BUT ONCE THEY BREAK GROUND THAT THESE WILL NOT APPLY. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME? NO.

THAT'S WHAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TOLD YOU. THAT'S A BIG, OKAY.

THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TOLD ME. SO, THE MINUTE THAT THESE, THAT THEY BREAK GROUND, EVEN IF THEY'RE HAVING A, EVEN IF THEY'RE HAVING THESE MEETINGS, EVEN IF THEY'RE WORKING AND I THINK THE MINUTE THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BREAK GROUND, THEY HAVE A VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT THAT YOU COULD REGULATE BUT IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE A REGULATORY TAKING MEANS YOU WOULD HAVE TO PURCHASE. THAT IS PURCHASE THE FINISHED PRODUCT THAT THEY'RE PLANNING. AND DID WE SAY WAS ABOUT 20 BILLION DOLLARS AT BUILD OUT? OKAY. SO, REALLY EVEN IF WE HAVE THIS THESE MEETINGS IT WOULD SERVE NO PURPOSE PROJECT THAT'S ALREADY UNDERWAY. IT COULD IMPACT FUTURE PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE.

RIGHT, BUT THIS ONE WOULD STILL GO AHEAD REGARDLESS.

CORRECT.

YOU KNOW, SO THAT WAY, YEAH.

SO THIS IS WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT, FOLKS, AND THIS IS WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT, IS THAT IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING, IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING, THIS IS GOING TO GO AHEAD.

THIS IS GOING TO GO AHEAD, AND IT'S ALL WITHOUT ANY KIND OF REGULATION.

AND THAT'S MY BIGGEST CONCERN.

BIGGEST WORRY.

IT'S NOT THAT I'M AGAINST BUSINESS.

IT'S NOT THAT I'M AGAINST GROWTH.

IT'S NOT THAT I'M AGAINST ANY OF THIS.

I JUST THINK THAT THE PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE SOME, I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE PEOPLE HAVING SOME SAY IN IT.

I DID NOT WANT THE TAXPAYERS TO HAVE TO PAY FOR IT.

I DID NOT WANT IT TO FALL BACK ON US.

I'M SO WORRIED ABOUT OUR WATER SYSTEMS. OUR WATER SYSTEM IS THE MAIN THING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.

WE WORKED SO HARD TO GET OUR GOOD WATER SYSTEM AND THIS DATA CENTER, THEY USE IMMENSE, IMMENSE AMOUNTS OF WATER AND ELECTRICITY.

AND SO THESE ARE THE MAIN THINGS.

YOU KNOW, IT'S FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, BASICALLY, IS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT.

AND SO THIS IS WHERE I'M EXTREMELY WORRIED THAT THIS IS GOING TO GO FORWARD.

AND I UNDERSTAND HOW EVERYBODY WANTS...

WANTS BUSINESS TO GO FORWARD.

I UNDERSTAND HOW EVERYBODY THINKS, OH, IT'LL CREATE JOBS AND THAT KIND OF THING.

BUT THE PROBLEM, WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING RESPONSIBLE ABOUT IT.

YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT HAVING ANY REGULATIONS FROM THE COUNTY.

NOW, THEY DO HAVE SOME REGULATIONS, BUT THESE ARE VERY, VERY MINIMAL REGULATIONS.

FROM WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING ON THE REGULATIONS THAT THEY HAVE ON THESE.

AND SO THIS IS MY BIGGEST, BIGGEST CONCERN, IS THAT WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING IN ORDER TO PUT A STOP TO THIS RIGHT NOW AND MAKE THEM.

GIVE US AN IMPACT STUDY.

GIVE US THE INFORMATION.

TELL US HOW MUCH THEY'RE GOING TO USE.

TELL US WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.

[00:30:01]

HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST THE TAXPAYER.

THAT WAS ALL EXPLAINED IN THE PRESSER THIS MORNING, MA'AM.

OKAY, SO I PROMISE YOU I'M TRYING TO BE AS DIPLOMATIC AS I POSSIBLY CAN TONIGHT.

MICROPHONE AND EVERYBODY I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK SO IF WE COULD JUST MAINTAIN JUST A LITTLE DECORUM MAYBE SOME RESPECT AND I PROMISE YOU I'M GONNA GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK UH JUSTICE BLACKWOOD DID YOU THAT'S OKAY I YIELD OKAY ALL RIGHT I I'M CURIOUS AND AGAIN I GUESS AS THE CHAIR I'M CURIOUS AND I'M THINKING OUT LOUD AGAIN BASED ON THE ARTICLES THAT I'VE READ TODAY AND OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS HOW DOES THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK MAYBE EVEN THE STATE THINK THESE ARE GOOD THINGS FOR THE CITY.

THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY IMPACT ON THE WATER AND ALL OF THESE THINGS, AND THE COUNTY IS COMING IN.

CAN BOTH THINGS BE TRUE? I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE CITY.

THERE MAY BE A CITY REPRESENTATIVE HERE THAT CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.

I THINK I'M TOLD THAT, LET ME SEE, MR. CHESHIRE? JAY CHESHIRE.

OKAY, YEAH, I THINK SOMEBODY, I WAS TOLD HE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE AT LEAST SOME INSIGHT THEN WE'LL... SO, JAY CHESHIRE.

I'M ALSO A RESIDENT OF PULASKI COUNTY AND I'M JUST GOING TO HEAD AND START WITH, I DON'T SPEAK FOR ANYBODY BUT MYSELF INCLUDING MY WIFE BECAUSE SHE WOULD SHE WOULD PROBABLY DEBATE A LOT OF THINGS THAT I SAY AT HOME I I REALLY APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SET A FEW THINGS STRAIGHT IN TERMS OF MISINFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN SHARED.

AND THE MISINFORMATION WASN'T A SCENARIO BY WHICH IT WAS SOMEONE TRYING TO INTENTIONALLY STOP SOMETHING.

IT'S INFORMATION ON HOW THESE PROJECTS HAVE NOT BEEN DONE WELL IN OTHER PLACES.

SO I WANT TO START WITH, WE BEGAN THIS PROCESS WITH BOTH OF THESE COMPANIES OVER TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO.

AND FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, WE HAD BOTH CITY AND COUNTY REPRESENTATION AS A PART OF THOSE MEETINGS ALONG WITH EVERY UTILITY THAT WAS GOING TO POSSIBLY SERVE THIS PROJECT.

AND THE REASON WHY YOU START WITH THOSE THINGS SIMPLY IS IF YOU CAN'T SERVE IT AND IF YOU'RE SERVING IT IS GOING TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT OTHER PEOPLE.

THEN OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT GOOD FOR ALL OF US.

AND THAT'S BEEN OUR GOAL ON EVERY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE LAST 21 YEARS THAT I HAVE BEEN HERE, IS THAT IT BE GOOD FOR EVERYONE.

SO AS YOU'RE GOING TO READ AND AS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE INFORMATION THAT WE SHARED THIS MORNING, WHEN IT COMES TO ELECTRICITY, WHEN IT COMES TO THE GRID, WHEN IT COMES TO RATES THAT WE AS RATE PAYERS ARE PAYING, THIS PROJECT WILL NOT IMPACT IT NEGATIVELY WHATSOEVER.

YOUR RATES ARE NOT GOING UP.

ENTERGY ARKANSAS THIS MORNING CONFIRMED THAT.

WHEN IT COMES TO WATER, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WATER, AND TAD BOHANNON, THE CEO OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS WATER, WENT THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE PRESENTATION THIS MORNING AS WELL, SHOWING THAT BOTH THE CAPACITY, THE QUALITY, AND THE AVAILABILITY OF WATER IS NOT GOING TO BE AN ISSUE FOR NOT ONLY THESE PROJECTS, BUT THAT THEY HAVE A STRATEGY THAT GOES OUT TO 2050 AND 2100 TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE, GOOD QUALITY WATER TO TAKE CARE OF OUR NEEDS TODAY AND OBVIOUSLY FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME IN THE FUTURE.

THAT'S IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US.

GENE BLOCK.

THE CEO OF LITTLE ROCK WATER AND RECLAMATION TALKED ABOUT THAT JUST LIKE WITH THE WATER, THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT TO RATE PAYERS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO PAY FOR WATER AND OR WASTEWATER SERVICE BECAUSE THE COMPANIES HAVE ALREADY AGREED TO PAY FOR ALL OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEY NEED IN ORDER TO OPERATE.

IN THE END, WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT.

AS YOU KNOW, THERE'S A CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT PROCESS UNDERWAY RIGHT NOW WITH ONE OF THE PROJECTS.

THIS IS A PROCESS THAT WE GO THROUGH WITH ALMOST EVERY PROJECT AT THE PORT OF LITTLE ROCK, SIMPLY BECAUSE

[00:35:02]

OF WHERE IT'S LOCATED.

SO THEY WILL DO THE REVIEW NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT WE DO NOT ALLOW THESE COMPANIES TO DO ANYTHING THAT WOULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE ENVIRONMENT AS WELL.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS, YOU HAVE THE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY THAT'S ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED, AND THE FACT THAT THESE COMPANIES HAVE TO GO THROUGH THESE PROCESSES BOTH FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE AS WELL AS FROM A NOISE PERSPECTIVE THAT THEY HAVE ALSO AGREED.

IN FACT, THE PROJECT IN THE COUNTY OF IOWA HAS SAID PUBLICLY THAT THE AMBIENT NOISE THAT YOU CURRENTLY HEAR AT THE EDGE OF THEIR PROPERTY TODAY IS NOT GOING UP ONCE THEY START OPERATION.

THEY HAVE SAID THAT THEY WILL DO EVERYTHING WITHIN THEIR POWER TO SHOW PEOPLE HOW THAT WILL ACTUALLY NOT TAKE PLACE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF INCREASED NOISE.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE REGULATION AROUND THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, FROM AN ELECTRICITY STANDPOINT, THE CENTRAL ARKANSAS WATER COMMISSION FROM THE WATER PERSPECTIVE, THE LITTLE ROCK WASTEWATER RECLAMATION COMMISSION FROM THE WASTEWATER PERSPECTIVE, ADEQ AND SEVERAL OTHER ENTITIES THAT HAVE TO BE A PART OF THIS PROCESS, THEN THERE IS SIGNIFICANT REGULATION ON ANY OF THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS, WHETHER THEY BE ADVANCED MANUFACTURING, DATA CENTER.

LOGISTICS OR WHATEVER THEY MAY BE.

SO WHERE WE HAVE BEEN VERY FRUSTRATED IS NOT HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO STEP FORWARD AND ANSWER A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS AS WERE ANSWERED THIS MORNING AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE ANSWERED BECAUSE IN THE END THE PROJECTS THEMSELVES WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION.

WE HAVE A WEBSITE UP.

WE ALSO HAVE LINKS TO BOTH GOOGLE AND AVIO'S INFORMATION FROM THAT WEBSITE SO THAT YOU CAN GO READ IT YOURSELF AND PROVIDE INPUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

SO ALL THAT TO SAY, THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THAT IS COMING FORWARD, HAS COME FORWARD TODAY AND IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS.

WE STAND READY, WILLING, AND ABLE TO TRY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU POSSIBLY HAVE, BUT WE FELT IT WAS MORE IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE HEADS OF THOSE UTILITIES ACTUALLY ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS THEMSELVES.

SO LET'S TRY TO WORK THROUGH THIS.

JUSTICE CURRY.

YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT INFORMATION.

AS I RESEARCHED THIS WEEK, FINDING OUT ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON, I THINK IT'S BEEN APPROPRIATE TODAY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO HEAR MORE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE NOT REALLY PRIVY TO UNLESS WE WERE TO ATTEND THE PORT AUTHORITY MEETINGS, THE CHAMBER MEETINGS.

AND IT'S JUST A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WAS NOT SHARED WITH US.

AND EVEN WHEN THESE ITEMS WERE PRESENTED ON THIS AGENDA, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE, AS MR. STOWERS HAD STATED, THAT THE STAFF...

WAS AWARE OF ANY KIND OF IMPACTS.

ALSO WITH THE ATTORNEY AND JUST PROPERLY GOING THROUGH WHAT THE PROCEDURES SHOULD BE FOR THE COUNTY.

AND FOLLOWING THAT AND NOT HAVING DONE THAT, THERE WERE THINGS THAT JUST HADN'T BEEN REVEALED WITHOUT SOME ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS.

AND I DID REACH OUT TO SOME OF THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT.

WELL, I NEED TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THAT.

THERE ARE SEVEN DATA CENTERS HERE IN THE CITY AND 11 ACROSS THE STATE.

SO HAVING GONE AND LOOKED A LITTLE DEEPER INTO WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON THAT WE WERE JUST NOT AS PRIVY TO, BUT WE NEED TO BE AWARE BECAUSE WE ARE AUTHORITY AT THE COUNTY LEVEL, AND WE WANT TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT ABOUT OUR STAKEHOLDERS AND INFORM OUR COMMUNITY.

THIS IS WHERE WE ARE TODAY, BUT WE DO NEED TO PUT SOME TIME FRAMES THAT...

THAT WE CAN DO WHATEVER HAPPENS IN THE NEAR FUTURE AS YOU HAVE ENTITIES COME IN LIKE THIS.

BUT JUST BE AWARE TO MAKE US BE MORE AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR CITY.

YOU YIELD? OKAY, THANK YOU.

JUSTICE CURRY, JUSTICE ROBINSON.

[00:40:01]

MR. CRANOR, I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU.

AND I APPRECIATE MR. CHESHIRE COMING UP.

HE KILLED A LITTLE BIT OF MY...

MY THUNDER ABOUT THE STATE REGULATORY ASPECTS OF EVERYTHING, BUT AS A COUNTY, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE THE PLANNING BOARD, SUCH AS YOURSELF, TYPICALLY, AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT TYPICALLY, WHENEVER YOU HAVE A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE COUNTY, PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS IS MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPROVAL, WHICH REGULATES, YOU KNOW, THE AMOUNT OF WATER, THE AMOUNT OF SEWER, THE ADQ.

THAT THEY HAVE THAT APPROVAL THAT THEY HAVE THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS APPROVAL AND THEY CAN'T GET A SITE PLAN APPROVAL FROM THE COUNTY UNTIL THOSE BOXES ARE CHECKED MARK IS THAT CORRECT SO IF AND I'M NOT I SUPPORT SENDING THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR SOME REVIEW AND COMMENT BUT WITH PUBLIC INPUT AND THE WAY THAT THE PLANNING BOARD IS SET UP, I MEAN, WE CAN'T REGULATE THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, ADQ, AND THE CORE.

SO THE ONLY THING WE CAN REALLY REGULATE IS PARKING SPACES.

SO MUCH BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE PER ACRE.

I MEAN, WE CAN'T REGULATE DISCHARGE OF SEWER.

I MEAN, THAT'S HEALTH DEPARTMENT.

I MEAN, THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS, NOISE, WE CAN'T REGULATE THE NOISE.

SO YES, WE CAN.

NO, IT'S SAFE.

SO I GUESS MY I KNOW ROGERS HAS A PRETTY LARGE DATA CENTER THAT IS BY THE NEW WALMART, I BELIEVE, FACILITY.

I BELIEVE IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BENEFICIAL TO LOOK AT WHAT KIND OF ORDINANCE AND REGULATIONS THEY HAVE SET UP FOR THEIR DATA CENTERS.

BUT MY MAIN QUESTION IS, AS I DIGRESS, IS HAVE YOU HEARD OF ANY OTHER DATA CENTERS THAT ARE WANTING TO COME INTO THE COUNTY, OR IS THIS REALLY THE ONLY ONE OUT THERE? THIS IS THE ONLY DATA CENTER I'M AWARE OF.

SO IF WE TOOK FOUR TO SIX MONTHS, THERE'S NOT ANOTHER ONE THAT'S LIKE, OH, WE'VE GOT TO GET HERE IN THREE MONTHS? I'M NOT SURE OF THAT.

YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ANY RUMORS? NO, I HAVE NOT.

AND I'D LIKE TO ADD FOR THE BODY'S BENEFIT THAT A LOT OF THE THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, REGULATING NOISE AND THAT KIND OF THING, THAT'S MORE OF A ZONING COMPONENT.

THANK YOU, I YIELD.

SO THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED MORE IN A ZONING ORDINANCE VERSUS THE SITE PLAN REGULATIONS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

BUT WE DO REGULATE THINGS LIKE ACCESS, SETBACKS, BUILDING HEIGHT.

DRIVEWAYS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

THAT'S PART OF OUR SITE PLAN.

AND I BELIEVE LIKE WHEN THE SHOOTING RANGE CAME IN, THE NOISES WERE ALL REGULATED BY GAME AND FISH, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

WHAT WAS I GOING TO ADD? MY QUESTION IS, AS FAR AS THERE'S AN APPLICATION PROCESS, IS THAT CORRECT? AS FAR AS LIKE THE DATA CENTER HAD TO APPLY WITH THE COUNTY.

THEY PAID A FILING FEE.

THEY SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN, AN APPLICATION LETTER, AND THAT'S THE INITIAL INFORMATION.

WE GOT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS WE MADE COMMENT.

IT'S KIND OF A BACK AND FORTH.

WE TELL THEM WE NEED THIS.

THEY SEND THIS, AND BASED ON WHAT THEY SEND US, OUR COMMENTS MAY CHANGE.

SO IT'S A...

IT'S A GIVE AND TAKE.

IS IT AGAINST THE LAW FOR YOU ALL, WHICH IS PART OF THE COUNTY, TO LET US AS JUSTICE, AS FAR AS IF IT'S IN OUR AREA OR IF IT'S IN OUR DISTRICT, TO AT LEAST LET US KNOW? I DON'T THINK IT'S AGAINST THE LAW, NO.

BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED IS WHEN MY CONSTITUENTS COME TO ME AND LET ME KNOW STUFF THAT'S COMING DOWN THE LINE, AND IT'S LIKE I SIT NEXT TO PEOPLE THAT KNEW ABOUT IT, BUT I WASN'T INFORMED.

HMM.

AND I DON'T REALLY LIKE THAT.

SO HOW CAN WE, AS FAR AS MOVING FORWARD, HOW CAN IT BE THAT YOU ALL LET US KNOW WHEN PROJECTS LIKE THIS IS COMING, EVEN APPLYING? SO ONE THING THAT...

I STARTED THINKING ABOUT AS THIS PROCESS, AS THIS ISSUE BECAME A BIG ISSUE, IS THAT MAYBE WE OUGHT

[00:45:01]

TO GO BACK TO DOING ALL THE SITE PLANS AT THE PLANNING BOARD.

SO AT THE VERY MINIMUM, THERE IS AN AGENDA POSTED AND...

UH YOU KNOW DEPENDING ON THE MAGNITUDE OF THE PROJECT MAYBE NOTIFICATIONS WOULD BE APPLIED LIKE WE DO FOR OUR LARGER SUBDIVISIONS SO THAT WOULD BE A DISCUSSION THAT WE SHOULD PROBABLY HAVE AT AN UPCOMING PLANNING BOARD MEETING IS TO GO BACK AND DO THE SITE PLAN REVIEWS AT THE BOARD LEVEL INSTEAD OF JUST STAFF LEVEL, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. JUSTICE PERSON.

THANK YOU. SO, AND I DON'T, THIS IS MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE DIRECTED TOWARDS YOU BUT MORE SO TO MY COLLEAGUES HERE UH THIS IS A REASON WHY THE LAND USE STUDY AND ORDINANCE AND REGULATION IS NEEDED UM WE HAVE SO MUCH PUSHBACK WHEN WE WAS TALKING ABOUT REGULATION BUT OH WE HAVE ETJ OH WE NEED REGULATION NOW WE NEED A LITTLE BIT OF REGULATION DATA CENTERS COMING IN OH NOW WE NEED SOME MORE REGULATION THIS AD HOC REGULATION AND CHERRY PICKING OF ORDINANCE AND REGULATIONS AND LAND USE.

THIS IS NOT GONNA BE SUSTAINABLE.

IT IS NOT GONNA BE SUSTAINABLE.

WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING A BIT MORE ORGANIZED, A BIT MORE STANDARD.

IF WE WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE GROWTH THAT PULASKI COUNTY IS GONNA SEE WHETHER IT'S RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL.

AD HOC CHANGES LIKE THIS, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE SUSTAINABLE FOR PULASKI COUNTY.

I HOPE EVERYBODY'S STARTING TO REALIZE THAT.

NEVERTHELESS.

ONE THING I DO NOT WANT IS FOR US TO BOX OURSELVES IN WITH ORDINANCES THAT ARE RUSHED.

I'D RATHER GET IT RIGHT.

I DON'T NEED TO BE FIRST.

I NEED TO GET IT RIGHT.

AND I DO NOT, I BELIEVE IN SINISTER PLANNING.

AND I'M GOING TO ASK YOU, CAN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT EITHER SPIN UP A WORKING GROUP? OR CAN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AS A WHOLE GET THIS DONE? I MEAN, WE HAVE ENERGY REPRESENTATIVES IN HERE.

WE HAVE THE CITY, THE LITTLE ROCK CHAMBER IN HERE, AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE PORT REPRESENTATION IN HERE.

WE NEED TO HAVE THESE PEOPLE UP FRONT IN FRONT OF THE PEOPLE OF PULASKI COUNTY ANSWERING QUESTIONS.

SO CAN YOU DO THIS IN THREE MONTHS? I JUST NEED TO KNOW, IS IT POSSIBLE, IS IT FEASIBLE TO DO THIS IN THREE MONTHS? PROBABLY, YES.

WE HAVE THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE ROOM TODAY AND I'M BORDERLINE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT NOW.

I REALLY IMPLORE YOU.

EXACTLY.

IN HERE.

I AGREE.

I MEAN, WE'RE HERE BECAUSE THEY PUT US HERE.

SO IF THE BOSS IS HERE, THEN, YOU KNOW, WE DO WHAT THE BOSS SAY DO.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF...

PROPER PROTOCOLS WHATEVER WITH THE AGENDA MEETING UM BUT IF THREE MONTHS THIS COULD BE DONE I STRONGLY IMPLORE YOU TO GET THIS DONE IF THAT MEANS HAVING A QUICK CONVERSATION WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THAT I JUST MENTIONED IS GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT A SITUATION WHERE A WE BOXING OURSELVES IN AND AND DON'T MAKE NO MISTAKE I DON'T WANT TO BE ON THE SIDE ANGRILY WAVING MY FIST AT THE AUTOMOBILE BECAUSE I'M A FAN OF HORSE AND BUGGIES.

OR ANGRILY WAVING MY FIST AT TELEVISION BECAUSE I LIKE RADIO.

YOU KNOW, I'M NOT THAT KIND OF PERSON.

I'M NOT THAT TYPE.

BUT I DO DEFINITELY FALL ON THE SIDE OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF OUR CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS OF PULASKI COUNTY.

SO THIS NEEDS TO GET...

THIS NEEDS TO GET DONE ASAP.

AND I BELIEVE THAT A THREE-MONTH TIME FRAME, IF NOT SOONER, YOU HAVE VERY SMART PEOPLE ON THE PLANNING BOARD WHO CAN PUT SOME THINGS TOGETHER TO GET THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT I JUST MENTIONED TO GET IN FRONT OF THE PEOPLE OF PULASKI COUNTY AND HAVE A CONVERSATION AND TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE RESIDENTS.

THANK YOU, I YIELD.

THANK YOU, JUSTICE MEDLOCK.

I WAS JUST ABOUT TO SAY THE SAME THING AS FAR AS I APPRECIATE THE PRESS CONFERENCE, ALTHOUGH I WAS UNFORTUNATELY NOT ABLE TO ATTEND, BUT I THINK THE MORE INFORMATION THE BETTER BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WITH A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT MAY HAVE BEEN MISLEADING OR CONFUSING AND ALL THE MORE REASON FOR IT TO GO IN FRONT OF THE PROFESSIONALS.

BUT THAT WAS MY COMMENT.

[00:50:02]

MAY I HAVE MR. CHESHIRE COME BACK UP HERE? THANK YOU.

OKAY, SO YOU SAID, WHAT IF THERE'S AN IMPACT? IF THERE'S AN IMPACT, AND YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO PAY.

I WANT TO.

UNPACK THAT A LITTLE BIT.

IMPACT ON WHAT? WELL, ON THE WATER, ANY OF THE STUFF THAT...

SO AGAIN THIS MORNING, THE UTILITIES THEMSELVES STATED THERE WOULD BE NO RATE IMPACT WHATSOEVER FROM THE ELECTRICAL, THE WATER, THE WASTEWATER AT ALL.

THAT'S THEM SAYING IT, NOT ME.

I KNOW.

GOOD THING.

OKAY, SO...

I'M JUST LIKE AN ORDINARY PERSON, OKAY? AND I DON'T USE A LOT OF WATER.

I DIDN'T EVEN ACTUALLY WATER MY LAWN.

EXCUSE ME.

SO I DIDN'T EVEN GET A NOTICE ABOUT MY WATER BILL, AND IT KEEPS GOING UP.

AND I'M GOING LIKE, IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO, NOTHING'S GOING TO IMPACT US, ARE THEY GOING TO SEND, LIKE, LETTERS OUT SAYING, HEY, KATHY, OTHER PEOPLE? WE'RE NOT GOING TO RAISE THOSE RATES.

THEY'RE GOING TO STAY THE SAME BECAUSE FOR SOME REASON IT SEEMS EVERYTHING IS GOING UP AND I DON'T KNOW HOW AN EVERYDAY PERSON IS GOING TO MAKE IT.

SO I JUST THINK WE SHOULD KNOW SOMETHING.

AND TO YOUR POINT, THAT WAS ADDRESSED THIS MORNING BY MR. BOHANNON.

THE CAW BOARD AND THEN I GUESS IN APPROVALS AT THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK AND THE CITY OF NORTH LITTLE ROCK APPROVED RATE STRUCTURES OUT TO 2032 LAST YEAR.

SO ALL OF THAT WAS ALREADY IN PLACE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WHAT THEY HAVE DETERMINED THAT THEIR RATES ARE GOING TO BE.

NOW, YOU MAY GET A LETTER ASKING YOU TO WATER YOUR LAWN BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO SELL MORE WATER.

BUT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE RATES, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO, THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITIES OF BOTH LITTLE ROCK AND NORTH LITTLE ROCK, EXTENDING INTO AT LEAST 2032.

I'M TRUSTING YOU.

I WANT TO REITERATE, IT'S THESE UTILITIES THAT ARE MAKING THOSE STATEMENTS.

I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S NOT YOU.

AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT FROM DAY ONE...

THEY HAVE ALL BEEN AT THE TABLE TO BE ABLE TO WALK THROUGH ALL OF THESE THINGS AND ALL THESE SCENARIOS AND ALL THESE POSSIBILITIES AND THEN TO DETERMINE WHAT, IF ANY, COSTS THERE WOULD BE AND THEN WHO WOULD BEAR THAT COST.

AND THESE TWO PROJECTS, EACH HAVE STATED PUBLICLY THEY WILL BEAR ALL THEIR COSTS.

THEIR NAMES? IT'S GOOGLE AND AVIO.

NO, THANK YOU.

I DON'T MEAN TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT THANK YOU.

I'M JUST WONDERING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'M LOOKING AT IT OUT THERE AND WE'RE ALL JUST EVERYDAY PEOPLE.

I MEAN, WE NEED TO ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

AND JUSTICE LEWISON, I AGREE.

AND I THINK WHAT'S HAPPENED, I'M JUST GOING TO GO TO MEMPHIS.

THAT'S NOT VERY FAR.

MEMPHIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF MAYBE HOW NOT TO DO THIS.

AND SO WHEN PEOPLE READ AND SEE WHAT HAPPENED IN MEMPHIS WITH XAI AND THE ISSUES AND HOW THEY ARE GENERATING THEIR POWER, NOT THROUGH ELECTRICITY, BUT THROUGH OTHER MEANS TO ACTUALLY OPERATE THOSE FACILITIES, THEN WE AS INDIVIDUAL REGULAR CITIZENS KNOW NOTHING ELSE BUT WHAT WE READ.

AND THAT'S BEEN A BIG PROBLEM FROM DAY ONE IN BEING ABLE TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH EVERYONE SO THAT THEY CAN SEE HOW THIS WAS DONE SOMEWHERE ELSE IS NOT GOING TO BE HOW IT'S GOING TO BE DONE HERE.

AND IN FACT, THERE ARE SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE TO KEEP THAT FROM HAPPENING.

GROUNDWATER ISSUES.

WE HAD A QUESTION THIS MORNING ABOUT WHAT IT WILL DO FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ACTUAL, NOT ONLY QUALITY OF WATER, BUT THE PRESSURE OF YOUR WATER.

YOU CAN GO TO PROJECTS ACROSS

[00:55:02]

THE COUNTRY WHERE THE COMPANIES DRILLED GROUND WELLS.

IN MANY OF THOSE AREAS, THE RESIDENTS WERE USING GROUND WELLS FOR DRINKING WATER.

WELL, IF YOU HAVE AN AQUIFER THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN HAS SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BECAUSE OF NEW USAGE OF THAT WATER, IT'S GOING TO IMPACT THOSE PEOPLE AROUND IT.

THERE IS NO GROUNDWATER IN THIS PROJECT.

IT WILL ALL BE SERVED BY CENTRAL ARKANSAS WATER, AGAIN, WITH THE CAPACITY NEEDED NOT ONLY FOR TODAY, FOR TOMORROW, BUT OUT TO 2100.

AND I'VE BEEN EXTREMELY LIBERAL BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS SOME IMPORTANT INFORMATION THAT WE'RE GETTING BECAUSE WE WASN'T AWARE.

BUT WE REALLY DO NEED TO FOCUS OR TRY TO GO BACK TO OUR CONSIDERATION OF ARE WE GOING TO SEND THIS TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR REVIEW.

SO I'VE GOT SOME OTHER PEOPLE.

I'VE GOT EVERYBODY'S NAME DOWN.

BUT I'M TRYING TO GIVE EVERYBODY AT LEAST ONE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BEFORE WE MOVE ON.

SO JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I DO AGREE THAT WE NEED TO GET THIS RIGHT.

AND WE NEED TO BE TRUTHFUL AND HONEST.

ABOUT THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEING GIVEN.

AND SO WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN I THINK ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD SEND THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING BOARD, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR JIM.

I WANT TO KNOW IF IT IS POSSIBLE, IF THE BODY DECIDES TO SEND THIS BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD, TO THE COMMISSION AND THE BOARD AND I KNOW YOU SAID THAT IT'S POSSIBLE TO DO PUBLIC COMMENTS IN THREE MONTHS IS IT FEASIBLE TO GIVE THE BODY MONTHLY UPDATES BECAUSE WE MEET MONTHLY OF COURSE LEADING UP TO THAT TIME FRAME LETTING US KNOW WHERE THE HOW YOU GUYS ARE PROCESSING THIS, WHERE YOU ARE IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING SURE AND ENSURING THAT IT CAN BE DONE IN THREE MONTHS OR IF NOT.

YES, WE WILL SEND THE BODY THE MINUTES OF EVERY MEETING THAT WE HAVE REGARDING THIS ISSUE.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING BACK.

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE GREATER LITTLE ROCK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE.

AGAIN, MR. JAY CHESHIRE.

DID I GET YOUR TITLE RIGHT, SIR? AS LONG AS I CALL YOU FOR DINNER, RIGHT? BOTTLE WASHER.

ONE THING WE'VE NOT BROACHED HERE TONIGHT IS THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S RIGHT.

AND.

THIS IS THE FUTURE.

THIS IS NOT THE PAST.

THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GOING IN THE NEXT 50 YEARS AS A SOCIETY.

SO, CAN YOU SPEAK TO, SIR, WHAT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT THAT WOULD ENTAIL AS FAR AS BRINGING GROWTH TO PULASKI COUNTY? WELL, I THINK FIRST OF ALL, TO QUICKLY FOCUS, AND WE'VE RUN SOME NUMBERS ON THE PROJECT AT THE PORT.

WE'VE NOT YET RUN THOSE NUMBERS ON AVIO, BUT WE'LL SOON.

JUST FROM A PROPERTY TAX STANDPOINT, TO PULASKI COUNTY, WITH ONLY ONE BUILDING, YOU'RE LOOKING AT OVER A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR JUST WITH THAT ONE BUILDING.

I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A SUPERINTENDENT VISIT THE PORT WITH ME, AND WE WERE SITTING OUT IN FRONT OF THE AMAZON BUILDING.

AND I ASKED IF HE KNEW HOW MUCH PROPERTY TAX REVENUE HE'S GETTING AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FROM JUST THAT ONE BUILDING.

AND HE MADE A GUESS, AND IT WAS REALLY LOW, AS YOU WOULD EXPECT, BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AT A BUILDING THAT IS APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION A YEAR TO THE PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT...

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT.

AND THAT INVESTMENT BEING SUBJECT TO PROPERTY TAX.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT SIGNIFICANTLY NEW REVENUES,

[01:00:03]

NOT ONLY FOR THE COUNTY, BUT IN THE CASE OF THE PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, WHAT COULD BE WELL OVER $10 MILLION A YEAR.

ALL WITH A PROJECT THAT'S CREATING REALLY GOOD JOBS, A PROJECT THAT'S NOT CREATING ANY UPWARD PRESSURE ON ANY RATEPAYER ASPECT.

OF ALL THOSE THINGS WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT AND COMPANIES THAT WANT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR OKAY THANK YOU THANK YOU MR. CHESHIRE AND WHILE I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR MR. KEITH I WANT TO ONCE AGAIN NOW THAT WE'VE HAD DIALOGUE DEBATE I WANT TO MAKE MY MOTION AGAIN AND THAT IS THAT WE REFER THIS ITEM AS WELL AS THE FOUR ACCOMPANYING PIECES OF LEGISLATION BEFORE US THIS EVENING REGARDING DATA CENTERS TO THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR STUDY, VETTING, PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND ULTIMATELY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PULASKI COUNTY QUORUM COURT.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, ALTHOUGH I THINK IT'S STILL ON THE FLOOR.

IT'S STILL ON THE FLOOR, BUT ON THE TABLE.

DID WE NOW FEEL THEY WERE OUT? THEY WERE, I GUESS THEY WERE ADDING A TIME FRAME.

DID WE WANT TO? I WOULD BE WILLING TO INCLUDE WITHIN MY MOTION.

A TIME FRAME, I THINK 90 DAYS WAS MENTIONED.

THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE SHORT TO GET PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD, BUT I WOULD BE WILLING TO GO WITH 120.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT THIS, BUT HE WAS JUST RESTATING HIS MOTION, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF THIS WAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD THE TIME FRAME.

OKAY SO IS TO GO ALONG WITH MY COLLEAGUES YES MY MOTION WOULD INCLUDE A REQUEST THAT PLANNING BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION TO THIS BODY WITHIN 90 DAYS ALL RIGHT AND DO YOU YIELD NOW I YIELD NOW OKAY ALL RIGHT I DON'T KNOW IF I GOT A SECOND THOUGH YOU DID, YOU DID. JUSTICE CAPPS. NO, I'M STILL GOING.

WE'RE STILL.

OK, SO YOU I'VE GOT SOME PEOPLE AHEAD OF YOU.

THAT'S WHY.

SO, JUSTICE MASSEY.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT IS PRESENTED BEFORE US TONIGHT.

IF WE PASS THIS TONIGHT AND THIS IS TO OUR ATTORNEY, WILL IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN REGARDS TO THE DATA CENTER IN THE WRIGHTSVILLE AREA? NO, MA'AM, IT WILL NOT.

SO PEOPLE ARE HERE TONIGHT.

THEY WANT TO FEEL GOOD.

THEY WANT US TO PASS THIS ORDINANCE.

IT'S NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING.

SO IF WE SEND IT TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE, UNDERSTAND ME THAT IT'S NOT, THAT'S WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO.

IF IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, PASSING SOMETHING JUST TO MAKE YOU FEEL GOOD TONIGHT IS NOT GOING TO HELP YOU IN THE LONG RUN.

IT'S NOT GOING TO HELP ANY OF US.

SO I THINK THIS NEEDS TO GO TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE.

AND I'M SAYING THIS TO JUSTICE BLACKWOOD BECAUSE SHE KEEPS SAYING.

WE NEED TO DO THIS BECAUSE WE NEED TO DO THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO DO THIS.

WELL, IF IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, WHY DO THIS NOW? TELL ME WHY WE NEED TO DO THIS NOW IF IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, IF IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE WHAT THEY'RE ABOUT TO DO AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

THANK YOU FOR YIELDING.

JUSTICE MCCOY.

BEAT THE DEAD HORSE HERE BUT SPEAKING ON THE MOTION WE SHOULD MOVE THROUGH OUR NORMAL PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE I'M NOT SURE WHERE THESE RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES TAKE US IF THEY MOVE THE PENDULUM WAY TOO FAR OFF I'M NOT SURE ANY OF US ON THIS BOARD CAN ADEQUATELY EXPLAIN IF THAT'S THE CASE OR NOT I THINK THIS IS HASTY MR CRANER HAS EXPRESSED IF I UNDERSTOOD HIM CORRECTLY THAT WE HE RECOMMENDS THAT WE DO SEND THIS THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE COMMISSION.

SO JUST A FEW COMMENTS.

I PROBABLY.

WHAT IS BEFORE US IS VERY SIGNIFICANT, AND WE NEED TO USE NOT NECESSARILY HASTINESS OR EMOTIONS AND SO ON TO PROCEED.

SO I DON'T THINK WE'VE PASSED SUCH SIGNIFICANT LEGISLATION POTENTIALLY IN QUITE SOME YEARS, MAYBE SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE QUORUM COURT.

SO THESE AREAS NEED TO HAVE PARTIES ON BOARD.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE.

THE PROPONENTS

[01:05:02]

OF THESE ITEMS AND ALSO THE LITTLE ROCK CHAMBER AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE INVOLVED WHO HOLD THE FACTS AND THE RESOURCES AND SO ON, I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM HAVE AT LEAST AN ATTEMPT TO GET ONTO THE SAME PAGE.

SO WITH THAT, I YIELD.

HAMILTON, IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE AN EMERGENCY MORATORIUM FOR THE NEXT MEETING? I'M PRETTY SURE THE COUNTY JUDGE IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO CAN DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.

WELL, I TALKED TO JUSTIN AND HE SAID THAT WE COULD TALK ABOUT IT AND WE COULD POSSIBLY PUT IT ON AS AN ORDINANCE.

AGAIN, MA'AM, I'LL HAVE TO RESEARCH IT, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO SAY IT BEFORE, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THAT ONLY THE COUNTY JUDGE CAN DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.

WELL, I THINK JUSTIN'S NOT AGREEING WITH YOU, BUT CAN WE LOOK INTO THAT? BECAUSE I DID NOT...

I REPRESENT FERNDALE AND WE HAD 12 BILLBOARDS ON CANIS IN A MATTER OF 48 HOURS.

SO JUST BECAUSE THERE'S NO DATA CENTERS ANYBODY KNOWS ABOUT DOES NOT MEAN THEY'RE AROUND THE CORNER.

SO I WOULD FEEL BETTER.

I AGREE.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT IF THIS IS TOO MUCH OR NOT, BUT IF WE COULD AT LEAST HAVE A MORATORIUM TO PROTECT US ON THE OFF CHANCE THAT THAT IS HAPPENING UNTIL THE PLANNING BOARD IS ABLE TO GET US ANY OF THE INFORMATION.

I'M HAPPY TO LOOK INTO IT.

PERFECT.

NOW, ARE WE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES, DATA CENTERS AND BILLBOARDS? ARE THOSE APPLES TO APPLES OR ARE THOSE APPLES TO ORANGES? IT WAS UNWANTED, UNKNOWN ABOUT, THAT CAME.

ALL RIGHT, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

I'D LIKE TO HAVE JUDGE GRIFFIN COME BACK UP SO I CAN ASK HIM A QUESTION.

WHAT THEY'RE TELLING ME IS THAT, AND WHAT DONNA SAID TO THE LAWYER HERE, WAS THAT EVEN IF WE PASSED IT, IT WOULD BE MOOT.

IT WOULD NOT, THIS WOULD NOT COUNT.

THIS WOULD NOT HAVE ANY BEARING ON WHAT'S GOING ON.

IS THAT TRUE? NO.

BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

YOU CANNOT SAY IT HAS NO BEARING ON WHAT YOU DON'T KNOW.

AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY YOU DON'T KNOW IS BECAUSE SINCE OCTOBER OF 2025, 2024, YOU HAVE NOT BEEN TOLD.

NOW, YOU HAVE NOT BEEN TOLD BECAUSE YOU WERE NOT INTENDED TO KNOW.

BUT NONE OF MY T-SHIRTS HAVE BOO BOO THE FOOL ON THEM.

IT TAKES A FOOL TO BELIEVE THAT SOMETHING THAT WAS IN CONVERSATION SINCE OCTOBER 2024 IS NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN LIKE A RABBIT POPPING OUT OF A HAT BEFORE YOU.

THESE MEASURES ARE NOT HASTY.

THESE MEASURES ESTABLISH SOMETHING PULASKI COUNTY CURRENTLY LACKS BECAUSE THE ADMINISTRATION DID NOT PUT IT INTO PLACE KNOWING THAT THESE USES WERE COMING.

THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT DID NOT DEVELOP IT KNOWING THAT THESE USES WERE COMING.

THESE MEASURES ARE NOT NEW.

I TEN-TIME DOUBLE-DOG DAY DO A LEGAL CHECK.

IT'S EASY BECAUSE THE MEASURES ARE...

INTERESTING.

I'M A LAWYER, SO I KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT LAND USE LAW.

A SITE PLAN IS DIFFERENT FROM A CONDITION USE PERMIT.

YOU CAN HAVE A SITE PLAN WITHOUT HAVING ZONING.

YOU CAN HAVE A SITE PLAN FOR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE.

SO LET'S NOT PLAY, LET'S BE SERIOUS.

THE REASON YOU DON'T KNOW IS BECAUSE YOU WERE NOT INTENDED TO KNOW.

AND THE PEOPLE WHO HAD NOT INTENDED YOU TO KNOW...

ARE NOW TELLING YOU TO TRUST THEM.

THAT IS YOUR OPINION.

EXCUSE ME, SIR.

HOLD ON, JUSTICE STOWERS.

DO I HAVE THE FLOOR, MR. CHAIRMAN? HEY, NO.

YEAH, JUSTICE STOWERS, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE ALLOW JUDGE GRIFFIN TO SPEAK AND THEN JUDGE GRIFFIN AND JUSTICE BLACKWOOD, I ASK YOU TO PLEASE STAY ON.

WHAT'S BEFORE US AT THIS TIME? CAN WE PLEASE DO THAT? MR. CHAIRMAN, I WILL.

THE QUESTION WAS PUT TO ME WAS, WILL THEY CHANGE ANYTHING?

[01:10:01]

AND THE ANSWER IS, YOU DON'T KNOW.

THESE ORDINANCES ARE NOT ANTI-DEVELOPMENT.

THEY ARE PRO- ACCOUNTABILITY.

THEY ARE PRO-TRANSPARENCY.

THEY ARE PRO-PUBLIC PROTECTION.

AND YOU CANNOT PROTECT PEOPLE AGAINST SOMETHING YOU DO NOT TELL THEM ABOUT.

YOU CANNOT PROTECT PEOPLE AFTER THE FACT, AND YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT'S COMING DOWN THE PIPE.

I AGREE WITH MR. KEMP THAT WHAT HAS ALREADY BEGUN CANNOT BE REGULATED, BUT I ALSO AGREE THAT HE DOES NOT KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW.

FOR INSTANCE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 90 DAYS.

THE NOTICE ORDINANCE YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU WOULD REQUIRE...

REQUIRE THAT PULASKI COUNTY GET NOTICE WITHIN 90 DAYS OF THE TIME THAT ANY INFRASTRUCTURE USE FEEDING THESE CRITERIA WAS GOING TO BE PLANNED.

NOTICE.

THAT'S NOT A BAD THING.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAT'S CALLED GOOD GOVERNMENT.

AND QUITE FRANKLY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THAT IS WHAT THE GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT REGULAR? REGULATORY IS A CONSEQUENCE OF REGULAR.

BUT YOU CAN'T HAVE SOMETHING REGULAR IF YOU'VE NEVER HAD IT BEFORE.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN EMERGING TYPE OF USE.

LAST THING, AND I'LL FINISH MY ANSWER, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

PULASKI COUNTY CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE A LAWFUL STRUCTURED PROCESS FOR REGULATING THE PERMITTING, THE MONITORING, OR THE ENFORCEMENT OF ANY PERMITTING REQUIREMENT FOR USES OF THIS NATURE.

IF WE DO, I DARE MR. CRANOR TO COME UP AND REFUTE ME.

I PAUSE FOR EFFECT.

THE REASON YOU DON'T HAVE IT IS BECAUSE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WASN'T AUTHORIZED TO CRAFT IT.

THAT IS NOT ACCIDENTAL.

FAILURE TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL.

DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION.

ANYTHING ELSE, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD? NO.

JUSTICE MASSEY? SO IF THIS PASSES TONIGHT, WHO ENFORCES WHAT THIS LEGISLATION? WHO WILL ENFORCE THAT? WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCING THAT? WILL IT BE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, PLANNING BOARD? WILL IT BE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, WHICH IS THE COUNTY JUDGE? WILL IT BE BOTH? DOES ANYONE KNOW? THE ATTORNEY.

I'M ASKING YOU.

BOTH.

OR MR. CRANOR, WHOEVER CAN ANSWER.

IT WOULD BE BOTH.

BOTH.

THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE COUNTY JUDGE.

SO WE'LL BE RELYING CURRENTLY ON OUR CURRENT ADMINISTRATION TO GIVE US INFORMATION THAT THEY DID NOT GIVE US IN THE BEGINNING.

AND MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU, JUSTIN.

I NOTICED THAT JUSTICE BLACKWOOD IS THE ONLY SPONSOR.

CAN WE, WHY IS THAT, OR DO YOU KNOW, OR IS THAT? I WILL MAKE IT.

ARE WE OFF OF THE MOTION? NO, WE'RE NOT OFF OF THE MOTION.

I'M JUST TAKING PERSONAL PRIVILEGE AT THIS POINT.

OKAY, ALL RIGHT, THAT'S FINE.

I WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER THAT.

OKAY, YEAH.

ONE REASON THAT I'M THE ONLY SPONSOR IS THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK TO EACH OTHER.

SO WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CALL EACH OTHER AND TALK TO EACH OTHER.

AND I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE CALLED EACH ONE OF YOU.

I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE GONE OVER THIS WITH EACH ONE OF YOU.

BUT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT.

SO THAT'S THE BIGGEST PROBLEM I THINK WE HAVE AS A BODY, TOO, IS THAT WE CAN'T, YOU KNOW.

I ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IN SOMEONE ELSE'S DISTRICT.

AND I'M WONDERING IF IT'S IN HER DISTRICT, WHY WAS SHE NOT AT LEAST BECAUSE, SAY, FOR INSTANCE, AND I DON'T WELL, I DO KNOW WHOSE DISTRICT IT IS, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF THIS, I WOULD THINK A CALL COULD HAVE BEEN MADE TO JUSTIN SAY, HEY, JUSTIN, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT IN MY DISTRICT.

I WANT TO SEE WHAT THIS INDIVIDUAL FEELS ABOUT IT AND SEE IF I CAN AT LEAST GET HER TO SUPPORT ME BEFORE I PUT MYSELF OUT THERE LIKE THAT.

BECAUSE, AGAIN,

[01:15:01]

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING BOTH OF THEM ARE IN HER DISTRICT AND SHE'S NOT.

AND IT'S JUST A CONVERSATION WITH YOU.

I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORKS.

THAT WAS JUST ANOTHER OBSERVATION.

SO IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, ARE WE ALL CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO VOTE ON? DO WE NEED TO RESTATE IT? I'M SORRY, MR. CHAIR.

AT THIS POINT, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD NOTIFICATION TO THE QUORUM COURT MEMBERS.

AS WELL, SO THAT WE CAN BE PROPERLY INFORMED BECAUSE WE WERE BLINDSIDED WITH THIS.

WHO ARE YOU ASKING TO INFORM US, THOUGH? WELL, IT'S GOING TO BE REPORTED TO THE ATTORNEY, CORRECT, THE PLANNING BOARD, COMMISSION, AND THE QUORUM COURT MEMBERS.

PROPERLY NOTIFIED.

ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING? AS THEY CONSIDER THIS? YES.

THAT WILL BE PROVIDED TO YOU.

NO.

NO, IT HASN'T IN THE PAST.

YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT APPLICATIONS WHEN THINGS LIKE THIS OCCUR? IN FACT, WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT THAT WE WERE PLANNING TO ADDRESS THAT.

IT'S COMING UP.

I THINK MR. CRANOR SAID THAT THEY WOULD LOOK INTO RETURNING TO, JIM? TO WHO? SITE PLANS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUT NOT TO US STAFF AND THEN THEY WOULD REPORT IT TO YOU AND STAFF WOULD REPORT IT TO US DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT AND UH YOU KNOW WHERE IT WAS AND THE NATURE OF THE PROJECT SOMEBODY'S BUILDING THE HOUSE I'M ASSUMING YOU GUYS DON'T WANT TO KNOW OR CRITICAL PIECES LIKE THIS, WHICH IS REALLY EMBARRASSING.

I THINK THEY INTEND TO STUDY THAT AND COME UP WITH A BETTER WAY TO KEEP YOU GUYS INFORMED.

WE HAVE ANOTHER ORDINANCE THAT WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT.

JUSTICE CURRY, IF YOU GUYS ARE REQUESTING INFORMATION, THEN I WILL SPECIFICALLY SEND THAT TO MR. CRANOR AND SAY, HEY, THE QUORUM COURT EXPECTS THIS REPORTING.

YOU KNOW THE FIRST OF EACH MONTH AND GO INTO YOUR PACKAGE JUST LIKE YOU GET YOUR OTHER INFORMATION IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT YES WE'LL GET IT TAKEN CARE OF OTHERWISE I DON'T KNOW I WILL I WILL HANDLE THAT AND GET IT TAKEN CARE OF I PROBABLY THANK YOU ALL RIGHT THANK YOU NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS JUSTIN ARE WE CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO VOTE ON ARE YOU DO YOU KNOW SO YEAH I BELIEVE THE MOTION IS TO REFER THE ITEM TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND TO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION WITHIN 90 DAYS.

I BELIEVE IS BEFORE THIS ITEM ALONG WITH THE OTHER.

YEAH, NO, IT'S FOUR ITEMS. 32, RESOLUTION 32 AND 33, ORDINANCE 31 AND 34.

CORRECT.

AND I THOUGHT HE SAID 120 DAYS, SO LET'S MAKE SURE.

90 DAYS.

SO IT'S 90 DAYS? 90.

YEAH, GO AHEAD.

OH, I DID TURN YOUR MIC OFF.

THAT'S FINE.

I DON'T BLAME YOU.

I TURNED MY MIC OFF TOO, SIR.

BUT NO, I FEEL LIKE THAT MY COLLEAGUES ARE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH 90 DAYS RATHER THAN 120, SO I'M ACQUIESCING TO THAT.

OKAY, THAT'S FINE.

SO, AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MEDLOCK.

MISS YOUNG-BAKER? YES.

SO THAT WOULD BE 11 AYES AND 3 NAYS.

11 AYES AND 3 NAYS.

WE WILL SEND TWO RESOLUTIONS, TWO ORDINANCES BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR 90 DAYS FOR REPORTING.

WE'RE GOING TO JUMP DOWN

[26-I-17 AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARD MEETING TIMES FOR COUNTY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND TO PROMOTE PUBLIC ACCESSIBILITY AND TRANSPARENCY; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

TO ORDINANCES NOW.

WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 26 I-17.

AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARD MEETING TIMES FOR COUNTY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

AND TO PROMOTE PUBLIC ACCESSIBILITY AND TRANSPARENCY AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

JUSTICE DAVIS.

I MOVE THAT IT BE SENT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

WE'RE ALREADY AT THE FULL QUORUM COURT.

[01:20:03]

IT NEEDS TO BE A MOTION FOR ADOPTION, MA'AM.

AGENDA MEETING.

WE'RE AT AGENDA MEETING.

YEAH, NO, WE'RE NOT AT THE FULL QUORUM COURT.

YEAH, WE'RE NOT AT THE FULL QUORUM COURT.

YEAH, I KNOW IT'S AN AMENDMENT.

SO I JUST GOT SIDETRACKED.

SO IT WAS A PROPER MOTION, RIGHT, JUSTIN? I DID HEAR.

IT WAS.

AND REMEMBER, IT'S AN AMENDMENT.

YOU GOT AN AMENDMENT THERE.

I JUST, I TOOK EVERYTHING Y'ALL SAID TO HEART, AND I TOOK OUT EVERY.

YOU GOT TO PUT THE AMENDMENT ON THE TABLE.

OH, AS AMENDED.

SO YOU NEED TO TAKE UP THE AMENDMENT FIRST.

AND THEN IF THAT SHOULD BE ADOPTED, THEN YOU WILL INCORPORATE THAT INTO THE AMENDMENT AND PASS THE ORDINANCE OR ITEM TO THE QUORUM COURT AS AMENDED.

SO WE'RE GOING TO AMEND 26.17.

SO MAY I SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT? DID I HEAR THE MOTION? OH.

TO AMEND IT.

TO AMEND IT, PLEASE, AND SEND TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT.

YEAH, WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT.

OKAY, A MOTION WAS MADE TO AMEND 26.17.

JUSTICE DAVIS.

YES, SO I TOOK TO HEART WHAT YOU GUYS SAID.

I TOOK OUT OR I REQUESTED THAT ALL OF THE ONLY BOARD THAT WAS ON THERE WAS THE PLANNING BOARD AND THEN I KNOW THAT THERE WAS QUESTIONS ABOUT OVERTIME AND I SPOKE WITH HUTCH AND JUSTIN AND THEY BOTH SAID IT WOULD BE VERY MINIMAL AND THAT THE OVERTIME WOULD BE COVERED THE SAME WAY THE SHERIFF'S TIME OVERTIME IS COVERED WITH UNSPENT SALARY FUNDS.

AND I KNOW THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE TO SPEAK ON IT, SO I YIELD THAT THEY WANT TO SPEAK.

WE'RE ON THE AMENDMENT.

YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO AMEND.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT? OKAY.

JUSTICE CURRY? JUSTICE CURRY? YES.

I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

SOMETHING TO BE ADDED? AND ONE OF THE THINGS IS BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL THAT WE ARE PRIVY OR HAVE BEEN PROPERLY NOTIFIED WHEN CRITICAL PIECES COME UP BASED ON THINGS THAT'S HAPPENING IN THE DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY AND IN THE COUNTY.

FOR US TO BE PROPERLY INFORMED, JUST A REPORT, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD.

A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO HAVE A MONTHLY OR HOWEVER OFTEN REPORT TO BE ADDED TO THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT WOULD HELP TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF WHAT ALL WE'VE BEEN THROUGH JUST TONIGHT ALONE TO GIVE US MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING THAT WE MAY NOT BE AWARE OF IN OUR PARTICULAR ZONING AREA.

BUT DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO THAT? DO WE, CAN'T WE JUST ASK FOR THE INFORMATION TO BE SENT TO US AND IT BE INCLUDED IN OUR PACKET? REPORTING.

DO...

YES, YES.

DO WE NEED TO DO THAT? JUSTIN'S SAYING WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT.

ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS MAKE A REQUEST.

IF YOU HAVE A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION, WE WILL CRAFT THAT FOR YOU AND PROVIDE YOUR QUESTIONS TO THE SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT.

AND IF THEY DON'T RESPOND? HEY, GUESS WHO HOLDS THE PURSE STRINGS? BUT I'D LIKE FOR IT TO BE ADDED SO THAT WE KNOW.

WELL, CAN WE TAKE A BRIEF FIVE, TEN-MINUTE RECESS SO I CAN REDRAFT THIS AS AN ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT? I DON'T.

GENERALLY, ONE OF OUR ORDINANCES TONIGHT, 26I28.

YES, I MADE A REQUEST TO JUSTIN THAT WE HAVE A FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT BE ATTACHED TO THAT ORDINANCE AND HE MADE THE REQUEST TO HUTCH I COMMUNICATED WITH HIM AND IT'S NOW ATTACHED TO OUR ITEM SO WE FOLLOWED UP.

I FELT LIKE IT WORKED SO I DO THINK IT'S A REASONABLE THING AND IT'S A PROCESS THAT WORKED JUST THIS MONTH SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT COMMENT.

THANK YOU WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE DO WE WANT TO TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK AND ALLOW JUSTIN TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT, OR CAN WE SEE HOW JUST MAKING A VERBAL REQUEST FOR THAT INFORMATION,

[01:25:01]

HOW THAT WORKS? OKAY.

VERBAL REQUEST.

YEAH, I WOULD SAY WE.

ALL RIGHT, ON THE AMENDMENT, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENT? THERE BEING NONE, AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE.

POINT OF ORDER.

ARE THERE ABLE CONSTITUENTS TO SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT? DO WE HAVE ANY? DO WE HAVE ANYONE ON THE AMENDMENT? YEAH.

ON THE AMENDMENT? IF THEY DIDN'T SAY THE AMENDMENT, THEN I'M SUBJECT TO SAY YES.

I FIND THE AMENDMENT TO BE SOMEWHAT DISCRIMINATORY BECAUSE IT'S PICKING ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THANK YOU, MR. KEITH.

LET'S REMEMBER, WE'RE ALL, 15 OF US ARE GETTING PAID TO BE HERE TONIGHT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION DON'T GET PAID.

THEY'RE VOLUNTEERS.

SO THE WAY I READ THIS IS THAT IT SINGLES OUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE PLANNING BOARD, EXCUSE ME.

IT EXCLUDES OTHER COUNTY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHICH CONSIDER EQUALLY.

AS IMPORTANT, IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT, ITEMS AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES.

I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT IN THAT IT'S DISCRIMINATORY, AND IT PICKS OUT AND PICKS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND THESE FOLKS SIGNED UP, THESE FOLKS SIGNED UP AND WERE RECRUITED.

BEING VOLUNTEERS KNOWING THAT THEIR MEETINGS WERE GOING TO BE AT A CERTAIN TIME NOW I'M ALL FOR THE NEXT ITEM THAT'S COMING UP THE QUARTERLY MEETINGS BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S DISCRIMINATORY AND I YIELD OKAY THANK YOU ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ONCE WE START, OKAY, AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AMENDING 26 I-17? MS. DAVIS? YES.

SO YOU HAVE 12 AYES AND 2 NAYS.

12 AYES, 2 NAYS.

WE WILL AMEND 26I17.

JUSTICE DAVIS? I MAKE THE MOTION TO SEND IT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT AS AMENDED.

DO PASS.

NO, WE'RE GOING TO SEND A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 26I17 TO THE FULL COURT WITH THE DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED.

OKAY, ALL RIGHT.

WHAT JUSTICE DAVIS SAID.

NOW, IF WE'VE GOT SOME PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SPEAK ON THAT, IF IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BODY, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND ALLOW COMMENTS AT THIS TIME.

AND JUST REMIND THEM, THREE MINUTES.

WE HAVE JUDGE WENDELL GRIFFIN.

MEMBERS, MY NAME IS WENDELL GRIFFIN.

I RISE TO ASK YOU TO PASS THIS MEASURE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO YOU REPRESENT INCLUDE PEOPLE WHO USUALLY ARE MOST ABLE TO ATTEND MEETINGS AFTER THEY GET FINISHED WITH THEIR OTHER THINGS THEY HAVE TO DO.

THE FOLKS WHO SERVE ON THESE BODIES WILL MEET WHEN THE PEOPLE CAN MEET WITH THEM, BUT THE PEOPLE CAN'T MEET WITH THEM IF THEY SCHEDULE MEETINGS WHEN THEY KNOW THE PEOPLE CAN'T MEET.

AND THEREFORE, IT MAKES SENSE FOR YOU TO HAVE THE MEETINGS WHEN THE PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO BE THERE AND THEY CAN THEREFORE TRUST THE PROCESS.

THIS IS SIMPLY ALLOWING TRANSPARENCY.

AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY.

I URGE YOU TO PASS THIS MEASURE WITH ONE FINAL THING.

IF YOU SCHEDULE A MOVIE WHEN YOU KNOW FOLKS CAN'T SHOW UP, DON'T BE SURPRISED IF THE MOVIE

[01:30:02]

DOESN'T GET VERY GOOD RATINGS.

THANK YOU, JUDGE GRIFFIN.

WE HAVE CHRISTINA KG GULLEY.

GOOD EVENING.

THANK EACH OF YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE TO PULL THE MICROPHONE DOWN JUST A BIT.

THANK EACH OF YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE TO PULASKI COUNTY.

I COME TO YOU TODAY SUPPORTING, SORRY, ASKING THAT YOU SUPPORT JUSTICE DAVIS ORDINANCE.

IN MY OPINION, 5:30 IS A REASONABLE TIME TO ACCOMMODATE WORKING CITIZENS IN PULASKI COUNTY.

UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT THEM BEING VOLUNTEERS, I WAS UNAWARE OF THAT UNTIL TONIGHT.

BUT IF THEY CAN'T ATTEND THE MEETINGS AT 5:30, MAYBE THEY NEED TO CONSIDER RESIGNING.

ALSO, I JUST WANT TO ADD THIS BECAUSE I'M GETTING READY TO LEAVE THE MEETING.

YOU KNOW, EACH OF YOU UP HERE IS SERVING, REPRESENTING YOUR DISTRICTS.

AND WHEN THEY HAVE THESE PLANNING MEETINGS, IN MY OPINION, YOU ALL HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO FOLLOW UP AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON AT PLANNING.

EVEN IF IT MEANS LOOKING ONLINE, SOME OF THIS INFORMATION LIKE THE DATA CENTERS, I MEAN, IT'S PUBLIC INFORMATION.

AND I AGREE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS TO YOUR ATTENTION.

BUT AGAIN, WE ALL HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.

WE HAVE TO BE PROACTIVE AND RESEARCH.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CONSIDERING THIS ORDINANCE, WHICH OUR AREA SUPPORTS WHOLEHEARTEDLY.

GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, JUSTICE.

AS I STATED LAST MONTH, I SUPPORT JUSTICE DAVIS'S ORDINANCE TO MOVE THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING TIMES TO NO EARLIER THAN 5:30 P.M.

AND THE MONTHLY PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS IS WHERE ALL OF THE ACTION IS.

MAJOR SUBDIVISION PLOTS ARE CONSIDERED THAT COULD CHANGE COMMUNITIES FOREVER.

AND YOUR CONSTITUENTS NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO ATTEND AND SPEAK.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO SUBDIVISION AND OTHER COUNTY CODES AND PLANNING BOARD BYLAWS ARE ALSO DISCUSSED AT THESE AND DECISIONS ARE MADE AT THESE MEETINGS.

PUBLIC INPUT INTO THE GRANULARITY OF CODE IS IMPORTANT TO OUR AREA.

AND SUCH CHANGES CAN IMPACT OUR COMMUNITIES FOR GOOD OR FOR ILL.

IT JUST BEARS REPEATING THAT THERE IS AN UPTICK IN ACTIVITY ON THE AGENDAS, PROBABLY DUE TO THE ETJ REPEAL.

THIS MEANS THERE'S EVEN MORE INTEREST BY THE PUBLIC.

AND ADD TO THAT THE DATA CENTERS.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MENTION ABOUT THE ZOOM CALLS.

TECHNOLOGY WORKS GREAT WHEN IT WORKS.

LAST MONTH, THE MEETING WAS IN PROGRESS BEFORE I WAS LET IN ON THE ZOOM CALL.

IT WAS NOT DONE ON PURPOSE, BUT WHAT IF THAT AGENDA ITEM THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED WAS SOMETHING THAT I WANTED TO COMMENT ON? THE IN-PERSON MEETINGS ARE BEST, AND SO YOU CAN BYPASS THE WILD CARD THAT TECHNOLOGY CAN BE.

SO PLEASE, PLEASE PLACE THIS ON THIS VERY POPULAR ORDINANCE.

ON YOUR AGENDA FOR THIS MONTH AND PASS IT.

I HAVE MS. ANNA MORCHETTI.

IS THAT? OH, OKAY.

I CURRENTLY SERVE AS THE VICE CHAIR OF THE PULASKI COUNTY PLANNING BOARD.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I'M ANNA MORCHETTI.

BUT HERE TONIGHT, I'M JUST REPRESENTING MYSELF, SPEAKING FOR MYSELF.

AND WHAT I WANTED TO COMMENT ON, AND THIS IS BUILDING ON WHAT MARK WILSON SHARED WITH YOU IN THE LAST MEETING, IS THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR AGENDAS THAT ARE IN OUR NORMALLY OCCURRING MONTHLY MEETINGS, MOST OF THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR THE LAST FEW DECADES ARE ITEMS THAT AFFECT A SMALL HANDFUL OF PROPERTY OWNERS.

IT'S NOT A ISSUE THAT AFFECTS THE ENTIRE PULASKI COUNTY.

AND I BELIEVE MR. KEMP HAD MENTIONED THAT WE'VE BEEN MEETING AT THE SAME TIME FOR DECADES.

AND THIS, I'M ASSUMING

[01:35:03]

FROM CONSTITUENTS, HAS NOT BEEN AN ISSUE FOR DECADES.

IT'S BEEN AN ISSUE JUST RECENTLY WHEN WE HAD LAND USE PLAN COME UP.

AND NOW I CAN SEE DATA CENTERS PROBABLY COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.

THOSE ITEMS...

THAT ARE FOR THE ENTIRE PULASKI COUNTY, THAT I BELIEVE, AGAIN, THIS IS SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE SEPARATED OUT IN A QUARTERLY MEETING WHERE WE CAN DISCUSS THAT SEPARATELY.

THAT IS A VERY DIFFERENT TYPE OF ITEM THAN WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT AS JUST OUR MONTHLY MEETINGS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, IS SOMEONE'S PROPERTY GOING TO BE ONE FOOT FURTHER SHOULD BE SHOULD IT BE ONE FOOT FURTHER FORWARD I MEAN THESE ARE THINGS THAT I WOULD ARGUE ARE ISSUES THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS WHO ARE NOTIFIED AND THEY KNOW ABOUT THE MEETING BEFOREHAND THERE ARE TECHNOLOGY OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL TO BE ABLE TO USE THIS TECHNOLOGY IN THIS MEETING I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT WAY TO ENHANCE WHAT WE DO AND WE ALSO ALLOW PEOPLE TO EMAIL THEIR COMMENTS AS WELL SO I THINK IT IS A WONDERFUL IDEA TO SEPARATE OUT THOSE COUNTYWIDE ISSUES AND THEN MAINTAIN OUR NORMALLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS THAT WE'VE HAD FOR DECADES FOR OUR REGULAR ITEMS. THANK YOU.

YEAH, WE'LL NO, YOU'RE FINE.

NO, JUSTIN, MR. ARLIE MARKS.

GOOD EVENING.

I'M ARLIE MARKS.

I'M A, I LIVE OUT IN ROLAND.

I'M PART OF A PINNACLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY COALITION.

AND AS SUCH, WE'VE RECEIVED SEVERAL EMAILS.

DISCUSSING THIS, SO IF YOU PERMIT ME, I'D LIKE TO READ SOME OF WHAT OUR RESIDENTS EMAILED US.

THIS IS FROM CHRISTINA SANTAFONTE.

DEAR JUSTICE, I AM IN SUPPORT OF ORDINANCE 26I17, SPONSORED BY JUSTICE DAVIS.

THIS ORDINANCE IS THE BEST OPTION FOR COMMUNITIES TO ATTEND THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS THAT GREATLY AFFECT THEIR INTERESTS.

MONTHLY MEETINGS AFTER 5:30 P.M.

WOULD BE TRULY APPRECIATED BY THOSE WHO CAN'T ATTEND MEETINGS AT 2 P.M.

BECAUSE OF WORK OR FAMILY OBLIGATIONS.

I UH LET'S SEE OH LET ME LET ME CONTINUE THIS IS FROM UH PEGGY MCCRACKEN I SUPPORT ORDINANCE 26117 SINCERELY MISS PEGGY MCCRACKEN THIS IS FROM SCOTT AND CHERYL STEUBENROCK WE WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT TO ORDINANCE 26117 SPONSORED BY JUSTICE REBECCA DAVIS MONTHLY EVENING PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS WILL BETTER PROVIDE FOR THE WORKING PUBLIC THE ABILITY TO ATTEND THE MEETINGS TENDING TO BUSINESS THAT AFFECTS THEM.

THIS IS FROM JESSICA KIVEL.

I STRONGLY SUPPORT REBECCA DAVIS'S ORDINANCE TO CHANGE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS TO BEGIN NO EARLIER THAN 5:30 P.M.

IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT THESE MEETINGS ARE HELD AT A TIME THAT IS ACCESSIBLE TO WORKING CONSTITUENTS.

IT'S ACTUALLY VERY SIMPLE.

SO WE HAVE A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR THIS ORDINANCE.

I MYSELF ALSO SUPPORT HER ORDINANCE.

I MEAN, SUNLIGHT IS THE BEST DISINFECTANT.

AND AS WE'RE SEEING FROM WHAT'S GOING ON TONIGHT, WE NEED A LOT MORE SUNLIGHT AROUND HERE.

ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS? OKAY, JUSTICE, WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF FINAL, JUSTICE ROBINSON.

SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WE'VE GOT 26 I-17 AND 26 I-28, WHICH KIND OF, I THINK WE EITHER, I MEAN, ONE SEEMS TO BE THE COMPROMISE OF THE QUARTERLY MEETINGS.

THE OTHER ONE, 26 I-17, IS NOT.

I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO DISCUSS, MY PERSONAL OPINION, IS BOTH OF THESE, AND AS A BOARD, IS COME UP WITH WHICH ONE WE WANT TO SUPPORT.

EITHER THEY MEET QUARTERLY, AFTER HOURS, OR...

YOU KNOW, WHAT EVERYONE'S BETTER.

BUT ONE OF MY COMMENTS IS, AND MR. CRANOR CAN COME UP HERE IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT UNLESS THE PLANNING BOARD CHANGES THEIR CRITERIA, THEN EVEN A DATA CENTER SITE PLAN WILL NOT BE HEARD AT THEIR PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND EVEN IF IT'S HEARD AT EIGHT O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING OR EIGHT O'CLOCK AT NIGHT.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DISCUSS IT, AND SO THE PUBLIC IS NOT GOING TO KNOW ABOUT IT UNLESS, LIKE

[01:40:02]

MS. CURRY TALKED ABOUT, EVERYTHING THAT'S SUBMITTED IS IN A REPORT AND IS SENT TO US.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, BUT I THINK WITH ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING WITH BILLBOARDS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, I THINK IT IS PRUDENT THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION START REVIEWING EVERY SITE PLAN.

I MEAN, THERE'S NO OTHER WAY FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS TO ACTUALLY HEAR WHAT'S GOING ON, HAVE A VOICE TO US, IF WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S GOING BEFORE THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE REVIEWING IT AT STAFF IF THERE'S NO VARIANCES.

BUT I THINK, I MEAN, I THINK...

WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE OF THESE TWO WE WANT TO ADOPT.

I KIND OF AGREE WITH JUSTICE ROBINSON.

WHY ARE WE HAVING A QUARTERLY, WHY DO WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE FOR A QUARTERLY MEETING, AND THEN WE'RE ASKING THEM TO CHANGE THEIR MEETINGS TO 5:30? WHY DO WE HAVE BOTH? WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF BOTH? I MEAN, I KNOW THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ORDINANCES, BUT THEY'RE REQUIRING THEM TO HAVE A QUARTERLY MEETING.

SO, OH, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? HOLD ON.

WHO IS THAT QUESTION TO? WHOEVER CAN ANSWER.

I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO ANSWER THAT, AND I THINK JUSTICE PERSON CAN.

WELL, JUSTICE PERSON ACTUALLY IS THE LEAD SPONSOR, SO JUSTICE.

I CAN ANSWER? YES, SIR.

GO AHEAD.

SO THE REASON WHY WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT ORDINANCES IS BECAUSE ONE IS SAYING ALL MEETINGS SHOULD BE DONE AFTER 5:30, AND THE OTHER ONE IS SAYING ONLY QUARTERLY MEETINGS ARE AFTER 05:30.

AND THEY CAN KEEP THEIR NORMALLY SCHEDULED TIME, BUT EVERY QUARTER THEY HAVE TO HAVE A 5:30 MEETING.

AND LISTENING TO WHAT BOARD MEMBER MACHETE JUST MENTIONED, THEY ARE, AND MR. CRANOR, THEY ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO DEFER ALL LAND USE ISSUES TO THAT 5:30 MEETING.

SO, SO, UM, I'M.

SO THEY WOULD DEFER THAT TO THE QUARTERLY MEETING, LAND USE ISSUES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, AND THEIR REGULAR MEETINGS WOULD STILL BE AT 5:30? NO.

OH, SEE, I'M GETTING, THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING.

NO, THAT'S WHAT, OKAY, I'LL CLARIFY.

THEIR NORMAL MEETINGS RIGHT NOW IS 2 O'CLOCK, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

THEY CAN KEEP THEIR, UNDER MY ORDINANCE, THEY KEEP THEIR 2 O'CLOCK MEETING.

OKAY, GOTCHA.

EVERY QUARTER THEY HAVE A 5:30 MEETING.

THAT'S WHY I WAS JUST WONDERING, WHY DID WE HAVE TWO? BECAUSE THEY WERE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, AND IT JUST DIDN'T MAKE SENSE FOR US TO BE VOTING FOR BOTH.

BUT, I MEAN, VOTING, EVERYONE SEEMED TO BE SUPPORTING THE BOTH OF THEM.

NO, I DON'T THINK SO.

I THINK JIM SAID THAT THE PLANNING BOARD MIGHT BE CHANGING THEIR.

WAY THEY DO THINGS SO THAT ALL SITE PLANS WILL BE AT THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS.

SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN EVERY BOARD MEETING WOULD NEED TO BE AFTER 5:30 IF WE'RE ONLY GOING TO TALK ABOUT THEM AT THE 5:30 MEETINGS.

AND ALSO, WHAT I THINK OR WHAT YOU THINK MIGHT NOT BE IMPORTANT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT TO A COMMUNITY.

SO JUST BECAUSE I THINK IT MIGHT BE BORING DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE COMMUNITY WHO WANTS TO BE IN THE PLANNING BOARD DOESN'T WANT TO BE THERE.

OKAY, HOLD ON.

I JUST REMEMBER WHEN JIM SAID THAT ALL THE SITE PLANS, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE WE'LL BE AT THE BOARD, AT THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS.

WELL, THAT MAKES ME REALLY WORRIED THAT YOU WANT TO KEEP, AND YOU'RE FIGHTING ME ON KEEPING THE BOARD MEETINGS AT 2 O'CLOCK.

JUSTICE CURRY, DID YOU? I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN COMPROMISE ON THIS.

WELL.

YOU JUST GOT TO COMPROMISE.

MR. PERSON'S ORDINANCE IS TO COMPROMISE.

SO, IS THAT TO COMPROMISE? YES, BUT WE STILL NEED TO KEEP 5:30.

THAT AIN'T TO COMPROMISE.

OKAY, JUSTICE MASSEY, DID YOU HAVE...

I JUST WANT TO SAY AS A WORKING PERSON I WANT TO ATTEND MEETINGS AND DIFFERENT THINGS SO I DO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE.

HOWEVER, I DON'T, I JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TELL THEM YOU NEED TO BE HERE AT 5:30 TO MEET FOR US.

NO, I DISAGREE WITH THAT.

A COMPROMISE, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE IN THE SECOND ORDINANCE MEETING

[01:45:01]

QUARTERLY, I THINK THAT THAT'S A COMPROMISE.

I DO NOT SUPPORT COMING, TELLING THEM TO BE HERE AT 5:30 FOR THEIR MEETINGS, YOU KNOW.

AS OF RIGHT NOW, NOW IF SOMETHING CHANGES OR SOMETHING IMPORTANT HAPPENS AND THEY DON'T MAKE THAT PRIVY TO THE PUBLIC, THEN I WOULD POSSIBLY CHANGE OR WOULD CHANGE.

BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, I DON'T SUPPORT TELLING THEM TO COME IN TO MEET AT 5:30 MONTHLY.

JUSTICE CAPPS? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. CRANOR.

IS HE STILL HERE? HEY, MR. CRANOR.

IF THE SITE PLANS...

WERE MOVED TO THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS, THOSE WOULD QUALIFY AS COUNTYWIDE ISSUES AND WOULD FALL INTO A 5:30 MEETING? YES OR NO? NO.

BECAUSE WE DO A SITE PLAN FOR SHOP BUILDINGS.

WE DO SITE PLANS FOR COFFEE STANDS.

WE DO SITE PLANS FOR THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW...

YOU KNOW, IF THE BOARD WANTED TO BE NOTIFIED OF THOSE KIND OF APPLICATIONS, WE WOULD OF COURSE DO IT, BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD STAY AT A TWO O'CLOCK MEETING.

NOW OF COURSE, A DATA CENTER, YEAH, I HAVE NO PROBLEM SUGGESTING THAT GO TO A QUARTERLY MEETING.

SO THAT WOULD BE AT THE PURVIEW OF YOUR OFFICE TO SEND IT TO THE 5:30 MEETING? I WOULD RECOMMEND THE BOARD SET A THRESHOLD FOR WHAT WOULD QUALIFY TO GO TO A QUARTERLY MEETING.

AND THAT THRESHOLD WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE? WELL, THE BOARD WOULD DECIDE THAT.

NO, WE WOULD NOT.

THE STAFF WOULD NOT DECIDE IT.

THE BOARD WOULD DECIDE THAT.

ANY OTHER? THANK YOU, MR. CRANOR.

DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING, JUSTICE STOWERS? JUSTICE STOWERS.

THANK YOU, MR. KEITH.

SO I DO SUPPORT MR. PERSON'S ORDINANCE, BUT ON THE ORDINANCE THAT WE'RE ON RIGHT NOW, 26 I-17, IT SEEMS TO NEGLECT THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WORK SECOND SHIFT.

A LOT OF FIRST RESPONDERS WORK SECOND SHIFT.

A LOT OF DOCTORS, NURSES.

MEDICAL PERSONNEL CUSTODIANS AT SCHOOLS UH GO ON DOWN THE LIST WORK SECOND SHIFT UH SO AGAIN I THINK WE'RE BEING DISCRIMINATORY UH WITH WITH 26 I-17 AND I THINK THAT WHAT WE WILL HEAR NEXT IS A REASONABLE VERY ACCOMMODABLE COMPROMISE.

I YIELD WITH THAT.

OKAY, THANK YOU, JUSTICE STOWERS.

JUSTICE ROBINSON.

AND I THINK MR. CRANOR MIGHT HAVE ENTERED THIS.

IF WE WERE TO ADOPT MR. PERSON'S ORDINANCE HERE AND A SITE PLAN WAS SUBMITTED, LET'S SAY IN FEBRUARY.

THE BOARD WOULD HOLD THAT UNTIL APRIL AT THE QUARTERLY MEETING.

IS THAT, OR WOULD THEY GO AHEAD AND HEAR IT IN FEBRUARY? QUARTER TO MARCH.

AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION, IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF THE SCOPE OF THE SITE PLAN THAT THE BOARD WOULD NEED TO DETERMINE IF THIS...

FALLS UNDER A TWO O'CLOCK MEETING OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT WARRANTS AN EVENING AN EVENING MEETING ON THE QUARTER SO THEN IT'S GOING TO BE A MATTER OF YOU KNOW IT COULD BE AS SIMPLE AS SOMETHING AN ACRE AND LARGER GOES TO THE QUARTERLY MEETING SOMETHING THAT'S A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS OR LESS I MEAN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON AT THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OKAY BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT YOU KNOW, IF IT'S SOMETHING LIKE A DUPLEX COMPLEX OR TRIPLEX, MULTIPLE MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY NEEDS TO GO TO A QUARTERLY MEETING.

SO YOU WOULD HOLD THAT DEVELOPER, AND I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M GETTING, IF THE DEVELOPER SUBMITS SOMETHING IN FEBRUARY TO BE HEARD AT FEBRUARY, BUT THE QUARTERLY MEETING'S IN APRIL, THEN THAT DEVELOPER HAS TO...

BASICALLY WAIT ALMOST TWO ADDITIONAL MONTHS BEFORE IT WOULD BE HEARD AT THE QUARTERLY MEETING IF THAT'S THE WAY THE BOARD WANTS TO DO IT YES AND THEN YOU WOULD COME TO US WITH RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CRITERIA OR Y'ALL WOULD

[01:50:01]

JUST SET THE CRITERIA YOURSELF BECAUSE IT SOUNDS JUDGMENTAL LIKE LIKE JUSTICE DAVIS SAID WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME MAY NOT BE IMPORTANT TO THE BOARD THANK YOU.

I WOULD THINK ULTIMATELY THOSE CRITERIA WOULD BE SET BY THE BOARD.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD RISE TO SOMETHING THE QUORUM COURT NEEDS TO VOTE ON.

THAT'S A LITTLE OVER ME.

BUT, MR. COUNTY ATTORNEY, I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO START SAYING THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ME BUT NOT YOU OR HER OR HIM OR WHATEVER, HOW DO WE? YEAH.

I THINK IT'S A FAIR QUESTION TO ASK.

IS IT SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO KNOW IT WHEN WE SEE IT? THAT PARTICULAR SITE PLAN NEEDS TO GO.

IT'S HARD TO PUT A CONCRETE STANDARD ON THIS.

YEAH, WHICH ALMOST.

I MEAN, UNFORTUNATELY, I LIKE THE QUARTERLY MEETING, BUT I THINK THERE'S TOO MUCH JUDGMENT OUT THERE TO HAVE A QUARTERLY MEETING.

I THINK WE ALMOST HAVE TO GO WITH THIS FIRST ONE AND IF IT'S, I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, MAYBE AFTER ANOTHER DECADE OF HAVING ALL OF OUR MEETINGS AT 5:30, WE GO, WELL, YOU KNOW, A QUARTERLY MEETING WOULD BE BETTER.

WE COULD SET THE CRITERIA AT HALF A MILLION DOLLARS OR WHATEVER.

I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S WAY, TO ME, THERE'S TOO MANY FEELINGS ATTACHED TO WHAT GOES TO 5:30 IF WE DO A QUARTERLY MEETING.

UNLESS WE CAN SET SOME KIND OF CRITERIA IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN AND THEN AT THE SAME TIME I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD DO TO A DEVELOPER.

COULD THEY COME BACK ON THE COUNTY AND SAY, HEY, I'VE INVESTED HALF A MILLION DOLLARS ON THIS PROPERTY AND YOU'RE MAKING ME WAIT THREE MONTHS? I COMPLETELY AGREE.

IT SEEMS TO ME TO BE WISER TO HAVE IN PLACE, FOR EXAMPLE, A REGULAR MEETING ONCE A MONTH AT 2 P.M.

AND THEN...

IF SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT COMES UP, WE HOLD SPECIAL MEETINGS OUT IN THE COUNTY AND MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR EVERYBODY.

SO IF WE'RE GOING TO DO A LAND USE PLAN, LET'S NOT DO THAT AT OUR 2 O'CLOCK MEETING.

LET'S DO THAT AT A SPECIAL MEETING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ALL OVER THE COUNTY AND GO OUT AND TALK TO THE PEOPLE.

SO THAT'S THE SYSTEM THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR 50 YEARS, AND IT'S WORKED.

SO, I MEAN, IN AN INSTANT, YOU KNOW, 90, I'D SAY 90%, 95%, 99% OF THE TIME IT HAS WORKED.

I MEAN, THERE'S, WE'RE GETTING MORE, YOU KNOW, WITH THE LEGISLATURE AND THE ETJ AND A BUNCH OF ADDITIONAL CRITERIA THAT HAVE COME UP AND KIND OF SLAPPED US IN THE FACE THAT WE WEREN'T EXPECTING.

THAT'S KIND OF WHAT'S BROUGHT ALL THIS ABOUT.

AND SO I THINK.

AND WE LEARNED ABOUT ALL OF THAT AT THE SPECIAL MEETINGS THAT WE HAD.

SO IT SEEMED TO ME TO WORK.

YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK OF THE SHOOTING RANGE THAT SHERWOOD DID.

THAT WAS KIND OF, WE GOT IT AT THE BACK END.

NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DATA CENTER AT THE BACK END.

WE GOT THE BILLBOARDS.

I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK, YOU KNOW, WHICH ONE OF THESE IS BEST.

AND I'M, ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO? I YIELD.

WELL, I'M ONE OF 15, SO I'D LIKE TO GIVE MY INPUT.

I THINK WE'RE ALL FORGETTING WHY WE SERVE, WHY WE'RE HERE.

TO ECHO WHAT JUSTICE PERSONS SAID EARLIER, WE SERVE AT THE PLEASURE, AT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE THAT PUT US HERE.

EVEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IT'S A VOLUNTEER POSITION, BUT THEY'RE TOLD THE CRITERIA.

THEY KNOW THAT IS GOING TO MEET THIS TIME, THIS, THIS, THIS, AND IT'S TO ACTUALLY DO THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNTY.

SO WHY ARE WE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PUTTING THEIR NEEDS OR THEIR DESIRES UP FRONT AS OPPOSED TO THE CONSTITUENTS, WHAT THE CONSTITUENTS ARE ASKING FOR? AND SELF-DISCLOSURE, I'VE BEEN ON THE QUORUM COURT 18 YEARS.

I'VE MISSED ONE MEETING.

BECAUSE I KNOW EVERY, AND I DON'T NEED ANYTHING TONIGHT, BUT MY POINT IS I KNOW THAT THE SECOND AND FOURTH TUESDAY OF EVERY MONTH, IT'S A MEETING.

AND I'VE MADE EVERY ONE OF THEM WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE.

SO I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND THANK GOD IT'S 15 VOTES, BUT I THINK WE'RE FORGETTING THAT SOMEBODY SAID, YOU KNOW,

[01:55:03]

WHAT MAY BE IMPORTANT TO ONE MAY NOT BE IMPORTANT TO THE OTHER.

BUT I THINK JUST US BEING WILLING TO AT LEAST TRY TO ACCOMMODATE.

TRY 5:30 AND SEE.

IF IT DOESN'T WORK JUST LIKE WE'VE CHANGED IT TO 5:30, WE CAN CHANGE IT BACK.

THAT'S ALL WE'RE SAYING.

TRY.

WITH THAT, I YIELD.

WELL, I WOULD PRESENT THAT I BELIEVE, AGAIN, MR. PERSONS, WE'RE NOT ON THAT, BUT THE NEXT ITEM COMING UP IS A REASONABLE COMPROMISE BETWEEN WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, SIR.

I BELIEVE IT'S SOMETHING THAT SATISFIES THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS SATISFIES STAFF AND THE BOARD.

AND WHERE WE'VE BEEN.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YES, I'D LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION.

ALL RIGHT, A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND.

THEN WE CALL THE QUESTION ON 26I17.

SO EVERYBODY KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.

WE'RE VOTING ON IF WE'RE GOING TO END THE DISCUSSION ON 26I17.

AMY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MEDLOCK.

WE'RE VOTING ON IF WE'RE ENDING THE DISCUSSION.

SO YOU HAVE 11 AYES AND 3 NAYS.

OKAY, 11 AYES, 3 NAYS.

WE WILL END THE DISCUSSION ON 26-I-17. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL ON 26-I-17, VOTING TO CHANGE THE TIME TO MONTHLY MEETINGS TO 5:30.

EVERYBODY CORRECT, CLEAR ON THAT? AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MISS DAVIS? YES.

MISS YOUNG-BAKER? NO.

MR. ROBINSON? YES.

SEVEN AYES AND SEVEN NAYS.

MR. STOWERS? NO.

AND MISS MEDLOCK? NO.

SO THAT, THAT'S A FAIL.

YEAH, YEAH,

[26-I-27 AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH QUARTERLY MEETINGS OF THE PULASKI COUNTY PLANNING BOARD TO PROMOTE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN REGARD TO LAND USE POLICIES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

SO WE'RE TIED THERE.

SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO, WERE YOU SAYING SOMETHING, JUSTIN? 26I27, WE'RE MOVING.

YEAH, PLEASE READ, AMY, PLEASE READ 26I27.

ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH QUARTERLY MEETINGS OF THE PULASKI COUNTY PLANNING BOARD TO PROMOTE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN REGARD TO LAND USE POLICIES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

JUSTICE PERSON.

MOVED AND SENT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DUE PASS.

A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND AND WE SEND 26I27 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE PERSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? I BELIEVE IT WAS THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED.

THIS IS STATING THAT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN KEEP THEIR REGULARLY SCHEDULED TIME AND EVERY QUARTER THEY MEET AT 5:30 STRAIGHT UP AND DOWN BILL OKAY OKAY YOU YIELD JUSTICE ROBINSON DID YOU GET SO I HAVE A I HAVE JUST A QUICK QUESTION HERE IF I READ THIS UM EVEN ON THE QUARTERLY MEETING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL STILL MEET AT 2 O'CLOCK.

SO THEY'LL MEET AT 2 O'CLOCK AND THEN 5.30? THE QUARTERLY MEETING IS AT 5.30 ONLY.

SO, I MEAN, IF YOU READ ARTICLE 1, IT MAKES IT SOUND LIKE THEY'RE STILL MEETING AT 2 O'CLOCK DURING THEIR QUARTERLY MEETING.

IN ADDITION TO THEIR REGULARLY SCHEDULED TIME, YES.

THAT MEANS THEY WOULD HOLD THEIR REGULAR MEETINGS

[02:00:02]

AT THE REGULAR TIME.

THE QUARTERLY MEETINGS COULDN'T BE SCHEDULED BEFORE 5:30.

THAT'S WHAT THAT INTENT IS.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY WEREN'T GOING TO BE HERE FROM LIKE 2 TO 7.

CHAIR, I DO HAVE ONE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.

OH, JUSTICE DAVIS.

DID YOU HAVE ONE? YEAH.

I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED.

I HAVE UNINCORPORATED.

TWO OF THESE SPONSORS DON'T HAVE ANY UNINCORPORATED IN THEIR DISTRICT.

THE PLANNING BOARD...

SO JIM, YOU SAID ALL THE SITE PLANS WILL BE AT THE BOARD MEETINGS.

SO I EXPECT CLEAR CRITERIA ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE FOR THE PEOPLE OF PULASKI COUNTY.

AND I AM EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED IN THE PLANNING BOARD FOR NOT BEING MORE TRANSPARENT WITH THE CONSTITUENTS.

JUSTICE DAVIS, WERE YOU FINISHED? OKAY.

JUSTICE PERSON? OKAY.

SO ARE WE READY TO VOTE? OH, PUBLIC COMMENT.

I HAVE A TESTIMONY FROM JUDGE WENDELL GRIFFIN.

YEAH, PUBLIC COMMENT.

YOU CAN MEET AT 2 O'CLOCK, BUT YOU CAN'T MEET AT 5:30.

IF YOU CAN MEET AT 5:30, YOU CAN'T MEET AT 2 O'CLOCK.

THEN WHY ARE YOU AFRAID TO MEET AT 530? THANK YOU, JUDGE GRIFFIN.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. MCCOY RAISED THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT MR. PERSON'S ITEM OR MOTION TO SECOND.

I SECOND IT.

YEAH, I KNEW I HEARD IT.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS CORRECT, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALL.

OKAY, YEAH, I THOUGHT I HEARD IT.

OKAY, BUT WERE THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS WITH THAT? OKAY.

JUSTICES, THIS ORDINANCE ACTUALLY UNDERMINES 26I17, WHICH YOU VOTED FOR THAT FAILED.

IS IT IN WHAT APPEARS TO BE A REPLACEMENT OR SUBSTITUTE OR COMPROMISE, OFFERING A MEETING FOR THE PUBLIC AT A TIME THEY WANT? THIS ORDINANCE PROPOSES TO ADD QUARTERLY MEETINGS TO THE PLANNING BOARD SCHEDULE TO, QUOTE, DISCUSS LAND USE MATTERS, ZONING APPLICATIONS, AND ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION, CLOSE QUOTE.

THE PLANNING BOARD DOESN'T PASS ORDINANCES, BUT THAT IS WHAT THE QUORUM COURT DOES.

THE PLANNING BOARD CONSIDERS RESOLUTIONS.

SO ISN'T THE WORDING INCORRECT? NOT EVERYTHING IS A ZONING APPLICATION.

ZONING OCCURS IN THE LAKE MAUMAU WATERSHED ONLY AND IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED? THESE IMPACT THE ROWLAND AND PART OF THE LITTLE ITALY AREAS, FOR EXAMPLE.

THERE ARE A LOT OF ORDINANCES THAT AREN'T CONSIDERED ZONING.

LAND USE MATTERS.

IS THIS SUGGESTING DISCUSSION IS RESTRICTED? TO THE MAY 2025 ADOPTED GARVER-LED PULASKI COUNTY LAND USE PLAN ONLY? THIS NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED.

WHAT EXACTLY IS MEANT BY LAND USE MATTERS? CAN ONE OF THE SPONSORING JUSTICES GIVE AN EXAMPLE? WILL STAFF NEED TO BE PAID FOR ATTENDING THESE ADDED QUARTERLY MEETINGS? AND I GUESS IT DOESN'T NEED IT, BUT I JUST NOTICED THERE'S NO STIPULATION FOR QUORUM.

THAT WAS TELLING ME THAT NO DECISIONS WILL BE MADE AT THE QUARTERLY MEETINGS.

BESIDES, ALL THESE ITEMS IN THIS ORDINANCE ARE ALREADY BEING DISCUSSED AT THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS MONTHLY.

QUARTERLY MEETINGS ARE THEREFORE NOT NECESSARY IF THE MONTHLY PLANNING BOARD TIME WAS CHANGED TO 5:30 P.M.

OR LATER.

AS MENTIONED, THE APPEALS PROCESS...

WOULD BE IMPACTED IF THE JUSTICES ARE SUGGESTING THE PUBLIC CAN ATTEND A QUARTERLY MEETING AT 5 30 P.M INSTEAD OF A MONTHLY 2 P.M MEETING THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS WOULD BE IMPACTED THE STAFF WOULD BE IMPACTED THE PUBLIC IS AGAIN CUT OUT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS WE ENJOY AT THE MONTHLY MEETINGS FOR THOSE FEW WHO CAN ATTEND IT TOO AND INSTEAD WE'RE RELEGATED TO A LESSER IN MEANINGLESS MEETING.

THAT ONLY SATISFIES THE MEETING TIME AND DOESN'T COVER EVERYTHING.

I DOUBT ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WILL REALLY SHOW UP TO THE QUARTERLY MEETINGS.

I REJECT THIS ORDINANCE.

IT'S CONFUSING, IT'S

[02:05:01]

UNNECESSARY, AND IT'S A WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY.

JUSTICE CAPPS, I THINK I VIEWED IT.

OKAY, JUSTICE MASSEY.

HERE'S MY ISSUE WITH THIS.

WE DON'T...

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO MEET AT 2 OR IF THE PUBLIC DOESN'T WANT TO BE THERE AT 2, THAT'S FINE.

BUT I'M NOT GOING TO TELL THEM TO BE THERE AT 5.30.

THEY NEED TO MEET.

THEY NEED TO SELECT THEIR OWN TIME.

AND WE, I MEAN, POSSIBLY WE COULD SAY ANY TIME AFTER 4, YOU ALL PICK YOUR TIME, PICK YOUR POISON.

BUT TELLING THEM TO BE THERE AT 530 FOR A MEETING, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT.

THAT'S JUST.

THANK YOU, JUSTICE MASSEY.

JUSTICE PERSON.

SO I AGREE 100% WHAT YOU JUST SAID.

THAT IS WHY I TOOK THIS TO THE PLANNING BOARD.

AND THEY AGREED THAT THEY CAN BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THIS QUARTERLY MEETING.

SO IT WASN'T A TIME THAT I PUT UP ON THEM.

IT WAS A TIME THAT THEY AGREED TO LEAVE.

JUSTICE DOWERS? YEAH, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT MR. PERSONS IS GOING TO MAKE ONE HELL OF A STATE REPRESENTATIVE.

THAT'S IN LINE WITH THAT? YES, LORD.

THE LORD IS GREAT.

HIS MERCY IS EVERLASTING.

DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD? JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS 530, FOLKS.

I MEAN, IT'S A LITTLE BIT RIDICULOUS TO SIT UP HERE AND COMPLAIN.

YOU KNOW, YOU WANT TO BE ON A BOARD.

YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING.

AND I DON'T THINK 530 WAS A BIG ASK FOR PEOPLE.

I THINK IT WAS A VERY, VERY SMALL ASK.

FOR PEOPLE TO DO AND FOR THEM TO, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO COME TO MEETINGS, I HAVE TO DO THINGS, I KNOW IF I WANT TO BE ON A BOARD, I KNOW WHAT TIME IT'S GOING TO BE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT MY HUSBAND'S ON A BOARD, HE KNOWS THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, AFTER FOUR O'CLOCK HE GOES.

I DON'T THINK THAT IT WAS A HUGE ASK, AND SO I JUST...

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY EVERYBODY HAD TO MAKE SUCH A GREAT BIG DEAL ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THEY JUST COULD NOT POSSIBLY, POSSIBLY COME AT 530.

ANYTHING ELSE, JUSTICE BLACKWOOD? THAT'S IT.

OKAY, JUSTICE MASSEY.

530 IS NOT A HUGE ASK, BUT WHO DID THE ASKING? HOW MANY PEOPLE SAID THEY WANT TO COME IN AT 530 TO OUR MEETING? I MEAN, WAS IT A SELECT SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE, OR WAS IT A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE? WE DON'T KNOW.

SO, I MEAN, WE'RE GOING ON WHO PICKED WHAT.

NO.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GO ON ALL NIGHT WITH THIS, BUT IT'S AS SIMPLE.

IT'S 15 VOTES UP HERE, OR 14 VOTES TONIGHT.

YOU VOTE IT UP OR DOWN.

THAT'S ALL YOU GOT TO DO.

BECAUSE ONE THING ABOUT IT IS...

YOU KNOW, WE'RE TAKING IT PERSONAL.

NO, I MEAN, IF I WANTED TO COME TO A 2 O'CLOCK MEETING, I WOULD COME.

IF I WANTED TO COME TO A 5 O'CLOCK MEETING, I WOULD COME.

BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S UNREASONABLE TO ASK A BOARD THAT SERVES THE PEOPLE TO COME AT 5 O'CLOCK.

THAT'S ME, BUT IT'S 13 OTHER VOTES UP HERE.

SO AT SOME POINT, WE'LL GET TO THE VOTE AND WE'LL SEE WHAT...

OH, KG.

EXCUSE ME.

I HAVE A SUGGESTION.

WHY NOT JUST PUT A SURVEY OUT? PUT IT UP ON THE WEBSITE.

LET THE PEOPLE OF PULASKI COUNTY VOTE ON IT.

HAVE THEIR INPUT.

AND NOBODY UP HERE, ONE PERSON DON'T SPEAK FOR KG. 5.30 IS A REASONABLE REQUEST.

I DO HAVE A CONCERN WITH SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT LIVE IN AN UNINCORPORATED AREA MAKING ALL THESE DECISIONS ABOUT THESE CHANGES.

I HAVE A CONCERN WITH THAT.

530 IS A REASONABLE REQUEST AND WE CAN PUT A SURVEY ON THE WEBSITE, COUNTY'S WEBSITE, SOCIAL MEDIA, AND LET THE CITIZENS VOTE ON IT.

HELLO, JUSTICE CURRY.

YES, THANK YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THE MOST COMPLAINT THAT I'VE HAD ABOUT THIS WHOLE ISSUE IS THAT SOMETIMES PEOPLE ARE WORKING, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE TO TAKE OFF FROM THEIR JOBS FOR A CONCERN.

I KNOW IN THE UNINCORPORATED.

LIKE WHAT REBECCA'S HAD AND ALSO MYSELF IN SEVEN.

I HAVE SOME UNINCORPORATED AS WELL.

SO CONSIDERATION BEING GIVEN TO WORKING PEOPLE, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WORK THAT CANNOT TAKE OFF FROM WORK TO COME TO A 2 O'CLOCK MEETING.

SO HOW IS THAT HANDLED? MAYBE, MR. KRAMER, HAVE YOU ALL HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THAT FOR PEOPLE? THAT'S NOT GERMANE TO THIS.

WELL, THAT'S TRUE.

BUT I'M JUST SAYING PEOPLE ARE

[02:10:03]

NOT ABLE TO COME TO A 2 O'CLOCK MEETING.

DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, JUSTICE CURRY? I YIELD.

QUARTERLY, WHATEVER.

5.30 IS A BETTER TIME.

OKAY, JUSTICE DAVIS.

YES, THAT TIME CAME FROM TWO MEETINGS THAT THE COUNTY HELD AT TWO DIFFERENT CHURCHES WHERE THERE'S ABOUT 50 PEOPLE AT EACH, AND THEY BOTH EXPRESSED THAT THEY WANTED TO BE INVOLVED AND THEY HAD TO WORK AND THEY HAD TO WORK TILL FIVE SO THAT'S WHERE THAT TIME CAME FROM ALSO I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT I DID NOT REALIZE THAT IT DID NOT HAVE QUORUM IN THIS QUARTERLY MEETING WELL IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MEETING I WANT TO BE A VOTABLE MEETING THAT MEANS SOMETHING TO THE PEOPLE SO I WOULD LIKE QUORUM TO BE ADDED TO THE QUARTERLY THAT A QUORUM OF THE PLANNING BOARD THAT NEEDS TO BE PRESENT OKAY, JUST A REMINDER, JUSTICE DAVIS, WE GENERALLY DON'T MAKE...

VERBAL AMENDMENTS, SO ARE YOU WILLING TO RECESS TO ALLOW JUST TO DO? YES.

WELL, WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT, RIGHT? WE CAN'T JUST, I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE ON IT.

I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE ON THAT, ON IF WE WANT TO AMEND THAT.

I AGREE.

BECAUSE WE'RE AMENDING IT AND WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO PASS.

SO WE COULD BE.

TIED UP AGAIN.

JUSTICE CAPPS.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION MAYBE FOR JUSTIN, AND MAYBE HE'S GOING TO ANSWER IT.

THE RECESS IS NON-DEBATABLE.

OKAY, SO WE NEED TO VOTE.

IS THAT WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY? NO.

OKAY, ALL RIGHT, GOOD DEAL.

SO, AMY, CALL THE ROLL ON IF TO RECESS TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT.

MS. YOUNG-BAKER? AYE.

MS. WARD? YEAH.

DID YOU CALL ME? YES.

ALL RIGHT, SO THAT WOULD BE 12 AYES AND 2 NAYS.

HOW LONG IS THE, DID WE, 10 MINUTES? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT, 10 MINUTES.

10 MINUTES.

HEY, LET'S SYNCHRONIZE.

IT IS 8-14.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RECONVENE.

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RECONVENE.

AND WE WERE IN THE DISCUSSION, BUT I GUESS WE NEED TO AMEND.

WE NEED TO TAKE UP THE AMENDMENT.

AMY, WOULD YOU READ? THE AMENDMENT FOR 26 I 27 OR JUSTIN WOULD YOU PLEASE YOUR OWN SO AMENDMENT 1 TO 26 I 27.

POINT OF ORDER IT HAS JUSTICE DAVIS AS A SPONSOR AND I BELIEVE THAT MR. PERSONS IS THE SPONSOR ON THIS ITEM.

THE SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT MR. STOWERS.

SPONSORING THE AMENDMENT.

THAT IS LEGAL.

IS AMY GOING TO READ IT? OH, JUSTIN.

MOVE FOR THE ADOPTION OR MOVE FOR IT TO BE SENT TO THE FULL COURT.

YOU MADE A MOTION TO AMEND.

CAN'T WAIT.

WHO FOR THE AMENDMENT? SOUNDS LIKE YOU MADE A MOTION TO AMEND 26 I 27.

OKAY, AND DID I HEAR SOMEBODY SAY A SECOND? SECOND.

OKAY, JUSTICE LEWIS MADE A SECOND.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT AMENDING 26 I 27? AND EVERYBODY, DO WE KNOW WHAT'S BEING CHANGED ON 26 I 27? THE LAST SIX LETTERS.

IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT, AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL A ROLL ON THE AMENDMENT FOR 26 I 27? MISS DAVIS? YES.

[02:15:01]

MISS YOUNG-BAKER? YES.

MR. ROBINSON? AYE.

JUSTICE DAVIS? OKAY, WHOEVER.

AND MISS MEDLOCK? AYE.

14 AYES, 0 NAYS.

WE CAN AMEND 26-I-27.

YEAH, I DON'T WANT MY NAME ON IT.

YOU JUST AMENDED IT.

I MOVE TO SEND 26-27 AS AMENDED TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE MOTION TO DO PASS.

ALL RIGHT, A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 26-27 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED.

ALL RIGHT, NOW, WE'RE BACK ON THE DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDED.

ON 26 I 27 AS AMENDED IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION? DID WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON AS AMENDED? NO, AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 26 I 27 AS AMENDED? MISS MEDLOCK? AYE.

MR. ROBINSON? PRESENT.

SO YOU HAVE 10 AYES, 3 NAYS, AND 1 VOTING PRESENT.

OKAY, ALL RIGHT.

ACCORDING TO WHAT AMY SAID, WE'LL SEND 26I27 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 26I28? ORDINANCE 25.0.R.

52, 2026 ANNUAL BUDGET,

[26-I-28 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 25-OR-52 (2026 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) TO APPROPRIATE ROAD AND BRIDGE FUNDS FOR VARIOUS PROJECTS.]

PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, TO APPROPRIATE ROAD AND BRIDGE FUNDS FOR VARIOUS PROJECTS.

I MOVE THAT WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION.

A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND, AND WE SEND 26I28 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE STOWERS IS HERE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

YES, I WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF OPENING COMMENTS, AND THEN I WANT TO RECOGNIZE A MEMBER OF STAFF IN CASE THERE'S ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE BODY.

SO, YEAH.

FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND, THE TRANSPORTATION FUND, IS A SEQUESTERED FUND AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR GENERAL FUND THAT THERE'S BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT.

SO, I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

THIS DOES A LOT OF GOOD PROGRESSIVE THINGS.

SOUTHWEST TRAIL.

PHASE TWO AND PHASE THREE ARE INCLUDED.

AND THIS COVERS A LOT OF OUR DISTRICTS.

SO THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK MAIN STREET VIADUCT, MISS YOUNG-BAKER, THAT'S IN YOUR DISTRICT.

AND THAT'S BEEN A PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN, THAT BRIDGE HAS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED FOR 20 YEARS.

THE CONCRETE'S FALLEN DOWN ONTO THE RAILWAY AND THE TRAINS.

THE ZUBER CONNECTION FOR THE PORT, ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION, AND THEN PHASE TWO AND PHASE THREE OF PROVIDENCE PARK, WHICH IS, WE ALL KNOW, HAS BEEN A BURDEN OF LOVE FOR THIS BODY AND FOR THE COUNTY FOR SOME TIME.

AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS ACTUALLY IN MY DISTRICT AND THAT IS THE INTERSTATE 40 MARCHE.

MORGAN INTERCHANGE, R-DOT, WE AGREED TO PARTNER WITH R-DOT IN THE CONSTRUCTION LOCAL MATCH OF $2.5 MILLION.

AND SO HAVING INTRODUCED THE ITEM AND REITERATED THAT THIS IS TRANSPORTATION FUNDS THAT ARE SEQUESTERED AND CAN'T BE USED FOR ANYTHING ELSE, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE MR. TABB COUNCIL, WHO IS OUR...

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, IF YOU WOULD COME FORWARD, SIR, IN CASE THERE ARE QUESTIONS.

[02:20:01]

FROM THE BODY AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME SIR I YIELD OKAY DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD BEFORE WE'VE GOT A COUPLE HAPPY TO THANK YOU MR KEITH MR CHAIRMAN AND QUORUM COURT I THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY WE DON'T NORMALLY LIKE TO COME ALL AT ONCE WITH THIS BIG OF A REQUEST HOWEVER THIS IS A CONVERGENCE OF A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING THAT WE COULDN'T NECESSARILY ANTICIPATE WOULD HAPPEN THIS YEAR JUST BECAUSE OF THE PROCESSES WE WORK THROUGH IN TERMS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ON SOME OF THESE PROJECTS AND APPROVALS THROUGH RDOT ON OTHERS, AND THAT'S THE TRAIL PROJECTS.

SOME OF THESE PROJECTS ARE ALREADY CONTRACTED FOR, AND WE NEED TO MOVE THE MONIES INTO THE CORRECT PLACE.

RIGHT NOW, AS JUSTICE STOWERS SAYS, WE HAVE AN EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE TRANSPORTATION FUND, OVER $60 MILLION.

THIS IS ONLY A PORTION OF IT.

IT'S STILL GOING TO BE NORTH OF $40 MILLION, BUT ONE OF THE COUPLE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO DO, I'M GOING TO POINT OUT TO YOU, THAT REALLY ARE IN THE CONTRACTUAL WE NEED TO GO ON AND DO THIS.

NUMBER ONE IS SOUTHWEST TRAIL PHASE 2, A PROJECT THAT YOU ALL HAVE SUPPORTED BY RESOLUTION THAT WE'VE PASSED ALONG TO RDOT.

THAT IS ON OBLIGATION REQUIREMENTS THAT NEEDS TO BE OBLIGATED THIS YEAR.

THIS WILL TAKE THE TRAIL THAT STOPS, IT STARTS AT THE COUNTY LINE.

AND IN THE SOUTHWEST, FOLLOWING THE OLD RAIL LINE, GETS TO HILARO SPRINGS ROAD UNDERNEATH THE BRIDGE.

THIS WILL TAKE IT FROM HILARO SPRINGS ROAD UP TO BASELINE ROAD.

AND THAT'S READY TO GO THIS YEAR.

WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT.

IT WILL PROVIDE THE MONIES FOR OUR MATCH AND THE BRIDGE WE'RE PURCHASING TO GO ON THAT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO CROSS THE LITTLE FOOSH CREEK RIGHT THERE.

THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE OF OUR MORE PRISTINE SECTIONS OF TRAIL, AND SO WE APPRECIATE THAT.

PROVIDENCE PARKS.

PARK PHASE 2.

WE ACTUALLY SIGNED THAT CONTRACT LAST YEAR.

THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF IT TO MAKE SURE WE CAN HONOR THAT CONTRACT WITHOUT TAPPING INTO THIS YEAR'S MONEY.

I WILL SAY AS WE ARE DOING THIS, WE ARE PROTECTING THIS YEAR'S ANNUAL BUDGET MONEY BECAUSE AS WAS QUESTIONED IN THE PAPER, WE STILL DO HAVE TO MOW.

WE STILL DO HAVE TO FIX THE POTHOLES.

WE STILL HAVE TO DO ALL THOSE THINGS WE NORMALLY HAVE TO DO.

THESE THINGS ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND OUR NORMAL OPERATIONS, SO THEY REQUIRE FUNDING ABOVE AND BEYOND OUR NORMAL OPERATIONS.

AND FORTUNATELY, OUR TRANSPORTATION FUND, OUR ROAD FUND, WE HAVE THAT HERE.

PROVIDENCE PARK PHASE 2, WE HAVE ABOUT A $2 MILLION PROJECT THERE THAT WE HAVE ABOUT $846,000 LEFT TO HONOR ON THAT CONTRACT.

THIS WILL COVER THAT.

ALSO, IF YOU GO DOWN TO ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF THE WAY DOWN HIGHWAY 365, THAT'S AN INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT, WIDENING THE ROAD TO A THREE-LANE ROAD DOWN TO MARCHE ROAD. THAT'S COMING UP.

THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE ALREADY AGREED TO WITH R-DOT.

IT'S GOING TO BE ALSO MATCHED BY KAMAL MAIL, NOT TO THE DEGREE WE'RE MATCHING IT.

IT'S TECHNICALLY OUTSIDE THEIR CITY LIMITS IN WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THEIR ETJ.

BUT THAT WILL HAPPEN, AND THAT WILL CERTAINLY BE A BIG SAFETY IMPROVEMENT FOR THAT AREA, TAKING IT FROM A TWO-LANE TO A THREE-LANE.

THEN THE PRATT RIMMEL ZUBER CONSTRUCTION IS RELOCATING A DOGLEG INTERSECTION TO STRAIGHTEN IT OUT, WHICH IS IMPORTANT FOR TRACTOR-TRAILER RIG TRAFFIC.

THIS IS FOR A DIRECT IMPROVEMENT TO ONE OF OUR MAJOR EMPLOYERS OUT THERE, AMAZON.

IT'S GOING TO IMPROVE THE GENERAL ROAD STRUCTURE OUT THERE.

WE ARE OBLIGATED TO DO THOSE.

THE OTHER PROJECTS WE HAVE, SOUTHWEST TRAIL PACES 8 AND 09, THIS IS FROM THE ARKANSAS FAIRGROUNDS.

TO LITTLE ROCK CENTRAL.

IT'LL BE READY TO GO THIS SUMMER.

IF WE DON'T FUND IT, IT'LL JUST SIT THERE READY FOR FUNDING.

SO THERE'S NO REASON TO NOT FUND IT.

WE HAVE THE MONEY.

WE HAVE THE PROJECT READY TO GO.

IT CAN MOVE AS WELL.

SAME WAY WITH SOUTHEAST TRAIL PHASES 2 AND 3.

THE SOUTHEAST TRAIL PHASE 1 WENT FROM CLINTON LIBRARY, HEIFER PROJECT AREA, DOWN ALONG THE LEVEE, PAST THE NEW MARINA ON THE...

IN THE EASTERN PORTIONS OF LITTLE ROCK TO ABOUT THE PUMP STATION FOR LITTLE ROCK DRAINAGE DISTRICT NUMBER TWO.

THIS WILL PICK IT UP THERE, CONTINUE IT DOWN THE LEVEE TO TEMPLE STREET WHICH GOES AROUND THE NORTH END OF THE WEST RUNWAY AND IT'LL TAKE IT TO THE TERMINAL.

SO YOU'LL NOW BE ABLE TO GET AN EXTENSION OF THE ARKANSAS RIVER TRAIL WHICH ACTUALLY GOES FROM TWO RIVERS PARK PAST THE BIG DAMN BRIDGE, CURRENTLY PAST DILLARD'S IN DIFFERENT WAYS.

BUT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE TERMINAL AT THE AIRPORT.

AND THEN ULTIMATELY, IN FUTURE PHASES THAT ARE DOWN THE LINE, NOT PART OF THIS, WILL BE EXTENDED INTO THE PORT AREA FOR ALL THE EMPLOYERS THERE.

[02:25:01]

AND BEYOND THAT, ULTIMATELY...

WRIGHTSVILLE AS PART OF THE CENTRAL ARKANSAS REGIONAL GREENWAY.

BUT THIS NEXT SECTION WILL COMPLETE IT FROM WHERE SOUTHEAST TRAIL PHASE 1 STOPS ALL THE WAY INTO THE TERMINAL, AND THAT CAN START THIS SUMMER TOO.

SO THOSE PROJECTS ARE LOOKING TO START THIS SUMMER.

YOU'LL SEE THAT THE SNOW AND ICE REMOVAL EQUIPMENT, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS.

I KNOW JUSTICE ROBINSON HAS EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THIS.

SOME OF THE OTHERS HAVE.

WE STARTED THIS.

ICE STORM SEASON WITH FOUR MAJOR DUMP TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH PLOWS AND SAND, FOUR SMALLER TRUCKS AND A ROW GRADER.

WE LIMPED THROUGH THE END OF THAT BECAUSE OF THE ICY NATURE OF THIS PARTICULAR STORM.

SO WE ARE GOING TO BEEF UP OUR RESPONSE.

BASICALLY HOW WE PICK OUR VEHICLES THAT WORK THE STORMS LIKE THAT IS WHEN THEY'RE THROUGH DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS, WE'RE READY TO GRAVEYARD THEM.

WE PUT A PLOW ON THEM AND PUT THEM OUT BACK AND USE THEM THAT ONE TIME A YEAR THAT WE HAVE SNOW REMOVAL.

THIS TIME IT WAS ICE REMOVAL.

SO WE DECIMATED OUR FLEET.

WE LIMPED THROUGH WITH ABOUT HALF THE FLEET THAT WE NORMALLY DO.

SO WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS REPLACING FOUR BRAND-NEW MAJOR DUMP TRUCKS WITH PLOWS BUILT IN, WITH THE SANDERS AND THE PRE-TREATING ICERS ON THE BACK.

WE ARE GOING TO START USING SALT.

WE HAVE NOT BEEN USING SALT FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS.

WE ARE GOING TO START USING SALT, AND THAT REQUIRES US TO CLEAN AND DO A GOOD JOB CLEANING.

THAT'S PART OF A REGULAR MAINTENANCE PROGRAM THAT GOES ALONG THAT.

WE'RE GOING TO BUY FOUR SMALLER TRUCKS TO GET INTO THE SMALLER AREAS.

THE LARGE DUMP TRUCKS WORK THE MAJOR ROADS.

THE SMALLER PICKUP TRUCKS WITH PLOWS AND DUMPS WORK THE SMALLER ROADS.

AND THEN THREE MORE GRADERS.

THAT WILL ALLOW US TO DIVIDE THE MAP OF THE COUNTY UP INTO QUADRANTS SO WE CAN HAVE A TEAM OF A GRADER, A LARGE DUMP TRUCK, AND A SMALL TRUCK WORKING EACH SECTION OF THE COUNTY.

ON TOP OF THAT, WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THE BUSINESS OF PRE-TREATING ROADS.

WE'VE NOT BEEN DOING THAT.

WE'VE NEVER REALLY SEEN GOOD PERFORMANCE OUT OF THAT UNTIL THIS PARTICULAR EVENT WHEN IT ICED.

THE ROADS THAT THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT PRE-TREATED EMERGED A LOT QUICKER THAN THE ROADS THAT WEREN'T PRE-TREATED, AND THAT MADE US BELIEVERS.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO A PRE-TREATMENT THAT INVOLVES BUYING BINS THAT ACTUALLY ADD SALINITY TO THE WATER, AND IT'S A SALINITY TREATMENT, AND VATS THAT ALLOW US TO GO OUT, FILL UP TRUCKS, WE'LL TAKE SOME OF OUR OLD TRUCKS AND MOVE THEM INTO THAT CATEGORY TO WHERE THEY'RE...

CARRYING TANKERS ON BACK INSTEAD OF THE SAND BINS, AND PRE-TREAT OUR ROADS 48 TO 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF EVERY STORM TO GIVE US A BETTER CHANCE OF RESPONDING MORE QUICKLY TO THESE STORMS. SO THAT'S WHAT THAT SNOW AND ICE EQUIPMENT IS GOING TO DO FOR US.

YOU'LL SEE THERE'S TWO OTHER PROJECTS THERE.

THE MAIN STREET VIADUCT IS A MAJOR, MAJOR REPLACEMENT.

THIS IS JUST THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND THE ENGINEERING PART, $2.5 MILLION TO GIVE THAT A JUMP START.

AND GET THAT ROLLING BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE TIME TO GET THAT DONE AND THEN PROVIDENCE PARK PHASE THREE THIS WILL WRAP UP THE ROADS IN PROVIDENCE PARK FOR FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT'S A LOT TO ASK OF YOU YES SIR I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR I BELIEVE GO AHEAD YEAH THANK YOU SO THANK YOU SIR FOR THAT THOROUGH EXPLANATION SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE 60 63 MILLION AND SOME CHANGE IN OUR ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND IF WE WERE TO REFER ALL OF THESE ITEMS IN THIS ORDINANCE TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT AND IF IT WAS TO PASS THERE WE WOULD STILL BE LEFT WITH 43 MILLION AND SOME CHANGE IN OUR ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND AND SO I'VE HEARD SOME CONCERNS OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE COUNTY COULD STILL AFFORD TO MOW THE RIGHT-OF-WAYS AND FIX THE POTHOLES AND BLACKTOP THE ROADS.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THE STATISTICS OR NOT, BUT IN JUDGE HIDES 12 YEARS AS COUNTY JUDGE, THE LAST STATISTICS I SAW, WHICH WERE A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, YOU MIGHT HAVE, AND YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE IT JUST AT YOUR FINGERTIPS RIGHT NOW, BUT WE HAD OVERLAID MORE ROADS THAN AT ANY TIME IN THE COUNTY'S HISTORY.

WE HAD REPAVED.

SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S A QUESTION OF IF WE DO THIS TONIGHT, IS THERE GOING TO BE ENOUGH MONEY LEFT TO DO? THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO, AND I ALSO WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THOSE THAT ONLY 12% OF THE COUNTY POPULATION LIVES UNINCORPORATED.

THE OTHER 88% LIVE IN ONE OF THE CITIES.

[02:30:02]

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY ALSO PAY A COUNTY ROAD AND BRIDGE TAX.

SO THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE CITIES DESERVE A RETURN ON THEIR INVESTMENT INTO THE COUNTY ROAD AND BRIDGE.

SO A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS, YES, THEY INCORPORATE MANY OF OUR DIFFERENT DISTRICTS, SOME OF THEM UNINCORPORATED, SOME OF THEM INCORPORATED, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE CITIES ALSO PAY COUNTY ROAD AND BRIDGE TAXES.

AND WHETHER IT'S THE VIADUCT OR WHETHER IT'S PROVIDENCE PARK OR WHETHER IT'S THE TRAILS OR WHETHER IT'S THE PROJECT UP AT MORGAN, WHICH IS IN, BY THE WAY, THAT'S NOT IN MAUMELLE.

THAT'S UNINCORPORATED WHERE THAT'S AT.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, WITH $43 MILLION, PLENTY LEFT TO MOW THE RIGHT-OF-WAYS.

WELL, THAT IS THE ONE-TIME LEFTOVER MONEY.

THAT'S THE BEGINNING BALANCE.

MONEY YOU COULD SAVE FOR THIS YEAR.

IT DOESN'T COUNT THE CURRENT REVENUES FOR THIS YEAR.

THAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TOWARDS CURRENT OPERATIONS, CURRENT EXPENSES.

THAT'S STILL INTACT.

THE $26 MILLION APPROVED IN Y'ALL'S BUDGET FOR 2026 IS STILL THERE, AND IT'S STILL GOING TO BE MOWING THE RIGHT OF WAYS.

AND I MIGHT SAY WE HAVE THE PREMIER ROAD MAINTENANCE PROGRAM IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS FOR COUNTIES.

OUR PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX, THE PCI, IS STILL WELL OVER 80 PERCENT.

FOR OUR ROADS, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THEY'RE SO GOOD THIS YEAR THAT THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF ROAD MAINTENANCE THAT WE TAKE CARE OF, OUR MAJOR CAPE SEAL PROGRAM, WHICH RESURFACES PRACTICALLY OUR ASPHALT ROADS AND KEEP THEM IN A PREMIER STATE INSTEAD OF CRACKING AND BEGINNING TO ALLIGATOR, WE'RE NOT EVEN DOING THAT THIS YEAR BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN IN SUCH A GOOD STATE BECAUSE OF THE INVESTMENTS WE'VE MADE IN PREVIOUS YEARS.

WE ARE PUTTING THAT MONEY INSTEAD IN OTHER PLACES.

CERTAINLY OUR CHIP SEAL PROGRAM IS GOING ON.

I THINK WE'RE IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE COUNTY THIS PARTICULAR SEASON, THIS PARTICULAR YEAR.

WE'RE STILL DOING FOG AND WHAT'S THE OTHER? SCRUB SEAL.

WE'RE STILL DOING ALL OF THOSE WITH REGULAR MAINTENANCE BECAUSE WE ARE IN A, WE JUST HAPPEN TO BE IN A POSITION TO BE AHEAD TO HAVE A LOT OF OUR EXPENSES FOR THAT.

AT SUCH A HIGH LEVEL MAINTAINED BECAUSE OF OUR CONDITION OF OUR ROADS.

SO THE NORMAL OPERATIONS ARE COVERED.

THIS IS GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND, DOING SOMETHING MORE FOR OUR COUNTY WHILE WE CAN STILL MARCH ON OUR REVENUES.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. TOWNSEND.

AND WITH THAT, MR. KEITH, I YIELD.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, JUSTICE STILES, JUSTICE WARD.

OKAY, JUSTICE MCCOY.

HOW MANY MORE PHASES ARE THERE WITH THE SOUTHWEST TRAIL? WE HAVE PHASE 3.

THAT'S GOING TO BE GOING FROM BASELINE TO 65TH STREET.

THAT IS DESIGNED.

IT'S GETTING APPRAISED RIGHT NOW.

THAT WON'T LAUNCH THIS YEAR.

MORE THAN LIKELY, IT'LL BE POSSIBLY READY NEXT YEAR.

WE HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL PHASE THAT'S ACTUALLY FOUR PHASES, PHASE 4, 5, 6, PHASE...

PHASE 4, 5, 6, AND 7 THAT LEAD FROM 65TH STREET RIGHT BEHIND THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES BUILDING, THEIR LODGE RIGHT THERE ON 65TH STREET, FROM THERE TO THE DRAINAGE UNDERPASS THAT WE'LL BE ATTEMPTING TO UTILIZE UNDER THE RAILROAD TRACKS AT THE ARKANSAS STATE FAIRGROUNDS.

THOSE FOUR PHASES ARE STILL UNDER MAJOR DESIGN.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT MORE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY.

YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A NO-RISE PERMIT FROM THE CORPS.

YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A CHANNEL BRIDGE OF SOME KIND BECAUSE THE FOOSH CREEK IS DOWN THERE.

AND THAT'S NOT ONLY THE FOOSH BOTTOMS, BUT THAT'S FOOSH CREEK.

IT WILL BE A SPECTACULAR RUN WHEN WE GET THE CHANCE.

BUT THOSE FOUR PHASES ARE STILL UNDER FURTHER DESIGN.

AND THEN GOING FROM THE STATE FAIRGROUNDS, THAT'S PHASES 8 AND 9 WILL BE COVERED.

SO REALLY THERE'S ONE MORE LEFT TO BID THAT WE KNOW IS WORKING TOWARDS GETTING BID, PHASE 3, BASELINE ROAD TO 65TH STREET.

AND THEN THE LONGER PHASES BETWEEN THE TWO UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS, IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT MORE DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL.

SO THAT'S LEFT ON THE SOUTHWEST REALM.

IF YOU JUST HAD TO GUESS, WHEN WILL THE SOUTHWEST TRAIL BE COMPLETED IN PULASKI COUNTY? THAT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON THE DEDICATION TOWARDS GETTING IT DONE WITH THE NEXT FEW ADMINISTRATIONS ON THAT.

I DO THINK THAT THERE'S QUITE A BIT MORE ENVIRONMENTAL, MORE THAN ONE YEAR PROBABLY.

ON PHASES FOUR, FIVE, SIX, AND SEVEN, GETTING THOSE DONE BEFORE WE CAN START WORKING ON GETTING THE LAND ACQUIRED.

MOST OF THAT'S GOING

[02:35:03]

TO BE OWNED BY THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK ALREADY.

THERE'S OTHER PIECES THAT ARE INSIDE THE BUSH BOTTOMS THAT ARE OWNED BY PRIVATE PARCELS.

SO IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE.

I'LL ADD ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION.

IF IT STAYS A PRIORITY, THAT IS.

YOU AND I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE SOUTHWEST TRAIL BEFORE, AND I'M IMAGINING WE'RE STILL IN THE SAME, THE OTHER TWO COUNTIES ARE STILL IN THE SAME RUT WHEN IT COMES TO ACQUIRING LAND.

SALINE COUNTY IS ACTUALLY WORKING ON, WE'RE THE MOST, WE'RE FURTHEST ADVANCED.

WE'RE THE MOST DEDICATED TOWARDS IT.

SALINE COUNTY IS MORE SLOWLY WORKING TOWARDS IT.

BUT IN ALL FRANKNESS, THEY DON'T HAVE THE ROAD FUNDS TO PROVIDE THE MATCH MONIES NECESSARY TO MOVE AS QUICKLY AS WE DO.

GARLAND COUNTY IS MOVING QUITE A BIT SLOWER.

SO THIS MAY BE A PULASKI COUNTY, SALINE COUNTY ISSUE.

IN ALL FAIRNESS TO GARLAND COUNTY, GARLAND COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE A DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCE IN METROPLAN BECAUSE THEY'RE BEYOND METROPLAN'S BOUNDARIES.

BUT RIGHT NOW, METROPLAN IS COMMITTED TO...

TO REGIONAL GREENWAY SYSTEM OF WHICH THE SOUTHWEST TRAIL IS AN ELIGIBLE ELIGIBLE FUNDING DESTINATION AND SO THEY'RE COMMITTED TO IT GARDEN COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT KIND OF RESOURCE THANK YOU AND THEN TURNING OUR ATTENTION TO PROVIDENCE PARK UM WHEN DO WE EXPECT PULASKI COUNTY'S PORTION OF ANY SORT OF CONSTRUCTION TO BE COMPLETED I UNDERSTAND THERE'S PHASES OF THAT PROJECT TOO ABSOLUTELY UH IT COULD CERTAINLY BE COMPLETED AFTER PHASE TWO AND IF WE GO ON AND PURSUE PHASE THREE, THAT WOULD BE THE ROADS.

THAT WOULD BE PROBABLY ALL THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

EVERYTHING ELSE ON THE INTERIOR WOULD PROBABLY BE THE PURVIEW OF THE PROVIDENCE PARK NONPROFIT.

THANK YOU, JUSTICE MCCOY.

JUSTICE PERSON.

SO I'M LOOKING AT 2.6 PLUS FOR PROVIDENCE PARK, 3.4 FOR THE SOUTHWEST TRAIL.

I'M ALL FOR QUALITY OF LIFE, TRAILS AND SUCH.

I'M ALSO FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO MY QUESTION IS KIND OF IRONIC BECAUSE EARLIER THERE WAS, AND THERE'S BEEN REMARKS ABOUT IF YOU DON'T LIVE IN INCORPORATED AREAS, THEN HOW DARE YOU? I HAVE AN OPINION WHICH IS COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS AND ASININE, BUT NEVERTHELESS, THERE ARE AREAS ON BALCOMBE ROAD, WHICH IS NOT IN DISTRICT 05, THAT HAVE BEEN FLOODING FOREVER.

SO IS THIS ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND USED TO FIX INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES LIKE THAT, OR IS THAT ANOTHER FUND? IF IT'S A ROAD-RELATED ISSUE, IT CAN BE USED FOR THAT, YES.

I'M A SUPPORTER OF PROVIDENCE PARK.

I BELIEVE IN QUALITY OF LIFE.

I'M ALSO A MAJOR PROPONENT AND SUPPORTER OF INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO I'M A LITTLE BIT TORN, BUT I BELIEVE THESE ITEMS ARE ALREADY UNDER CONTRACT.

CORRECT? YEAH, YOUR NAME.

THOSE ARE THE ONES I IDENTIFIED.

THOSE FOUR, YES.

WHICH ONES? SOUTHWEST TRAIL PHASE 2, PROVIDENCE PARK PHASE 2.

ACTUALLY, SOUTHWEST RAIL PHASE 2 IS UNDER A COMMITMENT TO RDOT.

IT'S NOT UNDER THE CONTRACT.

THAT'S TO BE FAIR.

HIGHWAY 365, I-40 IS UNDER AN AGREEMENT WITH RDOT.

AND THEN PRATT RIMMEL ZUBER, THAT IS UNDER AN AGREEMENT AND CONTRACT.

UNDERSTOOD.

APPRECIATE YOU.

SO LET'S NOT FORGET ABOUT THE ISSUES.

THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON IN THESE PARTS OF PLEXIGLAS COUNTIES FOR YEARS.

ABSOLUTELY.

AND THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE A PRIORITY ALONG WITH TRAILS.

THAT'S RIGHT.

AND ACTUALLY, THIS IS A GOOD TIME FOR YOU TO START THINKING ABOUT THAT AS WE'RE BEGINNING TO LOOK TOWARDS A NEW ADMINISTRATION.

THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO DISCUSS AS FUTURE EMPHASIS.

TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO NOT ONLY A, BUT A AND B, OR B AND C, OR WHATEVER THE EMPHASIS IS.

ARE YOU, MR. CHAIR? THANK YOU.

JUSTICE CAPPS, JUSTICE ROBINSON, DID YOU HAVE YOUR? WELL, I DIDN'T, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO.

SO HERE'S MY QUESTION FOR YOU.

YOU GO AHEAD.

OKAY, YEAH.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, DID WE NOT? USE CONTINGENCY OR EMERGENCY FUNDS OR WHATEVER TITLE THAT WAS UNDER FOR PROVIDENCE PARK PHASE TWO.

DIDN'T WE MOVE,

[02:40:01]

DIDN'T WE APPROPRIATE LIKE TWO MILLION DOLLARS OR SOMETHING? YES, WE DID.

I THINK WE DID.

I THINK I ASKED A QUESTION.

I THINK WE DID BECAUSE I THINK I ASKED THE QUESTION, WAS THAT GOING TO BE ENOUGH MONEY? AND THE RESPONSE WAS, WE DIDN'T KNOW.

AND SO I'M WONDERING IF THIS $800-SOMETHING THOUSAND IS THE MAKE.

THERE'S DIFFERENT THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN PAID MONEY FOR.

THERE'S BUILDINGS ASSOCIATED WITH PROVIDENCE PARK THAT ARE COUNTY BUILDINGS.

WE'LL BE ON LONG-TERM LEASE, AND THERE'S ROADS.

IT MAY BE TWO DIFFERENT TOPICS THERE.

BUT BECAUSE THIS IS STRICTLY STREETS OR ROADS INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT'S WHY YOU'RE ABLE TO USE THIS MONEY FOR THAT.

THAT'S THE ONLY REASON.

THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.

I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PROVIDENCE PARK AREA.

JUSTICE CURRY.

SO RIGHT NOW.

WHEN WE VISITED SOME MONTHS AGO, I BELIEVE THEY WERE TRYING TO WRAP UP ON PHASE ONE.

WE DON'T DO ANYTHING WITH THE HOUSING PART BECAUSE THAT'S DONE BY THE NONPROFIT, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.

SO WE'RE ONLY INVESTING IN THE OTHER PART OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE ROADS AND, OF COURSE, THE UTILITIES? YES, EXACTLY RIGHT.

I JUST WANTED TO TRY TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT.

THAT IS CORRECT.

AND THEREIN, SO WE'RE WORKING ON PHASE TWO? WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON PHASE TWO, ADDING THE ROADS IN PHASE THREE.

THAT'S REALLY, IT'S A BIG LOOP ON THAT.

AND THEN PHASE THREE WILL BE ANOTHER BIG LOOP, ANOTHER DIRECTION.

THE QUESTION I'VE GOT IS ALSO ABOUT PROVIDENCE PARK, AND I MEAN, I'M THE BIGGEST PROPONENT FOR HELPING THE NEEDY AND HELPING THE HOMELESS.

THANK YOU, MR. OKAY.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD? YES.

I MEAN, THAT IS SOMETHING I'M DEFINITELY FOR.

MY QUESTION IS THIS.

IF PROVIDENCE PARK, ON THESE CONSTRUCTIONS OF THE STREETS THAT WE'RE DOING, IS THERE ANY LEASE AGREEMENT THAT BINDS US TO ANY FURTHER MAINTENANCE ON ALL OF THIS STUFF.

I MEAN BECAUSE THE LEASE I YOU KNOW I DID PULL THE LEASE AND I YOU KNOW I'M JUST WONDERING I THINK IT GOES FOR WHAT 25 YEARS IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK THAT'S CORRECT.

YOU KNOW IF IT'S 25 YEARS? YEAH SO I MEAN THIS IS THIS IS YOU KNOW A LOT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO INVEST.

TO KEEP UP, KEEP UP THESE ROADS, MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S DONE.

SO WHAT'S OUR, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT OUR TOTAL INVESTMENT'S GOING TO BE ON THAT? BECAUSE AS THE PERSON SAYS, THERE ARE REALLY, REALLY SOME AREAS IN OUR COUNTY THAT REALLY NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

SURE.

AND THIS IS ONE-TIME CAPITAL COST IN DEVELOPING THESE ROADS.

THERE IS ONGOING MAINTENANCE COSTS, BUT IT'S FAR LESS THAN THIS.

WE MIGHT DO A CAPE SEAL ON A ROAD ON AN ASPHALT ROAD LIKE THESE ARE ONCE EVERY FIVE OR SIX YEARS AND IT'S A LOT CHEAPER SOMETHING LIKE A THIRD OF THE COST OF ORIGINAL PLACEMENT.

SO THAT THAT'LL BE WHAT WE'RE ADDING TO THE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE BURDEN ON THIS.

IF WE CAN GET BY WITH SOMETHING LESS BECAUSE THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE LIKE THE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADS YOU SEE AROUND THIS IS GOING TO BE INSIDE THE PROVIDENCE PARK YOU'D HAVE A LOT LESS TRAFFIC.

SO IT MAY BE THAT WE CAN GET BY WITH A SCRUB SEAL OR A FOG SEAL, AND IT'S EVEN LOWER THAN THAT.

SO MAINTENANCE COSTS WILL BE ADDED OVER TIME, BUT THEY'LL BE MINIMAL.

THESE WILL BE PUBLIC ROADS.

ANY OTHER? THERE SEEMS TO NO.

AND WE'VE GOT PUBLIC COMMENT.

SO I'M REALLY HERE TO SPEAK ON THE DATA CENTER BUT I COULDN'T HELP BUT SPEAK ON THIS.

BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ON THESE ROADS ESPECIALLY OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS ESPECIALLY IN MISS WARD'S DISTRICT AND SWEET HOME AND COLLEGE STATION AND GRANITE MOUNTAIN AN AREA THAT I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS.

I HAVE FRIENDS AND FAMILY THAT LIVE OUT THERE IN THAT AREA AND I VISITED THEM BACK 30 YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS DOING THE SAME

[02:45:01]

THING I'M DOING TODAY AS A DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER.

IF I'M MAKING A DOCUMENTARY THESE DATA CENTERS.

BACK THEN I WAS MAKING A DOCUMENTARY FOR THE MCMATH ENVIRONMENTAL LAW FIRM AGAINST THE 3M COMPANY AT GRAND MOUNTAIN AND THOSE 16 FAMILIES WON 32 MILLION DOLLARS.

AFTER I CONCLUDED MY INVESTIGATION, MY INTERVIEWS WITH THOSE 16 FAMILIES AND WENT OUT THERE AND FILMED THE 3M COMPANY GOING AGAINST THE LAW AND DOING WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO ANYWAY, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD BEEN TOLD TO SHUT DOWN FOR HEALTH REASONS, THEY JUST CONTINUED TO DO IT OVERNIGHT.

WE CAUGHT THEM, WE FOUGHT THEM, AND WE WON.

THAT PLACE IS STILL MAKING SOMETHING.

HE DOESN'T NAME THE BYPRODUCT OF THE ROOFING MATERIAL AFTER HIS GRANDDAUGHTER ANYMORE.

IT'S A DIFFERENT FILL MATERIAL, BUT IT STILL FILLS THE LUNGS AND THE HOUSES OUT THERE IN THAT AREA.

I'M COMPELLED TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I KNOW FOR A FACT, ESPECIALLY SINCE I WENT TO OVER A HUNDRED HOMES IN SWEET HOME IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS, MYSELF, ALONE.

TO SPEAK TO PEOPLE ABOUT THESE DATA CENTERS AND ABOUT THIS RADIO SHOW I STARTED TWO MONTHS AGO SO THAT I COULD HAVE A VOICE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT OWN THE SOCIAL MEDIA ARE THE ONES TRYING TO CONTROL OUR VOICE RIGHT NOW AND WHAT I'VE SEEN AND WHAT THE CHILDREN AND THE TEACHERS AND THE STUDENTS AND THE SUPERINTENDENT ALL HAD TO TELL ME WHEN I ATTENDED THE COLLIN STATION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DEDICATION CEREMONY THAT DAY AND ALL THE ATTORNEYS AND THE LAWYERS AND ENGINEERS SAID IS THAT THIS IS...

SOMETHING THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND WHAT'S VERY IMPORTANT IS WHAT THIS MAN RIGHT HERE POINTED OUT TO ME, IS THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE ISN'T THERE.

530 IS A DEAD STOP IN THE AFTERNOON.

IT'S A DEAD STOP RIGHT THERE WHERE THAT GOOGLE CENTER IS ALREADY BEING BUILT.

AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ZUBA ROAD.

I WAS OUT THERE AT ZUBA ROAD.

THAT'S VERY NEAR THE AREA WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING OTHER PLACES LIKE AMAZON AND THE STATUS CENTER.

THOSE ROADS AREN'T SAFE.

I SAY IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE SOME OF THIS MONEY, AND I'LL CONCLUDE WITH THIS ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE SOME MONEY AND PUT IT TOWARDS SOMETHING THAT WILL HELP THE COMMUNITY, PLEASE FOCUS ON THOSE ROADS.

PLEASE FOCUS ON MAKING THOSE ROADS AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE FOR CHILDREN, BECAUSE I FOLLOW BUSES OUT THERE THAT ARE DRIVING PAST MILLS AND THEY'RE GOING IN THESE AREAS, AND I THINK ABOUT THESE CHILDREN AS I THINK ABOUT THEM WHEN I'M AT THE PARK AND I'M TALKING TO THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES ABOUT THIS DATA CENTER.

JUST YESTERDAY, WE HAD THREE SCHOOL BUSES ON THE INTERSTATE GET INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT.

MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS THAT IT WAS THERE AT 530, ON HIGHWAY 530, A ROAD THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

AND AGAIN, I'M GOING TO SAY, BECAUSE I SPENT YEARS WORKING FOR THE HOMELESS, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR THE PROVIDENCE PARK WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

THANKS FOR APPROPRIATING THAT MONEY TO IT.

BUT NOBODY, NOBODY IN THOSE AREAS THAT I KNOW, NOBODY.

THERE'S GOING TO BE WALKING TRAILS AND BIKING ON TRAILS.

Y'ALL TAKE THAT $3 MILLION AND HELP THE COUNTY, HELP THESE ROADS.

YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN OUT THERE IN FOREST CREEK OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, ALL RIGHT? LIKE ALL THOSE BRIDGES, THEY HAVE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE REPAIRED.

YES, PLEASE FOCUS ON REPAIRING THOSE ROADS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? OKAY, THAT'S GRIFFIN.

THE PROJECTS YOU'VE MENTIONED AND MR. TOWNSEND'S MENTIONED ARE INTERESTING AND FINE.

LET ME REMIND YOU THAT IF YOU ARE DEVELOPING STREETS IN THE DEVELOPMENT, YOU DON'T DEVELOP STREETS IN PHASE 3 IF YOU HAVEN'T FINISHED PHASE 2.

NO-SHARE ONLINE DEVELOPS STREETS.

IN A FUTURE PHASE THAT HAS NOT BEEN OCCUPIED OR EVEN MARKETED BEFORE THEY FINISH THE PHASE THAT'S OCCUPIED.

RIGHT NOW, THEY ONLY HAVE THREE RESIDENTS IN PHASE ONE.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPENDING MONEY FOR PHASE THREE.

NOW, I'VE PRACTICED LAW FOR A WHILE.

I DON'T KNOW ANY DEVELOPERS WHO GOT THEIR MONEY OR INVESTORS' MONEY TO DO THAT.

WHY ARE WE USING THE TAXPAYER MONEY THAT WAY? IF IT ISN'T GOOD MARKET PRACTICE, BUSINESS-WISE, WHY IS IT GOOD GOVERNMENT TO DO THAT? AND LASTLY, IF YOU DON'T DEVELOP OUT TO PHASE 3, WHAT DOES THE ROAD THAT YOU'VE DONE ON PHASE 3 ACCOMPLISH?

[02:50:11]

THERE SEEMS TO BE NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

IT'S JUST PUBLIC COMMENT.

IT DOESN'T SAY WHAT TOPIC.

NO, WE'LL DO IT AT THE END.

IF WE GET THROUGH THIS ONE.

SO THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 26I28? MS. DAVIS? NO.

DID YOU SAY PRESENT? PRESENT.

MR. ROBINSON? AYE.

NINE AYES, ONE PRESENT, AND FOUR NAYS.

AND MS. MEDLOCK? AYE.

SO, WE WILL SEND 26I28 TO THE FULL COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 26I29.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 17OR12, PULASKI COUNTY

[26-I-29 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 17-OR-12 (PULASKI COUNTY PERSONNEL POLICY) AS AMENDED TO MAKE TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT 848 OF 2025 AND TO COMPLY WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AAC (ASSOCIATION OF ARKANSAS COUNTIES).]

PERSONNEL POLICY, AS AMENDED TO MAKE TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT 848 OF 2025 AND TO COMPLY WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AAC, ASSOCIATION OF ARKANSAS COUNTIES.

WHO WOULD WE SEND THE ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION? SECOND.

A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND NAME.

WE SEND 26I29 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE STOWERS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE BODY, OUR DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES, CHASTITY CYPRESS, IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? AND SHE SAT THROUGH THIS WHOLE MEETING FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

NO.

QUESTION.