City Council approves $76,715.87 per‑capita jail shortfall payment to Washington County amid accountability concerns

Fayetteville City Council approved a resolution on Jan. 6 authorizing a $76,715.87 payment to Washington County to cover the city’s share of jail shortfall charges for 2026. The resolution passed on a roll‑call vote after councilors questioned county accountability and the mechanics of the per‑capita billing arrangement.

The council took up a staff‑presented resolution to continue the existing agreement for jail services, which the Fayetteville Police Department has used since the city closed its jail in 2004. Chief of Police (presenting staff) described the contract as “a really good deal” compared with the county’s by‑day billing, noting the city’s current flat amount is far lower than what would result from daily billing. The chief said Fayetteville’s billable booking days average about 12,000 per year and that a county daily rate of $63.12 would cost the city roughly $800,000 annually, far exceeding the negotiated shortfall payment.

Councilmember Stafford voiced concerns about recent county investigations into alleged misuse of county property tied to the jail budget, citing one purchase allegedly used for private purposes. He asked whether the city could require additional accountability or reporting in the agreement. City staff and the chief said the Arkansas State Police handled the investigations cited and that the city does not have direct jurisdiction over county expenditures; city attorney Kit Williams explained legal remedies available to citizens for alleged illegal exactions but said the city itself cannot file that suit.

Members pressed staff on whether the county provides regular, auditable detail about billable booking days and whether Fayetteville receives credit for local diversion efforts. Staff said the county provides a billed shortfall number and that the city generally relies on county reporting; some council members urged staff to pursue clearer compliance or reporting language where possible.

Public comment included calls from residents urging the council to withhold funding and redirect resources to health and social services; one commenter recounted a prolonged holding experience and urged a fuller investigation into local detentions.

Motion and outcome: Councilmember Stafford moved to pass the resolution; the roll‑call vote recorded Weidicker (yes), Barnett (yes), Bunch (yes), Turk (yes), Jones (no), Stafford (yes), Dr. Jones (yes), Moore (no). The motion passed. Council directed staff to seek any reasonable accounting clarifications with the county and to report back if feasible.

What’s next: The agreement goes into effect for 2026 as approved; council asked staff to return with any feasible language or reporting practices that could improve transparency of county billing in future years.