Highlights of the Fort Smith Board of Directors Meeting 2/17/26

At the Fort Smith Board of Directors meeting held 2-17-26, the Board voted to establish a new ordinance that third-party intermediaries working with the City (including contractors, operators, management companies, consultants, advisors, brokers, and agents) will have to

• provide a disclosure prior to Board approval of a transaction about the nature of their role, financial interests, compensation received, relationship between the third party and and the vendor manufacturer, contractor, or financier involved, whether pricing and timelines presented are binding or estimated and the basis for those figures

• submit to the City a signed Certification of Accuracy that any pricing, cost estimates, financial projections, delivery terms, or material representations are accurate to the best of their knowledge, no material facts have been omitted, and are not knowingly misleading

• owe the City “a duty of good faith, fair dealing, and honest disclosure”

Failure to meet the standards set in the ordinance will result in seeking reimbursement or damages for losses, disqualifying the third-party from participating in City transactions for a period of up to 5 years, referring the matter for civil legal action, and imposing administrative sanctions.

This issue was discussed the 2-10-26 study session meeting.

Director Christina Catsavis said that the ordinance would be “addressing a gap in accountability” and would “standardize the process” making it similar to the requirements for engineering estimates.

Kim Fodge, Dan Williams, Carl Nevin, Krystal Cadelli, Chris Cadelli, and Shane McKinney all spoke in support of the ordinance.

Director Good said “I support accountability.” He asked City Attorney Rowe if the ordinance would be redundant to other ordinances already in place. Rowe answered “not to my knowledge” as it “covers a very narrow circumstance.” Director Good asked if contracts with engineers would be affected by the ordinance. Rowe answered “I don’t think so.” and mentioned that the ordinance applies to third party intermediaries who provide information like pricing that are not under contract with the City on the project and that engineers are typically under contract. Director Good called the ordinance “a one-off” in that it is a response to a unique situation with Parrot Island.

Director Kemp said “I support transparency. I support accountability.” but called the ordinance “over-correction.” Director Kemp asked if the ordinance had been in place when the discrepancy between American Resort Management’s estimates on the prices for the slides and installation and the actual costs was noticed if having the ordinance in place would have allowed for the City to have legal recourse against ARM. Rowe said that the ordinance doesn’t obligate the third party to be correct, just to act in good faith, so the City would have to show that they were intentionally misleading. Director Kemp said that the ordinance would slow down the procurement timeline, result in increased liability insurance costs for vendors, and treat estimates “as fixed guarantees.”

Director George Catsavis said that the ordinance would protect the City and the tax payers.

Director Christina Catsavis said that ARM was negotiating pricing when they were acting as a third party intermediary and that she believes that they had a financial incentive to try to sell the City the slides.

Director Rego said that he believes that ARM would have abided by the requirements in the ordinance. He said that he doesn’t “want to just add paperwork.” He expressed concerns about how it would be enforceable and about the difficulty to prove that a third party acted not-in-good-faith legally. He asked Rowe about the success rate of enforceability of that sort of claim and if it is difficult to prove. Rowe said that it would be enforced through civil litigation and that whether it’s successful or difficult to win that sort of case varies and is “going to depend on the facts.”

Director Christina Catsavis said that the ordinance “inspires people” to have accurate figures to back up the pricing they tell the City.

The ordinance passed with all but Director Rego voting in favor of it.

The Board voted unanimously to reinstate a $150,000 budget allocation for the spay/neuter voucher program. The program previously allowed for vouchers of up to $100 for the sterilization, rabies vaccination, and microchipping of cats and dogs until funds budgeted for the program run out. In 2024 and 2025 a total of $378,940 was spent on the program. In 2024, 2318 animals were sterilized through the voucher program. In 2025, 1546 animals were sterilized through the program. Funding for the vouchers ran out in August of 2025.

This issue was discussed at the 2-10-26 study session meeting.

Kim Fodge and Dan Williams spoke in support of the allocation. Gayvonne Hoover, Pam Webber, and Ashley Smith with Kitties & Kanines spoke in support of the allocation. Jo Elsken spoke in support of the ordinance and suggested that an emergency clause be added, that the program be advertised more widely, and that Animal Services be asked for their recommendations on which neighborhoods might be targeted for extra promotion.

Gary spoke and suggested that the allocation should be funded from a cut of something from the carry-forwards from the 2025 into the 2026 budget. He also suggested higher fines for dumping animals. On an unrelated note, during his time to address the Board he mentioned the need for headphones that connect with the microphones at the Board of Directors meetings for the hard of hearing. Acting City Administrator Dingman said that adding the equipment for the hard of hearing is currently in progress.

Krystal Cadelli and Chris Cadelli spoke in opposition to the allocation mentioning the need to prioritize other expenses and spay/neuter being the responsibility of pet owners.

Director George Catsavis said “This will save us money in the long run.”

Director Rego mentioned that the volume of feedback he has received from citizens on the voucher issue has been 50 to 1 versus the amount of feedback he has received on the water slides.

Chief Financial Officer Richards said that including all of the carry-overs and carry-forwards and the allocation for the vouchers that the budget for 2026 is projected to end with reserve balances of 32% for the general fund, 62% for the streets fund, 42% for the water and sewer fund, and 38% for the solid waste fund.

Director Good said that the current animal ordinance “doesn’t go far enough.” He said that the animal problem is an “ongoing problem” and “We need to do whatever we can to address the issue.” He said that it is a public safety issue because of people being chased by loose dogs and dog bites.

Director Kemp said that he sees the allocation as a “non-recurring investment” and that it should be evaluated every year and not seen as an ongoing operational expense. He said “There’s a great need right now.” He spoke in support of mandatory pet licenses with fees. Dingman mentioned that in the past the City had adopted a license requirement but the program was never implemented before the City did the more recent overhaul of the animal ordinance and went with mandatory spay/neuter instead.

Police Chief Baker said “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” and that the vouchers are already showing success.

Director Martin voiced his concerns about the allocation making the budget no longer operationally balanced Director Rego mentioned that the funds for the allocation would come from the general fund reserve balance, so it would not affect the balanced operations budget.

Director Settle voiced his support for mandatory pet licensing. He expressed support for moving the voucher program out of the Communications Department including adding a part-time employee to the staff if necessary.

Director George Catsavis asked Dr. Ashley Smith, spay/neuter veterinarian with Kitties & Kanines, how long it would take to see results from the voucher program. Smith said that in year 5-6 the community should start to see a difference and by year 8-9 it should start saving the City money.

The Board voted unanimously without discussion to renew the City’s auto, equipment and property insurance policies with Arkansas Municipal League (AML). The renewal for auto and equipment is estimated to cost $816,578.97. The renewal for property will cost $1,833,950.32. The total of $2,650,529.29 will be an increase from last year’s cost of $2,451,544.10.

This issue was discussed at the 2-10-26 study session meeting.

The Board voted unanimously without discussion to contract with Forsgren for $4,475,349.48 for 1.7 miles of street overlays and installation of 1250 ft of reinforced concrete pipe.

The Board voted unanimously without discussion to purchase equipment for the Public Works Department including three 1.5 ton flatbed dump trucks for $104,798 each, two 2 ton dump trucks for $132,564.20 each, and a one ton dump truck with snowplow and spreader for $264,769.97 from Carco, a Cat 305 mini-excavator for $84,458.86 and a Cat 308E mini-excavator for $128,210.26 from Riggs, a sewer cleaning vacuum and jet truck for $526,850.75 from Vac-Con, and a sewer camera truck for $304,857.75 from Vacuum Truck Sales and Service.

During the Officials Forum section of the meeting Director Kemp, in response to litigation against the City regarding the no-bid contract with Royal Ridge for the installation of the water slides, suggested that Administration rescind the contract with Royal Ridge and reissue a Request for Bids. Rowe said that Board would need to pass a resolution rescinding and terminating the agreement. Dingman agreed and added that he could start to advertise for the Request for Bids, but would need a Board vote to rescind the contract that has already been awarded. Director Settle voiced support for rescinding and going through a new bid process “to vacate the litigation” saying it is “time to move on.” The vote to rescind the contract will be added to the agenda of the first meeting in March and the request for bids will start before then.

Director George Catsavis expressed concerns about the number of water shut-offs due to non-payment. Citizen Services Director Robertson said that there are an average of 900 per month. Director George Catsavis expressed concerns especially for children without running water due to shut-offs. He asked if a lien could be put on the property instead of shutting off the water. Robertson said that the City is able to do that but that they don’t exercise that ability mainly because about half of the accounts are renters and it would mean putting a lien on property that is not owned by the water account holder.

Director George Catsavis voiced his concerns about extremely high water bills being sent out to customers (including bills in the thousands for people who typically have bills under $50 per month). He mentioned the hardship people face when they get astronomical bills and then get an adjustment but the adjustment is on the next bill so they get their water shut off and have to pay the reconnect fee. Robertson said that automatically when a bill registers as being 300% or more than the previous meter read that meter is reread and if they have contact info for the customer the customer is called to let them know it looks like they will have a high bill and they can work on it together and correct it if it is incorrect and any shut off is postponed while they are working on the correction or adjustment. Director George Catsavis said that the astronomical bills “shouldn’t even be sent out.” He said “These meters are a piece of crap.” He asked if there could be legal action taken against the company that manufactured the meters. Rowe said that if they are substandard and failed the contractual obligations that the City could have a claim if it is still within the statute of limitations. Director George Catsavis said “We’ll file one tomorrow.” Public Works Director Meeker said that on some of the stories that he’s heard being shared about extremely high bills that the “whole story isn’t being relayed” and that some involve factors like obstruction of the meter and multiple months of non-payment. Director George Catsavis asked Meeker if the billing needs to be revamped. Meeker said no, that “from a statistical standpoint” “they’re doing fine.” Director George Catsavis asked if there is a leak check done with the bills over 300% of the previous read. Robertson said that the meter is inspected, if there is a leak on the customer’s side of the meter, the customer is responsible for that. Robertson mentioned that water billing accuracy is at 99.35%.

Director Christina Catsavis asked if there is an issue with the meter reading software. Meeker said that there is a “pretty limited amount” of re-read errors involving the software and that most errors are on the manual reads. Director Christina Catsavis suggested doing a manual review of the electronic re-reads on extraordinary bills and mentioned a customer who received an extreme bill for their irrigation line this month. Robertson agreed that there could be more safeguards put in place on the procedure for irrigation bills noting that irrigation has the highest fluctuations.

Director Martin mentioned being “bombarded” by conversation about extraordinarily high bills on social media. He said that those bills should have never gone out, but acknowledged the trouble of not being able to contact customers before the bill goes out if the City doesn’t have their contact info.

Director Christina Catsavis asked if there is a way for citizens who want to enroll in the Project Concern utilities discount program can get help with the application paperwork. Robertson answered that there is an employee at City Hall in the Collections area dedicated to the program who can walk them through the paperwork.

Director George Catsavis suggested establishing a Water Advisory Board that only looks into high water bills. Director Martin said “I don’t know if I’m there yet” and expressed a desire to see more data on the bills over 300% of the previous read first.

Director Christina Catsavis said that she hears about people with high bills calling in to customer service and that they “don’t get anywhere.”

Director Good said “All these situations are different.” He also said “We’ve got meter problems.”