Residents urge city not to tap parks tax or general funds for Parrot Island slides; questions raised about unpaid bills
Loading...
Summary
Multiple residents urged the board not to use parks capital funds or other city money to cover installation costs for the Parrot Island water slides and raised questions about outstanding invoices. Speakers asked for monthly financial reporting, prior approvals for out‑of‑season expenses and clarity on who authorized work and purchases.
Several residents used the Oct. 28 citizens forum to press the board on whether city funds — including voter‑dedicated parks tax dollars — should be used to cover additional Parrot Island water‑slide installation costs.
Kim Fodge said an indoor sports complex could be a private enterprise and urged the city not to pledge public dollars for new private ventures. On Parrot Island specifically, she said she reviewed financial reports posted by a director and that the park operator reported unpaid invoices and operating deficits. "Were we able to determine if these outstanding payables were already included in that operating report or if they're in addition to that money that was owed?" Fodge asked, and she recommended monthly financial reports so the city and county can review out‑of‑season expenses as they arise.
David Roberts, a member of the Parks Commission, asked the board not to shift parks capital funds to pay installation costs for the slides. "The park's capital projects are funded by dedicated taxes approved by the Fort Smith voters. Those funds are the lifeblood of our parks," Roberts said, and he urged directors not to redirect that money.
Several other speakers, including Dan Williams and Quentin Cunningham, told the board the slides procurement and subsequent requests for more money have eroded public trust. Williams asked the board to "lead and hold people accountable" for statements and procurement decisions. Cunningham and others called for stricter disclosure and said they were worried about optics and priorities, noting that social services, animal shelter and other obligations are also under budget pressure.
Board members did not vote on subsidizing Parrot Island during the study session. Directors acknowledged public concern and asked staff and counsel to provide clearer financial information; Parks staff had earlier noted that some operating shortfalls are tied to weather‑related closures and to expenses the operator reported.
The citizens forum also included calls for clearer contract approvals and for monthly reporting when payables occur outside the operating season so the city and county can approve or decline unbudgeted work before it is performed.
