The Planning Commission held its last meeting of 2025 last week, and the two-hour session wandered into some discussions of principles and procedures.
Much of the Dec. 9 meeting dealt with the aftermath of a vote at the Nov. 13 meeting. At that time, commissioners voted to ask city council to budget $50,000 to update the city’s vision plan. The item did not appear on the agenda at the Dec. 8 council meeting.
Cassie Dishman, director of Planning and Community Development, serves as staff to the commission. She explained that any items referred to city council should go through the chairman or a commissioner designated by the chairman.
Dishman described her role as liaison between the commission and the city. She had taken the budget request to Mayor Butch Berry and Finance Director Michael Akins, and they had several objections. The city’s 2026 budget was already prepared, and this last-minute addition would require cutting funds somewhere else. Berry and Akins also said the commission should have a specific proposal for the amount, along with a potential contractor. Planning commissioners had asked to have that $50,000 set aside to empower them to find a contractor.
The budget request did not appear on city council’s agenda, and commissioner Susan Harman raised the issue during public comments, where speakers are limited to three minutes. City aldermen did not take any action on that question.
Harman told the other commissioners that ordinances recommended by the commission had routinely appeared on the council agenda, and she asked why this item did not make the agenda.
Dishman explained the steps she had taken with Berry and Akins. She also noted some reservations she had about the process, saying an expensive new vision plan might produce something similar to the existing plan. She said grants might help with the cost and suggested that the commission develop a more explicit proposal for council.
Commissioners Mike Welch and Ann Tandy-Sallee both agreed with slowing the push for a new vision plan. Tandy-Sallee said commissioners should read the existing vision plan and a 2021 update to see what goals the commission could tackle without expending new funds.
Commissioner Scott Price asked to hold a workshop to meet with prospective contractors and solicit bids. The commission would then have an exact figure to present to council. A major budget change at this late hour seemed unlikely, but Dishman said she would check for available dates in early January for a workshop.
Harman launched into a seven-minute speech assessing the city’s future. She noted that the city faces some major expenses and asked how to increase the city’s tax revenues. On the issue of housing, Harman said the city owns a number of parcels of land, which could be sold to accommodate new houses. She said the city needs to plan for the future and complained that the city could not spend less than a percentage point of its income to develop strategies. “If we can’t come up with money for a plan that will take us through the next ten years, we’re probably in distress as a city,” Harman said.
Dishman objected to Harman’s criticism of the city’s budgeting. She explained that she had already submitted a budget for her department, and the full city budget was already almost completed. Dishman agreed that Planning could still draft a formal request to have the budget increased, but she would prefer a careful and considered approach, looking ahead to the budget for 2026.
Responding to Harman’s discussion of future growth, Welch said the city’s population has remained stable for the past 50 years. “If you get more people here to increase the tax base, where would they work?” he asked. “We’re a tourist town with tourist jobs, and we need to be realistic about what kind of growth we’re looking for.”
Chairman Fergie Stewart said 2026 will be a challenging year for Eureka Springs and the entire state. A vision plan might help protect the city from unknown consequences. He encouraged the other commissioners to read the existing vision plan and come back with new perspectives.
In other business:
- The meeting began with a public hearing regarding a proposal to add two accessory buildings at 2 Mill Hollow Rd. Guidelines typically call for accessory buildings to be located at the rear of a property, but owners Robbin Polter and Derke Drouillard explained that their small lot rises sharply, and the art studio and workshop they want to build would fit better on some flat spots closer to the road. Those sites would require cutting fewer trees and would avoid some drainage problems. All voted in favor of the variance to allow their plan to proceed.
- The commission approved a request to remove a tree at 269 N. Main St. Arborist Mike Larrew represented an application by David and Ethan Avanzino, and explained that the tree has co-dominant stems and is rotting near the base. The tree also threatens a retaining wall.
- Dishman said she has updated the application form for tree removals. The new application form has explicit language about planting replacement trees or paying a fee in lieu of replanting. The form also has a checkbox for the applicant to authorize site visits. Dishman said if a property owner does not grant permission for site visits, the commissioners could use that as a reason to reject an application. She also noted that the building official would have made a site visit to look at a tree before an application would come to the commission. All approved the new application.
- Jack Moyer, general manager of the Crescent and Basin Park Hotels, encouraged the commission’s attempts to look toward the future. “Speaking as the city’s largest employer and tax collector,” Moyer spoke in favor of long-term planning. He called for planned population growth, infrastructure repairs, and housing development. Moyer said the commission should get specific bids to update the vision plan. “There is opportunity in Eureka Springs,” he said. “We just have to find it.”
- The agenda for the Jan. 13 meeting will include electing officers. Funding for a vision plan will continue on the agenda, along with the approval of bylaws, a meeting schedule, and other procedural issues.