[16:14] City Council September.
[16:19] » Oh, I'm sorry,
>> Mr. Burus.
[16:22] » Yes, thank you. We have Pastor Bart
Hodgegson with us from Covenant Baptist
[16:24] Church.
[16:30] just to say thank you is an honor to
time to time. So thank you for asking.
[16:36] Let's pray together. Father, thank you
gathering that uh
[16:43] getting to participate in serve.
Pray for all of our elected officials
[16:50] tonight. Lord, we
as always pray.
[16:56] Lord, that the decisions that come
before them, you would
[17:01] you would help them to good decisions
that uh that we as as
[17:09] we come
expect uh speak.
[17:17] Lord, I pray for uh patience, Lord, and
that you'd give us the ability well the
[17:23] other person.
Keep us from selfishness and greed.
[17:28] Lord,
[17:32] pray the decisions that would be made
tonight would for the good of the
[17:36] community.
As always, Lord, we lift up uh public
[17:40] servants. Lord, just pray for our
public's works people who they're
[17:44] working in
you protect them, for our emergency
[17:49] responders, Lord, as as they're going
out uh over them with their families,
[17:55] Father, all city employees,
you would give them success in their
[18:00] jobs,
integrity,
[18:05] and yeah, the great job for our I pray
for law enforcement, Lord, and our
[18:11] firefighters as they particularly put
themselves in kind of danger.
[18:18] They they worry about their their
husbands and
[18:22] family members who are out.
Father, we pray for our community. Pray
[18:27] for every member of Tony Town, Lord,
that you would make us good neighbors to
[18:31] one another. That you'd make us honest,
humble, that we would have courage and
[18:37] and show compassion to each other.
So father I just pray lord that uh
[18:42] tonight that you would guide this
meeting every decision would be made
[18:45] lord uh with wisdom and you would help
us in that we pray all that in the
[18:50] Jesus. Amen.
>> Thank you.
[18:52] » Thank you sir.
[18:56] Please stand for the pledge.
[19:17] Miss Jennison is filling in for Miss
Artmani again tonight.
[19:23] Call, please.
Craig.
[19:26] Nick
>> here.
[19:27] » Danny
>> here.
[19:29] » Here
[19:45] » that was um [clears throat] Mike and
[19:50] call.
Yes.
[19:54] » Yes.
>> Larry.
[19:56] » Yes.
>> Yes.
[20:02] » Approval
that we approve the agenda.
[20:13] » Oh, Mike. Okay. I'm sorry. Uh, Miss
Jennison had asked me earlier to help
[20:18] kind of keep up with uh the speaking
because it's hard to hear when you're
[20:22] all the way down there. So, that's why
I'm trying to
[20:25] » That's why I'm trying to make sure that
she knows. Um,
[20:30] roll call.
[20:33] » Yes.
[20:36] » Yes.
>> Yes.
[20:42] » City council members, the three rule for
[20:47] I move to dispense with the three
reading requirement for all organiz
[21:02] call.
>> Yes.
[21:05] » Nick,
>> yes.
[21:06] » Danny,
>> yes.
[21:07] » Larry,
>> yes.
[21:08] » Mike,
>> yes.
[21:10] » Yes. [clears throat]
>> Move on to old business.
[21:15] A a discussion of proposed ordinance to
establish the direct.
[21:21] » Mayor, if I may, uh I'd like to make a
motion that suspend
[21:29] A through G
[21:34] correction of the
[21:38] last meeting.
With that, I would
[21:44] Seconded motion.
[21:53] » Yes.
>> Nick.
[21:55] » Danny.
>> Yes.
[21:57] » Yes.
>> Mike.
[21:58] » Yes.
>> Yes.
[22:08] » Yeah. Why don't I read them?
>> Okay. Thank you.
[22:10] » And then you call for the vote on each,
please. All right. [clears throat]
[22:14] » Hey, a discussion.
I'm sorry. Do I need to read the full
[22:17] title?
>> Yes, sir.
[22:20] » Yes.
>> Titles available start to be in your
[22:24] pack. I'm sorry.
[22:32] » Yeah, my screen doesn't work. Okay. A an
ordinance establishing the Department of
[22:36] Human Resources creating the position of
director of human resources as a
[22:40] municipal department head. establishing,
appointing, reporting, qualification,
[22:44] authority, and responsibility
requirements, declaring an emergency,
[22:48] and for other purposes. And with this
council, it sounds like you have an
[22:52] emergency clause. So, so you'll need to
take a separate vote.
[22:56] » I don't know how much the verbiage there
matters, but instead of appointment, you
[23:01] said appointing, which may not matter at
all, but
[23:04] » thank you for the correction.
[23:10] Do we need a motion on this?
>> Yes.
[23:14] » Yes. You need a motion to approve a
second motion.
[23:18] » Danny,
>> second that motion.
[23:20] » And Tim,
[23:25] » yes.
>> Mick,
[23:26] » yes.
>> Danny,
[23:27] » yes.
>> Larry,
[23:28] » yes.
>> Mike,
[23:29] » yes.
>> Tim,
[23:30] » yes.
>> Now, the emergency clause. I'll make a
[23:34] motion we accept the emergency clause.
Second.
[23:37] That was Danny.
[23:42] » Tim,
>> yes.
[23:44] » Mike,
>> yes.
[23:45] » Danny,
>> yes.
[23:46] » Nick,
>> yes.
[23:48] » Craig,
>> yes.
[23:50] » Okay, we'll move on to B.
>> Okay, this is B. An ordinance
[23:55] establishing the position of director of
parks, museum, and grants for the city
[23:59] of Tinytown, Arkansas. Designating the
position as a department head position
[24:04] reporting directly to the mayor.
defining the director's authority and
[24:07] responsibilities for municipal parks,
the city museum, and citywide grant
[24:12] coordination. Clarifying that the
position shall not exercise the powers
[24:15] of a city manager, city administrator,
or chief administrative officer,
[24:19] reconciling references to the community
development director, adopting a job
[24:24] description, declaring an emergency, and
for other purposes. Again, council, you
[24:28] have a emergency clause to vote on
separately.
[24:32] » Make a motion.
I make a motion to accept or item B.
[24:40] Second
>> roll call.
[24:44] » Danny,
>> yes.
[24:46] » Nick,
>> yes.
[24:47] » Craig,
>> yes.
[24:50] » Larry,
>> yes.
[24:52] » Mike,
>> yes.
[24:53] » And Tim,
>> yes.
[24:57] » Seeking
for emergency.
[25:02] Motion for emergency clause.
>> I make a motion to accept the emergency
[25:06] clause.
>> I will second that motion.
[25:09] » Tim
roll call.
[25:12] » Roll call, please.
>> Craig,
[25:14] » excuse me.
>> Yes.
[25:14] » Mick,
>> yes.
[25:16] » Danny,
>> yes.
[25:17] » Larry,
>> yes.
[25:18] » Mike,
>> yes.
[25:19] » And Tim,
>> yes.
[25:21] » Okay, we'll move on to C. Attorney
Ferrar. This is an ordinance
[25:25] establishing the public works department
and the position of public works
[25:28] director for the city of Tonytown,
Arkansas. Defining the department's
[25:32] general responsibilities, establishing
the administrative reporting structure,
[25:37] repealing conflicting provisions,
declaring an emergency and for other
[25:40] purposes. Again, I note an emergency
clause.
[25:44] » Let's take a motion.
>> I move that we um vote to approve.
[25:53] Second
>> roll call.
[25:57] » Mike,
>> yes.
[25:59] » Tim,
>> yes.
[26:00] » Larry,
>> yes.
[26:01] » Craig,
>> yes.
[26:03] » Danny,
>> yes.
[26:04] » And Mick,
>> yes.
[26:08] » Seek a motion for the emergency clause.
>> I'll make a motion for the emergency
[26:12] clause. I'll move that we approve the
emergency clause.
[26:18] » Second.
>> Roll call.
[26:22] Craig,
>> yes.
[26:24] » Tim,
>> yes.
[26:26] » Mike,
>> yes.
[26:27] » Mick,
>> yes.
[26:29] » Danny,
>> yes.
[26:30] » Larry,
>> yes. [clears throat]
[26:33] » All right, moving on to E. Attorney
Ferrar.
[26:36] » Okay. We have an ordinance repealing and
replacing Tiny Town Municipal Code
[26:40] section 3102 concerning the governance
and administration of Tonnytown
[26:44] Historical Museum, establishing the
museum as an operating unit of the city,
[26:48] defining the authority of the museum
board of trustees, clarifying the
[26:51] employment status and supervision of
museum personnel, repealing conflicting
[26:55] provisions, declaring an emergency and
for other purposes. Once again, council,
[27:00] you have an emergency clause. Okay,
seeking a motion.
[27:05] I'll make motion to approve.
>> Second.
[27:10] » Roll call.
>> Craig,
[27:13] » yes.
>> Jim,
[27:15] » yes.
>> Mick,
[27:16] » yes.
>> Mike,
[27:19] » yes.
>> Danny,
[27:20] » yes.
>> Larry,
[27:22] » yes.
>> I move that we approve the emergency
[27:26] clause for this ordinance.
>> Second.
[27:30] » Roll call.
>> Craig. Yes,
[27:34] » Mick.
>> Yes,
[27:35] » Danny.
>> Yes,
[27:36] » Larry.
>> Yes,
[27:38] » Mike.
>> Yes.
[27:40] » And Tim,
>> yes.
[27:41] » Okay, moving on. Um, attorney Ferrar,
would you mind?
[27:47] [snorts]
>> Okay. We have an ordinance establishing
[27:49] the position of water and sewer director
within the city government, adopting a
[27:53] job description for the position, which
is attached as exhibit A, and for other
[27:57] purposes. Here we do not have an
emergency clause to vote on. I I think
[28:02] so. I think we should skip.
>> I think we skipped one. Attorney,
[28:06] » we did. Yes, sir.
>> The accounting.
[28:09] » We should have been an E.
>> I apologize for that. We I did skip one.
[28:18] Have it in my packet.
>> Might have to borrow. Oh, no. Here it
[28:22] does. I apologize. an ordinance
establishing the classified position of
[28:26] accounting clerk within the office of
the city clerk treasurer adopting a job
[28:29] description for the position attached as
exhibit A and for other purposes. Uh as
[28:33] I said before, no emergency clause on
this.
[28:36] » I move that we vote to approve this
motion.
[28:38] » Second.
>> Roll call. That was Danny that seconded.
[28:42] » Thank you. Tim,
>> yes.
[28:44] » Mike,
>> yes.
[28:46] » Larry,
>> yes.
[28:47] » Danny,
>> yes.
[28:49] » Mick,
>> yes.
[28:50] » And Craig,
>> yes.
[28:53] Okay, now we'll move on to F.
>> Okay, now we have an ordinance
[28:57] establishing the position of water and
sewer director within city government,
[29:00] adopting a job description for the
position attached as exhibit A and for
[29:04] other purposes.
[29:07] » Seeking a motion.
>> Make a motion to approve.
[29:12] I will second that motion.
>> Mick and Tim.
[29:18] » Roll call.
>> Craig.
[29:21] » Yes. Nick,
>> yes.
[29:22] » Danny,
>> yes.
[29:24] » Larry,
>> yes.
[29:25] » Mike,
>> yes.
[29:26] » And Tim,
>> yes.
[29:30] » We have an emer seeking for an emergency
clause.
[29:33] » There is no emergency.
>> There's no I apologize. Okay, moving on.
[29:37] Do you attorney?
>> Okay, we're off the ordinances. I'm
[29:41] happy to read. This is a discussion of
an approval of a proposed resolution uh
[29:46] for the removal of trees along South
Bington Road.
[29:51] Mayor, if I may.
>> Yes, sir.
[29:54] » Um, the council was uh provided at the
last meeting there was uh three bids
[30:01] received and yet uh the scope of
services there was some question about
[30:05] if everybody was bidding on the same
stuff. City engineer prepared a scope of
[30:11] services and those same three people
were submitted to that and they each
[30:16] returned the bids. I would note all of
them lower. And the low bid, which is in
[30:23] your packet, was provided by Pragrow
Tree Service for $16,560.
[30:31] The second lowest bid was Monster Tree
Service 19,100 and the highest was
[30:37] Treeandscape for $20,850.
I would make a motion that we accept the
[30:43] low bid from Prairie Grove Tree Service.
Do I have a second?
[30:49] » I'll second that motion.
>> Roll call.
[30:55] » Mike,
>> yes.
[30:57] » Tim,
>> yes.
[30:58] » Larry,
>> yes.
[31:00] » Craig,
>> yes.
[31:01] » Danny,
>> yes.
[31:03] » Mick,
>> yes.
[31:06] » Okay, moving on to public comments. If
you would [clears throat] like to speak,
[31:10] please come to the podium, state your
name and address, and you have three
[31:15] minutes.
[31:28] Hey guys. Um, Heather Armstrong, 3851,
Old Highway 68, 20town, Arkansas. I just
[31:34] wanted to reintroduce myself and tell
you guys how we're glad that we've got
[31:38] y'all's support letter and everything.
21 weeks ago. Um, we have had a few
[31:43] people reach out to us in the community
and we were just want to see what we
[31:46] might be able to help y'all with in the
future, seeing as we've been helping
[31:50] y'all for the last four years. And just
kind of want to invite y'all out, let
[31:55] you guys see the place, see what we've
been doing. Let you know that all of our
[31:58] city officials, officers, firemen,
police officers, everybody's coming out
[32:03] tomorrow for a big shindig. if anybody'd
like to come out and see what we have
[32:06] done for the city of Tony Town. Um,
wanted to address and see if there's any
[32:11] way possible we could actually get some
support on some things that we've been
[32:16] asking for. We would love to have you
guys out. I know Miss Russell's been out
[32:20] to the house and I know Mr. Mike's been
out to the house, but we'd definitely
[32:23] like to have you guys out. Um,
let you guys kind of see what we're
[32:28] doing
>> tomorrow. Could you tell us the times?
[32:31] » Um, yes. will be operating a fundraiser
between 10:00 and 1:00 p.m.
[32:35] » 10 and 1. Thank you. Thank you guys.
>> Mayor, excuse me. Uh but you said this
[32:42] was for items on the agenda. Is there
agenda item for this subject?
[32:49] What is this for for agenda items?
[32:56] » No. So there that was not one of the
items. I think that she just wanted to
[33:00] get up and
>> Okay. didn't see that. Uh, Maddie, is
[33:02] there anyone online? No. All right,
moving on.
[33:08] » New business.
A presentation by Sarah Living Good.
[33:16] » If I may, mayor, I I invited Miss Living
Good uh and put this uh on the um agenda
[33:24] for discussion. I felt it would be
better hearing from a live person. and I
[33:29] presented a position paper to the
council um a few weeks back and uh Mr.
[33:36] Lab good here I'm sure is going to be
better in person than my written paper.
[33:42] Thank you sir.
>> Thank you guys for having me. One
[33:45] second.
[34:08] So, I'm Sarah Lifing Good. I'm the
executive director for the Fagetville
[34:12] area of Arkansas Community Foundation.
Um, I would say Fagetville area is a
[34:17] little bit of a misnomer, so I don't
want that to be misleading. We serve all
[34:21] of Washington County along with a bit of
Madison County and Benton County as
[34:26] well. and Arkansas Community Foundation
has been serving the state of Arkansas
[34:30] to build a better communities across the
state for 50 years. So I'm going to
[34:34] start the presentation just sharing a
little bit about who the foundation is
[34:39] and then share the types of funds that
we have because I know the discussion
[34:44] has been around the historic museum here
in Tonitown just so that I can give you
[34:49] guys opportunity to see what options
that we do have and how we have
[34:54] supported other organizations in the
Washington County area as they've gone
[34:58] to grow either their museum or their
parks and rec um departments as well.
[35:07] So a community foundation, we are a
taxexempt charitable organization and it
[35:13] provides support primarily for the
geographic community or region. Because
[35:17] we are a statewide organization, we have
affiliates throughout the state with a
[35:24] local board that represents us. So that
it is concentrated on that unique
[35:28] geographic area.
We act as a grant making foundation and
[35:34] as I mentioned we serve geographically
um the community. We have a very broad
[35:40] mission. We're supported by private and
public donors and we're governed by
[35:45] those local boards.
Right now the Arkansas Community
[35:50] Foundation has 29 affiliates throughout
the state. Fateville area being the one
[35:55] of the largest ones. We have over 2,000
charitable funds totaling more than a
[36:00] billion dollars. and we've been making
grants since 1976 in the range of $600
[36:06] million.
[36:11] We do have three different types of
funds. So, we have a charitable
[36:16] distribution fund that's in the purple
and that starts at $1,000. And I'm going
[36:22] to give you guys some examples of how
orgs have used the different types of
[36:26] funds as I move forward in slides. That
charitable distribution, it's not
[36:30] invested. That means it's also not
endowed. You have access to the entire
[36:35] corpus. And the fees are a bit higher on
that one with 2% per gift. And any
[36:41] donors into that fund do have the
opportunity to pay for any sort of um
[36:46] credit card fees that if they decide to
make donations through our online
[36:50] system. We have a quasi endowment that's
in the blue. It is $100,000 minimum.
[36:56] It's fully invested. And what's unique
about that account is you do have access
[37:00] to the entire account. It has an annual
fee of 1.25%.
[37:06] And then the green is a fully endowed
fund. It has a $10,000 minimum and it's
[37:13] fully invested and endowed and it has a
spendable of 4% after it's invested for
[37:19] 20 quarters.
So, a couple examples of how some
[37:24] Washington County organizations have
used our funs. We've got the Shiloh
[37:28] Museum in Springdale. They have the
green. They have an endowment and they
[37:35] use that spendable. And I'm just going
to back up so you can see it.
[37:40] So, Shiloh Museum has an endowment and
they use that 4% spendable to go towards
[37:46] organizational costs. They are set up as
um a city entity and so when they ask
[37:52] for their funds, those funds get
directed to the city and they are
[37:56] itemized as to exactly what those funds
are to be used for and then they are
[38:01] spently
[38:06] in Fagatville. We've got the Von
Richardson Community Center. They also
[38:10] have an endowment. are also a c a city
entity and similarly they have that
[38:17] endowment that gets directed through the
city to fund programming at the
[38:21] community center. What's unique about
them is that they do have their own
[38:25] nonprofit arm that directs those funds,
which is in contrast to the the Shiloh
[38:32] Museum. And the Von Richardson Community
Center is who their nonprofit arm, the
[38:38] Friends of YCCC is who chose to take
what were extra funds that they had at
[38:44] the time and invest them into an
endowment for the long-term usage and
[38:49] support of Ivon Richardson Community
center programming.
[38:56] And then one of my my last example is
Mount Sequoia. Mount Sequoia has two
[39:01] different types of funds. They have that
quasi endowment and they have an
[39:06] endowment. So the quasi endowment
allows them to have their their corpus
[39:13] of funds invested. So they are growing
year after year, but they have access to
[39:19] the entire corpus. So if they need some
sort of building maintenance or they
[39:23] need something towards other operational
funds, they can pull from the entire
[39:27] corpus of that quasi endowment, but they
also have a full endowment so that that
[39:35] is fully endowed and they can only pull
from that 4% for long-term stability.
[39:43] And that's just a quick a quick
overview. Um if you guys have any
[39:47] questions,
>> I do.
[39:50] in regards to the
uh charitable donor fund pass through
[39:56] which I think the Favville friends of
Favville parks is 2% fee that you
[40:02] mentioned is that a one-time fee when
someone makes a
[40:08] or is that a recurring monthly annual
fee or is it just a one time 2% let's
[40:13] say I wanted to give you $100 is $2 a
one time fee or is it the balance of the
[40:19] signed at 2%.
How does that work
[40:23] » for the charitable distribution? Every
time a donation is made to that
[40:31] um that fund,
there's a 2% fee on that gift. We've
[40:37] seen a lot of organizations that don't
come in with a large amount of funds
[40:42] start with either a char with a
charitable distribution and then change
[40:47] it over to a quasi endowment or an
endowment in time so that it is only an
[40:52] annual fee as opposed to a 2% per gift.
>> Okay. But my question is a little bit
[40:59] different. I think I understand it's a
one-time deal, but there's no monthly or
[41:03] annual after the initial 2% is paid. Is
that correct?
[41:09] On a fund. If I give you $100,
it's $2 on the outset. That's all the
[41:16] fees that's ever charged on that
particular donation.
[41:20] » Correct.
>> So, there's no maintenance fee
[41:22] throughout [clears throat] what I was
trying to get to
[41:25] » with the charitable distribution. Yes,
>> exactly. That was my Thank you.
[41:30] » Uh
[41:34] from a an accounting standpoint,
I understand it correctly. Um you would
[41:43] issue 1098s at the end of each year to
person that makes a donation.
[41:49] City ultimately has no obligations or or
responsibilities from a county
[41:55] standpoint. You handle all of that.
Correct.
[41:59] » Okay. So, let's take it one step
further. Let's say this account grows
[42:04] and you've got $50,000 in it and
that be determined that they want to do
[42:12] something, build a statute of
Christopher Columbus or whatever and
[42:16] they need 50 of that $100,000.
Um,
[42:21] walk me through the mechanics of how
that 50 is returned. you pay statute
[42:27] builder or how does that work?
>> So, we do not directly pay vendors
[42:32] because we're a charitable making a
grant making organization.
[42:37] The request would come in for the
$50,000 that then gets directed either
[42:43] through the nonprofit or the city
entity. So, for example, with the von
[42:49] Richardson Community Center, when they
request a
[42:54] they request a grant distribution, it
goes to the city of Fagatville earmarked
[43:00] for the community center. So, similarly,
you would make the request earmarked for
[43:06] the Christopher Columbus statue as per
the example and then it can go through
[43:11] the city or the nonprofit organization
depending on who's making the request.
[43:15] So there's a full audit trail when the
auditors come to town. It there's no
[43:19] question that the city itself in that
case is not making a charitable
[43:24] donation. City's dismanaging it to to
push it back through to this case the
[43:30] museum or parks or whichever fund that
might be.
[43:34] » Correct. Just as if um someone made the
$50,000
[43:39] donation to the fund for the the statue.
It's tracked from the donation coming in
[43:46] and that memo to it going out with that
memo. So, you've got multiple stages of
[43:52] tracking exactly how those funds are
supposed to be used.
[43:55] » Another question, um, is the city
limited to one fund? We have a museum,
[44:02] which is front and center of this
discussion that we first started talking
[44:08] about it, but there may be a parks and
wreck that that needs to have
[44:12] the ability if somebody wants to donate
something to the parks. Does this is the
[44:17] city limited to one fund or can they
have multiple uh in this case charable
[44:23] distribution funds?
>> You can have multiple.
[44:25] » Okay.
I think that's all my question. Sure to
[44:29] these other guys. I'm sure has got some
nothing at all, Mr. Wagner. I'm good.
[44:34] Madame Mayor, may I
>> Yes.
[44:36] » He can read my mind. Uh okay. You said
that on the endowment that after you
[44:41] sort of slipped it in after 20 quarters,
which you know in layman's terms that's
[44:46] five years. Yep.
>> Uh that we can't touch that. Um and then
[44:49] once we can touch it, there's access to
4% of spendable. What is that? What is
[44:54] that spendable number? Where does that
come from?
[44:57] » And uh and explain to me why it's 4%.
>> So we have a state board that manages
[45:04] the whole organization and they are a
fiduciary board. They are the ones that
[45:08] set the spendable rate. Several years
ago, it was a 5% access to the
[45:13] spendable. And because our board and the
company that we use for investments,
[45:20] look at investing
for ever in like in perpetuity as
[45:25] opposed to investing for retirement.
when the market dipped um about 10 years
[45:31] 10 years ago um they decided to drop it
down to 4% to make sure our endowments
[45:37] were going to last.
>> Okay. That that that tells me why. Uh it
[45:43] doesn't tell me what. So if we have a
million dollars in the endowment fund,
[45:48] are you telling me that only 4% of that
is spendable?
[45:51] » Correct. The rest of it is invested and
growing.
[45:54] » Okay. So when it says access to 4%
spendable, perhaps a better verbiage is
[46:00] access to 4% is spendable or the
spendable amount is only 4% whatever.
[46:05] But that means for every million we can
only spend $40,000.
[46:09] Uh and is that per year? Is that per
calendar year? Is that
[46:12] » it is per year.
>> Okay. And that is per calendar year.
[46:15] » Our fiscal year runs from July 1st to
July 1st to June 30th. So that's so that
[46:24] is a a fiscal year. Yes.
>> Um and so if we took money out on June
[46:28] 30th, we could take it out again on July
1st.
[46:30] » Correct.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. Um
[46:34] and then what are these funds fully
invested in? You said that they're one
[46:39] is uh uh fully invested, one is quasi
invested. What are they invested in?
[46:46] they're invested in a very large
portfolio and it it ch it's different
[46:52] depending on the fund. Um that is
something that I can get
[46:56] » depending on the fund you mean
>> because it's
[47:00] we have different funds for different
people and for different organizations
[47:04] and so with all of those investments our
advisory organization invests across
[47:11] board. That is not my I say that's not
my territory.
[47:14] » That's just fine. I appreciate that. Uh,
but who has input? Do do we as a city or
[47:19] does does the the Tonny Town Museum have
any input in in that or
[47:24] » we are different from say like a Schwab
where you would be able to determine
[47:29] where your investments are. We have the
the same organization that works with
[47:34] Crystal Bridges on their investments.
That's who we we work with as to they
[47:38] make determinations of our investments
and the state board approves that.
[47:42] » I appreciate that. It's not exactly the
question I'm asking. So, let me try
[47:44] again. Um, when you you said there are
different investments or different funds
[47:51] for different companies, but then your
answer made it sound like there's one
[47:56] idea and all people get the same thing.
So, my question is, is there any
[48:02] variation between what Mount Sequoia has
and what the Tony Museum would have for
[48:07] instance,
>> potentially depending on the market?
[48:12] » Okay. And then what deres that
difference? Is it the amount of money
[48:15] that's there?
>> It depend it would depend on what the
[48:20] different funds are invested in.
>> Okay. So again, who who makes that
[48:24] decision and why and and if we have no
input, we just say like, hey, you guys
[48:28] are smarter than us. You go figure that
out. I understand that. Um and and
[48:34] that's why we're paying the one and a
quarter% on the one and 1% on the other.
[48:38] But those can change based on what they
deem is most appropriate for for
[48:43] whatever it happens to be in
>> what the advisers are advisers
[48:46] determine. Yes.
>> Okay. So there's fiduciary
[48:49] responsibility and and they have to do
what's in the best interest um in that
[48:53] regard. Okay. And then um the fees of uh
one and a quarter% 1% those aren't those
[49:00] aren't necessarily high low or sideways.
But is there a is there a tiered
[49:07] breakdown where the more money that's
there the less that costs?
[49:10] » There is once you get into the the
million dollar range we have a different
[49:15] breakdown.
>> Okay. Would you mind sharing that with
[49:16] me?
>> I I don't have that with me.
[49:18] » Okay. But you can get me that.
>> Absolutely.
[49:20] » Wonderful. Thank you.
Let me look over my notes again.
[49:25] Okay. So again, if we did an endowment
fund, we say we start with a million
[49:30] dollars in the endowment fund. We can't
even touch that 40,000 for five years.
[49:37] Yes, you. So I'll use the Fagatville
operating endowment as an example. We
[49:44] can touch a small percentage each year,
but the full 4% is not available until
[49:51] you hit the 5year mark.
>> Okay? So we can do something under four
[49:55] and we're not entirely certain what it
is yet but you can get me that too.
[49:57] » Y
>> wonderful thank you. And um
[50:04] and then on the quai endowed
if there was again say a million dollars
[50:09] there um would we have access to a
million dollars on day one?
[50:16] » That's a great question. The caveat
would be you can't go below $50,000 for
[50:22] three years.
Okay. So, again, if it had a million
[50:25] dollars um and we took out $950,000 of
it, you don't have a problem with that.
[50:30] » Correct.
>> Um and you might not even have a problem
[50:33] if we take out a little more. But after
the three years go by where it's under
[50:36] that, that's when you start to have an
issue.
[50:40] » You can't go below the 50,000 until
after the three years.
[50:46] » Okay. Okay. Okay. Um wonderful. I very
much appreciate your presentation. you
[50:52] did a great job. Uh, but is is there a
way to get the the nuts and bolts, the
[50:56] the fine print?
>> Absolutely. Um, I didn't want to bring
[51:00] all of our investments and I can also
put you in contact with our CFO who
[51:05] works with our um, our advisory group if
that would be helpful to kind of break
[51:10] down
>> what our investments have looked like
[51:13] and return.
>> Extraordinarily helpful for me.
[51:14] » Can definitely do that.
>> Thank you.
[51:16] » Absolutely. Okay. Does anyone else have
Mr. W KOak.
[51:19] » Mayor got one more question if nobody
else is.
[51:21] » Mr. Wish Kak has got a question.
>> Okay, great. Um, I'm going to maybe try
[51:27] to help Mr. Burus, maybe myself too,
with this question. Maybe what he's
[51:31] asking if I'm an investor and I go to
Schwab, they're going to give me
[51:34] different growth strategies to look at.
Is that the kind of angle you're looking
[51:39] for, or are you looking at more of a
like on a moral basis? I don't want to
[51:43] invest in particular funds.
>> No, more more the first, but it doesn't
[51:46] necessarily matter. I think that she's
answered that uh we don't really have
[51:50] much to say about that. We're saying you
guys do it and you do what you think is
[51:55] best and that's the best we we can get
from that.
[51:57] » But can we pick do do we get to pick
like a we want more uh safer with our
[52:04] money or is it we give you the money and
you make the decisions on what to do
[52:08] with it?
>> Correct.
[52:09] » It's not I get to pick aggressive growth
strategy or I want to go all bond funds.
[52:14] » Correct.
>> Okay, that's fair enough. Thank you.
[52:17] » Okay, Mr. Wagner,
>> one one more question. U I assume it's
[52:21] possible that as you start out, let's
just say right now, I don't know how
[52:26] much money that everybody's going to
rush to the altar and start handing in
[52:30] uh money to whatever funds we create,
but uh the simplest way looks like to
[52:36] start out as the charitable distribution
model. Uh but at any point in time or I
[52:42] guess at least on an annual basis you
could upgrade to one of the quasi
[52:47] endowed or endowed uh as we get more
experience with it. It's it's possible
[52:53] to switch from one type of of fund to
the to the next.
[52:58] » Correct. But you can only go
depends on how you're looking at the
[53:02] screen. You can only go to the right.
You can't go
[53:06] » back to the left because you're going
more permanent once you head towards the
[53:11] endowment.
>> Yeah, that that's what I was meaning.
[53:14] But right now, for an example, the the
Favville uh park is using the that and I
[53:21] think their strategy is that they want
to have the money that they get to for
[53:26] whatever it needs as quickly as they can
even though it's got a little higher fee
[53:30] structure. Um, I would note though the
2% is a one-time deal is is what you
[53:36] just explained. The other two are annual
fees.
[53:41] » Yes, they're annual fees, but just to
just to reiterate, it's per gift. So, if
[53:46] each one of you donated $100, it's a 2%
fee on on everybody.
[53:52] » Understand that. But but in your
examples here in the charts, it's got
[53:57] fee 1.25%
annual. So if you had $100,000
[54:02] in the fee, that's 1.25%. Then next year
if it grows to 200, it's 200 times 1.25.
[54:08] So that's an escalator clause. Wherever
the the charitable donation, a one time
[54:13] hit on each donation.
>> Correct. The the caveat is you are your
[54:18] fund is growing hopefully more than than
is being um donated into it because of
[54:25] how it's invested.
>> Thank you. That's all my question
[54:30] » and madam madam mayor I would love to
take ask another question or two. Um so
[54:35] on the charitable distribution just just
as a reminder to everybody up here that
[54:39] is static all that's just a bank
account. There's not there's we're not
[54:43] gaining anything. We're not losing
anything. We pay 2% to walk in the door
[54:46] and that's that. um on the quasa endowed
and on the endowment I know that that
[54:53] you don't necessarily want to say this
but somewhere along the line as a point
[54:58] of public record uh we can see what
those rates of return are and what sort
[55:03] of rates of return are we looking at
under a quasa endowed and endowed fund
[55:10] » it it has ranged anywhere from four to
7% depending on the market and I I would
[55:16] be happy to share all that
documentation.
[55:18] » Thank you. Appreciate it.
>> That is all. Thanks.
[55:21] » Anyone else?
[55:25] » Thank you very much, ma'am. I appreciate
it. Thank you.
[55:27] » Thank you, chair.
>> Moving on to B. A discussion of proposed
[55:32] resolution allowing the mayor to solicit
RFQS for professional grant
[55:35] administrative administration services.
Miss
[55:40] » uh yes, I uh sponsored this for Mr.
Laam. Uh this is brought forward um to
[55:46] go for RFQS um for our grant program. Um
I'm just looking for approval on this.
[55:53] I'll uh go ahead and give it a motion um
so we can begin discussion.
[55:58] » Okay. Do I have a second?
>> I'll second.
[56:02] » Danny
and Mike
[56:06] just look at me whenever you [laughter]
[56:09] Okay. Um, all right.
Roll call. Craig,
[56:16] » yes.
>> Mick,
[56:18] » yes.
>> Danny,
[56:19] » yes.
>> Larry,
[56:20] » yes.
>> Mike,
[56:21] » yes.
>> And Tim, [snorts]
[56:23] » yes.
>> Okay, we'll start our discussion then.
[56:26] We'll start with Mr. Wishko. Do you have
any questions?
[56:29] » I have no questions.
>> Mr. Burus?
[56:33] » Um,
no ma'am. Thank you,
[56:38] » Mr. Ardammani.
[56:42] » No questions.
>> Montes.
[56:45] » No, ma'am. I think it's pretty laid out.
>> Mr. Graves,
[56:48] » no questions.
>> Mr. Wagner,
[56:50] » none.
>> Okay. Roll call.
[56:53] » Craig,
>> yes.
[56:55] » Mick,
>> yes.
[56:57] » Danny,
>> yes.
[56:58] » Larry,
>> yes.
[57:00] » Mike,
>> yes.
[57:01] » And Tim,
>> yes.
[57:02] » Okay, moving on to C. a discussion and
approval of a proposed resolution
[57:06] allowing the mayor to enter a contract
with Harrington Miller regarding
[57:10] condemnation of Grow for Fletcher. Mr. W
Kak.
[57:15] » Uh yes, thank you, mayor. Um these next
two items go hand in hand. Um as if if
[57:23] you've looked through your packet at
all, you understand that. Um I intend to
[57:28] provide a brief discussion on um why
we're at this point. um based on um
[57:36] information I've ganed from discussions
with several people um and
[57:42] uh the study of the appraisal report.
The city obtained an appraisal by Reed
[57:49] and Associates in April of 26 uh on the
value of the rightway acquisitions,
[57:55] permanent utility easements, and
temporary construction easements for the
[57:59] city's portion of the Fletcher Road
extension at the west half of Fletcher
[58:04] Road.
The appraised value for the whole
[58:08] property according to Reeden Associates
um um [clears throat]
[58:13] was valued at the land is owned by A&J
Real Estate Holdings by the way. The the
[58:20] appraised value by Reed Associates was
put the uh whole property value at
[58:25] $2,62,400.
[58:28] The land was purchased according to Data
Scout by the owners for $1.8 million.
[58:35] the remainder property, that is the land
that is left uh in the owner's
[58:41] possession after the city acquires what
it needs for the for its rightway uh
[58:47] permanent utility easements and uh
temporary construction easements. The
[58:53] would be $1,853,800.
[58:57] So even the the value after the uh
damage to the property that was
[59:01] determined by Reeden Associates is a
little bit more than what the u the
[59:06] purchase price was. Uh the damage to
market value calculated uh for the
[59:11] rightway, the utility easements and the
temporary construction easements uh
[59:15] according to the appraisal report from
Reeden Associates was $221,300.
[59:23] [snorts] U a couple months ago, city
council uh received the appraisal report
[59:28] and also a resolution to u uh authorized
the mayor to negotiate this purchase uh
[59:35] based on the appraisal and the city
offered the um the damage to market
[59:42] value calculation to the land owner
which was refused. landowner rejected
[59:47] the offer but uh has not formally
countered with a written offer on what
[59:54] they would accept for the property. Uh
nor do they have a formal appraisal to
[59:58] justify their valuation of the land
which I've had discussions with the land
[1:00:02] owner uh and they value the land
somewhere between $600 and $700,000.
[1:00:11] Um the uh you know I spoke with the land
owner indicated to him clearly I I have
[1:00:17] no power to negotiate on behalf of the
city uh and I wasn't attempting to do
[1:00:22] so. So I just merely wanted to find out
his position on how this got to this
[1:00:27] particular point. and u you know he u
went back to um the purchase price of
[1:00:35] the acre of land on the eastern portion
of Fletcher and uh the remainder of the
[1:00:43] land that they got from that purchase
was about a half an acre and they paid
[1:00:49] approximately 157 for the land. So his
valuation for what he thinks the uh uh
[1:00:57] acquisition that the city needs to pay
for is
[1:01:01] 150 a half acre. So we're talking about
a total of a little over two acres in
[1:01:07] the um
the acquisition rightway easements and
[1:01:13] uh construction easements. So we're
we're a little bit off on numbers
[1:01:17] obviously. um they have um no intention
on budging on their um
[1:01:26] price according to my discussions with
him. He has no hard [clears throat]
[1:01:30] feelings towards the city u should the
city move forward with the condemnation
[1:01:36] um uh resolution um and the
resolution to hire the appropriate legal
[1:01:44] authorities to represent us in doing
that. Uh there were discussions in the
[1:01:48] past with the land owner and the city on
u uh
[1:01:55] maybe I don't want to call it a land
swap type of deal but it it was
[1:02:00] something that hopefully could be worked
out where there would be a dedication of
[1:02:06] the rightway um u on the western half to
the city provided that a a a reszoning
[1:02:16] were to take place, there were no
promises made. Nobody from the city
[1:02:20] bound or or attempted to bind the city
because there there's no way anybody
[1:02:26] from the city could bind the city to
such a condition. Uh there there's no
[1:02:32] that that is the purview of the council.
Um the council rejected that reszone
[1:02:37] proposition when it came forward uh for
a couple of reasons. Uh I don't have to
[1:02:42] rehash those. If you're at the meeting,
you know why. Uh but anyway, so they're
[1:02:48] not budging on their price. Uh I think
what we've offered based on the
[1:02:52] appraisal report and um if you compare
the the numbers and run the numbers
[1:02:59] yourself, what we offered I think is
fair market value. Um and that's really
[1:03:04] all I'm going to say about that. So,
I'll make a motion to
[1:03:09] um
>> move forward
[1:03:12] » move forward with the
engagement of the law firm and then we
[1:03:16] can go to the second one. But they all
they kind of tie together, but we can
[1:03:20] only do them one at a time. So, make a
motion.
[1:03:23] » Do Thank you, Mike. Do we have a second?
>> I'll second that motion.
[1:03:27] » All right. Motion and a second. We'll go
ahead and start. Uh Mr. Mr. Wagner,
[1:03:32] we'll start with you.
>> Sure. Um,
[1:03:36] Mr. Was Kovak, I appreciate you uh kind
of bringing us up today. I'm a little
[1:03:41] bit disappointed in that this item come
before us and uh I only saw the
[1:03:46] appraisal uh yesterday when you sent it
to me. It would appear to me like before
[1:03:51] we start suing people for condemnation
or any other purpose, the council would
[1:03:55] be provided with a little bit more
facts. My first question is who in fact
[1:04:00] had the negotiations? you said you
weren't qualified to do it, but it would
[1:04:04] seem logical that some city
representative would have something in
[1:04:07] writing that council could en enjoy. Uh
it appears that the um developer is uh
[1:04:14] making his own uh comp, so to speak,
when he bought a house that the city
[1:04:19] took $170,000 shellacking on. Uh, and I
said once upon a time, I wouldn't at
[1:04:26] council at that point, but maybe maybe
we each needed to read a copy of uh, The
[1:04:31] Art of the Deal by a guy. Uh, and at
that time, Fletcher Road u, we we had
[1:04:38] full set of plans and we knew where the
routes were going to be. So, we knew
[1:04:42] where the west end was going to go
versus the east end. We took no
[1:04:46] consideration.
But, let's go back to the cops for a
[1:04:49] moment. Uh the the road had to jog jog
south because the city and previous
[1:04:55] administrations had let a building
encroach the master street plan which
[1:05:00] caused the road to J to all on be on the
AJ properties which by the way the road
[1:05:06] is going over a pond. So I don't think
you can compare swamp land to a hard
[1:05:12] corner on Bington. And in in fact u I
adamantly while not being on the council
[1:05:19] was shocked and amazed that this council
actually even considered without taking
[1:05:24] competitive bids what that property was
worth and it was oh well we're going to
[1:05:27] lose some because we got to give it to
the rideways and everything. You don't
[1:05:32] bargain a whole project one piece at a
time. You take it in a macro aspect. And
[1:05:40] I'm not sure who done the negotiations,
but it's a damn poor one from what I can
[1:05:45] see to this point with what little
information that I've been given. And I
[1:05:50] hope that we all learn going forward
from this that a little bit more
[1:05:54] documentation and communications would
be healthy for all and probably a little
[1:05:59] bit less expensive. But we're kind of in
a sticky wicket. And unfortunately,
[1:06:05] um, this is what you get when you
halfway considered. Ready, aim, fire.
[1:06:11] No, this is ready, fire, aim. And in
fact, we had to rush to vote because
[1:06:16] this developer was going to order some
iron to make a decision to sell a corner
[1:06:21] lot, which had more value to him than
anybody else because the setback rules
[1:06:27] go away when he owns all the property.
Um, again, I cannot explain enough what
[1:06:34] a poor job the city has done to this
point and why we're in this situation. I
[1:06:40] yield.
>> Hey, Mr. Graves.
[1:06:43] » I got nothing.
>> Mr. Montes,
[1:06:48] » I have nothing as well.
>> Mr. Arty,
[1:06:54] » nothing.
>> Miss Burrus.
[1:06:57] » Thank you, Madam Mayor. I would try to
be uh as kind as possible. Um I hope
[1:07:03] nobody gets their feelings hurt here or
elsewhere.
[1:07:06] » Mr. Burr, just a moment. U would you
mind starting the clock over?
[1:07:12] » I [snorts] would.
>> She wants to make sure I have my full
[1:07:14] minutes
>> on the record to be kind.
[1:07:16] » All right, Mr. Burst, go ahead.
>> Thank you. I lost five seconds. That's
[1:07:20] fine.
Um, this piece of property has been the
[1:07:24] bane of my existence since it first came
into our periphery. Uh, I have literally
[1:07:32] never voted in the affirmative for
anything this council has ever tried to
[1:07:37] do with it. Um, and if I do vote yes to
move forward on condemnation, it will be
[1:07:43] the first time that I have voted yes on
a single thing about this property. Uh,
[1:07:47] I've been extremely disappointed with
the way the city has acted. Um, I think
[1:07:52] the city has made a lot of really,
really foolish decisions. And to answer
[1:07:58] your question, Mr. Wagner, as to who
moved into a negotiation role, I'd like
[1:08:03] to first of all commend council member
Wkoak for not moving in to that
[1:08:08] particular posture. But there was a
former council person um who will remain
[1:08:12] unnamed uh who took upon themselves to
do a fair amount of that negotiating. Um
[1:08:18] again to be kind, I believe they were
trying to do what they thought was best
[1:08:22] to make something happen, but they
stepped way out of their um their
[1:08:27] authority.
So with that said, as we've been dealing
[1:08:31] with this particular property, as we've
been dealing with this particular issue,
[1:08:35] swamp land and all, you're not wrong. Um
Reeden Associates um gave us this
[1:08:43] appraisal. Readen Associates has a great
uh great reputation and um
[1:08:50] I believe their pricing to be fair and
adequate. Um even if it were not, for
[1:08:57] the owner of this property to just pick
some number out of thin air is is
[1:09:02] ridiculous. So I do not love the idea of
condemning a property. I do not love the
[1:09:08] idea of imminent domain, but I'm not
entirely certain how we move forward
[1:09:13] when apparently there was a little wink
wink nudge nudge previously of hey, you
[1:09:17] do this, we'll do that, which never got
an approval from this council or
[1:09:21] anywhere else. Um, but it's uh a little
bit of what has happened here for the
[1:09:27] last 135 years or so, which is you
scratch my back and and I'll roll over
[1:09:32] for you so you can take full advantage.
It's just not appropriate. It's not
[1:09:38] showing good fiduciary responsibility
for the city. So, I am not super excited
[1:09:44] about where we find ourselves and I
[clears throat] would rather that A&J
[1:09:48] had some other idea in mind that perhaps
we find a way to work through. But we do
[1:09:54] have an appraisal whether we got it
yesterday or not uh or sorry for the
[1:09:59] first time yesterday or not. I I knew
that number before. Um, but I don't see
[1:10:05] how we move forward when we've got such
a chasm of roughly $400,000 between us
[1:10:13] that they can't come up with any other
idea except well, we want more money for
[1:10:17] that. Um, so I'm glad that they like us.
I'm glad they like Mike. I'm glad they
[1:10:23] don't have hard feelings and they
recognize that it's business. Uh but um
[1:10:29] we do indeed need to act like
professionals. We do indeed need to
[1:10:35] ready ourselves, aim, and then fire
instead of just saying, "Well, I guess
[1:10:40] we've got to do that thing now." So I
agree with you, Mr. Wagner. I do believe
[1:10:44] that we need to do better. Uh, and
unfortunately because we didn't and they
[1:10:50] didn't, we find ourselves in a rather
unusual and unfortunate position. I
[1:10:56] yield.
>> Mr. Wishak.
[1:11:00] » Yes. [clears throat]
Just a just a couple of things. Um, the
[1:11:04] only two people who wouldn't have seen
this before I reeailed it on uh Monday
[1:11:11] would have been Mr. Wagner and Mr.
Graves because they're both new. Uh,
[1:11:15] post date. the uh appraisal. Again, I'm
not casting aspersions on anybody in the
[1:11:21] city either. It it it this probably
could have been handled a little bit
[1:11:24] better. I don't like uh uh the situation
and I think this is a last resort method
[1:11:34] that should only be used as a last
resort. And I don't see any other resort
[1:11:38] to resort to to beat that word to death
uh at this particular point. So, I I I'm
[1:11:47] not super happy, but I don't see any
other way forward at this moment. Uh,
[1:11:54] so, and I'll yield the rest of my time.
>> Okay, Mr. Wagner, your second round.
[1:11:59] » I really don't have anything to say, but
you can't fix stupid. Thank you,
[1:12:04] » Mr. Graves.
>> Nothing to add,
[1:12:07] » Mr. Montes.
>> Um, no. I I I mean I just kind of echo
[1:12:13] everything that was set up here. You
know, um this has been mishandled and
[1:12:17] we've got to do what we've got to do and
uh this seems like the next appropriate
[1:12:21] course of action.
>> Hey, Mr. Artmani. Oh.
[1:12:24] » Yes, ma'am.
>> I don't have anything to add.
[1:12:27] » All right, Mr. Burrus.
>> No, ma'am. Thank you.
[1:12:29] » Uh Mr. Wish Koak.
>> All done.
[1:12:33] » Welcome.
>> Craig,
[1:12:36] » yes. Mick,
>> for clarification, we are voting on the
[1:12:41] item C, which is to hire the lawyer.
Correct.
[1:12:45] » Correct.
>> Yes, sir.
[1:12:46] » Yes.
>> Danny,
[1:12:50] » yes.
>> Larry,
[1:12:52] » yes.
[1:12:56] » Mike,
>> yes.
[1:12:58] » Tim,
>> yes.
[1:13:00] » Okay. Moving on to D. A discussion and
approval of proposed resolution allowing
[1:13:05] condemnation for Fletcher Road. Mr. Wish
Koak.
[1:13:08] » Um, I don't think I really have anything
to add, although I think um um I will
[1:13:15] add this as a just a personal note. Um I
I believe the attorney that will be
[1:13:20] handling this from the firm. I I I know
him and he's a super good dude. Uh so if
[1:13:27] that uh puts anybody [laughter] at ease,
uh so be it for what it's worth. But uh
[1:13:33] I'll make a motion to approve this
resolution.
[1:13:37] Do we have a second?
>> I will second that.
[1:13:39] » All right. Um, we'll start with Mr.
Wagner.
[1:13:43] » Is this discussion?
>> Yes, sir.
[1:13:47] » Well, the only thing I can do is pray
that when this becomes before a judge
[1:13:54] that he can feel mercy on
uh Forest Gump once said, "Stupid is
[1:14:04] stupid does." And uh we'll look at this
appraisal
[1:14:09] and figure that a developer that paid
$2.25 cents a square foot for property
[1:14:16] owner about April 7th of 2025
and now expects to receive three times
[1:14:23] that amount in an 18month growth period.
uh might think that would be absorbent
[1:14:29] even though the comp that is used to
compare to is land that this city sold
[1:14:35] him. Um and with that uh just pray for
mercy. Judge, [laughter]
[1:14:43] » you yield your time.
>> Yes.
[1:14:46] » Mr. Graves,
>> I yield my time.
[1:14:48] » Mr. Montes,
>> no comment.
[1:14:50] » Mr. Armmani,
>> no comment.
[1:14:52] » Mr. Burus?
>> I yield. Thank you.
[1:14:53] » And Mr. Wish Kak?
>> No. Thank you, mayor.
[1:14:56] » All right. Is it all right if we go
ahead and move forward or do we want to
[1:14:59] go through the second round of
>> y my time?
[1:15:04] » We can move forward. I'll yield my
second bite.
[1:15:06] » All right.
>> I have nothing to say.
[1:15:08] » Roll call.
>> Craig,
[1:15:11] » yes.
>> Mick,
[1:15:14] » Danny,
>> yes.
[1:15:15] » Larry,
>> yes.
[1:15:16] » Mike,
>> yes.
[1:15:18] » And Tim,
>> yes.
[1:15:20] » All right, moving on to E. A discussion
and appointment of alderman to the city
[1:15:23] of Tonytown standing committees. Mr.
Wish Kak.
[1:15:26] » Um, council, you see before you, uh, the
resolution. Um,
[1:15:32] there's
a couple of things.
[1:15:37] » Well,
do I need to state my position on this
[1:15:41] or just make a motion to to
>> make a motion for it or
[1:15:48] » I I want to make sure I'm doing this
right, counselor. I haven't had a chance
[1:15:50] to
>> You You need to make a motion. Um but
[1:15:55] but also we've been allowing for
introduction statements. So I think you
[1:15:59] need to give an introduction and then
make a motion.
[1:16:01] » I will do that. Thank you. Um we
[clears throat]
[1:16:07] have a little bit of a conflict in our
ordinance and that it calls for three uh
[1:16:11] council members, but I'm hoping um
there's a an easy rectification for
[1:16:17] that. I'll I I will bring a um
resolution or anybody else can next time
[1:16:21] that uh we'll we'll do a a similar
committee meeting style to what is done
[1:16:27] in um other cities where all committees
will meet on the same night. Um
[1:16:35] and that'll put this uh three council
member issue
[1:16:41] to rest perhaps. Um u also
[1:16:48] these if if appointments are my
suggestions um based on discussions with
[1:16:56] um um I've talked with the incoming
mayor and Mr. Zupo and we just came up
[1:17:02] with these together. I could not
obviously ask each council member what
[1:17:06] they wanted. Uh so the only thing that I
might see is a change. I didn't have Mr.
[1:17:13] Burus as a chair and that's just
>> good good common sense through that.
[1:17:18] It's just good common sense.
>> I mean if if you want to be chair of
[1:17:20] something anyway. So um with that I'll
make a motion that we approve this
[1:17:25] resolution as it's written.
>> Do I have a second?
[1:17:29] » I will second that.
>> All right. Um discussion. Mr. Wagner.
[1:17:33] » Yes. Uh to clear up some of the preamble
that Mr. Wkoviac said regarding three
[1:17:38] members. You're correct. There's nothing
in the ordinance that said they all have
[1:17:42] to be three appointed tonight. Um, in
regards to that, you mentioned a
[1:17:46] resolution. I think it was an ordinance
that formed this or an amending
[1:17:49] ordinance. And uh, I'll I'll challenge
you, Mr. Wascoak, to uh, provide an
[1:17:55] amending ordinance to require this to
have two two members versus three. Uh
[1:18:01] the one thing that that's not been
mentioned is in the existing ordinance
[1:18:06] which is not before us. uh it says that
there's other support people and and I
[1:18:13] assume but I want to get this out for
the thought of all the panel that uh the
[1:18:19] chair and co-chair would would I guess
collectively look and see in in the case
[1:18:25] for an example water we certainly want
the city engineer to be a part of that
[1:18:30] and we'd certainly want uh the water and
chair u director to be a part of that.
[1:18:38] So, if I understand that correctly, that
would be the purview of the council
[1:18:44] members to choose those supporting
people if that's the correct term. Uh,
[1:18:48] is is that I I believe that's correct.
>> Yeah, I don't think it says anywhere in
[1:18:55] the ordinance itself. Correct me if I'm
wrong, anyone that may have it in front
[1:18:58] of them, but typically the way um
committees would be would work under
[1:19:02] just parliamentary procedural rules is
the chair would appoint. Uh, I don't
[1:19:06] remember. It's on the screen now. You
scroll down to membership a little
[1:19:10] further. Um, yeah, I'm trying to look at
the original ordinance. Um, yeah, I
[1:19:16] think it's silent beyond chair and vice
chair, right? So, there are no minimum
[1:19:21] or maximum amount of members. I think
the chair has the the authority to um
[1:19:27] will further
>> any recommendation be
[1:19:30] » Matty go down just a little further,
please.
[1:19:32] » Okay. So, this has clarified what I
think I'm looking after here, which is
[1:19:36] that there is no minimum maximum amount
of um appointments that need to be made.
[1:19:40] So, it it is within the chair's perview.
>> Thank you, Madame Mayor.
[1:19:46] » Hang on just one moment.
>> Oh, sorry, Mr.
[1:19:48] » Going down the road.
>> I yield.
[1:19:50] » All right. Um, Mr. Graves,
>> yield.
[1:19:53] » Monte,
>> uh, thank you, Mr. Wash Kak and, uh,
[1:19:57] incoming mayor for putting this list
together. Um, I uh also would like to
[1:20:03] thank you for putting me in the two
spots I publicly put um that I would
[1:20:08] like to participate in. So, I think as
long as everybody else is okay with
[1:20:12] where they're at on this, um I don't see
why we wouldn't go with this um
[1:20:18] this example in front of us, this
resolution. I yield.
[1:20:21] » Okay. I'm going to go ahead and take my
time right now. Um I just want to let
[1:20:24] you know that Mr. Graves did send me his
three and I did give them to uh Mr. Wish
[1:20:29] Koak. So, Mr. Gri, I just want to let
you know that I did pass that along. All
[1:20:34] right, Mr. Artmmani,
>> and the only thing I have is we were
[1:20:38] talking about soliciting people or
getting people for committees. I think
[1:20:43] it would have to be where they readily
say yes, I will. I don't want to go out
[1:20:48] and say, "Mr. Bratcher, you're on the
parks and recck committee whether you
[1:20:51] like it or not." You know, I don't want
to pull that kind of stunt, but but as
[1:20:55] long as people acquies or agree to be on
a committee, uh, I'm good with it.
[1:21:00] [snorts]
>> Yield
[1:21:03] » first.
>> Well, I hate to cause trouble, but a
[1:21:05] couple things happened. Number one, uh,
this particular page, I've got notes on
[1:21:08] everything before it and everything
after it, but apparently those got stuck
[1:21:11] together. So, I didn't see where all the
names landed. And, uh, after the email
[1:21:16] from Tyler Ferrar, I was under the
impression that we were not supposed to
[1:21:19] be putting out there where we wanted to
be. that that would all come up tonight.
[1:21:23] With that said, the public safety
committee, of which I am the co-chair on
[1:21:27] this list, was literally my fourth
choice. I I mean, no offense to the
[1:21:32] public safety committee, uh but uh that
was my fourth of what, five choices, six
[1:21:39] choices. Uh so I it's [clears throat]
fine, but I would much rather be on
[1:21:44] parks and wreck. Uh uh I think finance
and budget makes perfect sense with my
[1:21:48] background. Um, but if anybody is uh is
willing to make a change there, uh I
[1:21:54] would appreciate that very much.
[1:22:01] » Well, I am temporary and you may be
full-time. So, if you want me to acquies
[1:22:06] then and move over with with with Danny,
I I will I will try to do that.
[1:22:10] » Well, and that's the other benefit is
that you would get to be with Danny.
[1:22:14] » Okay. Yeah, sure.
>> Sure.
[1:22:17] » All right. Um,
>> thank you, Larry. So are you motioning
[1:22:19] to amend
>> amend?
[1:22:23] » Was that was that your motion? Okay.
>> If that's his motion, I will I will
[1:22:28] second it.
[1:22:31] » So you made the motion to amend the
resolution.
[1:22:34] » Chair co-chairs on the swap swap four
and five.
[1:22:38] » Four and five. Okay.
>> Thank you.
[1:22:42] » Okay. Do you yield the rest of your
time, Mr. Burrus?
[1:22:44] » I do.
>> All right. Mr. Wish Kak.
[1:22:48] uh just one comment. I have no intention
of uh unilaterally appointing anyone to
[1:22:54] anything that they don't want to be on.
So, uh it will certainly be a
[1:22:58] conversation. I think that there's been
a little bit of reluctance among council
[1:23:02] members themselves to be uh put on
committees. So, we're certainly not
[1:23:07] going to try to force this upon someone
who doesn't want to be
[1:23:10] » Hey, mayor. I'm sorry. Can I interrupt?
>> Sir,
[1:23:13] » you have a secondary and a main motion
pending right now. you need to call for
[1:23:17] a vote on the amendment so we can get
back to business.
[1:23:20] » Okay, let me go ahead and do that.
Everybody understand what's going on
[1:23:24] here? We have the motion and for the
amendment.
[1:23:27] » The amendment is um Tim will move to
co-chair of parks and wreck and Larry
[1:23:32] will move to co-chair of uh public
safety committee. Cool.
[1:23:36] » Roll call.
>> That needs a second.
[1:23:38] » I will second that.
>> Roll call.
[1:23:44] » Okay. Um, Craig,
>> yes.
[1:23:47] » Meg,
>> yes.
[1:23:48] » Danny,
>> so we're voting on the amendment, not on
[1:23:53] passage.
>> Okay. Yes,
[1:23:56] » Larry.
>> Yes.
[1:23:57] » Mike,
>> yes.
[1:23:58] » Tim,
>> yes.
[1:24:02] » Okay,
Mr. Wish Koyak, did you amend or yield
[1:24:06] the rest of your time
>> for the first round?
[1:24:09] » Uh, just one other comment that these
will change again at first of the year.
[1:24:14] Okay. Uh, we'll start second round. Mr.
Wagner, do you have anything else?
[1:24:19] » Nothing.
>> Mr. Graves,
[1:24:20] » yield.
>> Mr. Montes.
[1:24:23] » Uh, thank you, Mr. Wash for pointing
that out that uh this will change here
[1:24:28] at the beginning of the year. This is
kind of like a test run of this uh this
[1:24:33] this procedure. So, uh I think that's
good to know. So, we'll all kind of know
[1:24:38] where where we need to be ne next year.
I yield.
[1:24:43] » Mr. Armmani,
>> I have nothing.
[1:24:45] » Mr. Burus?
>> No, ma'am. Thank you.
[1:24:47] » All right. Mr. Wish Kodak.
>> Nothing else. Thank you, Mayor.
[1:24:50] » Okay, roll call.
>> Craig,
[1:24:52] » yes.
>> Mick,
[1:24:53] » yes.
>> Danny,
[1:24:54] » yes.
>> Larry,
[1:24:56] » yes.
>> Mike,
[1:24:57] » yes.
>> And Tim,
[1:24:58] » yes.
>> All right, we'll move on to F, a
[1:25:00] discussion approval of a proposed
resolution allowing the fire department
[1:25:03] to rearrange funds for the purchase of
tools and equip equipment. Mr. Montes.
[1:25:08] » Yes, ma'am. I was brought this uh to my
attention by the uh fire chief, Chief
[1:25:13] Krug. Um they are looking to outfit a
truck with updated equipment and in lie
[1:25:21] of purchasing that John Deere uh
lawnmower, they're wanting to repurpose
[1:25:25] those funds uh in the budget to purchase
those. um he had broughten by two
[1:25:32] estimates um that were provided in a u
Excel spreadsheet to us um kind of broke
[1:25:39] breaking them down to you know uh which
company came up with each amount one was
[1:25:45] I think 22,700
the other one was 20,700
[1:25:50] um so we're underneath that 25,000
uh that was
[1:25:57] um allocated ated for that John Deere.
Um, so I brought this to council to get
[1:26:03] the approval on that. Um, I'll make a
motion so we can get to discussion.
[1:26:07] » Second.
>> Roll call. Oh, I'm sorry.
[1:26:13] » Not roll call.
>> All right. Um,
[1:26:16] » Mr. Par.
>> Yes, mayor. We have uh the chief here
[1:26:22] and uh since we don't have committees
yet and we don't have um anyone
[1:26:27] » someone wants to hear from the chief,
you need a motion and a second and a
[1:26:30] roll call vote to let them chief talk.
>> I move that we uh let the chief uh make
[1:26:36] us all that much smarter.
>> I second.
[1:26:39] » Roll call.
>> Tim,
[1:26:42] » yes.
>> Mike,
[1:26:44] » yes.
>> Larry,
[1:26:45] » yes.
>> Danny,
[1:26:46] » yes. Mick.
>> Yes. Although I think I can read but go
[1:26:51] ahead chief.
>> I just want to
[1:26:57] » Yes.
>> I just want to clarify that the amount
[1:26:59] on there was the just want to make sure
I understood what Mr. Montes was saying,
[1:27:03] but the amount is the 25 [snorts] 63673
I believe. So, and it is more than the
[1:27:10] price of the mower. So, we will adjust
the budget accordingly.
[1:27:16] » All right. We'll start discussion. We'll
start with Mr. Wagner.
[1:27:20] » No comment.
>> Hey, Mr. Graves.
[1:27:22] » Nothing to add.
>> Mr. Montes?
[1:27:25] » No, ma'am.
>> Mr. Artmani?
[1:27:27] » Nothing.
>> Mr. Burus?
[1:27:28] » No, ma'am. Thank you.
>> Mr. Rush Koak.
[1:27:31] » Thank you, Chief, for uh the details you
provided us here. I appreciate it.
[1:27:34] » All right. Instead of going a second
round, can we go ahead and roll call?
[1:27:38] » Hi.
>> Please.
[1:27:39] » All right. Roll call.
>> Barry?
[1:27:42] » Yes.
>> Danny?
[1:27:44] » Yes.
>> Tim? Yes,
[1:27:46] » Mike.
>> Yes,
[1:27:48] » Mick.
>> Yes,
[1:27:49] » Craig.
>> Yes.
[1:27:50] » All right, moving on to G. A discussion
and approval of a resolution adopting
[1:27:54] the city of Tony Town's organizational
chart. Mr. Wagner.
[1:27:57] » Uh, I think this is probably pretty
self-explanatory, but over the past few
[1:28:02] months, um, several department heads
have been defined clearly now. And so
[1:28:08] this is a
revision of the existing organization
[1:28:13] chart to true up to what actually is now
uh, in ordinance form. With that, uh, I
[1:28:20] pray for a favorable vote and make a
motion that this passes. Do I have a
[1:28:25] second?
>> Second.
[1:28:27] » All right. Discussion. Mr. Wagner?
>> None.
[1:28:30] » Mr. Graves?
>> None.
[1:28:32] » Mr. Montes.
>> Um, I just think this was laid out
[1:28:36] pretty well. Um, I'm interested to hear
if anybody on else council thinks it u
[1:28:42] could be drafted in any other way, but
it looks pretty good to me. I yield the
[1:28:46] rest of my time.
>> Mr. Artmani.
[1:28:50] » I don't have anything.
>> Mr. Burus.
[1:28:53] » Uh, no, ma'am. Thank you,
>> Mr. Wish Kyak.
[1:28:55] » Uh, just thank you for the detailed
exhibit A. Uh, very thorough. Um, it's u
[1:29:02] good to see that. Thank you.
>> Everybody. Okay, moving on.
[1:29:08] Roll call
>> question.
[1:29:11] » Tim,
>> yes.
[1:29:12] » Mike,
>> yes.
[1:29:14] » Larry,
>> yes.
[1:29:15] » Danny,
>> yes.
[1:29:16] » Nick,
>> yes.
[1:29:18] » Craig,
>> yes.
[1:29:19] » All right, we'll move on to H. A
discussion regarding the Tinytown
[1:29:22] Community Foundation. Mr. Montes.
>> Yes, ma'am. Uh we discussed this uh last
[1:29:27] meeting um talking about the Tony Town
uh historic historical museum over here
[1:29:35] and I had brought up a question asking
about the Tonytown Foundation um and
[1:29:42] whether those funds were um a part of
that reserve fund and all the fundings
[1:29:47] that was in there or if this is a
separate thing. Um, so I thought we
[1:29:50] could have a little discussion on that
and see if we could clear that up. um
[1:29:56] and find out um just where we're at with
the Tony Town Foundation and um I mean
[1:30:04] where those funds are um documented as
far as whether or not they're in our um
[1:30:12] reporting that we get from the clerk
treasur and uh where we're at on that
[1:30:17] that uh entity.
[clears throat]
[1:30:23] » Mr. Um, Ferrar, did you want do you have
anything that you would like to speak to
[1:30:27] about?
>> Well, um, I'm the city attorney, so I'm
[1:30:32] here for legal advice. If I'm being
called to ask factual questions, someone
[1:30:37] may, but right now there's no pending
question to me.
[1:30:41] What would you like?
>> I didn't know if you wanted to go over,
[1:30:44] you know, what you had uh what you with
at this at this [clears throat] point.
[1:30:49] » Okay. Yeah. I mean I wasn't here um from
a from a you know factual perspective I
[1:30:54] don't know what occurred I have been
asked to sort of look into corporate
[1:30:58] documents that were constructed um by
the city what I found is that um there
[1:31:04] is a separate legal organization the
Tinytown Community Foundation um and
[1:31:10] that has been incorporated by the city
um um I mean I don't know what you want
[1:31:16] me to speak to this is there's a very
dense history here and I wasn't here for
[1:31:20] it. But um there is a community
foundation. It is a separate
[1:31:24] organization. Doesn't have um really any
co-mingling or interlock interlocking
[1:31:29] sort of um overlap between the city and
its board as far as I can tell. Um there
[1:31:35] are no documents in place that require
the community foundation to give money
[1:31:39] to the city. Um so there's a lot of
legal corrections that need to be done
[1:31:45] with this. Um again, I can't speak
historically. really wasn't here, but um
[1:31:49] there's some things to fix with this.
>> Okay. Well, I can just tell you we we
[1:31:53] wanted to come up with a a a community
foundation and um of course I we had no
[1:31:59] idea how to do it correctly. So, we went
to um Harrington Miller and asked them
[1:32:04] to help us get a 501c3 and a community
uh foundation started and we went
[1:32:09] exactly by what the attorney told us to
do and that's where we're at now.
[1:32:13] » Uh is this discussion time?
>> Yes, sir. I'll go ahead and start with
[1:32:16] Mr. Wagner,
>> are we going? Okay, thank you. Yogi Bear
[1:32:20] once said deja vu all over again. Uh,
previously I provided the council with a
[1:32:25] detailed position paper concerning the
Tiny Town Community Foundation aka TCF.
[1:32:30] Tonight I will identify the central
facts and newly produced records. First,
[1:32:36] this is not an attack on the foundation,
its mission, or the citizens who
[1:32:40] volunteered their time. a privately
funded founding foundation benefiting
[1:32:45] county may be worthwhile. My concern is
how this organization was concerned and
[1:32:50] how public resources were used. The
available record shows that Mark Laam
[1:32:55] and Mayor Russell discussed forming a
5013C for city related projects and the
[1:32:59] mayor agreed to proceed. It also
indicates that only two aldermen
[1:33:03] particip participated in some
discussions or meetings while the other
[1:33:07] four aldermen were not involved. Mr.
Leam acknowledges that a complete
[1:33:12] council was never fully informed or
formally authorized the sign the
[1:33:16] expenditures to form TCF. Yet the
project proceeded without any identified
[1:33:25] full public presentation to the council
explaining its structure, private
[1:33:29] control, use of city resources or
expected benefits before the city funds
[1:33:34] were spent. The city retained attorneys,
prepared the organization, and taxexempt
[1:33:39] documentation, but the corporation was
not placed under the city control. A
[1:33:44] private board controls it. The city
apparently cannot appoint directors,
[1:33:48] control accounts or expenditures, amend
bylaws, or automatically receive any
[1:33:52] assets. Newly produced records now put a
much sharper point on the funding issue.
[1:33:59] October uh November 8, 2023 before
incorporation and formation expenses
[1:34:05] occurred, city attorney Justy Ikeman
introduced Mr. Leighton to his firm's
[1:34:10] tax attorney and advised him directly.
The foundation would have to be
[1:34:14] established with private, not city
funds. Nevertheless, July 29, 2024, TCF
[1:34:23] received and forwarded by email to Mr.
them two bills for the si from the
[1:34:28] city's law firm, Mr. Aman's firm,
totaling $1370,
[1:34:32] and asked in that email, what do we do
with these? Records do not show who
[1:34:37] authorized the city payments. The
invoices were built to CCF, not the
[1:34:41] city, yet the city paid for these TCF
bills. On August 13, 2026,
[1:34:48] city attorney Ferrar explained that
constitutional concerns extend beyond
[1:34:52] money to personal, property, and other
resources. The city supplied staff,
[1:34:57] time, email, city hall, and retain
councils with while the corporation
[1:35:02] remained privately controlled. The
city's receipt journal now add another
[1:35:07] important fact. From January of 2024
through late August of 26, over 9,113
[1:35:15] receipt lines which include 60 entries
coded as donations or return uh
[1:35:20] reimbursements. However, not one entry
identifies a receipt from TCF. The
[1:35:26] city's books therefore show zero dollars
received from TCF, not for the parks,
[1:35:31] not for the museum or any other city
department of fund. Mr. Ikeman says the
[1:35:36] city should not have happened in its
billing and they say they're going to
[1:35:41] reimburse it. Well, whoopla, but that
repays only the hard dollar expense. It
[1:35:46] does not calculate or repay the city for
staff time, city hall, or administrative
[1:35:52] handling. The record identifies no
method of calculating and recovering
[1:35:56] those costs. The taxpayers therefore
have not been shown to be made whole.
[1:36:01] So, this is not merely about $1370. is
about the chain of government authority.
[1:36:06] I am not asking the council tonight to
declare that anyone committed an illegal
[1:36:10] exaction or violated law. I'm asking
that we establish facts, determine legal
[1:36:16] authority, correct weaknesses in our
controls, p pause further city
[1:36:20] promotions or use of city resources for
TCF until the council approves a
[1:36:25] transparent structure in public.
Identify these problems is not enough.
[1:36:30] The council should give citizens a
clear, accountable way. I recommend a
[1:36:34] properly noticed meeting directing the
city attorney and our CPAs to obtain a
[1:36:39] written proposal from Arkansas Community
Foundation without committing the city
[1:36:44] before action would be reserved for the
council. Proposal should initially
[1:36:49] include separate proposals for funds for
the museum and parks and wreck. After
[1:36:54] public review and council approval, the
city's website and official Facebook
[1:36:57] page should provide direct donation
leaks for each fund, which provide
[1:37:01] donors with receipts and including
details of the donation. Until then,
[1:37:06] city communication should not encourage
donations that could cause public to
[1:37:10] believe the city owns or controls TFC.
This does not accuse TCF volunteers of
[1:37:17] wrongdoing. It preserves the charitable
goal while separating city government
[1:37:22] from privately controlled corporations
and placing administrations.
[1:37:26] Reimbursement for legal bills is
appropriate, but reimbursement is not an
[1:37:30] explanation. The city of Tiny Town and
this council are entitled to both
[1:37:34] explanations and responsible path
forwards. An appendix is a copy of this
[1:37:38] and anybody can have it that shows a
timeline to support what I've just said.
[1:37:42] Thank you.
>> Hey, Mr. Graves.
[1:37:45] » Nothing to add.
>> Mr. Fontes. Well, I think we learned
[1:37:49] quite a bit from that um
that Mr. Wagner. And I had a little bit
[1:37:55] of questions for uh our attorney over
there, but it seemed like that uh pretty
[1:38:00] much cleared it up.
>> Okay.
[1:38:01] » Um I mean, essentially
those funds were paid by the city. Yet,
[1:38:07] we don't have anything that's ever been
proven to us to show, you know, what
[1:38:11] funds are in that account. being that it
is a
[1:38:15] a you know a standalone entity. It's
almost essentially equivalent to the the
[1:38:20] gentleman that came up here this morning
or earlier today, the Arkansas uh
[1:38:25] community foundation. This is almost
like an entity that would be presented
[1:38:29] like hers. Um totally separate from the
government here of Tony Town. Um,
[1:38:37] so I guess we have no no reason to look
into that, but I'm just puzzled, you
[1:38:41] know, to how how does that affect,
you know, I heard we were selling bricks
[1:38:47] for the community building over here.
How does that affect
[1:38:51] I guess I'm I'm a little murky on how
how do those bricks get placed in th in,
[1:38:56] you know, from those donations
on a tiny town entity that we're
[1:39:01] constructing? You know, I get the the
point of that, but the funds are just
[1:39:07] comingling and then it just sounds like
based off of what Mr. Ikeman has
[1:39:13] presented, we even co-mingled as from
the existence of this. Um, so I'm a
[1:39:17] little perplexed on where we're at with
this entity and how it is in regards to
[1:39:25] the city of Tony Town.
And I should clarify, I was caught off
[1:39:30] guard to c be called to speak to the
entire issue. I'm happy to answer legal
[1:39:34] questions. You you seem to pose some
legal questions in there and I'm happy
[1:39:37] to take those on. Yes, Mr. Ikeman did
confirm to me an email that the his firm
[1:39:43] uh was paid for this and he's confirmed
he's going to remit those payments back.
[1:39:47] Yes, we have confirmed city money was
paid. To your sort of broader question,
[1:39:51] there is no control. This is a se this
is like creating an LLC with its own
[1:39:56] member management class or or
shareholders or whatever. There is no
[1:40:00] control whatsoever.
>> It is operating as the Tiny Town
[1:40:04] Community Foundation, but it could um
under its charter, under its bylaws, it
[1:40:09] could repurpose itself as something
completely different and rename itself
[1:40:12] tomorrow and then all the money for
those bricks could be used for whatever
[1:40:15] the purpose they see fit legally. M
>> not to suggest that they would do that,
[1:40:22] right? But we live in a world where they
could and it's our job to make sure that
[1:40:26] we don't let them live in a world where
>> we create things, they raise money on
[1:40:31] our behalf and then we have no
accountability.
[1:40:33] » So hypothetically speaking, Mr. Ferrar,
if I were to donate to
[1:40:38] would it be possible for me to donate
straight to the city that money for,
[1:40:43] you know, say I wanted to bench out here
in the park out here in the park. What
[1:40:47] is that a tax deductible donation that I
could present to the city rather than go
[1:40:52] through this?
>> I am not a tax attorney and don't
[1:40:54] profess to be, but I my belief is yes.
There is no um requirement there is no
[1:40:59] prohibition against giving money to a
municipal uh or municipal government for
[1:41:05] tax purposes and and the and the city
can take tax the city can take
[1:41:09] donations.
>> Okay.
[1:41:11] » Okay.
In other words, I don't know that we
[1:41:14] have checked all the boxes to identify a
foundation has an underlying
[1:41:17] » well legal need.
>> Thank you. And to that, you know, I
[1:41:21] looked before I brought this to council
to have a discussion on this. I looked
[1:41:26] for any kind of ordinance or resolution.
Uh the closest thing I could find was
[1:41:30] back in March of 2024.
um and you'll feel free to go watch it.
[1:41:35] But in March 19th, 2024 at minute 23 um
and 50 seconds, we had a small smidg
[1:41:44] discussion about um the current status
of this entity and how we had um
[1:41:53] appointed, you know, a president and a
co-president and directors that were on
[1:41:59] there. Um, but that's as far as I can
find anything as far as our involvement.
[1:42:06] It sounds like we didn't have any
involvement in it. Um,
[1:42:11] so I'm I'm kind of, you know, when when
I heard of it last meeting and I asked
[1:42:16] that question, we kind of had our
communication. Um, it just kind of left
[1:42:20] me perplexed on where we're at on those
donations, on those funds, and where
[1:42:24] we're where they're at and how we use
them. Um, so thank you for letting me
[1:42:28] have this discussion and I will yield
the rest of my time.
[1:42:31] » Artmani,
>> I'm going to let the smarter people to
[1:42:35] my right ask questions as opposed to me
because I'm thoroughly confused.
[1:42:39] [laughter]
>> You yield your time.
[1:42:41] » I yield my time,
>> Mr. Burrus.
[1:42:44] » Thank you. To answer council member
Montes's um question about tax advantage
[1:42:49] donations to municipal governments,
according to the Internal Revenue Code
[1:42:52] 170C1, you can indeed give that to a
municipality and get a a tax advantage
[1:42:59] for that. It's something called Route
50. Um, uh, in other news regarding all
[1:43:04] of this, uh, I'm I'm a little torn on
how to think about all of it because I
[1:43:12] think there were
well-intentioned people doing
[1:43:17] well-intentioned things for a good
purpose,
[1:43:23] and yet um, doing it the wrong way
doesn't necessarily exempt that. And uh
[1:43:32] I think my biggest concern in the midst
of all of it and as council we've been
[1:43:36] sitting here we've we've heard people
talk about it and it it's always just
[1:43:40] sort of been presented like this is what
we're doing. This is how it's going and
[1:43:43] I thought okay that's cool that's good.
Um, but I I think uh and and I don't
[1:43:48] mean to pick on on the law firm, but I
think that when we ask our attorneys for
[1:43:55] help that it's incumbent upon the
attorneys to give us the right advice
[1:44:01] and I understand that sometimes we're
just doing the best we can and I'm not
[1:44:05] that that is not at all aimed at you,
Mr. Ferrar. Um but I do appreciate that
[1:44:11] um uh Harrington Miller when they charge
the wrong entity and that has been found
[1:44:17] out and uh there they say they will give
that money back to us. I appreciate
[1:44:21] that. But I I think just along the line
there have been some things that that
[1:44:25] weren't entirely uh correct. Um could
each of us as council members dig in a
[1:44:30] little deeper? Sure. I think we can and
and should. Uh, and yet there are
[1:44:36] certain areas where we say, you know
what, we're hiring them to do a thing
[1:44:39] and and we expect that. So, um, again,
I'm a little torn. I don't mean to
[1:44:44] condemn anybody in particular, and if
there's any condemnation here, I believe
[1:44:48] that belongs, uh, to to the legal firm
there, uh, and not those that have been
[1:44:53] trying to do their best um, to get this
handled. However, in the midst of all of
[1:44:57] it, I do appreciate the digging, the
cajoling, the kicking, uh the pointing
[1:45:02] out uh of error. Uh because if we don't
point out what's wrong, we certainly
[1:45:06] can't fix it, and we most certainly
can't fix it in the future. So, uh
[1:45:10] Forest Gump may have been right uh when
he said you can't fix stupid. And yet,
[1:45:15] uh maybe you can.
>> That was Rod White.
[1:45:18] » Oh, my bad.
>> Forest was stupid.
[1:45:20] » That's right. Stupid is a stupid does.
Uh we we sometimes put put different
[1:45:24] words in there. Uh, and u, and I uh, I
don't in any way want to disparage Yogi
[1:45:31] Bear,
>> the lovely Hannah Barber character from
[1:45:34] the 1950s, but it was not Yogi Bear who
made that comment. I believe that was
[1:45:38] Yogi Barra of the Yankees fame. I could
be wrong. Two of my favorite Yogis. Uh,
[1:45:45] I just want to make sure we get them
right. And that is that is all I have to
[1:45:48] say. [laughter]
>> Mr. Lori,
[1:45:52] » thank you, Meg. Uh, thank you for
providing a little bit of levity there,
[1:45:56] Mr. Burrus. Um, I just want to
re-emphasize I I'll keep this really
[1:46:00] short. U, uh, kind of dug into the three
position papers that uh, Mr. Wagner sent
[1:46:05] out and just want to reemphasize. I know
he asked tough questions and sometimes
[1:46:10] comes at uh, at people a little bit
hard, but uh, the bottom line is not
[1:46:15] casting aspersions on anybody who's
trying to do this. Um, it may seem that
[1:46:19] way, but it's not. We're just trying to
make sure that this thing is tightened
[1:46:22] down uh in in a usable fashion. There
there is a world in which these two
[1:46:28] foundations, the Arkansas Community
Foundation and Tinytown Community
[1:46:31] Foundation can both uh coexist
peacefully together. Uh just pointing
[1:46:36] out some of the weaknesses. Um you know
the questions about municipal authority,
[1:46:41] city council authorization, donor
transparency, baking and signatory
[1:46:45] controls. Um and uh uh the overall
recommendations from the papers is not
[1:46:52] to shut down the charitable fundraising
but to complete the factual record,
[1:46:55] attain obtain formal legal review and
clarify the city foundation
[1:46:59] relationship, protect donor
understanding and establish clear
[1:47:03] financial governance controls before the
matter is closed. So and I think those
[1:47:08] are the weaknesses that Mr. Ferrar
pointed out u that exist. we can tighten
[1:47:13] those up and we can get this uh thing
operational the way it needs to be. Uh a
[1:47:18] couple of key points that that showed
some of the weaknesses the foundation
[1:47:23] stated purposes are broad and not
limited exclusively to Tonytown. Um I
[1:47:29] think the way the if you can correct me
Mr. Fer if if I misstate something
[1:47:34] please do. Um um but
donors could not be um assured that the
[1:47:41] funds would be limited to just uh the
city of Tiny Town. They could go
[1:47:46] anywhere. Uh the articles uh do not
require the foundation assets to pass to
[1:47:52] the city upon its dissolution. Uh that's
something that probably needs to be
[1:47:56] rectified.
um
[1:47:59] you we could more narrowly define the
purposes of the Tonytown Community
[1:48:04] Foundation and probably tighten it up
and make it stronger. Um and then
[1:48:12] an important thing that was brought out
in all three of the papers, donor
[1:48:15] clarity matters. Uh the papers make it
recommend making it unmistakable whether
[1:48:23] a donation is going to the city, the
foundation, another charitable
[1:48:26] administrator and whether the gift is
restricted. So people when they donate,
[1:48:30] they need to know uh that their
donations are going where they want them
[1:48:34] to go. U I think that's pretty
important. Uh again, this is not about
[1:48:41] who's on the board now. uh none of us
are going to be here in 40 years, but
[1:48:46] this foundation may well be here for 40
years. And if we don't set it up right,
[1:48:53] that's the problem. So, I think uh thank
you for bringing these points to us. Uh
[1:48:59] it's I think a fruitful discussion and I
think it warrants further looking into
[1:49:04] so that the Tonytown Community
Foundation could be a viable entity.
[1:49:11] » Do we get second?
>> Yes, Mr. I yield. Okay. Uh, in contrast
[1:49:17] to what Mr. W Koviaak just said, he uses
the term we a lot. We don't have a dog
[1:49:23] in the fight. The Tony Town Community
Foundation is an entity that's created.
[1:49:30] It was created initially with the funds
of the city, but it's been cast free.
[1:49:34] But for those board members, uh, maybe a
little bit word of advice. I started my
[1:49:39] conversations with Mr. Laam because u
I asked most of y'all y'all didn't have
[1:49:46] a clue but I read through some minutes
and the mayor said is our 501c well I
[1:49:52] don't know who our is a mouse in her
pocket or the city council but now I
[1:49:55] learned that city council mostly was in
the dark but on May 23 an email u shows
[1:50:01] that uh
Mr. Laam contacted Mr. Ikeman Mr.
[1:50:07] Dykeman clearly says that he informed
contrary to what Mr. Burus pointed out
[1:50:13] that he instructed this should be a
private funded situation. My previous
[1:50:19] email and and dissertation says that I
also asked u in in my due diligence of
[1:50:26] this trying to learn what TCF was. I
discovered it was not in current
[1:50:32] standings with the Arkansas Secretary of
State which is formed and shows any uh
[1:50:37] voluntary 50. I also asked for the
annual form 990s filed and I have an
[1:50:44] email from Mr. Leam saying because they
were under 50,000 they didn't have to.
[1:50:48] Well, that's not exactly right because
in the IRS standards
[1:50:53] 50,000 and under forms what's known as a
990- N. anything over 50 to up 2009 990
[1:51:02] EZ. So for those people on the board,
you might be considered this. You won't
[1:51:07] have to be worrying about staying around
four years because if you file or fail
[1:51:12] to file your federal tax returns in that
fashion even though you're a nonprofit,
[1:51:17] you're required to file those firms. You
do it three years in a row, you lose
[1:51:21] your tax exempt status. So it will take
care of itself unless somebody wants to
[1:51:26] really get involved and bring it
forward. Now, from the city's benefit,
[1:51:30] the way this thing is formed, they can
give anything. They can give to uh I
[1:51:35] don't know if PETA is a a qualified uh
charitable donation, but they can give
[1:51:40] to anybody they want to. There's no ties
whatsoever. Maybe Mr. Leam was a little
[1:51:45] confused when he said he had experience
with this in Holland, Illinois. Review
[1:51:48] of the record showed that Highland,
Illinois has two 5013C's. One is called
[1:51:53] the Community of Highland, Illinois. It
is a broad-based community organization.
[1:51:58] History shows that they contribute to
the city to the to the uh u schools.
[1:52:04] There's a second one that's closely tied
which is for lack of a a correct
[1:52:09] terminology. It's it's regarding youth
sports and that's tied real close to the
[1:52:15] city. This is really
um not even close to either one of
[1:52:21] those. is the way it's structured. I'm
saying we keep using the term we. No, we
[1:52:26] don't have a dog in the fight. Uh we
need to structure how we want to deal
[1:52:32] with our parks, our museums to receive
funding, and we don't have the
[1:52:40] accounting uh staff even though we got
some hired CPAs to keep up with the uh
[1:52:46] documentation of how these funds are
received and documented. Uh we need to
[1:52:52] look at a third party until we get much
bigger and we have a few million or so
[1:52:58] in our pockets in some quasi or some
kind of of uh charitable foundation. I
[1:53:06] yield.
>> Okay. Mr. Graves,
[1:53:08] » I yield my time.
>> Mr. Montes,
[1:53:11] » no comment.
>> Mr. Ottomani,
[1:53:15] » I have nothing.
>> Mr. Fur. Uh, well, first off, Council
[1:53:18] Member Wagner, if I misspoke earlier,
thank you for pointing it out. I'm not
[1:53:21] sure what I misspoke about, but I trust
you. And so, please accept my uh my
[1:53:26] apologies for that. Um, I am um
I agree with you. We do say we a lot. Uh
[1:53:33] I think we do that about a lot of things
here. Um and we and we shouldn't. But,
[1:53:37] uh I also agree with Mr. Koak. Um uh
chances are this council will not be
[1:53:43] seated here in 40 or 50 years from now.
But if we can get this thing working
[1:53:48] right, that that would be good if if
that's necessary. Um, I did have a
[1:53:52] question and and I don't know if anybody
can answer it. But do we even know how
[1:53:56] much is in that foundation currently?
>> Private, so a member might graciously
[1:54:02] tell us now, but I hope they got $1370.
We're gonna have to pay that law firm.
[1:54:09] But, you know, it really would hurt my
feelings if the law firm get stiff or
[1:54:12] something.
>> All right, let's move on. I think uh Mr.
[1:54:17] Fur was about to answer that question.
>> Yes, he was. And
[1:54:19] » I was just going to say what Mr. Wagner
said. We don't know how much is in there
[1:54:22] and we can't compel them to tell us.
>> Hey, Mr. Bur.
[1:54:27] » I will yield the remaining time. Thank
you.
[1:54:30] » Mr. Wish Goyak.
[1:54:36] » If by we, I I don't mean I don't want
the city to try to micromanage this
[1:54:41] thing. I agree with you 110%. We we've
got plenty of things on our plate. I'm
[1:54:47] just more interested in them getting
their wheels lined out for themselves
[1:54:51] and if they want to stay as a
functioning entity yield.
[1:54:55] » Okay, that was the second round. Um I do
want to say a few things. First of all,
[1:55:01] the community foundation was supposed to
be set up to help the city of Tony Town
[1:55:06] and we did go to the attorneys. We did
ask what we needed to do and we did what
[1:55:11] we were told that we needed to do. Um,
and I do think that it would be great
[1:55:16] for Tonnytown to be able to receive
funds and help have a foundation help
[1:55:23] us, but that's here and there. But we'll
move on um to closing comments.
[1:55:29] Mr. Wagner,
[1:55:33] » Mr. Graves,
>> none.
[1:55:35] » Mr. Montes,
>> thanks for coming out tonight. Uh,
[1:55:38] everybody enjoy your evening.
>> Mr. starting.
[1:55:42] » Well, I do appreciate the people that
showed up and uh there was a couple
[1:55:47] comments about stupid and stupid does
and you can't fix stupid, but as I
[1:55:52] recall the movie, Bubba Gump Shrimp
Company did awfully well, so I guess you
[1:55:56] can fix stupid. So, I move on,
>> Mr. Burrus.
[1:56:00] » Thank you, Madam Mayor. I wanted to
thank those that uh that came to the
[1:56:04] Catholic Church St. Joseph's last week.
Uh a week ago tonight, uh ADQ came uh to
[1:56:10] hear public comments uh regarding the um
uh issuance or lack thereof of an air
[1:56:17] permit uh for Waste Management's Eco
Vista landfill. Um unfortunately there
[1:56:23] uh there weren't as many people as as
we've seen there in the past. The upshot
[1:56:27] is the people that did speak spoke
passionately, intelligently. They did a
[1:56:31] great job. Um, unfortunately, I walked
away feeling like ADQ doesn't really
[1:56:36] care much about what we had to say and
that instead it was more uh of them
[1:56:41] going through some motions that they had
to do legally. Um, but at any rate, um,
[1:56:47] I'm I'm thankful for those that did come
to speak and uh, and to share their um,
[1:56:53] their opinions. That is all. Thank you,
>> Mr. Bushko.
[1:56:57] » Thank you, Mayor. U, thank you to Mr.
Ferrar for serving as our
[1:57:01] parliamentarian. Uh, and thank you for
kind of lining our wheels out. Uh, we're
[1:57:06] we're going to get better at this as we
go. Um, I've ran across something in the
[1:57:10] news uh that I figured was um
important to bring out. Northwest
[1:57:16] Arkansas needs $ 1.5 billion in
wastewater investment. So, um, you know,
[1:57:22] with our growth, um, you know, that's
some of the bad news that comes along
[1:57:27] with it. But um anyway, we'll end on a
positive note with that. Thanks to
[1:57:32] everybody for coming out. Uh hopefully
see you in a couple of weeks.
[1:57:35] » Okay, Mr. Parr.
>> I have no comments. Everybody have a
[1:57:39] good night.
>> All right. Same. I hope you guys all
[1:57:42] have a good evening and uh
all in favor of a journ say I.
[1:57:47] » All right.