26-I-67 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 25-OR-52 (2026 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FOR THE YOUTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

[26-I-67 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 25-OR-52 (2026 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FOR THE YOUTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT.]

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 25-OR-52 2026 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS TO RECOGNIZE AN APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FOR THE YOUTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT. JUSTICE LEWISON. MOVE TO SEND IT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS.

SECOND. SECOND. A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 26-I-67 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE LEWISON WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? NOT EXACTLY, [LAUGHTER] BUT I'VE GOT, I'VE GOT.

WHERE IS SHE? JAMIE.

OKAY.

THIS IS A GRANT THAT WE GOT RENEWED FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS UNDER THE DYS WE HAD THE HIGHEST WE HAD THE HIGHEST APPLICATION SCORE FOR THIS GRANT. WE'RE REALLY PROUD OF THIS WORK.

WE STARTED THIS PROGRAM THREE YEARS AGO. IT WAS A PILOT PROGRAM.

THERE WAS A LOT OF YOUTH VIOLENCE. THERE STILL IS.

AND WE WERE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO KIND OF HELP SOME OF THE AT RISK POPULATION WITHIN THE SCHOOLS.

THE FIRST YEAR WE DIDN'T REALLY MEET ALL OUR METRICS, BUT I WENT IN, I PITCHED THE PROGRAM, THEY GAVE US THE MONEY, BUT THEY BELIEVED IN US AND THEY KEPT FUNDING IT.

THIS YEAR WE DID MEET ALL OUR METRICS. 60% OF OUR KIDS HAVE.

AND THESE KIDS [INAUDIBLE] REFERRAL ONLY. YOU CAN ONLY GET IN THIS PROGRAM IF A JUDGE REFERS YOU OR AN ADMINISTRATOR IN THE SCHOOL OR A PARENT, AND THEY HAVE TO SEE THAT YOU'RE HAVING ISSUES AND THAT YOU'RE ON A PIPELINE TO PROBABLY BE IN JUVENILE DETENTION OR PRISON.

AND SO THESE ARE NOT JUST THE TOP KIDS. SO FOR MILLS MIDDLE SCHOOL, THEY ARE GIVING US, THEY'RE REFERRING THE BOTTOM 33% OF THEIR KIDS. SO THOSE ARE KIDS ARE WITH ALL KINDS OF ISSUES, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

MEANING THEY'RE NOT ATTENDING SCHOOL. THEY HAVE BEHAVIOR ISSUES, ALL KINDS OF ISSUES.

AND WHAT I TOLD THE STATE WAS WE HAVE THE BUY IN AND THE SUPPORT FROM THE SUPERINTENDENTS, BECAUSE I ALWAYS START THERE BEFORE WE WRITE A GRANT.

WE SOMETIMES ALWAYS DON'T HAVE THE SUPPORT OF LEADERSHIP IN THE SCHOOLS.

SO YOU HAVE PRINCIPALS WHO ARE NOT BEING SUPPORTIVE OF WHEN WE'RE GOING INTO SOME OF THESE SCHOOLS.

AND SO THAT DOESN'T DETER US. IT ACTUALLY MOTIVATES US A LITTLE MORE.

BUT WE HAVE KIDS IN THIS PROGRAM. THESE KIDS GO TO COLLEGE TOURS.

WE'VE TAKEN THEM TO LSU, XAVIER, UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS.

EXPOSURE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US. A LOT OF THEM ARE FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS, BUT THEY ALSO ARE INTERESTED IN THINGS.

NOT. SOME OF THEM DON'T WANT TO GO TO SCHOOL.

AND SO WE ARE VERY MINDFUL OF THAT TOO. AND THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE EXPOSE THEM TO.

SOME OF THEM WANT TO BECOME CHEFS. SOME OF THEM WANT TO OWN THEIR OWN CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES.

SO WE MAKE SURE. WHEN WE WENT TO NEW ORLEANS WE WENT TO A COOKING SCHOOL SO THAT THE KIDS THAT WANTED TO BE CHEFS COULD BE ABLE TO SEE,

[00:05:05]

YOU KNOW, WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THEY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT NONE OF THEM HAD HAD GUMBO.

AND SO THE REST OF THE TRIP, THE KIDS ORDERED GUMBO EVERYWHERE WE WENT [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE THEY HAD NEVER HAD GUMBO BEFORE.

BUT WE HAVE KIDS IN THIS PROGRAM WHO WERE AT ONE POINT SELLING DRUGS.

THEY'RE NO LONGER SELLING DRUGS. THEY'RE LEADERS IN THEIR SCHOOLS.

THEY'RE IN. THEY'RE DOING COMMUNITY SERVICE. LIKE, THESE ARE THE KIND OF KIDS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO TURN AROUND WITH THIS PROGRAM.

WE'RE APPRECIATIVE OF THE SUPPORT FROM THE STATE.

AT LEAST 60% OF THESE KIDS HAVE AT LEAST A 2.0 OR ABOVE.

AT LEAST 60% OF THESE KIDS IN THIS PROGRAM HAVE DECREASED THEIR LEVEL OF BEING KICKED OUT OF SCHOOL FROM SUSPENSION, IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION, OUT OF SCHOOL SUSPENSION WRITE UPS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

SO THAT'S THE KIND OF DOCUMENTATION THAT WE KEEP FOR THIS GRANT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S MORE OF A TRUE AT RISK PROGRAM AND NOT SOME OF OUR OTHER PROGRAMS THAT ARE JUST TRADITIONAL AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR YOUNGER KIDS.

AND I THINK THAT'S IT. SO WE WERE REFUNDED. WE HAD THE TOP APPLICATION.

I'M REALLY PROUD OF MY STAFF BECAUSE I TOLD THEM I WASN'T GOING TO WRITE FOR IT.

IF WE COULDN'T SHOW THAT WE COULD DO THE WORK.

I DON'T WANT TO JUST TAKE GRANT MONEY FROM ANYBODY.

IF WE DON'T, IF WE CAN'T SHOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL DOING IT.

WE HAVE THE HEARTS TO DO THE WORK. BUT IF WE'RE COMING UP SHORT AND WE CAN'T GET THE RESULTS THAT WE NEED BECAUSE I'M VERY DATA DRIVEN IN WHAT WE DO, THEN I WON'T WRITE THE GRANT, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO TURN IT AROUND.

IN THE STATE, THE STATE WAS VERY HAPPY ABOUT IT.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT THIS PROGRAM IS CALLED, THE NEXT GEN PROGRAM.

AND SO WHEN WE FIRST WROTE IT, ALSO WE PILOTED FOR JUST THREE SCHOOLS BECAUSE WE WERE JUST TRYING TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT, FIGURE OUT THE PROGRAMING, BUT NOW WE'VE EXPANDED IT TO LIKE A COMMUNITY MODEL.

SO NOW WE'RE PARTNERING WITH 13 SCHOOLS AND WE'RE GOING TO SERVE ABOUT 50 KIDS WITH THIS PROGRAM.

ONE, 1 OR 2 QUICK QUESTIONS FROM MYSELF. I MAY HAVE MISSED THE AGE.

WHAT AGE IS THIS? IF ANY? WE COLLECT REPORT CARDS EVERY NINE WEEKS.

WE GET BEHAVIOR INCIDENTS. WE'RE IN THE SCHOOLS WEEKLY.

I WAS JUST IN DUNBAR THE OTHER DAY MEETING WITH THE KIDS BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE TO JUST BE A DIRECTOR THAT'S DOWN HERE AT PULASKI COUNTY.

I LIKE FOR THE KIDS TO KIND OF KNOW WHO I AM.

AND SO WE DO A LOT OF TRACKING BECAUSE WE JUST HAD AN AUDIT AND MONITORING FROM THE STATE.

AND SO THAT'S HOW I'M ABLE TO TELL YOU IF WE MET THE MARK WITH THE GPAS OR IF WE FELL SHORT WITH THE BEHAVIOR INCIDENTS, AND IF WE WERE ABLE TO, AND WE USE THAT DATA ALSO TO WRITE THE NEXT GRANT.

SO THE FIRST YEAR, WE HONESTLY ONLY MISSED THE GRANT, THE GPA REQUIREMENT BECAUSE WE HAD A COUPLE KIDS WHO LITERALLY HAD LIKE A ZERO POINT SOMETHING, BUT THE REST OF OUR KIDS HAD LIKE 3.0S AND, YOU KNOW, 2.8S.

BUT IF YOU HAVE A ZERO POINT SOMETHING THAT BRINGS EVERYBODY IN THE POOL DOWN.

AND SO WE WERE LIKE, LET'S KIND OF LOOK AT WORDING THAT VERBIAGE DIFFERENTLY.

WHY DON'T WE SAY THIS PERCENTAGE OF OUR KIDS WILL HAVE JUST THIS GPA INSTEAD OF WRITING IT THIS WAY? AND THEN IT'S NOT REFLECTIVE OF THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE KIDS.

BUT IS THERE ANY DATA ONCE THEY LEAVE MIDDLE SCHOOL? IS THAT? WELL, THIS IS JUST OUR THIRD YEAR DOING THIS PROGRAM, SO I DON'T, BUT WE DO WANT TO MOVE INTO THE HIGH SCHOOL AREA.

BUT WHEN WE HAD A HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAM, I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 12 YEARS THAT WAS PARTNERED AND FUNDED THROUGH THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK AND WE HAD IT AT SECOND BAPTIST.

IT WAS REALLY HARD TO HAVE AN AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM FOR HIGH SCHOOL KIDS.

HIGH SCHOOL KIDS LIKE THE DROP IN, BUT IT'S HARD TO WRITE A GRANT FOR FIVE DAYS FOR THEM.

RIGHT. BUT THE YOUNGER KIDS PARENTS NEED SOMEWHERE TO GO.

SO IT'S EASIER TO WRITE THOSE KIND OF GRANTS AND GET KIDS IN.

SO YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT PROGRAMING DIFFERENT WHEN YOU GET TO THE OLDER, THE OLDER AGES.

AND WE JUST PLAY AROUND WITH THINGS WHEN WE SEE THINGS WORK AND WHEN THINGS DON'T WORK. OKAY.

I'M SORRY. JUSTICE LEWISON I, WERE YOU? DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I'M SORRY. CAN I SAY SOMETHING TO MISS SENATOR SCOTT, WOULD YOU MIND TELLING EVERYBODY ABOUT.

BECAUSE USUALLY JUST A FEW OF US EVER SHOW UP TO THAT HALLOWEEN PARTY.

BUT WOULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THIS IS? BECAUSE I THINK IF ALL OF US KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON, THEY'D SHOW UP.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORDINANCE. NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORDINANCE. [LAUGHTER] WE HAVE A FALL FESTIVAL THAT WILL BE NEXT WEDNESDAY, AND IT'S OUT HERE IN THE PARKING LOT, LIKE ALL THE STAFF MOVE FOR US.

AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE STREET BLOCKED OFF TO THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK IS BLOCKING OFF THAT STREET BEHIND.

LAST YEAR WE HAD A THOUSAND. THOUSAND OVER A THOUSAND PARENTS AND KIDS SHOW UP. AND SO WE'RE EXPECTING THE SAME.

AND SO IF YOU WANT TO COME OUT AND MEET FAMILIES IN PULASKI COUNTY, EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BE THERE.

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

I HAVE A QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION AND CONGRATS ON YOUR HIGH SCORE.

THAT'S VERY IMPRESSIVE AND HARD TO DO. I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE FUNDING ON THIS.

[00:10:03]

IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A REMAINING BALANCE. IS IT.

IS THERE CARRYOVER OR NO COST EXTENSION IN THIS? THIS GRANT ENDS AT THE END OF NOVEMBER. OKAY.

SO RIGHT NOW I JUST SAW MISS VALERIE. ME AND MY STAFF WAS LITERALLY JUST MEETING.

THEY LITERALLY JUST WALKED OUT THE DOOR. SO WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO SPEND THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF MONEY.

WE HAVE SOME COLLEGE TOURS COMING UP. ONE IS AT UAPB, ONE IS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AT PHILANDER, LIKE NOVEMBER 13TH AND ONE IS OCTOBER THE 30TH AT UAPB.

BUT WE'RE COORDINATING WITH THE PRINCIPALS AND THE TEEN COURT PEOPLE, BECAUSE THIS GRANT ALSO FUNDS OUR TEEN COURT PROGRAM AND OUR TEEN COURT PROGRAM.

IS THE ONLY CON IN THIS STATE TO WHERE OUR KIDS GET CREDIT FOR ACTUALLY BEING IN THE TEEN COURT PROGRAM, AND THEY GO TO CLASS AND GET THAT PROGRAM. AND SO WE BUILT THAT PROGRAM.

PROBABLY EIGHT YEARS AGO WITH JUDGE LEVERETT, WE TRAVELED ACROSS THE COUNTRY LOOKING AT DIFFERENT MODELS, WENT TO NEW JERSEY, PHILADELPHIA, LOUISIANA, BECAUSE SOME SCHOOLS HAVE SOME SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE A OUT OF SCHOOL MODEL TO WHERE THE KIDS ARE COMMUNITY BASED. AND A JUDGE COMES IN AND THEY HEAR THE CASES, BUT THEY DON'T GET CREDIT FOR IT.

SO THE WAY WE HAVE OUR SET UP HERE AT PULASKI COUNTY IS OUR KIDS ACTUALLY, AND WE PARTNER WITH ALL OF THE HIGH SCHOOLS IN PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT.

AND IT'S BEEN A REALLY GOOD PARTNERSHIP. SO WE'RE COORDINATING SOME DAYS WITH THEM AS WELL, WHERE THEY'LL COME TO THE COUNTY AND THEY'LL MEET WITH EVERYBODY FROM THE COUNTY JUDGE TO THE PROSECUTORS TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. SO THEY LEARN ABOUT COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND THEN WE'LL GO DO SOMETHING FUN WITH THEM.

BUT THAT'S ALSO PART OF THIS GRANT THAT I GET TO TALK ABOUT.

THE NUMBER I SAW THE OTHER DAY WAS LIKE 3,000 OR 2,000.

THAT'S THE NUMBER BECAUSE I JUST PAID FOR A BUS.

THEY'RE GOING TO A GAME TO ALSO ON OCTOBER 28TH, UALR VERSUS UAPB IS HAVING A GAME.

SO I THINK WE'RE DOING A FAMILY NIGHT AND INVITING ALL THE TEEN COURT KIDS AND THEIR FAMILIES SO. OKAY.

WE'RE REALLY CLOSE TO, I DON'T LIKE TO SPEND MUCH SEND MONEY BACK.

NO, DON'T SEND THEM OUT IT SHOULD BE 18,000.

THIS GRANT IS 18,000 FOR BOTH. OKAY. OKAY. YES, MA'AM.

I YIELD. ALL RIGHT. JUSTICE DAVIS, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO BE ADDED AS A SPONSOR, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. OKAY, OKAY. JUSTICE, JUSTICE CURRY.

ALSO WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED, BUT THANK YOU FOR ALL THE HARD WORK THAT YOU ALL YOUR STAFF HAS PUT IN.

WE APPRECIATE THE RESULTS. WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AS WELL.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, DIRECTOR SCOTT. LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT JUSTICE MASSEY HAS ARRIVED.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 26-I-67.

JUSTICE CAPPS. AYE. JUSTICE CAPPS VOTES YES. JUSTICE LEWISON.

YES. JUSTICE LEWISON VOTES YES. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

AYE. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD VOTES YES. JUSTICE PERSON.

YES. JUSTICE PERSON VOTES YES. JUSTICE MASSEY.

AYE. JUSTICE MASSEY VOTES YES. JUSTICE CURRY.

AYE. JUSTICE CURRY VOTES YES. JUSTICE KEITH. YES.

JUSTICE KEITH VOTES YES. JUSTICE WARD. YES. JUSTICE WARD VOTES YES.

JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER. YES. JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER VOTES YES.

JUSTICE ROBINSON. AYE. JUSTICE ROBINSON VOTES YES.

JUSTICE MCCOY. YES. JUSTICE MCCOY VOTES YES. JUSTICE HOUSE.

YES. JUSTICE HOUSE VOTES YES. JUSTICE ELLIOTT.

YES. AND JUSTICE ELLIOTT VOTES YES. SO THAT IS 14 AYES.

14 AYES. WE WILL SEND 26-I-67 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 26-I-68? AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE PULASKI COUNTY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF SITE PLAN

[26-I-68 AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE PULASKI COUNTY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS TO ALL JUSTICES OF THE PEACE; IDENTIFYING THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE DISTRICT OR DISTRICTS AFFECTED BY EACH APPLICATION; PROMOTING TRANSPARENCY IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

APPLICATIONS TO ALL JUSTICES OF THE PEACE. IDENTIFYING THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE DISTRICT OR DISTRICTS AFFECTED BY EACH APPLICATION.

PROMOTING TRANSPARENCY IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER. I MAKE A MOTION TO SEND 26-I-68 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT FOR DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND. A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE SEND 26-I-68 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? THIS IS BASICALLY A STRAIGHTFORWARD MEASURE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY WITHIN THE PULASKI COUNTY GOVERNMENT.

RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NOT A UNIFORM REQUIREMENT FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY US, AND AS JUSTICES WERE ELECTED, TO REPRESENT THE INTEREST OF OUR CONSTITUENTS.

AND WHEN THERE IS DEVELOPMENT IN OUR DISTRICTS AND WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT, AND WE ARE THE LAST PEOPLE TO BE INFORMED, THAT'S PROBLEMATIC. SO I THINK THIS MEASURE CLOSES THAT GAP.

IT ENFORCES THEM TO NOTIFY US, EACH ONE OF US, WHEN THERE'S DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING WITHIN THE COUNTY,

[00:15:07]

AND IT MAKES THEM IDENTIFY THE JUSTICE OF THAT PARTICULAR DISTRICT.

IT ALSO REQUIRES THEM BEFORE THE FINAL APPROVAL CAN BE MADE ON A SITE PLAN APPLICATION.

THEY HAVE TO. THEY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY ACTUALLY NOTIFIED US.

SO I THINK IT JUST CLEARS UP THE TRANSPARENCY.

OKAY. WE DO HAVE A FEW PEOPLE. JUSTICE MCCOY, I THINK I SAW YOUR LIGHT FIRST.

THANK YOU. I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THIS ORDINANCE, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION OR MAYBE CONCERN ABOUT PAGE 2, LINE 9. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF ABSENCES OR EXCUSE ME, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE WE'VE HAD A RESIGNATION. THIS YEAR WE'VE HAD JPS REMOVED FROM THE QUORUM COURT BEFORE.

SO MY QUESTION IS, AND I'LL ASK THIS TO WHOEVER WANTS TO CHIME IN, WHETHER IT BE COUNTY ATTORNEY OR SOMEONE FROM THEIR OFFICE OR THE SPONSOR.

BUT WHAT IF WE SEE OURSELVES IN A SITUATION WHERE SOMEONE HAS RESIGNED, SOMEONE HAS DIED, SOMEONE'S BEEN REMOVED FROM THE OFFICE THAT COULD TAKE 2 OR 3 MONTHS TO BE REPLACED.

SURELY WE THAT PERSON WANTING THE CHANGE IN THEIR APPLICATION, THEIR PROPERTY OR WHATEVER, DOESN'T WANT TO WAIT THAT LONG FOR THAT JP TO BE NOTIFIED OR AM I, AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE? SO. LET ME TELL YOU HOW THIS ORDINANCE CAME ABOUT I WAS AT A PLANNING. I THINK EVERYBODY REMEMBERS WHEN JIM STOOD BEFORE THIS BODY AND SAID THAT HE WOULD MAKE SURE THAT WE WOULD GET NOTIFICATIONS WHEN SITE PLANS APPLICATIONS WERE APPLIED FOR. I HAD A PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT HAPPEN IN MY DISTRICT AND I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE. I WENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING AND A PLANNING BOARD MEMBER TOLD ME JUST WHAT YOU SAID. THAT STAFF CHANGES AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY IT. AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS UNFORTUNATE AND THAT'S WHY THIS ORDINANCE CAME ABOUT. SO, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, A JUSTICE MAY LEAVE.

BUT I THINK THAT THERE COULD BE WE COULD ADD A PROVISION.

I MEAN, IT SAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO NOTIFY ALL OF US AND THAT'S THAT.

I MEAN, AS LONG AS WE'RE ALL NOTIFIED THAT REQUIREMENT SHOULD BE MET.

I MEAN, WE'RE. I HOPE ALL 15 OF US AREN'T GONE AT THE SAME TIME.

[LAUGHTER]. SO I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD STOP THIS FROM GOING THROUGH BECAUSE AS LONG AS THE BODY IS NOTIFIED, BUT THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY NEED TO ALSO TELL THAT THEY HAVE TO OUTLINE THAT PARTICULAR JUSTICE WHOSE DISTRICT IS BEING AFFECTED.

YEAH. AND I DOUBT THAT THIS TYPE OF SITUATION WOULD HAPPEN.

AND I THINK SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO BE A STICKLER IN SPLIT HAIRS.

BUT I JUST WONDER IF THERE WAS THOUGHT PUT INTO THAT PROCESS.

BUT IF IT'S THE WHOLE BODY AND I REALIZE IT SAYS ON THE IN THE TITLE IDENTIFYING THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE DISTRICT OR DISTRICTS AFFECTED BY EACH APPLICATION, AND THEN ALL JUSTICES BEFORE THAT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT THAT IF THERE'S A RESIGNATION, A DEATH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT THAT THIS WILL STILL MOVE FORWARD.

YES. SO ALL JUSTICES HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED, BUT IN THAT NOTIFICATION, THEY HAVE TO SPECIFICALLY SAY WHICH JUSTICE, WHICH DISTRICT IS SPECIFICALLY IS BEING AFFECTED.

OKAY, I YIELD. AND I GUESS I DON'T KNOW WHO I CAN ASK THIS QUESTION, BUT HOW IS THIS ENFORCED? IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, HOW, WHO ENFORCES IT? OR I MEAN, JUST BECAUSE I THINK THAT IF IT'S NOT SO. YOU'RE ON, YOU'RE ON. I MEAN, IT WOULD BE ENFORCED, YOU KNOW, THROUGH PUBLIC WORKS FALLS UNDER THE COUNTY JUDGE, AND THEN PLANNING FALLS UNDER PUBLIC WORKS. SO THAT'S THE TOTEM OF WHO WOULD BE IN CHARGE OF MAKING SURE THAT THOSE ORDINANCES WERE BEING COMPLIED WITH.

I MEAN, IT'S IT'S JUST BASICALLY COMPLYING WITH AN ORDINANCE.

RIGHT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S.

I GUESS MAYBE THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. [LAUGHTER].

OKAY. AND I DID YOU HAVE? I'M SORRY, I IMAGINE I COULD I MEAN, I COULD CHIME IN.

I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT I IMAGINE SOMEONE WAS STANDING COULD BRING FORTH SUE.

[00:20:03]

LEGAL ACTION, INDIVIDUAL LEGAL ACTION. BUT IT'S SEEING THAT THE JUSTICES BE NOTIFIED.

SO I'M SAYING, AS A JUSTICE, WOULD WE BRING SUE AGAINST THE PLANNING COMMISSION? THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. SO IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN PRACTICE OF NOT FOLLOWING ORDINANCES? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING. IS THAT SOMETHING NEW OR THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN GOING ON, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT JUST HAPPENS ALL THE TIME WITH PLANNING OR PUBLIC WORKS? I'M NOT AWARE. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY DEPARTMENT WILLFULLY IGNORING ANY.

I DON'T I'M NOT EITHER. SO YEAH, I DON'T. OKAY.

I'M YEAH, I'M GOOD WAY TO LOSE YOUR JOB. I'M SORRY.

WE'RE GETTING [LAUGHTER] I APOLOGIZE. I'M. JUSTICE MCCOY DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. JUSTICE DAVIS. LIKE TO BE ADDED AS A SPONSOR PLEASE.

OKAY. JUSTICE CAPPS. YEAH TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS, IT LOOKS LIKE UNDER ARTICLE 4, LINE 22, IT SAYS BEFORE COUNTY FINAL COUNTY ACTION IS TAKEN ON A SITE PLAN APPLICATION.

THIS HAS TO HAPPEN. SO I BELIEVE IF SOMEBODY WAS NOT NOTIFIED, WE MIGHT HAVE RECOURSE TO GO BACK TO PLANNING AND SAY, I WAS NOT NOTIFIED, I NEED TO BE NOTIFIED, AND THEN IT NEEDS TO BE PUT BACK THROUGH PLANNING.

FEELS LIKE THAT SOUNDS LIKE THE FINAL COUNTY ACTION.

OKAY OKAY. THANK YOU, I YIELD. ANY. I LIKE TO BE ADDED OH. JUSTICE WARD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENT BECAUSE JUSTIN DID GIVE ME.

BLESS YOU. WE DO HAVE A COMMENT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM, FROM THE COURT? COMMUNITY COMMENT. CHRISTINA GULLEY.

THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING ME. THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT FIRST OF ALL, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THEY'RE VOLUNTEERS.

THEY'RE APPOINTED BY THE COUNTY JUDGE.

ELECTED OFFICIALS, ALL 15 OF YOU GUYS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO EVEN LOOKING AT THE WEBSITE, DOING RESEARCH OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN YOUR DISTRICT.

I UNDERSTAND HOW THIS CAME ABOUT, BUT WE GOTTA LOOK AT OURSELVES.

ARE WE STAYING IN TUNE WITH WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR DISTRICT? YOU KNOW, WHEN THE PLANNING MEETINGS ARE, THEY PUT THE NOTICES ONLINE.

YOU SHOULD DO YOUR RESEARCH. AND WE TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

YOU ARE A DEVELOPER, YOUNG-BAKER YOU ARE A DEVELOPER.

PLEASE DON'T. DON'T MAKE IT PERSONAL.

DON'T CALL OUT ANYONE IN PARTICULAR. YEAH, WE HAVE A DEVELOPER.

OKAY. WHO CREATED THIS ORDINANCE, WANTING IT TO PASS.

WHEN YOU BUILD APARTMENTS IN YOUR COMMUNITY, YOU NEVER HELD THE COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY MEETING.

AND THAT'S ONE THING I'M BIG ON. WHEN DEVELOPERS ARE COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY, BIG OR SMALL, THEY HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTACTING THOSE RESIDENTS AND HAVING A MEETING AND EXPLAINING WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO DO.

SO I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT WE WANT TO HOLD THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACCOUNTABLE BUT I MEAN, IT'S LIKE A CONTRADICTION THERE. OKAY.

YOU UNDERSTAND I'M COMING FROM. OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 26-I-68.

MR. JUSTICE HOUSE. YES. JUSTICE HOUSE VOTES YES.

JUSTICE MCCOY. YES. JUSTICE MCCOY VOTES YES. JUSTICE ROBINSON.

AYE. JUSTICE ROBINSON VOTES YES. JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER.

YES. JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER VOTES YES. JUSTICE WARD.

YES. JUSTICE WARD VOTES YES. JUSTICE KEITH. YES.

JUSTICE KEITH VOTES YES. JUSTICE CURRY. AYE. JUSTICE CURRY VOTES YES.

JUSTICE MASSEY. AYE. JUSTICE MASSEY VOTES YES.

JUSTICE LEWISON. YES. JUSTICE LEWISON VOTES YES.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD. AYE. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD VOTES YES.

JUSTICE LEWISON. YES. JUSTICE LEWISON VOTES YES.

JUSTICE CAPPS. AYE. JUSTICE CAPPS VOTES YES AND JUSTICE DAVIS.

YES. JUSTICE DAVIS VOTES YES. SO THAT IS 14 AYES AND ONE ABSENT.

14 AYES. WE WILL SEND 26-I-68 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 26-I-69? AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 16-OR-53, AS AMENDED,

[26-I-69 AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 16-OR-53 AS AMENDED AND ESTABLISH POLICIES AND PROCEDURES TO PRESERVE PROPERTY RIGHTS; TO PROVIDE FOR ROUTINE REMOVAL OF DISCARDED DEBRIS FROM COUNTY ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY; AND TO REGULATE AND ENFORCE DANGEROUS OR UNSANITARY CONDITIONS WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF PULASKI COUNTY, CONSISTENT WITH THE POWERS GRANTED PULASKI COUNTY BY ARKANSAS CODE ANNOTATED § 14-14-813.]

[00:25:05]

AND ESTABLISH POLICIES AND PROCEDURES TO PRESERVE PROPERTY RIGHTS.

TO PROVIDE FOR ROUTINE REMOVAL OF DISCARDED DEBRIS FROM COUNTY ROAD RIGHTS OF WAY, AND TO REGULATE AND ENFORCE DANGEROUS OR UNSANITARY CONDITIONS WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF PULASKI COUNTY. CONSISTENT WITH THE POWERS GRANTED PULASKI COUNTY BY ARKANSAS CODE ANNOTATED 14-14-813.

JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER. I MAKE A MOTION TO SEND 26-I-69 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT FOR DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN? SURE. SO BASICALLY, THIS ORDINANCE DEALS WITH THE ISSUES THAT AFFECT THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF OUR RESIDENTS THROUGH THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF PULASKI COUNTY.

THE ACCUMULATION OF GARBAGE, DISCARDED DEBRIS, JUNK, UNSANITARY CONDITIONS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITIES.

MOST OF US WHO REPRESENT THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS GET LOTS OF CALLS REGARDING ILLEGAL DUMPING DEBRIS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. UNSIGHTLY AND UNSAFE AREAS WITHIN OUR DISTRICTS.

AND A LOT OF TIMES THAT PROCESS TO CLEAN UP OR GET ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OF JUNK REMOVED IS LONG AND TEDIOUS, AND IT'S DIFFICULT. SO IF YOU DRIVE THROUGH SOME OF OUR AREAS, THEY LOOK TRASHY. AND THIS ORDINANCE HELPS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR AND CONCISE AND ALLOW PUBLIC WORKS TO GO IN AND PICK UP GARBAGE THAT'S WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

IT ALSO ALLOWS, LIKE RIGHT NOW, IF YOU HAVE A, A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS UNSAFE OR UNSANITARY, YOU CANNOT JUST CALL AND SAY, HAVE A COMPLAINT AND GET HELP.

YOU HAVE TO GO GET A PETITION. AND YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT TO GET YOUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO SIGN THIS PETITION.

AND THERE'S THIS WHOLE TEDIOUS PROCESS THAT TAKES UP TO A YEAR.

AND SO THE PROCESS OF THIS ORDINANCE IS TO KIND OF HELP STREAMLINE THAT AND NOT MAKE SOMETHING THAT IS UNSAFE THAT'S WITHIN THE COMMUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE TO WAIT A WHOLE YEAR BEFORE WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

SO, YOU KNOW, THIS ORDINANCE PRESERVES THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT.

THE 30 DAY COMPLIANCE PERIOD IS STILL PROVIDES PROTECTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THE GOAL IS VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE WHEN A PROPERTY IS REPORTED.

SO YEAH, I THINK THAT IT ALSO ALLOWS INSTEAD OF YOU HAVING TO GATHER A PETITION, YOU KNOW, ONE PERSON CAN CALL AND SAY, HEY, THIS, THIS PROPERTY, I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, IS, IS UNSAFE.

AND SO THEN, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD INITIATE WHERE A PUBLIC WORKS PERSONNEL WOULD COME OUT AND, AND INSPECT IT AND, AND MAKE A REPORT AND DOCUMENT IF THERE IS A VIOLATION OR NOT A VIOLATION.

IT ALSO CLEARS CLARIFIES THE COUNTY AUTHORITY TO REMOVE AND DISCARD GARBAGE AND DEBRIS FROM THE COUNTY'S RIGHT OF WAY FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE. SO I THINK IT JUST, IT MAKES THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR.

HOW.

WHO GETS TO DECIDE WHAT'S ROUTINE? I THINK THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ROUTINE REMOVAL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ROUTINE REMOVAL. I THINK PUBLIC WORKS GETS TO DECIDE THAT OKAY. OKAY. I DON'T THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD JUST CALL IN EVERY WEEK AND SAY, CAN YOU COME OUT HERE AND PICK THIS UP? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE. I THINK.

NO YOUR LIGHTS ARE ON. YOUR MICS ARE ALREADY ON.

SO JUSTICE, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? I'M SORRY JUSTICE.

I WANT TO KNOW. MAYBE WE SHOULD HEAR FROM PUBLIC WORKS AS TO HOW MANY CASES WE'VE HAD RECENTLY, SAY, WITHIN THE LAST SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR. AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE TAKING THEM AWAY FROM THEIR NORMAL DUTIES. HOWEVER WHAT KIND OF IMPACT ECONOMIC IMPACT THIS WOULD HAVE WITH PERSONNEL AND THE COST?

[00:30:05]

SO I CAN TELL YOU THAT PUBLIC WORKS WELCOMES A REVISION OF THIS ORDINANCE, A REVISION OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WE'RE REPEALING, BECAUSE THEY, TOO, AGREE THAT IT IS LONG AND TEDIOUS AND NOT QUICK.

SO WHEN WE HAD SOME COMPLAINTS WITHIN MY DISTRICT ABOUT SOME ILLEGAL DUMPING.

OKAY. HOLD ON. IS SOMEONE HERE FROM. PUBLIC WORKS? PUBLIC WORKS? I DIDN'T SEE ANYBODY. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM PUBLIC WORKS ON THAT.

THAT'S WHAT I'M ADDRESSING. RIGHT, YEAH. DO YOU SEE SOMEONE FROM PUBLIC WORKS? ANYBODY HERE FROM PUBLIC WORKS. SO MAYBE WE NEED TO ASK FOR THE FINAL MEETING.

YEAH, BUT I HAVE ALSO SOME UNINCORPORATED AREAS.

AND TO GO IN AND TO CLEAN THAT UP. COULD BE A LITTLE COSTLY.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR THAT. WHAT KIND OF IMPACT? OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE YOU REQUESTING THAT THAT THEY ASK PUBLIC WORKS TO? YES THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. OKAY. JUSTIN. AMY, DID YOU SEE THAT? JUSTICE ELLIOT. NO, NO, NO, I GOT YOUR NAME. YEAH, I GET IT.

I'M WORKING IT. OKAY, SO I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

JUSTICE DAVIS YOU'RE NEXT. YES. I THOUGHT WE DID HAVE A PROCESS.

LIKE, I KNOW I'VE HAD RESIDENTS CALL THE SANITARY DEPARTMENT, AND THEY DO COME OUT AND THEY LOOK AT THE HOUSE.

YOU HAVE AN UNSANITARY CONDITIONS ORDINANCE CURRENTLY.

THIS WOULD REPEAL IT AND REPLACE IT. SO IT'S YOU STILL HAVE A PROCESS.

BUT I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IT'S A BIT CUMBERSOME IN THE WAY THAT IT'S CURRENTLY APPLIED.

SO I THINK WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS STREAMLINE THE PROCESS THAT.

OKAY, MY NEXT QUESTION IS WHO GETS TO SAY WHAT IS THE UNLAWFUL AMOUNT OF ACCUMULATIONS OF GARBAGE, RUBBISH, JUNK AND UNSANITARY CONDITIONS? I BELIEVE THAT'S GOING TO BE THE PUBLIC OR THE PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR THAT GOES OUT AND INSPECTS THE SITE.

BECAUSE THIS IS THE COUNTY. SO THIS IS NOT THE CITY.

PEOPLE DO PUT THEIR TRUCKS IN THE YARD. IT'S THEIR PROPERTY.

THEY CAN DO THAT IF THEY WANT. I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S A HUGE IT'S NOT THE HOA IT'S NOT THE CITY.

WE WERE OUT THERE IN THE COUNTY FOR A REASON.

ALSO, I THINK THE ANSWER TO DIANNE'S QUESTION IS I THINK THE RESIDENT WOULD PAY FOR THE WORK ORDER.

THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS.

YOU CAN'T. I DON'T LIKE THAT. AND I ALSO DON'T LIKE ON PAGE 4, LINE 7 IT SAYS THE COUNTY JUDGE SHALL DETERMINE WHETHER THE DOCUMENTED FACTS ESTABLISH THE CONDITION. I WOULD LIKE THAT TO COME BACK TO THE QUORUM COURT.

THAT'S GIVING A LOT OF ONE PERSON POWER THAT I DON'T THINK SHOULD HAPPEN.

I REALLY DON'T LIKE THIS. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY TO TABLE IT AND COMPARE IT TO THE CURRENT ONE THAT WE HAVE WITH PUBLIC WORKS AND COME BACK.

THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO REALLY AFFECT PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY AND THE WAY WE LIVE OUT THERE.

I DON'T LIKE MESSY. I DON'T LIKE ALL OF THAT, BUT I LIVE IN THE COUNTY, SO I CAN'T TELL MY NEIGHBOR WHAT TO DO AND THEY CAN'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO. SO I YIELD. CAREFUL OKAY. JUSTICE ROBINSON. THANK YOU. I DO SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE.

AS I WAS A CO-SPONSOR ON IT. SO I'LL JUST GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND.

MURRELL TAYLOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN JACKSONVILLE IS RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS.

THERE WAS A BURNED OUT BUILDING THAT THE KIDS WOULD GO AND PICK UP BRICK AND PLAY ON.

WE SPENT ALMOST TWO YEARS TO GET THAT SITE CLEANED UP.

WE HAD TO NOTIFY EVERYBODY WITHIN. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT IS.

SO MANY FEET. WE HAD TO GET A PETITION. WE DOCUMENTED THE KIDS PLAYING OVER THERE.

WE NOTIFIED THE LANDOWNER TO FENCE IT OFF. THE LANDOWNER WOULDN'T FENCE IT OFF.

SO WHAT JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER. AND I TOLD HER I WOULD SUPPORT HER ON THIS.

WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO WAS NOT NECESSARILY GO INTO PEOPLE'S PRIVATE PROPERTY AND GO, YOU'VE GOT 13 CARS OR YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT BEEHIVES OR, OR WHATEVER.

AS YOU, AS YOU DRIVE DOWN THE ROADS IN THE COUNTY, THERE ARE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE JUST DUMP TRASH.

[00:35:08]

WHEN YOU CALL PUBLIC WORKS AND YOU ASK THEM TO GO PICK IT UP IF IT'S CLOGGING A DRAINAGE STRUCTURE OR IMPEDING PROGRESS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES. THAT'S ABOUT THE ONLY WAY THEY WILL EVEN GO LOOK AT IT.

WASTE MANAGEMENT ALSO PICKS UP SIDE OF THE ROAD TRASH.

AND GARBAGE WILL TOO. BUT IT ALL, IT ALL HAS TO GO THROUGH PUBLIC WORKS.

AND WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO HERE WAS BASICALLY STREAMLINE THE PROCESS.

AND THERE ARE A COUPLE THINGS IN HERE THAT, THAT I ACTUALLY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHICH I WISH PUBLIC WORKS WAS HERE.

I DID TALK TO TAB A LITTLE BIT TODAY. AND ONE OF THEM IS EMPLOYEES.

I WANT TO KNOW IF THEY LIKE THIS OR ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO HIRE ANYBODY IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HIRE ANYBODY? OR ARE WE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER VEHICLE? YOU KNOW, SAME THING WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE SHERIFF.

YOU GET MORE VEHICLES, YOU HAVE TO BUY MORE FUEL, YOU HAVE TO HAVE MORE THIS.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE MORE OF THAT. AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY CONCERN ABOUT THIS IS ARE WE GOING TO IMPOSE SOMETHING ON PUBLIC WORKS THAT WILL ULTIMATELY AFFECT OUR BUDGET.

AND I WOULD I DO THINK PUBLIC WORKS NEEDS TO BE HERE.

I DON'T THINK THIS IS ME PERSONALLY. I DON'T THINK THIS HAS TO HAPPEN THIS MONTH.

I THINK PUBLIC WORKS NEEDS TO BE HERE AND HAVE SOME INPUT AND WITH, WITH THAT I YIELD.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU JUSTICE ROBINSON. JUSTICE MASSEY.

THANK YOU. I JUST PRETTY MUCH WANT TO ECHO THAT, THAT I THINK THAT PUBLIC WORKS NEEDS TO BE HERE.

WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THEM TO MAKE THIS BIG OF A CHANGE, WHETHER IT BE GOOD OR BAD.

I WANT TO HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY ABOUT IT.

MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE. SECOND. OKAY. A MOTION WAS MADE WITH THE SECOND THAT WE.

TABLE 26-I-69. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE TABLE? YES. YEAH. OKAY. HOLD ON, JUSTICE HOUSE, I SAW YOU FIRST.

THIS BEFORE IT IS TABLED. WE ALSO NEED TO HEAR FROM THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO NEED MORE LEGAL COUNSEL.

I WAS FOLLOWING THE ORDINANCE AND WHERE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THIS, AS WELL AS PUBLIC [INAUDIBLE] AND THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

SO I SEE THAT AS AN ISSUE. AND THEN I SUPPORT THE TABLE THE MOTION.

OKAY. OKAY. SO BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WE'RE STRICTLY TALKING ABOUT ARE WE GOING TO TABLE THIS? DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE JUSTICE? OKAY. JUSTICE CAPPS.

CAN WE GET A REMINDER OF WHAT TABLE MEANS? DEFINITION.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. JUSTICE. [LAUGHTER] JUSTIN.

JUSTICE JUSTIN. SO A TABLING MOTION REQUIRES A MOTION TO REMOVE IT FROM THE TABLE.

A POSTPONEMENT MOTION POSTPONES IT TO A DEFINITIVE DATE, IN WHICH CASE IT JUST SITS ON THE AGENDA.

SO THE MOTION WAS MADE TO TABLE, IN WHICH CASE A MOTION WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE IT FROM THE TABLE.

AND IF IT FAILS TO DO THAT WITHIN SO MANY DAYS, THEN IT JUST DIES.

THIS IS A NON-EMERGENT ORDINANCE, CORRECT? YES.

AND SO WE ARE ON FIRST READING. COULD WE DISCUSS IT NEXT MONTH AS WELL IF PUBLIC WORKS WAS ABLE TO COME ON A SECOND READING? I WOULD SAY YES, THAT'S REASONABLE THANK YOU I YIELD. JUSTICE ROBINSON, DID YOU HAVE? WELL, YEAH. SO THAT'S, I WAS GOING TO TRY AND CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TABLING AND POSTPONING.

AND IF WE TABLE IT, THEN WE HAVE TO REMEMBER TO UNTABLE IT.

AND SO I, I THINK POSTPONING OR EVEN HAVING A FIRST READING IS, IS MORE PRUDENT.

OKAY. I CAN'T MAKE THEM CHANGE THEIR MOTION, BUT I'D RATHER SEE A POSTPONED UNTIL NEXT MONTH.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. JUSTICE CURRY, DID YOU HAVE? WELL, I THINK IT'S BEEN STATED WHAT THE CONCERNS ARE WITH THE MONEY ATTACHED TO IT AND ALL THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN STATED BY SEVERAL OF US AND OUR CONCERNS WITH THIS AND THE FACT THAT WHY ARE WE BRINGING THIS NOW? AND WE ALREADY DO HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE SO.

OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? NO. JUSTICE.

JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER. OKAY. JUST SO I'M CLEAR.

SO IF WE IF WE VOTE ON IT AND FOR FIRST READING AND THEN OR WHATEVER, IF IT'S FIRST AND THEN SECOND READING, YOU BRING PUBLIC WORKS. DO WE VOTE ON IT AGAIN OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? OKAY. SO IF YOU TABLE THIS, WHEN YOU COME BACK IN HERE FOR COMMITTEE MEETING IN NOVEMBER, IT WOULD REQUIRE A MOTION

[00:40:09]

TO REMOVE IT FROM THE TABLE, IN WHICH CASE IT'S A MAJORITY VOTE, AND THEN ONCE IT'S REMOVED FROM THE TABLE, THEN YOU GO BACK TO WHERE YOU WERE BEFORE YOU MADE THAT MOTION TO DISCUSS THE MERITS OF THE ITEM.

FIRST READING WOULD BE WHEN YOU GET TO THE QUORUM COURT MEETING.

SO IF YOU WERE TO NOT TABLE IT TONIGHT, IT WOULD GO TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

THE ITEM WOULD BE READ FOR THE FIRST TIME. AND IF THERE WAS ANY DISCUSSION OR CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS THAT NEEDED TO OCCUR AT THAT TIME, YOU COULD DO THAT. BUT IF YOU TABLE IT, YOU'RE TABLING IT UNTIL AT LEAST THE AGENDA COMMITTEE MEETING IN NOVEMBER.

IS THAT CLEAR? AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT TABLING BECAUSE I'M NOT FOR TABLING.

CORRECT. SO IF WE VOTE ON IT TONIGHT AND IT PASSES IT COULD GO TO FULL QUORUM COURT.

THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST READING? YES, MA'AM. AND THEN WE COULD HAVE TAB COME TO THAT AND WE COULD STILL DISCUSS IT.

AND WE WOULD VOTE ON IT AND THEN IT COULD PASS OR FAIL THEN? YOU WOULD BE ON FIRST READING AND YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DISCUSS IT AND HEAR TESTIMONY.

BUT UNLESS YOU SUSPENDED THE RULES TO PLACE IT ON A SECOND OR THIRD READING, IT WOULD JUST BE A FIRST READING.

AND DECEMBER WOULD BE, I GUESS, SECOND READING, JANUARY WOULD BE THIRD READING.

AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE, I BELIEVE, IS 60 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION.

SO THIS WOULD ESSENTIALLY GO INTO EFFECT SOMETIME IN MARCH, I THINK, OF 27.

OKAY. THE PROBLEM BEING THAT OKAY. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER? NO AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT AND TO MAKE SURE WE GET IT RIGHT BEFORE WE JUST GO ON AND JUST HOPE WE CAN AMEND WHAT WE CAN.

I YIELD. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER? WELL, ONE THING I THINK IF WE TABLE IT, JUSTIN, WE WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO.

AND SO NOW WE'RE ON POSTPONING. OKAY. UNTIL WE HAVE TO HAVE A DATE.

RIGHT? UNTIL. RIGHT UNTIL THE NEXT AGENDA. NEXT AGENDA MEETING.

THANK YOU. SECOND. OKAY. OKAY, SO WE'RE BACK [LAUGHTER].

SO WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE 26-I-69 UNTIL OUR TO OUR NOVEMBER'S AGENDA MEETING.

ARE THERE. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON POSTPONING TILL NOVEMBER AGENDA MEETING? AND I GUESS IN THE MEANTIME WE CAN MAKE UP THE POWERS THAT BE AWARE THAT WE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, SANITATION, WHOMEVER.

THEY'LL BE INFORMED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON POSTPONING? THERE BEING NONE. AMY, IF YOU PLEASE, CALL THE ROLL ON POSTPONED IN 26-I-69.

AYE. JUSTICE CAPPS VOTES YES. JUSTICE LEWISON.

YES. JUSTICE LEWISON VOTES YES. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD.

AYE. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD VOTES YES. JUSTICE PERSON.

YES. JUSTICE PERSON VOTES YES. JUSTICE MASSEY.

AYE. JUSTICE MASSEY VOTES YES. JUSTICE CURRY.

AYE. JUSTICE CURRY VOTES YES. JUSTICE KEITH. YES.

JUSTICE KEITH VOTES YES. JUSTICE WARD. YES. JUSTICE WARD VOTES YES.

JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER. YES. JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER VOTES YES.

JUSTICE ROBINSON. AYE. JUSTICE ROBINSON VOTES YES.

JUSTICE MCCOY. YES. JUSTICE MCCOY VOTES YES. JUSTICE HOUSE.

YES. JUSTICE HOUSE VOTES YES AND JUSTICE ELLIOTT.

YES. JUSTICE ELLIOTT VOTES YES. SO THAT IS 14 AYES AND ONE ABSENT.

14 AYES, ONE ABSENT. WE WILL POSTPONE 26-I-69 UNTIL OUR NOVEMBER'S.

NOVEMBER AGENDA MEETING. NOW, I'VE GOT A COMMENT.

JUSTIN, DO I HEAR THAT NOW, OR CAN I WAIT TILL THE END? JUSTICE GULLEY, YOU CAN.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR POSTPONING. I GOT A CALL ON MY WAY FROM SOUTH ARKANSAS ABOUT THIS.

AND ONE THING I WILL SAY. IS THAT.

THERE'S A LOT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST. I WILL SAY THAT.

ON THIS QUORUM COURT. I'M GOING TO WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT AGENDA MEETING TO SPEAK ON THIS IN DEPTH.

[00:45:06]

BUT WE GOT SOME CONFLICT OF INTEREST WHEN YOU HAVE A JUSTICE AND THEIR ENGINEERS SPONSORING LEGISLATION.

I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. THREE CONFLICT OF INTEREST UP HERE.

THREE JP'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST. WE SHOULDN'T BE HAVING THAT, GUYS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AMY.

YEAH. CAN I ASK A RELATED QUESTION TO THAT POSTPONEMENT? YES GO AHEAD. I'M A LITTLE OUT OF ORDER. YEAH.

WOULD IT. JUSTIN, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE? I KNOW I ASKED JUSTIN TODAY TO SEND ME THE REPEALED ORDINANCE.

WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO DO A SIDE BY SIDE SO THAT WE COULD HAVE A CLIFFSNOTES VERSION OF THE DIFFERENCES? THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT. AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ 26-I-70?

[26-I-70 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 25-OR-52 (2026 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS) TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSMENT COORDINATION DEPARTMENT FOR THE ASSESSOR’S DEPARTMENT. ]

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 25-OR-52, 2026 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSMENT COORDINATION DEPARTMENT OR THE ASSESSORS DEPARTMENT.

JUSTICE LEWISON. I MOVE THAT WE SEND IT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT 26-I-70 WITH A DO PASS AND I WOULD LOVE TO CALL THE HONORABLE. CAN YOU.

FIRST? SECOND AND YOU COULD CALL IN [LAUGHTER]. AND I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE HONORABLE JANET WARD, THE ASSESSOR, TO COME UP AND EXPLAIN THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME.

AND FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO SAY, IN 32 YEARS, THIS IS THE ONLY TIME I'VE CAME A THIRD TIME BEFORE THE COURT.

YOU'LL SEE ME AT BUDGET AND YOU'LL SEE ME WHEN I PUT MY REAPPRAISAL MONEY OVER.

BUT THE STATE HAS FARMED OUT WHAT THIS MONEY IS FOR, AND IT'S A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PAYMENTS THAT OUR EMPLOYEES GET.

AND I CAN I TAKE JUST A COUPLE OF MINUTES. I KNOW Y'ALL ARE TIRED.

WE HAVE 53 SENIOR LEVEL 4 APPRAISERS IN OUR OFFICE, 5 APPRAISAL MANAGERS.

WE HAVE 11 DESIGNATIONS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ASSESSING OFFICERS.

WE HAVE 9 CADASTRAL MAPPING SPECIALISTS, 2 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT SPECIALISTS, THAT'S AN AAS.

2 RESIDENTIAL EVALUATION SPECIALIST RES-1 CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER.

WE HAVE 6 PEOPLE PREPPING FOR THE INTRODUCTORY COURSES 12 LEVEL ONE APPRAISERS, 8 LEVEL 2 APPRAISERS, AND 3 LEVEL 3 APPRAISERS. 82 OF OUR 110 STAFF MEMBERS ARE IN EDUCATIONAL CLASSES, AND THE STATE GIVES.

THEY CALL THEM PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PAYMENTS, BUT THEY GIVE $500 ALL THE WAY UP TO $2,500, DEPENDING ON YOUR DESIGNATIONS. THESE ARE COLLEGE LEVEL STATISTICS CLASSES, AND THEY TAKE THEM AND THE ONES THAT ARE BEST IN THEM TUTOR THE OTHERS AND WE GET EVERYBODY THROUGH. AND THERE'S MANY APPRAISERS.

THERE'S MANY ASSESSORS IN THE STATE THAT AREN'T EVEN LEVEL 4 CERTIFIED, AND WE HAVE 53 OF THOSE HERE.

SO THE STATE GIVES US THIS MONEY, AND IT'S USUALLY IN OUR MONEY THAT Y'ALL MOVED LAST MONTH, BUT THEY HAVE FARMED THAT OUT. DF&A FARMED IT OUT.

AND ONE OF OUR LEVEL 4 APPRAISERS PASSED AWAY.

AND SO THE CHECK CAME WITH HIS MONEY ON THERE AND THEY HAD TO TAKE THE CHECK.

IT'S JUST BEEN A NIGHTMARE. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GET THESE JULY 15TH.

WE GOT THEM LAST WEEK. SO I'M SORRY I CAME A THIRD TIME.

I TRY NOT TO DO THAT, BUT I WANTED TO BRAG ON OUR STAFF BECAUSE THESE ARE NOT EASY CLASSES, AND I'M REAL PROUD OF THEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SO I'D APPRECIATE A FAVORABLE VOTE ON THIS. AND I PROMISE Y'ALL SEE ME AT BUDGET.

THAT'S IT. YOU WON'T SEE ME AGAIN. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU JANET. THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR SHOWING UP. THANK YOU. AMY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON 26-I-70.

JUSTICE HOUSE. YES. JUSTICE HOUSE VOTES YES. JUSTICE MCCOY.

YES. JUSTICE MCCOY VOTES YES. JUSTICE ROBINSON.

AYE. JUSTICE ROBINSON VOTES YES. JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER.

YES. JUSTICE YOUNG-BAKER VOTES YES. JUSTICE WARD.

YES. JUSTICE WARD VOTES YES. JUSTICE KEITH. YES.

JUSTICE KEITH VOTES YES. JUSTICE CURRY. AYE. MRS. CURRY VOTES YES. JUSTICE MASSEY. AYE. JUSTICE MASSEY VOTES YES.

JUSTICE PERSON. YES. JUSTICE PERSON VOTES YES.

JUSTICE BLACKWOOD. AYE. JUSTICE BLACKWOOD VOTES YES.

JUSTICE LEWISON. YES. JUSTICE LEWISON VOTES YES.

JUSTICE CAPPS. AYE. JUSTICE CAPPS VOTES YES AND JUSTICE DAVIS.

YES. JUSTICE DAVIS VOTES YES. SO THAT IS 14 AYES AND ONE ABSENT.

14 AYES, ONE ABSENT. WE WILL SEND 26-I-70 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.

WE ARE PASSING OVER 26-I-71 IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

[26-I-71 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PULASKI COUNTY SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS, REPORTING OBLIGATIONS, AND REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR REGULATED DATA CENTER FACILITIES LOCATED WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

[00:50:03]

SO MOVED NO, I SAID WE'RE PASSING OVER THAT. YEAH, WE'RE PASSING OVER THERE.

OH, I HAVE SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP.

IF THAT'S OKAY. IS IT AN ANNOUNCEMENT OR IS IT SOMETHING? NO, IT'S THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOVE THAT WE VETO THE OVERRIDE.

NO COUNTY COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARKANSAS CODE 14-14-912.

I JUST WANT TO PUT ON THE AGENDA. OKAY. I'VE HAD THAT DISCUSSION WITH IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OKAY. SO, SO NOTED. OKAY. OKAY. SO WE ARE ADJOURNED.

ARE THERE, ARE THERE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE BAR? THERE BEING NONE. WILL COMMENT. JUDGE GRIFFEN.

I WANT TO QUICKLY, SIMPLY DO ONE THING. I KNOW THAT WE'RE PASSING THE ITEM OR 26-I-71. YOU ALL HAVE ON YOUR EMAIL MY WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE OCTOBER 5TH MESSAGE FROM JUSTICE HOUSE REGARDING 26-I-71. I DON'T HAVE JUSTICE HOUSE'S EMAIL ADDRESS.

SO I'VE ASKED MR. BLAGG BY EMAIL TO FORWARD IT TO JUSTICE HOUSE QUICKLY.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THREE THINGS. FIRST OF ALL, I THANK JUSTICE HOUSE FOR HIS, HIS PROPOSAL.

SECONDLY, I THINK THAT WE NEED. AND I'VE MADE SOME NOTATIONS.

FIRST OF ALL, IN 1990, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT DECIDED THAT LEGISLATIVE IMMUNITY IS ABSOLUTE, IS ABSOLUTE. AND SO THE CONCERN ABOUT LIABILITY FOR JPS, FOR VOTES YOU TAKE ON LEGISLATIVE ISSUES WAS SETTLED ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO BY THE HIGHEST COURT IN THIS COUNTRY. THE ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT DID A SIMILAR RULING IN 1997, THE YEAR BEFOREHAND. SO UNDER ARKANSAS LAW AND FEDERAL LAW, ANY CONCERN ABOUT LEGISLATIVE LIABILITY WAS ANSWERED DEFINITIVELY.