Highlights of the Fort Smith Board of Directors Meeting 9/12/23

The very long, very well attended Fort Smith Board of Directors study session meeting held 9-12-23 with Director Settle absent began with a presentation from Community Development Director Gabucci regarding affordable housing as it relates to the Community Development Block Grant and HOMES federal grant programs.

Gabucci pointed out her department’s plan to deal with the top five needs, housing assistance (including down payment and closing cost assistance), housing rehab, housing construction, emergency assistance, and emergency home repairs. The CDBG allows for funding to be spent on acquisition of land, demolition, and rehab of single family dwellings, but does not allow for new construction of single family dwellings or for anything to do with multi-family construction or renovation except for when it’s involved with homeless shelters. She discussed the housing assistance program that is handled in-house where citizens can apply for a grant to repair their homes. The program has $250,000 a year to spend on home repair grants, all coming from federal HUD funds, none from City funds. The HOME grant of $462,538 for new homes that are sold at market value went to CSCDC this year to build 5 homes on land acquired via the CDBG grant. 63% of the money spent on the homes comes back into the program. The up to $40,000 subsidy to the buyers of each house is forgivable after 15 years (and what has to be repaid of the subsidy is reduced over time even before the 15 years, so if they say sold it after 5 years, they would still benefit some from the subsidy).

Director Rego discussed “affordable housing” being a term to refer to at or below the median income of $45,000 in our city, at about 30% of the income, an $1100 mortgage. He asked how Fort Smith is currently doing in having housing as it relates to that metric. Gabucci said there is “still a lot of work to be done”. She mentioned that the current market and interest rates are posing challenges.

Director Good asked about possibly using the funds and grants in ways that address affordable housing while also addressing blighted areas. He also expressed his view that $250,000 for assistance is a “very small amount of money for the amount of residents that need help.”. City Administrator Geffken said that Administration is currently working on a proposed plan to address blight including possibly taking over blighted properties where the amount of the liens is higher than the value of the property and rehabilitating them and selling them. Director Good mentioned a program in Pennsylvania that works like that. Director Martin said “we have to be careful how we get involved” but said we “gotta be able to incentivize removal of blighted properties”.

Director Good acknowledged that rents in a lot of places in town simply aren’t affordable.

Director Christina Catsavis asked if the 4 person staff of the Community Development Department is adequate. Gabucci said that the staff is 100% funded by a HUD grant and that there “is always work to be done” and that they could use more staff. Director Christina Catsavis asked if the new grant writer whose hiring will soon be finalized will benefit the department. Gabucci said that they would.

Director Morton said that the only way to reduce prices is to build more housing and that the Housing Authority will be key to the solution.

Caleb Brown with the Crawford Sebastian Community Development Council (CSCDC) spoke regarding that organization’s role in affordable housing. He mentioned the free programs for homebuyer education and housing counseling that are both available to residents of all income levels. He mentioned the Homebuyers Assistance Program that helps qualified buyers with up to $10,000 toward their down payment, but said that the program is currently paused because of housing market trends and interest rates and that they hope to restart it in 2024. He talked about the Stone Bridge rental housing subdivision comprised of 50 single family homes with 3 or 4 bedrooms that is a partnership between CSCDC and property management company Strategic Realty. The homes are all full and there is currently a waiting list 300 people long. The Board showed enthusiasm for the Stone Bridge program. Multiple directors showed support for expanding that type of development. Director Morton asked how long it takes between ADFA funding application to having a rental development like Stone Bridge finished. Brown said that Stone Bridge applied for funds in 2018 and was finished in 2023, but it was delayed by Covid. A similar development, Stone Brook in Van Buren, applied for funds in 2015 and was completed in 2017.

Director Good praised the properties on Young that are a partnership between CSCDC and Compass Property Management calling them “very well done homes”. He asked how the land is acquired for CSCDC projects. Brown said that it is mostly Housing Authority lots and some “making sure you notice when something comes up for sale.” Director Good asked if the city could sell blighted properties to CSCDC. Geffeken said that they could provide land or homes to be rehabilitated. He said that current policy on liens allows the City to take ownership of properties with liens. The City in the past used to do that, but they ended up with a bank of properties they didn’t have a program in place to deal with. They might be able to reactivate the practice again with partnering with CSCDC.

The Board discussed potentially building a roundabout at the intersection of Free Ferry and Albert Pike. This issue was up for a vote at the 8-15-23 meeting and was discussed some at that meeting including input from multiple residents of that neighborhood in opposition to the roundabout. The issue was tabled at that meeting to allow for further discussion first and because there were 2 Directors absent.

The roundabout was proposed because the intersection is the #7 highest accident intersection in the city and the roundabout is a better option financially than a signal.

Director Rego who lives very near the intersection said it “doesn’t seem like the status quo at this intersection is sustainable”. He expressed a desire for pedestrian safety improvements like a cross walk and sidewalks. He mentioned that the contract with Mickel Griffin would allow the Board to make the best decision based on up to date information.

Director Morton said “I don’t believe there’s any way to put a roundabout there without infringing on the people who live there.” He mentioned his experiences with roundabouts in Conway and said that they work well but that it takes space to make them work. He said “a roundabout is not the solution here.” He suggested installing flashing red light stop signs and then assessing their outcomes after a year and potentially adding a signal if the accidents have not decreased. But he questioned if they would help because a lot of the accidents are rear-end crashes and many of those are caused by people not paying attention. He said that $20,000-$30,000 for the lighted signs would be cheaper than $190,000 for the study. He said that the flashing signs work in his neighborhood and are solar powered. Streets Director Meeker said that flashing lights are not likely to prevent accidents at that location. His recommendation is that “for the welfare of the people as a whole”, if not a roundabout, that a traffic signal be installed.

Director Christina Catsavis expressed concern about roundabout wrecks. She also expressed concern about the amount of property required to be taken to build the roundabout (or to add a signal, especially with a turn lane). She said the current 4-way stop sign is “the best of all the bad options we’ve got.”

Director Good said “I haven’t seen a real traffic need.” and questioned if other areas might need addressed before #7 on the accident list. Meeker said that the other intersections ranked more dangerous are already signalized and “this intersection there’s something we can do.” Director Good called the required space from property owners “tremendous”. Of the roundabout, he said “I can’t see it going there.”

Director George Catsavis asked if there are other roundabouts in town. Engineering Director Snodgrass mentioned ones at Riley Park, Ben Geren, and in the Providence subdivision at Chaffee. Director Catasavis called the 100 signatures on a petition against the roundabout “good enough for me”. He also said “I hate roundabouts.” and said they’re confusing and called the project a “definite no from me.”

Director Rego said that the feedback he’d received regarding pedestrian safety was “crystal clear” and that he wanted to consider sidewalks and crosswalks regardless of what else was or wasn’t done at the intersection. Geffken said that there is definitely potential for that and that they would need easements.

Director George Catsavis asked what happens if the property owners on the corners where the roundabout would need to be built don’t want to sell. Snodgrass said that the Board would have the option to use eminent domain to buy the property. Director George Catsavis said he would not use eminent domain.

Director Christina Catsavis said “I don’t care to see this placed on a future agenda.”. Director Martin agreed. Geffken reminded that Mickel Griffin could look at multiple options including a signal both with or without a turn lane, and they could be instructed to consider all options except for a roundabout. Director Christina Catsavis asked “Do we want to pay $190,000 to find that out?” and voiced support for the flashing light stop signs. Director Good said that the cost is “a lot of money to spend on the study, but how much do you spend on public safety?”.

Director Morton motioned for contracting with Mickle Griffin for the study, but with a roundabout not to be considered as an option, to be put on a future agenda for a vote. Director Rego acknowledged a “preponderance of folks who prefer the status quo” and said that the issue coming back would have a “fairly unproductive outcome, I would imagine.” The motion died for lack of a second. So the issue of a roundabout or signal at Free Ferry and Albert Pike will not be returning to the Board any time in the foreseeable future.

The Board heard updates on the water, wastewater, and consent decree related wastewater Capital Improvement Plans. This discussion was originally on the agenda for the 8-29-23 meeting with the updates on Capital Improvement Plans from all of the other departments, but was tabled due to the long length of that meeting.

Utilities Director McAvoy mentioned efforts by his department to bundle smaller projects together for a single bid and that it has allowed them to get more for less money.

Director Christina Catsavis asked about the staffing levels of the department. McAvoy answered “Some sections are good. Some are abysmal.”

Director Martin asked about the Towson Avenue project. McAvoy said that it had been on the 2024 CIP. But there is no money for it. Geffken said that the DCIB grant that was hopefully to be used to fund the $24 million project was not awarded to Fort Smith.

Director George Catsavis expressed concern that at the current rate of spending there will not be enough money to complete the consent decree required projects in time to not be in violation. McAvoy said that worst case scenario, the City could be put into receivership and the federal government would appoint someone to be over the utilities and would set the water and sewer rates and make the contracts and the Board would have no say. He said that it has happened in Jackson, MS. Director Morton said “We’re a long way from the scenarios we’re talking about.” He mentioned that in 2025, there will be opportunity to reissue bonds and generate $100 million dollars. He said “This Board’s obligation is to get us into a financial position” to do that. Director Christina Catsavis asked when the rate study being conducted will be ready. McAvoy said a draft will be ready the 1st of October.

Before the Citizens’ Forum began, Director Good mentioned that he looked into the incident at Hope Campus mentioned during the Officials Forum at last week’s meeting. He read the police report and the person with the weapon was going to harm themselves, but Officer Hendrix de-escalated the situation well. He expressed it not being evidence of Hope Campus being a bad place that is detrimental to the community. Director Good said “I don’t want us to jump on bandwagons” being negative about Hope Campus.

Directly before speakers started in the Citizens Forum section of the meeting, Director Rego and Director Morton spoke a little about the Planters Road issue. Director Rego said that the proposed Mickel Griffin contract would be designed to protect trails and add trails and facilitate numerous public meetings. He said the Board is “trying to future proof our community” and “Any new road extension would be several years away.” Director Morton said that the map for the project “has been misinterpreted” and added that it is also “only a concept”. He said that City is going to look towards Burrough or Excelsior Road and other possible alternatives away from Ben Geren. He said it is “Clear to me there’s no current need for Planters Rd.” and he is “confident that in the time we have we can come up with a good route for police that is not Planters Rd.” Geffken said Planters Road is “in no way a done deal”.

Resident Reed Handlery spoke in opposition to the Planters Road extension. He said that he bought his house sight unseen because of Ben Geren and its nature trails. He shared his love for the experience of getting lost in the city in the greenspace there. He mentioned that Arkansas is ranked #46 among the states in physical activity and said that people are more likely to get out and move in spaces where you don’t have to cross roads.

Resident Andy Postrick mentioned that statistics show that the more roads are built, the worse the traffic actually becomes. He mentioned the work of Strongtowns that suggests limiting road expansion. He said that road building is a “never ending cycle” that ends up with cities that look like Los Angeles or Rogers. Director Christina Catsavis requested that Postrick email the Strongtowns info on roads to the Board. He agreed that he would.

Resident Gary Henry said that Planters Rd is mostly industrial and that an extension would bring industrial truck traffic down Massard and create a “big hazard.”

Resident Chris Piza urged the Board to keep in mind not stripping the community of greenspaces. He also questioned why the location for the new police precinct was chosen where a $16 million road project would be needed for it. Geffken said that it is to correspond with areas that have grown. The City looked at Chaffee first and the costs there did not make sense. The location chosen is selected for its proximity to both Chaffee and Fianna Hills.

Geffken said that there are documents circulating that say that the proposed Planters Rd extension would go through the center of Ben Geren, but it actually would not. He agreed that the City would need to look at limiting trucks or saying no trucks. Geffken said they are looking at other options and other roads. One barrier to some of those ideas is that the city doesn’t have all the land in all of those areas. However, he said “All options are open for this.”

Director Morton said the “city is going to have to decide are we in favor of trails and greenspace or not.” He said his “preferred approach is always going to be to the south.” He hopes the county works with the City on the property to make that route work.

Director Martin said that he wants additional trails built regardless of what does or doesn’t happen regarding the Planters Rd extension or some other extension in that area. Geffken said that when they are able to build roads they are able to build multi-purpose areas next to it and that they have been doing that. Of the trails at/near Ben Geren and the proposed Planters Rd extension, he also said emphatically that “we would never consider cutting off those trails” that the idea has always been that the design would include bridges, overpasses, or tunnels for pedestrians and bikes.

Multiple citizens spoke and attended in opposition to the new signage making Vista Boulevard a one-way street.

Vista Blvd. resident Craig Lorenza said that Hillcrest has a park in the middle and Vista goes to the park. In the last week or so, someone complained and one-way signs were put in. The one-way traffic requires drivers to circle around the park where young children are. He said he’d never seen a roundabout with a children’s’ park in the middle of it. He said it has been 50 years since there was an accident there and there is “no reason to put those signs in”. He said that Administration didn’t talk to the neighborhood and within 12 hours of the complaint the signs were installed. Expressing concerns about pedestrians being hit by vehicles, he said “Blood is gonna be on this committee if they allow these signs to persist”.

Vista Blvd. resident Sabrina Davis said “there’s no reason for the one-way.” She mentioned the lack of accidents in the area. She expressed opposition to tax dollars being spent on the signs in that neighborhood. He expressed concern for children and pedestrians being hit by cars as well as the lack of public input on the issue saying “We were not given a voice.”

Vista Blvd. resident Johnna Johnson was told by the City when she checked when she moved into her house that Vista was a two-way street. She was surprised to see the new signs. She called the one-way “a ridiculous solution to a non-existent problem.” She suggested instead it be signed as two-way to help clarify so that the residents of the neighborhood could keep doing as they have in the past and not be inconvenienced while still eliminating potential for confusion for drivers from outside of the neighborhood.

Vista Blvd resident Phillip Mortar presented a petition opposing the one-way signed by the residents of every occupied house with a driveway onto Vista. He said that it has been used as a two-way for 100 years. He said that studies show that one-way streets increase traffic, increase crime, and decrease property values. He said the one-way “creates a dangerous environment for a very walkable and playable neighborhood.”

Hillcrest resident Wendall Willburn called the 23 signs around the circle park in a one block area “blatant overkill.” He said that the one way has “created a racetrack around the circle”. He said that roundabouts are designed for high volume traffic “not for quiet residential neighborhoods.” Willburn said that he was a former Assistant Streets Department Head and that if the signs were needed he would have attempted to put them there.

Hillcrest resident Johnnie Rogers said that the neighborhood has not had problems with the flow of traffic. She said she was “curious those signs were put up so quickly”. She said that she asked for a sign on Vista 30 years ago and was denied at that time because there had been no accidents. She called the roundabout “more confusing.” and said “If it’s not broke, don’t fix it.”

Director Christina Catsavis called Vista “really truly one of my favorite streets in all of Fort Smith”. She called the number of signs “not in character with the neighborhood.”

Director Rego expressed that the City put up the signage to conform with State law that requires streets divided by a median like Vista to be one-way. Streets Director Meeker clarified the law. Vista has had a median that is considered a replacement for the center line since it was built in 1923. By law, traffic may not drive down the left side of the road. The law says the “rotary traffic island” that is the park is treated like a roundabout and people drive around the park like a traffic circle. The signs were installed as dictated by the state manual. He said that the City has “done everything in accordance with our statutory requirements.”

Director Morton said “I don’t think any one should fault the City for following black and white State law.” Director George Catsavis asked the Hillcrest and Vista Blvd residents if there was any compromise that would be suitable. Johnson mentioned possibly a grandfather clause to the State law. She suggested that the Board take their time to explore exceptions and solutions and make an informed decision on the issue. Director Rego asked if they had talked to their representatives at the State level yet. They responded that they have not yet because the signage just happened on Friday.

Mayor McGill said the City “discovered a mistake” and “now that it’s public record we must obey the law.”

Director Martin asked the residents if they are opposed to the signs or the one-way or both. They responded both.

Director Christina Catsavis asked if there needed to be so many signs. Meeker said that it was the “most limited amount we could get away with.”

Resident Rick Murphy spoke to express his concern that a City solar energy program is “dead in the water.” He reminded that the window for federal funding is closing October 2024. He advocated hiring a staff member to do grant writing and make an action plan. Director Rego mentioned that the hiring of a grant writer for the City is almost finalized and that they will be able to work on that. He also mentioned the role that Josh Robertson is playing in the energy conservation plans and measures. Geffken mentioned the Emissions Grant that is part of the Inflation Reduction Act that the City is currently working to obtain. Director Christina Catsavis assured that solar has “not just gone by the wayside.”

Resident Jo Elsken suggested that whenever something is being done in a particular neighborhood it might be posted in that neighborhood when the meeting regarding that issue is to be held so that people don’t feel “blindsided” by changes and decisions.