Following several weeks of questions regarding the status of the contract between the city and Main Street Siloam Springs, city directors chose to discuss the contract during the city board Tuesday, Jan. 17.
When the contract came before the city board during the Dec. 6 city board meeting, it was voted down in a vote of 3-2 with directors Brad Burns, Reid Carroll and Mindy Hunt voting for the contract; Directors David Allen and Lesa Rissler voting against the contract and Directors Marla Sappington and Carol Smiley absent.
Mayor Judy Nation said the contract failed because it required four votes to be approved. A few days later, the mayor vetoed the board's decision and the contract was brought back up at the following meeting Dec. 20.
Rissler made a motion to override the veto, but the motion failed due to a lack of a second. Rissler and Allen have both called the mayor's veto "illegal," each saying that a non-action cannot be vetoed.
This debate continued during the meeting Jan. 3, when Allen made several proposed amendments to the annual rules and procedures for the city board.
At the Jan. 17 meeting, members of the downtown community attended the meeting and were expected to address the board during the public comment portion. No member of the audience addressed the board during the public comment portion.
Before the board shifted to the consent agenda, Hunt asked if the board could address the Main Street contract.
"I want to address the elephant that's in the room," Hunt said. "I think we have a lot of people here tonight that are here to talk about Main Street one way or the other."
Hunt asked for clarification if the contract is on and said if the board needs to make any changes.
Rissler asked how the contract could be on, and Hunt said it was by virtue of the fact that the veto was not overturned. Rissler said the city received an opinion from the attorneys at the Arkansas Municipal League (AML) on the veto.
The AML opinion differed with the opinion of City Attorney Jay Williams, who said the veto was legal. Despite this difference, AML's attorneys said they usually defer to the local attorneys. Williams said he read the AML opinion but disagreed with their conclusion.
"I believe that they are misreading the state statute," Williams said. "But that's just a difference between attorneys. We read it differently. I take the words of the statute literally. They do not."
AML recommended bringing the contract back for another vote in order to settle the matter once and for all, according to City Administrator Phillip Patterson. Patterson sent this recommendation to the directors in an email.
Hunt said he didn't think the veto was illegal and that the veto still stands. Patterson concurred that the veto was not ruled illegal but is just a difference of opinion from two different attorneys.
"The mayor vetoed it," Patterson said. "The board chose not to overturn that veto and based on that I signed the contract, and so the contract is signed."
Rissler said she will do what the other directors want to do but also said that this seems underhanded and conniving.
Allen said he was surprised by the email and didn't feel bringing the contract back was a good idea because this occurred in 2022 subject to the board rules in 2022.
"The contract has been signed by both parties," Allen said. "I don't think anyone has the authority to bring this back for another vote."
The newly elected city directors also weighed in on the opinion. Director Ken Wiles agreed with Allen that bringing the contract back was a moot point. Director Betsy Blair agreed with Rissler saying that the mayor received poor legal advice from the city attorney.
"Our governor can't veto a non-action," Blair said. "The President of the United States cannot veto a non-action, but our mayor can. That doesn't seem right."
Following more discussion, Rissler made a motion to place the contract on the agenda for this meeting, which Blair seconded. The motion failed with a vote of 4-3 with Allen, Blair and Rissler voting yes and Directors Carroll, Hunt, Smiley and Wiles voting no.
Rissler asked if the directors should put this on the next agenda because the issue needed to be resolved. Carroll said he felt the legality of the veto has stepped in front of the true meaning of what is going on, which is Main Street and what they do for the community.
Smiley said she was not at the meeting when this was voted down and was surprised by the decision.
"I do believe there's some personal issues that go back to Main Street," Smiley said.
Smiley said if it takes the directors putting this on the agenda for the next meeting, she would like to see that happen.
Rissler said she doesn't have an issue with Main Street, saying she had a business downtown at one time.
"I'm trying to represent all the citizens of our community and it's not just about Main Street," Rissler said.
Allen said to Smiley he didn't know why she wasn't at the meeting but was upset when she intimated that he had personal issues with Main Street and said she was wrong.
The two directors had a brief exchange on whether Smiley was right or wrong and Nation called for a point of order for the discussion to stop. Nation reminded the directors that they will be respectful of each other and no directors will make accusations.
After Allen made more comments Carroll called for another point of order. Rissler said she had a legal question and Nation asked if Carroll was good with Rissler asking her question. Carroll said it was as long it is not rehashing what has been done.
More discussion followed and then Nation called for a motion to place Main Street's contract on the next agenda. No director made the motion, so the contract stands as is.
City directors also voted on and heard the following items:
Presentations
• Recognition of the Siloam Springs Police Department and Officer Christoper Ramos.
• 2022 Fourth Quarter Reports for the Siloam Springs History Museum, Main Street Siloam Springs and the Siloam Springs Chamber of Commerce.
Consent Agenda
• Approving the regular meeting minutes for the Jan. 3 city board meeting.
• Approving the dedication of utility easements for the 22,000 block of Davidson Road.
• Approving a grant application from the Federal Aviation Administration for rehabilitation for the apron pavement in the amount of $900,000.
Contracts and approvals
• Tabling Resolution 04-23 regarding the contract for the prosecuting attorney until the next meeting.
• Approving a purchase of a 2023 rear-load trash truck in the amount of $205,360.
• Approving a contract for a 2024 Mack Day-Cab truck in the amount of $155,428.
Ordinances
• Placing Ordinance 23-01 concerning an annexation correction on its first, second and third readings then taking a separate vote to approve the ordinance.
• Placing Ordinance 23-02 regarding of a vacation of drainage easement for the 500 block of Highway 412 West on its first reading.
Resolutions
• Approving Resolution 05-23 concerning the appointment of Patterson as the authorized settlement representative in the litigation matter of Lockhart vs City of Siloam Springs.
• Approving Resolution 02-23 regarding the procedures and organizational matters of the board of directors.
Staff Reports
• Administrator's report