Heat. Heat. N. Good morning, Witchita and welcome to all  of you here to city hall. We'll call the   meeting to order. With us this morning  is Reverend Ben Staley of Chapel Hill   United Methodist Church to provide our  invocation. Following that invocation,   we will have the pledge of allegiance.  I invite you to stand for both. Let's pray together. Oh Lord, we give you  thanks for all that you've given to us.   We thank you for allowing us freedom and  peace to be able to come here today and   to move about freely. And we pray for  those living with fear in the midst of   oppression and war, especially in the  Middle East. And we pray for peace.   We give you thanks for all that you provide for  us. All that we have, food and shelter, social   services, and all the help that's needed. Help  us to be responsive to the needs of the poor and   homeless and those in need of care. We're thanks.  We give you thanks for our teachers and our   school administrators. We pray for them and our  parents and children as school begins this week.   We give you thanks for our safety and pray for  those who protect us. And we pray that you'd guide   our police and firemen, first responders. And  thank you for our city leaders, our mayor and city   council members. We ask that you would give them a  heart for the city and the mind of Christ in order   to lead us with integrity and courage and wisdom  and love for our people. Help us all to give to   others with love and generosity as you have given  to us. And we pray it all in Jesus' name. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the  United States of America and to the republic   for which it stands, one nation under God,  indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Pastor Staley. Madame Clerk,  can you please call the first item? Yes,   Mayor. I was just made aware of  a proclamation this morning. Uh,   the proclamation for today is  Women in Sports Broadcasting Day. May I please ask Miss Kansas USA and her  friends to come forward at this time? The proclamation reads, "The city of Witchah,  Kansas, founded in 1870. Whereas women have made   significant and lasting contributions to sports  broadcasting using their voices and leadership to   elevate athletics and inspire audiences in Witchah  has been home to pioneering women in sports media   including Mikuel Ada, the first female sports  director for Cake TV, Kendra Douglas, a former   Witchaw sports anchor and current NBA sideline  reporter and Asia Simone Smith, a Witchah based   anchor and founder of Girls Talk Game Mentorship  Program. Whereas based on an analysis of the most   recent staff directories from Witchah's major  television stations, Cake, KWCH, and KSNW. Women   occupy approximately 37.5% of sports broadcasting  roles, highlighting a persistent gender imbalance   in the need to support and amplify women's  voices in local sports media. Whereas increased   visibility of women in sports media challenges  outdated norms and encourages girls to pursue   careers in journalism and athletics, fostering a  more inclusive and equitable future for Witchah.   Whereas, while women in Kansas earn approximately  84 cents for every dollar earned by men, according   to US Census data, reported by the Kansas  Reflector, continued efforts to close the pay gap,   are essential to ensuring that women in sports  broadcasting in Witchah are valued, respected,   and given equal opportunity to thrive. Now  therefore, be it resolved that the Witchah   City Council does hereby proclaim August 18,  2025 as Women in Sports Broadcasting Day. I want to say thank you to Mayor Woo and the rest  of the council for recognizing Women in Sports   Broadcasting Day. This day will be more than just  any old day on the calendar. It's a celebration   for the women who have used their voices in the  past and their present for their passion and their   leadership to tell stories of our teams, our area  athletes, and our community. I'm so proud to stand   here as Miss Kansas USA and as a woman in sports  broadcasting here in Witchah, but more importantly   to be with other women who are in sports  broadcasting and the broadcast industry who have   made their mark in the field. I'm honored to stand  alongside these incredible women, Ananda Smith,   um Rachel Hollum, and Michaela Day. And they all  continue to break barriers and set an example   for what is possible. This day is a reminder  that visibility matters, mentorship matters,   and representation matters as well. And when  young girls see us on their screens covering   sports with authority and with excellence,  they see what's possible for themselves. So,   thank you for helping us continue to push for  equity, opportunity, and the future of women's   voices in sports media to show that it's  not an exception, it's the norm. Thank you. Over here Madame clerk, can you please call the next item? Public agenda. The public agenda allows for up  to five speakers to have five minutes each to   address the council. No address no action  will be taken relative to items on the   public agenda other than referral to the city  manager for information as necessary. Speakers   will please state their name and address for the  record. A time clock will display the speaker's   remaining time to speak. Order and rules of  decorum will be observed. The first speaker   for today is Crystal Doer. Presentation on the  city archaeologist office for Witchah, Kansas. Good morning. I'm Crystal Doer  at 215 North Parkwood Lane. I   brought handouts if the council would like. As I've stated, my name is Dr. Crystal Doer  and I wear many hats. I am a assistant prof   associate professor and chair in the department  of anthropology at Witchaw State. There I direct   the archaeology of food lab. And the reason why  I'm here today is I serve as city archaeologist   for Witchaw, Kansas. You all may not know, but  this city archaeologist office was originated in   1977 as a collaboration between Witchaw State in  the city of Witchah to promote the protection of   the archaeological and cultural resources of  our area. The cultural resources of our area   would be the many archaeological sites and  historical resources that document the over   14,000year history of Witchaw. To date, the city  archaeologist office has identified more than 65   archaeological sites in the municipal area and  hundreds of archaeological sites in southern   Kansas. It is one of the earliest collaborations  of this kind of an archaeological office situated   for and in support of municipal government and it  has gone through many iterations since co and when   I took over as city archaeologist. I was really  interested in ensuring that the modern version of   this office would be able to support the needs of  our city and our many residents. Uh back in 2023,   one of our graduate students, Broen Gilmore,  did a preliminary study to understand what   were the current needs of our our area  as well as what we could be doing better.   In this preliminary study, he talked to members  of municipal, city, and county government as   well as indigenous tribal leaders who identified  that the use of this office is best to promote   uh the the legal requirements of cultural  resource management, such as section 106 and   the National Historic Preservation Act, which  requires that all federal funds that are used   in development do consider their development  impacts on archaeological resources and as a   a centralized place to support the knowledge of  our thousands of year history here in Kansas.   This is needs to be done through open and clear  communication which is why I'm here today to let   you all know that we exist as a resource both for  programmatic development as well as for public   outreach and knowledge. And that is pretty much  it. I am here to take questions if you have any.   Thank you, Miss Doer. Council member Johnson.  Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate all the work   that you were doing. So, one question.  How was your office supported? You work   at Witchah State. Is that a part of the mill  levy that we give to Witchah State or? So,   when the office was first created in the in the  late 70s, it did support a graduate student in   the role of city archaeologist. Um since then the  needs of uh review require a qualified federally   qualified archaeologist which is something that  only a faculty member can support. Uh currently   our department doesn't receive any part of the  mill levy funds. Uh so this is something I do   out of the goodness of my heart uh in support of  the really important needs uh to make sure our   history is known. Awesome. So if we I guess had  questions about different parts of the city, we   would come to you and look at any archae I cannot  say that archaeological significance. Right. So   uh there's two different things that I think  um might be of interest to this committee. Uh   the first thing is if you need advice in regards  to compliance needs uh particularly for cultural   resource management um my office can provide  archaeological review to satisfy those reviews.   uh we employ students which provides hands-on  applied learning opportunities at a highly reduced   cost. So to date the office has provided under my  tenure five or six archaeological reviews saving   local municipal and county governments thousands  of dollars from going to a third party outside. At   the same time we're supporting our local students  by providing them the opportunity to learn how to   to work in the industry. The second thing that  might come up is say you find archaeological   materials on your property and you want to learn  more. My office is a great place to learn more. We   offer a open to the public meeting once a month,  Thursday 6 p.m. the Archaeological Association of   South Central Kansas. Uh we welcome all to attend  and learn more. Awesome. One more question and   this may be a dumb one. No. Um so we have to do  environmental studies sometime. Is that a part of   what your office does or is that separate? It's a  very similar process, right? So, an environmental   impact review follows a very similar permitting  process as archaeological review. So, we don't we   can't do the environmental impact components, but  we can do cultural impact components. Very often   the the permitting process is aligned. Awesome.  Thank you. Yep. Council member Glascock. Doctor,   I will keep my remarks very quick u or very short.  I didn't know that we had city archaeologists. So,   thank you for um educating us from the bench  today and educating the public. Thank you, Council   Member Hoheisle. Thank you, Mayor. Um I just want  to say thank you for your work on behalf of the   city. I know we worked with you on the um looking  for the Plane View project. Um some interesting   finds out there. I never knew how particular  we can get with uh some of the findings that we   have. So I I just want to express my gratitude for  the work you've done and the work that you will   continue to do with us. Thank you. Thank you very  much. Have a lovely day. Madame clerk, can you   please call the next individual? Jim Underwood.  Multimodal the inher inherent liability. Mayor, members of council, I thank you for  allowing me to address you today. I did make   a slight error when I applied on the petition. It  should be multimodal as used in Witchah. Uh Kansas   totally lacks a geographical feature for one form  of transportation. With a lack of concentration of   people, we also rest eliminate another one and  greatly restrict the third. So, it's not quite   multimodal. variety of wheeled transportation  is used in Witchah. Um, as the fourth tier of   government, we're all subject to federal, state,  local, and city. You well know that for 250 years,   it's been standard that a lower tier of government  cannot override an upper tier of government.   Um therefore when we look at things that  are passed we look at their jurisdictional   boundaries. When it comes to sidewalks they  actually end at the curb. The roadway and   highway are totally separate. They have a  crossing on them as outlined by the state. It is um required that um under the law of  the land in the last 40 years ADA we now put   ramps in at those sidewalk inter connections  with streets and highways. Unfortunately,   a lot of people are using those wheeled  vehicles to go up and down those ramps.   The liability incurs if you encourage them to  do this on the sidewalks. You can encourage them   to do whatever you want. But at the highways  and streets, you can't make a non-licensable   vehicle legal. It's that simple. That's the  first liability. The second liability would   come if somebody rolled down one of those  under power or gravity and had an accident.   The driver that hit them could have litigation  against the city and you. The person who got   hit could have litigation against the city and  you. And it just gets deeper and deeper because   I assure you there are plenty of attorneys out  there and they won't pass the opportunity. Um, sorry. the um I do apologize. I apologize for this. Uh,  mayor, members of council,   I'm going to have to sit down. I do  apologize for taking your time. Assist. Mr. Underwood, if you would  like to come back in a bit,   you may. Um, I know security  is helping you at this time. We can also bring a mic  closer to you if that would madame clerk, can you please  call the next individual? Barb Myers, updates on Highland Cemetery. Good morning. My name is Barb Myers. I live at 1322 Stackman  and I am the founder of the Friends of the   Witchaw Pioneers. First, I want to thank Mayor  Woo, council members Ballard and Glascock for   coming to Highland Cemetery for tours and for  your support. It's very much appreciated. And   I did think long and hard about how I wanted  to address this. On June 17th, over 100 mph   winds ripped through Witchah, tearing down trees  and power lines and causing an an as yet unknown   amount of financial damage to the city, the parks  most specifically. The city's public work offices,   the parks, forestry, and facilities departments  have all put in countless extra hours to clean   up the city. And for that, I say thank you.  However, one area of the parks department,   Highland Cemetery, was not completely rid of all  the tree damage until less than two weeks ago.   When I visited the cemetery this weekend, as I do  almost every week, I was shocked when I saw tire   tracks in the middle of section one, which led to  a big pile of dirt and a couple of co of tossed   gravestones. On further investigation, I found  at least three gravestones. These were for uh   Glenn Whitmore who died in 1908 at age three. Ruth  Whitmore who died in 1909 at age three months and   their father lol who died in 1910 at the age of  43. His stone is currently turned upside down. I   also found a knocked over marker for an Ida romig  right next to them who died in 1892 at age 24.   And while the wind might have knocked over a tree  that then knocked over her stone, the wind nor the   tree caused the tire tracks in or the dirt pile.  And while it is possible that it was a new burial,   an upturned stone would not have been left. Also  unrelated to the storm, the mausoleum now has a   broken window, a broken door, and in section  five, there's a broken fence due to a tree   that I can confirm fell months ago. That tree has  been removed, but the underbrush is still covering   several stones. There are roads all over the  cemetery that are bottomed out, including uh right   in front of Governor Stanley's, and the only ones  without current damage were paid for by a private   donor so that she could get to her own family.  The list of damages out there goes on and on.   We know that the city has confirmed that  there is a trust fund that has adequate   liquidity to repair the roads, install a  timed gate, and possibly put in cameras. So,   we thank you for that sincerely. We're also in  agreement that the state and federal laws prohibit   anyone who is not family to touch what is private  property without their approval, which of course   is what we do. We get a hold of families. We work  with families. And with their written consent,   we take care of their gravestones. So, what  I'm asking for today is that the city consider   funding a cemetery department. Not only to  monitor the cemeteries, because there are four,   but also to communicate those needs to the city's  various departments in a timely manner. and then   to verify that the work such as the removal and  grinding of trees, road repairs, and mausoleium   work has been done correctly and to the family  satisfaction. We know there's no money, there's   no people, there's no time. But please don't rely  solely on a volunteer entity such as ours with   limited funding to be the only ones finding major  damages needing necessary repairs at Highland.   Please, for once in this 156y old cemetery's  existence, let's show the city exactly how   much respect Highland Cemetery deserves by hiring  dedicated staff for that purpose. I look forward   to working with you in the future as I intend  to do with theou that is pending currently and   I thank you for that opportunity. Thank you, Barb.  Council member Ho Heisle. Thank you, Mayor, and   thank you, Barb, for bringing this up and to our  attention. Um, Reggie, I don't know if you're the   person to ask or maybe Bob. What all are eligible  expenses for our cemetery fund? I'm going to ask   Reggie to come up. We've had some discussions  since Barb last spoke uh to the council and done   some additional work and looking at our trust  fund as well as the eligible expenses. Okay.   So, we did look into what some of those  options are with the trust fund to be able   to cover expenses for improvements there at  the park and anything that's related to the   actual infrastructure of the roadway, looking  at cameras, access to the park or things that   would be eligible expenses. Uh, it wouldn't  be anything that's related to the actual   grave sites or anything of that nature because  they're private property. Okay. So there's So if   you have a fun when you guys are working  on some of the issues you're working on,   do you work to do um to work with the private  property there? The the gravestones? Barb,   typically when we work uh through theou  that we have with Barb and her group,   we normally coordinate with any repairs that  they need to make to the actual private property   itself. Uh they actually reach out to them to see  to get permission before they can actually be done   and then we support them on those efforts. And one  of the things that we've done now is working real   closely with public works that we're looking at  how we can uh look at the facility itself and see   where we can make improvements and then scheduling  work days each year that we're going out to make   some of those things that are identified by  BR or either any other family members who have   uh people who are there at that location. Okay.  Do we have any staff I don't think we would have   any staff totally dedicated to? We don't. We have  Leanne Sack who is our person at our supervisor   that maintain that supervisor to clean up for the  crew. We have contractors that go in and does the   mowing and then Barb has worked real closely with  Leanne uh with reporting things that come uh that   needs to be addressed or either directly with me.  Okay, I appreciate it. Thanks for giving a little   bit of background there. And what steps are we  taking now? Is it just more communication getting   these things ready, the work orders ready? Uh yes,  just more communication working with Bob. We put   something in place where we're meeting quarterly  to go through look at things that she needs to get   addressed. Uh we're also looking at options now  for security as well as potential gates on site.   And one of the things that we're doing as we move  out putting new security on in place. We reach out   to PD to have a SEPTAD done uh to make sure that  we're putting cameras and things in the correct   place to make sure that we get the uh best uses  for when we're making investments. Okay. And how   many cemeteries are we do we oversee with the  trust fund? Uh this particular one is just for   Highland. Uh there are uh three other ones  that are in the uh uh city preview that we   are responsible for maintaining as well. Okay.  Thank you, Council Member Ballard. Thank you,   Mayor Barb. I just wanted to say um thank you  for all of your hard work. Um, I did go meet Barb   um out at the cemetery on Sunday morning and it  was um a little overwhelming to see some of the   um damage that had been done. So um I also wanted  to say thank you for coming a couple months ago to   bring all of this to our attention. Um since my  time on council, I had never had anybody um come   talk to me about it. So, it's been something that  we have all um been able to kind of look into and   learn more about and see where there's some gaps  that uh we can work together to fill. So, I just   appreciate all of your advocacy and I know that  the families do as well. Um and we'll continue   to keep working on it. So, thank you so much.  Thank you, Council Member Glascott. Thank you,   Mayor. I don't want to um repeat a lot of  what council member Ballard said, but just   thank you for preserving Witchaw's history and  caring about our history. I learned a lot from   the trip and I would encourage residents to uh  maybe take you up on an offer to go out there   and learn a little bit about Witchaw's history um  because I think it was incredibly impactful. So,   thank you for that. Thank you. Thank you again,  Barb. And I know that um Dr. Doer just spoke as   the very first individual. of you guys  can connect or have already connected,   continue that collaboration as a lot of the things  that um we want in our community require more than   just one individual or one organization. So, thank  you again for your hard work and your volunteers.   Thank you. Madame Clerk, can you please call the  next individual? Jan Kenabi, zoning case 2025-30. My name is Jan Kenabi. I live on 8303 South  Cypress Street. Good morning and thank you for   allowing me to address my concerns with you about  zone change 2025-30. If I share information with   you that you already know, please bear with  me. I want to give you a full picture of the   concerns of my neighborhood and the development  of a residential area to the west of our homes.   In the minutes of the MAPC from July 10th, there  is a statement that the subject site will have   access to East 39th Street South, a paved two-lane  arterial. This is the crux of our neighborhood's   concern. Although that is identified as a paved  road, the reality is it was a dirt road with   asphalt lifts placed on top of it a few years ago.  There are no shoulders. And in the eight years I   have lived in the neighborhood, it was resurfaced  once about three years ago, and is already   deteriorating on the edges with the current  traffic use. I believe this is a code composition   asphalt that is not designed for permanent roads.  There is no information about whether there would   be an upgrade to this street and if so, who  would be responsible for that upgrade and the   maintenance that the use of heavy construction  equipment and trucks required to build the   subdivision would cause. I have been in touch  with my Sedick County Commissioner, Jim Howell,   with these questions. Because 39th Street South  was paved, it became the responsibility of Sedick   County to maintain. Commissioner Howell agreed  that at this time it could be a county issue.   However, he also said, and I quote, "The details  of the access points will be on the development   drawings that are part of the plat that will  be solely approved by Witchah." End quote.   In addition, in the minutes of the District 2  advisory board with Rocky Ford LLC on July 14th,   council person Johnson was asked if 39th Street  was in the city limits and the answer given was   this property is in the city limits. It does not  speak to the street itself. And in the annexation   map, it looks as if the street was not annexed  by Witchah. Currently 39th Street South is the   access road for those of us who live north of  it in the Prairie Breeze estate subdivision and   south of it in 5acre lots. Every day I see people  walking and riding their bikes on this road. With   the amount of traffic the subdivision will produce  that will become a hazardous thing to do. In fact,   there was a fatality on the northeast corner  of Rock and 39th Street a few years ago that   is currently marked by a cross. Many of the people  who will be most impacted by this change were not   able to have a voice in protesting it because  of the 1,00 ft limit of their residences to the   proposed subdivision. And if that restriction  applies to the zoning change notifications,   they would not have been aware of the application.  And because we do not live in the city of Witchah   and have no council person for our area, we  have little say in what decisions Witchah's   government will make. Yet, this has strong  potential to become a hardship we will have to   bear daily. Additional possibilities of harm for  pedestrians and quite possibly increase taxes for   us to maintain this road. My strongest request  is that the subdivision does not have access to   39th Street South, but instead would be routed  through the newly zoned commercial property,   also owned by Rocky Ford LLC, that faces Rock  Road. In the event this is not the decision made,   then I would instead request that the zone change  for zone 2025-30 of single family homes to two   family residential homes be denied by this  council to help reduce traffic on our road.   Further, I would ask that some stipulation would  be made that Rocky Ford LLC would be responsible   to upgrade 39th Street South as they are the  ones who will be profiting financially from   it and will be causing the damage due to their  construction equipment and the number of residents   who live there. I am seeking the answers for two  questions. Will the decision be made when will the   decision be made about whether 39th Street South  will be the access point for that subdivision?   and who will be in control of maintenance and  traffic control adjacent to the property of   39th seat stra 30 excuse me 39th Street South  is this a responsibility of Witchah thank you council member Hohheisel thank you mayor and  we'll get with you on the other two questions   you have okay I did just want one point of  clarification um I guess 39th Street would be   a main arterial is that paid for by specials or is  that something that would be written into our CIP. Paul Gun, Gunselman, Public Works and Utilities.  Uh, council member Ho Hazel, 39th Street between   Rock and Web, as she stated, is paved already. Um,  and we have not uh annex that roadway yet within   the city of Witchaw. Um, as she mentioned, there  are 5 acre lots on the south side of 39th Street.   Um, so I don't know. Typically, we wouldn't annex  the roadway until we the city has both sides annex   both, you know, the north properties and the south  properties. So, I'm not seeing that forthcoming   anytime soon. So, we would not program that in  the CIP at this time. Okay. And if in the future   we do annex it, it would be um in the CIP and not  specials. Correct. Yes. It's already paved. Okay.   And that would and we'd look at maybe doing a  a concrete road there potentially or curb and   gutter. Most likely curb and gutter. Whether  it's asphalt or concrete, we wouldn't know,   but Okay. And right now is it ditches? It is open  ditches. Yes. Okay. Thank you for that. Yes. Paul,   since you're at the microphone, she had two  specific questions and I think she actually   referenced Council Member Tuttle, not Council  Member Johnson. Um, could you address the two   questions she asked regarding the access points on  the 39th Street? I think was one of the questions.   Um one of them was um I thought it was council  person Johnson from the notes about that   um that meeting that he asked if that was city  of Witchah which you already answered that right   it is not and I don't question is yeah the access  points it seems like I had seen a sketch plat of   that proposed subdivision but I do not recall um  where the access points were on 39th Street and   or if they had access points onto Rock road. Um  I have talked to the developer of um Rocky Ford   LLC um because when Rocky Ford went in, Rock Road  was not improved for a southbound left turn lane.   Um but he has inquired about that to you know  if this development uh moved forward um whether   um we would ask for us or andor this Cedric County  would ask for a southbound left turn to serve this   residential development. So I think he is open  to that when I have had discussions with him. And what was the second question? The  will the when will the oh that that I   don't know that might be a question for Mr. Wadel   with the planning director as to when  that uh plat's moving forward. Sorry. Yeah. In terms of the uh application  to plat the property, we do not   um looking at GIS on our records, we do not have  an application at this time to plat the property.   So that will be as part of the platting process  and that process uh will go through the planning   commission and then ultimately any reserves  uh will be dedicated and be asked that the   city council dedicate those but uh planning is  different than zoning. The final action is taken   by the MAPC except for the dedications which is  done at the governing body. Thank you very much. Madame clerk, can you please call the  next individual? Janette Peterson,   Witchaw Animal Shelter. Uh Janette Peterson, uh 3522 North Lake Court,  and I'm just a regular citizen that wanted to   come today. Um, six months ago, I began looking  into the animal crisis in Witchaw. The more I   learned about what was going on at Wasp, the more  my concerns grew. When I met with Emily Hurst, one   of the first questions I asked was if she believed  in and wanted to see changes made at the shelter.   She said one of the reasons she was hired was to  make some of the positive changes needed. Emily   and I have met a couple of times and communicated  through email and text many times. She has been   very willing to respond to my questions and has  listened to and openly discussed my concerns.   However, on June 24th in a public meeting, Chief  Sullivan stated that he thought we should get rid   of the shelter and animal control altogether.  to everyday citizens and voters like me. This   brings into question whether there is really  an interest by our leadership in making changes   at all and leaves us with little confidence that  changes to a broken system will even be considered   much less enacted. The second big concern is the  euthanization rate and treatment of the animals.   In June, 26% of the animals entering wasps were  euthanized. That would be an equivalent of two   council members. Those that are left will  sit in a concrete floor caged with no walks,   no toys or or enrichment, nowhere but their cage  to use as a bathroom, and no understanding of   why they are treated this way. Then they  will be judged for being scared, nervous,   and not reacting perfectly to this foreign world  they have just been thrown into and then put on   the euthanization list because of their reaction.  I see several posts a day where people are keeping   stray animals in their homes while they look for  the owners themselves or advise others to just   let the animals go if they can't help because  it is it will not survive more than three days   at the shelter before they are euthanized. More  times than I can count, I have heard our shelter   referred to as the death chamber. As a taxfundded  entity, this is an organization that we should be   to be be able to be proud of and to be able to  participate in. We have no volunteer program   to help with, no foster program available, no  programs to promote and advertise available   animals for adoption. In the end, it appears  euthanization is the preferred method rather than   taking advantage of these other options that seem  to work very well for other municipalities and   surrounding cities and states. I'm aware of the  agreement we have with KHS for years and amware   of the financial ties we have with them and we pay  a lot of a lot every month for services. However,   times have changed and they appear to no longer be  able to or willing or able to provide the level of   service required. We need to consider a new system  that better suits our needs and has been proven   to work in communities around us. We want to have  programs like the city of Tulsa where faced with a   hoarding case, the community work together to save  animals rather than our current method of simply   euthanizing enough animals to make room for the  new incoming ones. My third concern is the budget   for the shelter. On Thursday, I repeatedly heard  about the 461 people that answered the survey used   as the basis for our budget simulator. That  is onetenth of 1% of the people in Witchaw. I   have yet to talk to anyone that even knows about  this survey. Two weeks ago, I started a petition   to gauge people's interest in reform. It's titled  implement humane reform at Witchaw Animal Shelter.   While there's no time to share details of this,  you can find it at change.org/witchaw animal   shelter. after only posting it a couple of places  so far and without any promotional efforts yet.   There have already been over 340 signatures is  expected to receive many more once the promotional   efforts are enacted. In closing, we need to do  more to make the shelter one that our citizens   can be proud of and be given the opportunity  to participate in, to work harder to improve   the conditions and treatment of the animals,  and to make every effort to save every life   we can rather than using ethanization as a quick  and convenient means of dealing with the problem   and to give Emily the resources and support needed  to enact the changes she was hired for. If we do,   our community, our citizens, and our moral values  will be strengthened. Thanks. Thank you, Council   Member Ballard. Thank you, Mayor Emily. I see  you back there. Can I ask you a couple questions? Hi guys. Hi. Thank you for being here. Um, can  you address some of her concerns? I know you   guys seem to have had good conversation, but um  I know you have a very tough job, but um yeah,   if you could just address any of her concerns  that she mentioned or how can we help you? I mean,   I personally in District 6, I'm sure my colleagues  do too, hear a lot about the animal shelter and   you know, I want it to be successful. Um,  and I think you're doing a great job. Um,   how can we help it be better, I guess. Sure.  Absolutely. Um, so I think that it can be   our our shelter dynamics are a bit unique in the  way that our city w is operating. So, the Kansas   Humane Society was a rescue and a first and then  a shelter and they lobbyed the city of Witchah oh   15 or 20 years ago for this shared campus um in  orders for us to be able to save more lives. And   um I really appreciate Janette's advocacy for  pets as well as um all of those that help us   care for animals in our community. Um, and so not  to discount any of the things that you're saying,   but it sometimes the confusion between the types  of shelters and the operations between them,   um, leads people to believe that they should  support one versus the other when really when   we support them together, it that is what makes  that the purpose of how that agreement should   work. And so, for example, um, we were created as  a stray facility. So that so animals should only   be in our facility for a short period of time.  That's the way the building was designed. We have   um and then the Kansas Humane Society's building,  for example, is designed very differently than   ours. While they have both have runs, um they  just have different resources. And so animals   shouldn't be with us for an extended period of  time without significant modifications to both   the facilities or the staffing. Not to say that  we can't make improvements with what we have,   but there are limitations within that and it's  not a long-term facility. Whereas the Kansas   Humane Society has different um amenities where  animals can stay there for a month or more and   res and have basically what is considered humane  treatment, regular exercise, access to different   things. They have different laundry facilities for  toys and blankets and things like that. Um, and so   effectively when somebody supports the Kansas  Humane Society or even one of our local rescue   groups, um, they are really supporting the animals  that are within our shelter. So, um, one of the   reasons we don't have a foster program is because  of our partnership with the Kansas Humane Society   and with our rescue groups. So, Witchaw Animal  Action League, there's a lot of things like uh   pug rescues and Pyrenees rescues and PALS and all  of these different places that have wonderful um   foster programs and they are all in need of foster  animal fosters right now. And so, every time a   foster family opens up at one of our partners  that effectively takes an an can take an animal   from Witchaw Animal Services. And um it's not  it doesn't work quite the same with volunteers,   but the more support those nonprofits have, the  more we can get the animals in our shelterworked   and out. And so that's really where that that  public private partnership comes. Um we are still   exploring a volunteer program within Witchaw  Animal Services. Um, again, our our building   wasn't designed for that and we have a little bit  of uh like um issues around like monitoring the   public and keeping it safe and things like that,  but it's not off of the table. We also have a lot   of other projects that we're working on um that  we want to get shored up before bringing that one   out just because that could cause the volunteers  could co issue could cause problems um if we don't   make sure that we are get cleaned up in some other  areas. I'm trying to think what are some what were   some enrichment of the animals. Oh, enrichment  of the animals. That is one of the things that we   um were in need of. But it you guys as our city  council have a huge task in front of you to make   sure that all of our city's needs and amenities  are are taken care of. So, um I I it's it's just   something that is it's a budgetary um staffing  issue and supplies and having those kinds of   things um to be able to access. And again, we  we'll do the best that we can with what we have.   Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Council member Ho Heisel.  Thank you, Mayor. Um thank you, Emily. Uh first,   um Janette, uh the change.org, um that comes up  with recommendations as well. or is it just a   survey? Um, no. It Well, it's it's mainly just  saying what is um it's just a petition saying   this is the things that like that would like to  be seen changed. Yeah. So, I guess it does. Yeah.   What you're saying it it uh it was like saying  that you know what goes on at the animal shelter   and what people would like to see changed. The  biggest thing is is you get on social media and   anybody in the public like we all everybody's  saying don't take it to the shelter. It's just   a kill place. Keep it in your home. Let it go.  This is the way the community sees it. And we   um I just wanted to see how many other people out  there were interested. So, I wrote this petition   just to say um you know there a lot of deaths at  the shelter. Um some things that I had seen online   that people had what their concerns were. And a  lot of people online like I've maybe read five   good things online about the shelter. Maybe there  is and I granted people usually tend to I get   people tend to say the negative before they say  the positive. So it was just written mainly to see   are there more people interested out there and a  lot of people will not come talk like this scares   me to death. I don't like like talking in public.  This scares me to death. And so normal citizens   will not usually come talk but it was a way for  citizens. I heard a lot of people saying is there   a petition we can sign? Is there something we can  sign? So, it was a way just to kind of gauge like   how interested the the community is in a change.  And it is and I understand what Emily is saying   that it wasn't designed for that, but since CO  and since things have happened, we have a lot   more animals now. And so, what has worked for 10,  15, 20 years isn't going to work now. and we have   very strict rules on which rescues we use. Fine.  I'm not going to get into that. Don't care about   that. But if we're not going to work with certain  rescues, then we better be contacting every rescue   in this nation trying to get our animals out. But  I don't believe that's happening. Um, so it's just   wanting the community wanting more for to be done  to save these animals. Well, I I appreciate that.   I'm in here doing fine. So, thank you for coming  and exercising your first amendment rights to   tell us off and the negative before the positive.  Yeah, it's government. So, that's what we hear. Um   Emily, um how long is the contract with KHS? When  does that come up? Um that we it's not we don't   Okay, so um there's a couple layers to that. So  um when we built the two facilities next to each   other for the campus um that was a memorandum of  understanding of operations. It's not a contract.   Um nobody's really bound or required by it. It's  more of this was the original concept and design   of what we wanted to do and these were our goals  of what to do with it. Obviously some things have   changed as the animal needs of our community have  changed as the veterary community has changed and   so forth. Um and so that isn't really it's not  it's just indefinite. um it's not really up for   renewal. We also do have um contracts with them  uh specifically for veterinary care and so that   can be with anybody. It the idea was is because we  do have our animals are essentially their animals   in most cases. And so it it behooves them to be  our veterinary of uh purchase essentially because   when we used to have uh a different clinic do it.  The clinic um would have to come and drive to our   facility do exams that day provide whatever things  that they provided and then leave. Whereas we do   have um better access to veterinary care and they  understand shelter medicine which is a specialized   um area of medicine in veterinary care. So that  um I believe uh is is up for renewal next year.   Um I think that they did renew the op they  have the forgive my option. Yeah. Yeah. The   option to renew and did that this year and then  it's up again next year. Okay. Um could we get a   list of possible improvements that you might  have your eye on down at the shelter? Yeah,   absolutely. Okay. Um and then um you guys had a  big hoarding case here recently, did you not? Um   no, we didn't. I don't know. That was kind of um  rumor, I guess. Okay. I'm not sure. There um we   regular really pretty regularly deal with hoarding  cases. I would say under maybe 30 animals. Um and   that can be cats or dogs or a mixture of the two.  And it can be anything from police confiscations   that's unrelated to the animals, but there  happen to be animals at the property or something   uh around neglect or hoarding of the animals.  Like I said, we have we actually do have a really   um great network of people and rescues who who  come to that. For example, I think that wall   um just handled a pretty large hoarding case  for cats and they were able they contacted us.   We reached out to some of our other partners and  instead of bringing I think it was 30ome cats to   the shelter, they were able to find fosters,  network and triage. And I think they ended up   bringing two and that one was a couple weeks ago.  I don't know what this what this other one was,   but I did see that in social media also. Um, and  so we we we have a strong network. It that doesn't   mean that it can't have improvement and that we  can't invite more people to participate it because   we are facing a really um intense overpopulation  across the country. And the more people we can   get to be a part of it, the better. Okay. What's  the employment status down there? You guys having   easier time filling some of these positions?  Yes. Um I should have all of my uh full staff,   all my employ excuse me, all I should be fully  staffed um by next week is with with the last   hire. Okay. Um just the the last point I'd just  like to make is, you know, we're up here to make   long-term decisions. uh decisions that can help  further down the road. And one thing I do like to   encourage is spay and neuter. Absolutely. Spay and  neuter with the community. Um especially a lot of   these neighborhoods. I think we have something  coming up where um from my district with Hyatt   funds, we're going to um put be putting some  money out there in the community for spaying   and neutering as well. And that's a long-term  solution. So that's something I do think that   we need to focus on here. Um because it will pay  dividends further down the road if we had more of   this seven or eight years ago. We would not be in  this situation that we're in right now. So that is   something that I think we need to keep in mind. So  thank you guys. Absolutely. And I would just add   that we do have a lot of affordable um and lowcost  and income qualifying spayneuter um resources for   the community just so people know that they can  access that. I'm working on building a resource   center at the um shelter as well that will have  it online. But a lot of those places have open   constant open appointments. They're not over full  or have um a lot of no-show. So again, the more we   can get people out spaying neutering their pets,  the sooner we can deal with our overpopulation.   City Manager Leighton. Thank you, Mayor. Uh I just  want to say we're very fortunate that Emily is   with us and she has made some exceptional changes  at the uh animal shelter since she's arrived. It's   a she's running a complex business um subject to a  lot of regulation and if it would be okay with the   council we could schedule a workshop presentation  about animal control. So, I know that many of you   receive uh concerns from residents and maybe  you hear one perspective but don't understand   all the restrictions and limitations that Emily  and her staff are operating under. I'd like her   also talk about what she's done to enhance  the qualifications or the work of the staff.   It's uh I think it's a great success story to  date and I know there are still critics out there,   but I'd like to be able to give you a status  report of where we stand and what Emily sees   as a future if that would be all right with you.  I would like to see that. Um I know that I have   visited the animal shelter. I'm actually looking  at the budget right now and it appears that the   budget does continue to increase for the animal  shelter piece. Um and so it would be uh important   for the community to understand where those  resources are going which include uh animal   texts that has been instrumental in helping with  um the care of these animals. So again I would   like to see the workshop. Any other council  members if you could put that for an upcoming   workshop that would be great. Thank you city  manager. Thank you. Thanks Emily. Thanks Janette. Madame clerk, can you please call the next  item? Consent agenda items 1 through 31. Council   members, any items to be pulled? Council member  Johnson. Thanks, Mayor. I'd like to pull item 16. Any other items, council members? I see none.  I move to approve consent agenda items   1 through 31 without item number  16. Second. Motion and a second.   Any further discussion? I see none.  Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes. 70. Item number 16. Thanks,  mayor. Due to a personal conflict of interest,   I have to abstain from this vote. May I ask  uh would this be Sally regarding this item?   I'm going to start asking uh department heads  if an item is pulled to just explain this item   so that folks who are watching understand why the  item was pulled or what that item entailed. Can   you explain this item for the audience? Sure.  The item is a uh a funding agreement amendment   with Jacob's ladder. Um they are a CHTO community  housing development organization that was awarded   home funds in 2023 for the build of a single  family home. Um this item has been pulled as   there's a conflict of interest with council member  Johnson. Um the the item itself is an increase in   the amount of funding from $80,520 to our project  maximum of $90,000 and an uh the ability for the   developer to increase the sales cost to meet  uh today's demands on the price increases that   have occurred since 2023. So Sally, can you also  address um I did have a concern with this item. It   was not because of a a personal problem, but it  says vandalism and theft is the reason why this   item has now increased in cost. Can you address  uh this problem, which is a challenge not just to   this property, but we have seen that in other  properties as well? Sure. Vandalism and theft   is one component of the um the increased cost.  There are many others. We've seen great increase   increases in costs related to labor and supplies,  but vandalism happens a lot um in our community,   especially when properties either new  construction or under renovation. Oftentimes,   uh we have squatters that will get in or the  owner will see uh you know, air conditioning   condensers stolen for the copper. Things like that  can happen. And that's why it's really important   that these projects turn very quickly when we  can. um so that they're not left vacant for very   long. Thank you very much, Sally. Any further  questions for staff? I see none. Um I will open   it up for public comment regarding this specific  item, consent agenda number 16. I see none. I'll   bring it back to the bench. And before the motion,  I just want to quickly mention that the Witchaw   Police Department just received a property crimes  reduction task force award. uh for the amount of   uh stolen property that was recovered as well as  uh investigations that they've been able to close   and that's regarding property crime which includes  these types of um problems that we just addressed.   So, I just wanted to say that again, when it comes  to property, whether it's your property or public   property that the city um has the opportunity to  share with the rest of the community, vandalism   and theft just continues to be a an increased  cost, not just to those who own that property,   but also for the public to not be able to utilize  those items. So, um I am grateful that the Witchaw   Police Department is focused on that type of task  force um because those are crimes that we do not   want to see in the city of Witchaw. I move to  approve consent agenda item number 16. Second.   Motion and a second. Any further discussion? I  see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 60 with one  abstension. Madame clerk,   please call the next item. Board of bids  and contracts dated August 11th, 2025. Good morning, Mayor, City Council, Josh Lober,  Department of Finance. The board of bids and   contracts convened yesterday, August 11th,  2025 for the following items. For engineering,   this item should look familiar. The R Kansas  River East Bank restoration. This was withdrew   last week. We are bringing it back to formally  reject all the bids. We have the 2025 outsource   pavement preservation program CIP concrete street  repairs phase 8 for PPJ construction incorporated   awarded within the engineers estimate of $286,000  from the original bid of $280,14. We have the 2025   outsource pavement preservation program CIP  Crosswalk Improvements for PPJ Construction   Incorporated awarded within the engineers estimate  of 155,000 from the original bid of $149,625. For purchasing, we have the 9,000 gross vehicle  weight two-wheel drive regular cab 8 foot bed   pickup truck for Rustyc Ford for an aggregate  bid total with options selected for $51,639. We have the interior and exterior modifications  for 12 single family homes for the vendors listed   for aggregate bid total of 875,000 $77. This  is how to become a vendor with the city. This   is our purchasing calendar of events with  small resource partners that we're hosting   or participating in. And this is our listing of  open public opportunities out on the street today   for our departments. And I'd be happy to try to  answer any of your questions. I recommend the   bids as presented. Questions for staff beginning  with Council Member Ballard. Yeah. Thank you,   Mayor. Uh Josh, could you back go back to  page eight, please? Sure. Or slide. Can you   just explain the no their bids received? Sure.  So, in part, this is a policy issue in that   um if you're hitting the cap of 50,000, you're  starting to hit new procurement requirements.   So historically before COVID, if you had an  informal procurement, that meant three quotes.   We would very typically see department requests  for pickup trucks or vehicle purchases where we   would get three quotes and we move forward.  Um this is an item where it hit that trigger,   that threshold of 50,000. So we're doing a formal  publication, we're publishing it in the paper,   we're contracting it. Um, in effect, it  it can be a cooling effect if you have   uh businesses that are responding to items of a  certain threshold that historically they don't   need to in the private sector. Okay. Thank  you. I see no further questions. Thank you,   Josh. I move to approve the board of bids and  contracts dated August 11th, 2025. Second.   Motion and a second. Any further discussion? I  see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 70. Madame clerk, please call the  next item. Petitions for public improvements. Good morning, mayor, city council members. Paul  Gunsman, public works and utilities. For the   record, I have some new and revised petitions for  your consideration this morning. The signatures on   the petitions represent 100% of the improvement  district and the petitions are valid per Kansas   statute. Dugan West Kellogg commercial fifth  edition located in district 4. The projects will   provide water and sanitary sewer improvements  required for new residential and commercial   developments. Walnut Grove Edition located in  district 6. The project will provide sanitary   sewer improvements for exist for an existing  commercial development in Prairie Glenn Edition   located in district 2. On March 18th, 2025, the  city council approved sewer improvements required   for a new residential development. The developer  has submitted revised that should state sewer   sanitary sewer petitions to remove the acquisition  fees. budgets remain as previously approved and it is recommended that the city council  approve the new and revised petitions and budgets,   adopt the new and amending resolutions  and authorize the necessary signatures   and I will stand for questions.  Questions for Paul? I see none.   Madam motion to approve petitions for  public improvements. Second motion and   a second. Any further discussion? I see  none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 70. Madame clerk,  please call the next item. Development agreement. Sorry. Public hearing considering approval of  a development agreement with Union Development   Holdings LLC and issuance of multif family  residential revenue bonds. Honorable mayor,   members of council, Troy Anderson, assistant city  manager. um stand before you today with a request   uh for u approval of a development agreement that  includes some terms and conditions associated with   uh residential uh affordable housing project  uh located in the waterwalk redevelopment area.   So, a little bit of background history. Back in  September 2002, City Witchaw introduced into a   development agreement to redevelop at that point  in time the East Bank redevelopment district. Um,   and more specifically what later became  known as the Waterwalk Development. There's   a 20-year history involving the Waterwalk  Development. Uh but bringing that to today,   uh Union Development Holdings LLC, you'll uh hear  me refer to them as Union throughout, now proposes   developing on city-owned land within the Waterwalk  Development 186 unit multif family affordable   housing project. As part of the project, Union's  requesting issuance of multif family residential   revenue bonds and an amount not to exceed $50  million to finance the project. Union estimates   the total investment for the project to be just  under 50 million and will include one, two,   and three bedroomedroom unit options along with  amenities for the tenants. The project qualifies   for a property tax abatement. In addition  to the request for property tax abatement,   union has agreed to a 10-year pilot payment in lie  of taxes. The estimated value of abatement for the   first full year is approximately $107,000. With  that being said, unless the pilot of approximately   $62,000, the net value of an abatement applicable  to each of the jurisdictions is provided here on   the screen in front of you. Uh I won't read  through those. Project is also eligible for   a sales tax exemption. Uh the approximate value  of that sales tax exemption is about $1.8 million   with the city share being approximately $141,000.  a costbenefit analysis was uh performed and um the   following ratio of benefits uh have been provided  as a result of that costbenefit analysis. Again,   I won't read through those, but those  are available to you in the report. So,   let's talk about the development agreement just  a little bit. Um, approval of the development   agreement will allow union to proceed with number  one, applying to the Kansas Housing Resource   Corporation for low-income housing tax credits  to assist with funding the project. Number two,   obtaining the development rights to the subject  property. Number three, pursuing all other due   diligence in commencing construction on the  project. However, it withholds execution of   the ground lease until such time as all of these  preconditions are satisfied. Um, execution is   conditioned upon adequate financing commitment,  tax credit approvals, obain obtaining those   development rights, and then successfully removing  the property from the waterwalk redevelopment   project area in order to achieve the property  tax abatement that's being requested. This is a   a snapshot of the history of public versus private  investment in the Waterwalk development. Um, I can   answer any questions you might have on that. Down  at the subtotal there shows kind of where we're   at today and then what this might look like if  council approves the development agreement today. Kind of a standard disclaimer. Revenue bonds are  a mechanism for achieving a sales tax exemption   and a property tax abatement. City's not lending  any money. Owner developer is required to achieve   all of its own financing. No taxpayer dollars  are at risk. All costs are borne by the company   requesting the use of the bonds. That being  said, if approved, union agrees to pay all   costs of issuing the bonds and agrees to pay  the city's $2,500 annual origination fee.   Law department's reviewed the development  agreement has approved it as to form. Any   of the bond documents that require are required  for the issuance of the bonds will be prepared   by outside council but ultimately law  department will review and approve all   those in final form. The recommendation uh for  today is to kind of hold a public hearing but   ultimately close a public hearing, approve the  development agreement, authorize the necessary   signatures. And with that being said, we do have  representatives here from the applicant that   uh would like to introduce themselves and  they have a few slides to share with you. Good morning, Mayor Woo, Vice Mayor Johnston,  Council Members Tuttle, Council Member Johnson,   Council Member Glascock, Council Member Ballard,  and Council Member Hoheisle. Good morning. My   name is Jim Cororac. I am the co-rustee of the  estate of the late Jack Dbor. I am also president   of Consolidated Development, a subsidiary of the  estate, leading the waterwalk development. Moving   forward, as Troy mentioned, in September of 2002,  Mayor Knight and the entire city council filled   with iconic leaders and names you would recognize  for sure. Brewer, Schlap, Fury, Gray, Marts,   and Lamky approved a 99-year development agreement  for the East Bank with local entrepreneur Jack   Dbor and his Riverwalk LLC, granting the exclusive  rights to develop approximately 20 acres, now   known as Waterwalk. As Troy mentioned, we're 23  years into that agreement with 76 years remaining.   The vision for Waterwalk was big. A vibrant  mixeduse retail development office, entertainment,   residential, retail district revitalizing the  our Kansas River East Bank. Imagined as a central   gathering place for Witchah. Much like one may  experience at Kansas City's Zona Rosa or Leewood's   Town Center, the city invested significantly  in infrastructure, parking, utilities, art,   all laying the ground for something very special.  But I think we can agree the reality after 23   years is less than what was hoped. Waterwalk  features today include luxury condominiums,   the Marriott Fairfield Inn and Suites, Realtors  of South Central Kansas, and the offices of King   of Freight, where sporting goods retailer Gander  Mountain once stood. Significant efforts have been   made throughout the years to develop a corporate  headquarters, a luxury apartment building,   an office building, and yes, even a casino. though  none of those were ever realized. Looking back,   Mayor, it's clear that Waterwalk has fallen  painfully short of Jack's original vision. It   would be easy to cast blame on external economic  forces like the Great Recession or the pandemic.   However, internal missteps and shifting priorities  all played a role in the slow growth of Waterwalk.   Perhaps the original vision focused too  much on nice to haves like fine dining and   upscale retail before establishing a critical  mass of residents to support such a demand.   Perhaps Gander Mountain's failure was an indicator  of bellweather of how retail development may have   fared in Waterwalk. We'll really never know. But  regardless, on behalf of the state, I sincerely   apologize to the council, to the citizens of  Witchah for falling short of that original vision.   We could and should have collaborated better,  asked for help, and been more transparent. There's   nothing we can do about the past. It's time to  move forward. Today's proposed single development   represents a level invest of investment almost  equal to all private investment in Waterwalk   since 2002. We all see the great things happening  in downtown Witchah. Major investments like the   Witchah Biomed Campus, the Kansas College of  Medicine, WSU Tech, and potentially Kansas's   first dental school. Proper housing for those  who work at our universities, hospitals,   and keep the city running is essential. Witchita  needs affordable housing for its workforce,   its teachers, its technicians, its maintenance  workers, and entrylevel first responders,   certified nurses, and more. Affordable quality  place to call home that doesn't consume the lion's   share of one's paycheck. This project, this place,  this time is where critical needs begin. Today   should not be so much about airing grievances of  the past, although we're ready to hear those, but   more about dreaming about Water Walk's future and  the opportunity we have to dream and start fresh.   My experience with the Annex Group for the past  year has been outstanding. With 43 communities   and over 6,300 units nationwide, Annex brings  professionalism and attention to detail and   experience. For example, when I insisted right  from the get-go that the condo owner's river   views remain protected, they listened and  they adapted their design. I think city   staff can attest to their responsiveness and high  level of collaboration. After this development,   what's next for Waterwalk? With over 300 potential  new residents calling Waterwalk home, we begin to   approach a critical mass needed to think seriously  about restaurants, perhaps a grocery store,   and even destination shopping. as this project  takes up onethird of the remaining significant   twothirds of the waterwalk development remaining.  But first things must come first. It's time to   make Waterwalk a catalyst for growth, a place  the community can be proud of. We're committed to   partnering with you, the city, to help Waterwalk  and Witchah grow now and into the future.   Mayor Woo and Council, your vote supporting the  project today is a vote for the hardworking little   guy who deserves to live in a vibrant, active,  and beautiful committee and not be a victim of   the past. Thank you for your time. I can stand for  questions or if you would like to hear from the   developer first. Up to you, mayor. Thanks, Jim.  I actually have lots of questions and I know that   um assistant city manager Troy Anderson also  has some slides that go along with what you've   just said which you alluded to airing grievances  is not this time but I believe it is this time.   We have never aired these grievances and these  grievances is the reason why this community has   said they don't want to see sweetheart deals. This  is the ultimate sweetheart deal. And I do want the   community to know exactly what happened so that we  can then move forward. But we cannot move forward   without addressing what has been promised and not  fulfilled. So, I would like to ask assistant city   manager Troy Anderson to provide the next set  of slides because I believe we need to address   this portion before we can address future housing  or development that continues to happen in that   area. So, I'm going to ask assistant city manager  Troy Anderson to provide the next set of slides. Okay. So, as I indicated a little while ago, uh  there's about 20 years of history here. Um all   in all, I probably have about 50 slides. Um  this is going to be in depth. There's a lot   here to unpack. Um so again, if at any point  in time there's questions, don't hesitate   to interrupt. I'll try to go through this as  quickly as possible. But with that being said,   this really started even before 2002. Started  back in March of 1995, there was an agreement   regarding development and operations of the East  Bank Hyatt Regency Hotel and related improvements.   Couple months later in October 1995, there was  a resolution considering establishment of a tax   increment financing redevelopment district. in  October that set the public hearing for December   of 1995. And in December of 1995, there was  a public hearing and ultimately there was   established the waterwalk tax increment financing  redevelopment project plan. Eventually that was   deferred to March 25th. Um this is an illustration  of the original Eastbank redevelopment district.   You'll see how later this is revised. So then  in September of 2001, city issues a request for   proposals to develop the area south of Century  2 Convention Center, now known as the Eastbank   Redevelopment Project Area. At the time, there  was only one proposal received. The one proposal   received was from a group of local developers  including Jack Dbor, Dave Burke, Dave Wells,   Greg Cover. At that time that group was known as  Riverwalk LLC. The proposal submitted by the group   was for a development of mixeduse project that  included apartments, condominiums, a multi-story   office building, retail shops and restaurants all  to be built around a public waterway. And in June   of 2002, there was ultimately a reduction in those  uh eastbank redevelopment district boundaries. Uh,   as you can see, it was reduced to sort  of Douglas, Maine, Kellogg, and Mlan. So then in July of 2002, there was anou,  memorandum of understanding, designating Riverwalk   LLC as the preferred developer for the East Bank  Redevelopment District. In August of 2002, there   was a contract with a group Gossson Livingston  Associates for preparation of the East Bank   master plan. At that time, the proposal included  about $65,000 in design fees, about $3,600 in   reimburseable expenses. At the time, costs were  supposed to be shared equally between Riverwalk   LLC and the city. month later in September of  2002, a development agreement with Riverwalk   LLC was drafted, presented to city council and  approve uh approved as part of a master plan that   key the key elements of that initial development  agree agreement included the following. There were   public improvements that included acquisition  of land, construction of a parking garage, a   waterway, riverbank improvements, and at the time  a Witchah Street turnaround. Private investment uh   was supposed to include development of four office  buildings, over 250 units of high-end residential   housing, retail, entertainment, and restaurants.  the time it set forth a 99-year lease structure   for the use of the land with lease payments based  on profit sh uh with based on a profit sharing   formula. And additionally, there was a phased  project approach to reduce public risk, built-in   private sector guarantees of $24 million as a  condition of starting phase 1A public improvements   and $9.6 million for phase 1B. the developer was  ultimately responsible for all outdoor maintenance   and that the city shared profits with the  developer after the minimum rates of return were   achieved. So I've taken that original sort of east  bank or the revised reduced eastbank redevelopment   district zoomed in a little bit to the the real  the subject area and as you can see here former   Maple Street kind of bisected the development.  You can see there to the south phase 1 A,   to the north phase 1B. Um, you can see the water  feature that connects phase 1 A and 1B uh and all   of the proposed developments surrounding  those water features, that water feature.   So at the time there was a proforma that was  put together that um illustrated the public   improvements and the p private improvements. The  cost of the east bank public improvements at the   time were estimated at about $30 million excluding  construction financing for a combined total   of about 32 $33 million. At the time, private  improvements were estimated at about 61 million   for phase 1A and about 24 25 million for phase  1B for a combined total of about $86 million. When they first developed that proforma, the the  revenues to help offset the public investment were   identified as tax increment financing from  that private development totaling about 19.6   million. Some parking revenue estimated  at about $3 million. At the time, there   was an idea to submit an application for an EDA  grant for about 1.5 million and then ultimately   programming within the capital improvement  plan funds totaling about $ 8.9 million. So in February of 2003, there was a  resolution considering adoption of   the redevelopment project plan set the public  hearing for March 18th, 2003. In March of 2003,   there was also an award and an agreement for  the Eastbank Redevelopment Design Services.   That was that Gossson and Associates again.  So to design the redevelopment project plan   was about a $1.46 million lumpsum payment to that  group. So then at the March 2003 public hearing   um establishing the waterwalk redevelopment  project plan, the financial feasibility study   examined the pro the projected change and assess  valuation from the base year of 1995 which is when   the redevelopment district was created. Um and  that based on assumptions of full completion in   2009, the value at the base 1995 was about 4.5 4.6  million again with the assumed capital investment   on the private side. The appraised value in 2009  uh was supposed to achieve about 868 $87 million.   And with that being said, the analysis at  that time said that there would have been   sufficient property tax increment revenues  together with parking revenues sufficient   to retire the principal and interest on about  $22 million general obligation bond issuance. Additionally, the balance of the project costs  were again to be financed by general obligation   bonds uh from general property tax revenues  programmed within the capital improvement   program. Additionally, the plan authorized about  $31 million in tiff eligible expenses. At that   time, the vote was to defer to March 25th, but  ultimately on March 25th, 2003, there was a motion   and a second to close the public hearing and  approve the project plan, and that motion failed   by a vote of 4 to three. At the time, there was an  alternative funding source idea to use star bonds.   So on March 25th, 2003, there was a resolution  that a resolution be drafted in support of   Starbond for the Waterwalk redevelopment project  plan. That motion carried 70. Additionally,   on March 25th, 2003, there was another action  item regarding the Eastbank Development Agreement,   and that was to divert Lewis Street traffic to  Waterman and vacate Lewis Street. At the time   there was an indication that there was quote  unquote no change to the development budget.   So this kind of illustrates at that point in  time maybe one of the first revisions to the   master plan. As you can see there, the idea was to  uh vacate or abandon that section of Lewis Street,   uh illustrated there in red, and to um  redirect traffic from Maple up to Waterman. So, in April of 2003, again, uh now the actual  resolution is put in front of city council uh   voted on to support the use of star bonds for the  waterwalk plan. And later on in September of 2003,   there's an approval of sort of the first  comprehensive revised waterwalk master plan   and starbond area. The revised master  plan incorporated a major destination   retail facility based on the use of starbond  financing and other changes. Subsequently,   approval of the revised master plan was  conditioned on subsequent approval by city   council of necessary changes to the development  agreement. So, just to kind of continue to paint,   we got two things going on, right? We got  kind of the the master plan and the concepts,   but then there's also the development  agreement for the terms and conditions   and the obligations and roles and  responsibilities of all the parties. So, this was the revised master  plan that was put forward. Again,   I've kind of overlaid that over the subject  property. Uh you can kind of see how the the   plan has shifted and changed. Uh there down in  kind of the southern part of it, you see that   large retail destination that was the impetus for  um pursuing Starbond financing and funding at the   time. Just a better perspective. It's kind of  easier to see like this rather than overlaid,   but some early illustrations of what that  development was supposed to look like. And in December 2003, there were amendments to  the waterwalk agreement. This is known as the   first amendment to the waterwalk development  agreement. The amendments to the development   agreement incorporated the details of the  revised master plan that I just showed.   Since the development agreement was first  approved, the developer entity changed its   name from Riverwalk LLC to Waterwalk LLC. The  use of star bonds to finance public improvements   related to the destination retail store added  a new element not contemplated by the original   development agreement. These new improvements  add approximately $24 million to the cost to   be paid by the city with the sole source of  funding identified as star bond proceeds. As you can see here, there was a revised uh  table in that first amendment that talks about   the public improvements, the private improvements,  and those eligible expenses. The star bond funding   would be able to support. The revised cost of  the East Bank public improvements uh are now   estimated at about 28.8 8 million excluding  construction financing for a revised total   of about 30.9 or 3 $31 million. There was about  a $2 million reduction in public improvements.   Uh the way that it was um suggested in the  context of that conversation at the time was   uh redirecting the waterway and making  alternative waterway improvements was   going to save uh the city about $2 million  in public improvements. At that time,   private improvements were additionally  reduced from 86 million to about 82.266. So then in December of 2003, there was  a resolution considering adoption of a   redevelopment tiff project plan. Remember the  previous plan failed. So this is now returning   uh because in order to uh capture tax increment  financing and the use of the star bonds,   you have to have a project plan in place. So  this is the resolution considering adoption   of a redevelopment tiff project plan that  set the public hearing for January 27th,   2004. In the meantime, um, in December of  2003, there's a an action item captured   generally around the river corridor project.  Uh, the reason why we start introducing this   into the conversation is because this is where  the river corridor project and the waterwalk   redevelopment begin to sort of blend sources and  uses. Uh you'll see why here in a little bit,   but it was the expansion of the concept to include  the river corridor project um for the use of the   star bonds. Interestingly, within one of the  uh staff reports for that December 30, 2003,   it talks about how $1.9 million of that river  corridor project was going to be transferred to   the Eastbank Waterwalk Development Project. Okay.  So, then comes the public hearing. Uh, excuse me,   not yet. January 2004, there is an amendment  to the design service agreement with Goss and   Livingston increasing the contribution by another  $71,000. This was for some survey, geotechnical,   and topographical work. And then we get to the  public hearing. January 27th, 2004, there's the   public hearing establishing the Waterwalk Tax  Increment Financing Redevelopment Project Plan.   The financial feasibility study is revised and  examines uh again the original 1995 base year   um but pushes out the proforma from 2009 to 2011.  Um again, assume base year still maintains the   $4.6 $.6 million of value, but based on a 2011  completion date, the appraised value is reduced   from about 87 million to about $81 million. At the  time, the analysis still showed that the stream of   projected tax increment revenues uh together with  parking revenues would be sufficient to retire the   principal and interest on at that point in time  now a $23 million general obligation tax increment   bond. over that same 15-year period. The balance  of the project costs again would be financed   by general obligation bonds from property tax  revenues as identified in the capital improvement   program. And the plan at that point in time,  again, seeing that $2 million capital investment   savings on the city side only authorized  $28.8 million in tiff eligible expenses. So then on February 3rd, there's a second reading  adopting the Waterwalk redevelopment project   plan and in addition to that approving an EDA  grant application. So as part of the Waterwalk   redevelopment project financing, the budget  included a $ 1.5 million EDA grant. Staff prepared   a pre-application for the EDA funds totaling $3  million. So, at that time, staff submitted an   application for $3 million in uh actual EDA grant.  The EDA funding will be used to pay a portion of   the cost for constructing the waterway and or  street improvements within the project area. Uh,   for what it's worth, and I think I hit on this  later on, but that grant is not received. That   grant is not awarded. So, then in March of 2004,  acquisition by eminent domain of tracks required   for the Waterwalk project. So early on in the  process, there's a suggestion that the city owns,   operates, controls about 75% of the land within  the redevelopment plan area, but an additional   25% of the land still needed to be acquired.  So this is an action item by city council at   the time to exercise or potentially exercise  eminent domain to acquire the remaining tracks. In June 2004, there's then a memorandum of  agreement with the state historic preservation   office um because of the use of star bonds  and some other things. There's environmental   um and state historical studies and analyses that  had to be conducted. And so that's part of that   contract agreement. In September of 2004, star  bonds for the waterwalk project are beginning   to introduce beginning to be introduced into the  conversation with city council. At that point in   time, there is a an LOI letter of intent with  a destination retailer, specifically Gander   Mountain. At the time, the letter of intent  calls for construction of about an 88,000q   foot multi-level mixeduse commercial building,  including a lodge style conference center,   a mezzanine restaurant, a deck overlooking the  river, a pedestrian bridge, and surface parking   together with other amenities. At the time, the  estimated total development cost is a little   more than $14 million. The request of the time  was that the city contribute $7 million plus up   to a million dollars for additional public art  with about $7.1 million funded by Waterwalk LLC. However, and this is where I suggested earlier  why the river corridor project started to get   introduced in the conversation. State law  does not permit the use of star bonds to   finance construction costs of privatelyowned or  leased buildings. Under the developer's proposal,   a portion of the building costs will be  paid from the city's contribution and   then using its home rule powers.  The city may however finance its   contributions with general obligation bonds.  General obligation fundings included in the   approved capital improvement program for  a nearby project that could be then used   for this project. Upon approval of all of  those statutory steps, star bonds would   then be used to finance the eligible costs  to finance costs in that nearby CIP project. Again, staff identified the river corridor project  as those project eligible expenses eligible for   starbond financing and compatible with the  public improvements in the waterwalk project.   In order to facilitate the arrangement, it was  going to be necessary to amend the Starbond area   to include that river corridor project. Staff  planned to return to council on October of   2004 with development agreement revisions and an  ordinance exempting the project from the city's   bid law. It was recommended at the time that  on November 2004 be set as the public hearing   on the expansion of the Eastbank Redevelopment  District to include the revised star bond area.   You can see that expansion  here on this illustration. So then in September 2004, uh another council  action item for a waterwalk area phase 2   environmental assessment. More specifically on  December 2004, waterwalk development agreement   amendment is introduced. This is known as the  second amendment to the development agreement.   Again, now the retail the destination retail  store has been introduced and so that that   needed to be constructed. The suggestion at the  time was that that be constructed on a design   build basis using key construction as the design  build contractor. Key construction was chosen as   the design build contractor uh in part because  one of the owners is a partner in Waterwalk LLC.   The budget for the star bond funding is being  replaced by general obligation bond budget for   the destination retail improvements totaling  $14.1 million. The destination retail store   being constructed on a design build basis. Did I  just duplicate that? Oh, my fault. That was a dup   duplicate slide. I apologize. Okay. So then on  um October 2004 there's a second reading of that   waterwalk development agreement amendment.  Uh we also amend the definitions of parking   facilities in surface in place of surface parking.  So originally the retail destination required all   of this sort of free on uh surface parking but  because the site constraints wouldn't allow it   uh they had to go vertical with parking garage and  hence the amendment to the definition of parking   facilities. Uh December 2004 there's a memorandum  agreement with state historic preservation office   again continued efforts around compliance with  those measures. December 2004 approval of a   waterwalk ground lease number one and related  agreements. This is the first ground lease.   Uh so again, remember the original development  agreement and proposal talked about a 99-year   lease. And so the first project that really came  up out of the ground, uh the destination retail   now needing its first sort of ground lease. This  is referred to as ground lease number one. Later   on in January of 2005, there's a council action  to approve a non-disturbance agreement. Uh this   is just in regards to some some sort of legal  ease around depending on who defaults, right?   That that doesn't necessarily impact the tenant.  Um and so there's a non-disturbance agreement that   they would be allowed to continue to operate if  for whatever reason the other party defaults. In March 2005, uh there is a now one of the first  construction contracts for street and utility   improvements totaling about $638,000. Uh these  are the the public improvements. Additionally,   in May, there's a change order for those  construction uh improvements. This is the   first amendment to that adds about another $38,000  to that street and utility work. In October 2005,   there is an art consultant that is hired. Um  remember there's a previous commitment to um   spend approximately a million dollars on art. And  so an art consultant is hired in October of 2005. In December of 2005, there is um yet another  revised site plan and supplemental agreement   with Goss and Livingston for another $175,000.  Really, this takes into consideration a lot of   the previous conversations regarding Gander  Mountain, regarding the parking facilities,   the revised street layouts, replacing the  waterwalk canal with water features that include   programmable elements such as moving water, music  lights, fire lasers, and deleting the foot bridge   over the river. This is the first time that that  water concept sort of evolves into more of a sort   of theatrical water feature. And you begin to see  that here in this illustration. So, uh notice the   previous water feature is now gone. Um this is  really more um um replicates that amphitheater   and water you see there in front of building  C. uh the reorientation of some of the streets   and the building pad sites and then the again  the retail destination there in the southwest. Okay. So then in June 2006 um there is a HUD  EDI special purpose grant that is applied for   for about $247,000. Uh again, the previous  $3 million EDA grant um was was denied,   was not approved, and so this is coming back to uh  perhaps other grant opportunities available at the   time and the pursuit of those. So then in June  of 2006, there is also now another development   agreement amendment. This is referred to as the  third amendment and again just now continues   to memorialize the conversations and actions  that have been taken place up until now. The   new site plan. So the location of building  C, parking structure, the location of the   amphitheater. Again, that's the part of the  site plan that has been replaced uh or that   has replaced the water feature. Amendments  to coincide with the revised master plan,   deletes the waterway improvements, deletes the  bridge, and updates the public improvement budget. So, here's the public and private improvement  budget that is uh included in the third   amendment. The revised cost of the public  improvements are now estimated at uh about   29.8 or $30 million excluding construction  financing. Again, now we start to introduce   the $7 million towards the destination retail  improvements, the million dollars towards art.   So now the public improvements uh are in  the ballpark of about 39.9 or $40 million.   Private improvements are again reduced uh this  time from about 82.25 to about $80 million. So then in August 2006 uh there's a waterwalk  capital contribution and construction fund   agreement. council action on June of 2006  to approve the third amendment allowed   for the commitment of funds to construct the  amphitheater and the parking garage. However,   it didn't include the actual agreement documents.  So, that had to get brought back. It was just   kind of a formality at that point in time to um  to finalize that and uh authorize the necessary   signatures. In September 2006, there's a plat  of the waterwalk phase 2 edition. So then we   get into December 2006 where we introduce ground  lease number two. Um this is with Waterwalk LLC to   construct the four-story mixeduse building which  will include retail, commercial and residential   condominiums and a structured parking. So this is  that building C there on the far east side of the   of the redevelopment area. December approval of  a waterwalk ground lease number three and related   documents. So, at the same time, there's also  conversation commitments uh to build the Witchaw   Area Association of Realators building. It's about  a 12,000 foot office building. So, we now have   ground leases number two and three. Additionally,  in February of '07, uh that EDI grant is approved   and so there's a council action item to  accept that EDI EDI grant for about $247,000. Okay. Okay. So then in May of 2007, um  there's a star bond for River District   Redevelopment Project. This is a resolution  setting the public hearing for July 10th. On   July 10th is now the public hearing. The total  not to exceed amount of improvements that can   be funded with STAR bonds has been revised to  now be sort of capped out at $13 million based   on the feasibility study in the project plan.  The total cost of the entire river district   redevelopment project is about $155.8 million  with 87 from private and 68.8 from public,   which now includes the Starbond funded  improvements. Again, that includes that $1.9   million transfer from the River Corridor project  to the Eastbank Waterwalk Development Project. So then it was suggested at the time that  within the condominium owners and owners   uh that they were some users that were unable  to obtain financing um in the state of Kansas.   And so there was a suggestion that title of that  land needed to be transferred to Waterwalk LLC   in order for those condominium owners to obtain  financing on the condominium units. So building C,   which includes a 490 car parking structure,  48 residential condominium units, and 12,000   ft of office space, 16,000 ft of retail space,  is transferred in title. There's a number of   residential condo units that have been contracted  for. they've been able to unable to obtain that   first mortgage financing. And so at this point in  time, the city transfers title of the ground over   to Waterwalk LLC. So this building is is not part  of that 99-year lease structure at that point. Again, there's no residential condominiums in  the state of Kansas that can serve as comps.   Uh they say the reason why is the residential  condo properties in Kansas are located on land   owned by a condo association, not on leased land.  Bank's been unwilling. Developers asked the city   to replace the ground lease with the first right  of refusal to repurchase the property for a dollar   and the property is transferred. Okay. Can we go  back to 84, Mayor? Is that okay? Right here. Yeah.   84. 84. Yes, sir. Yep. Okay. Um, so does this mean  that the city no longer owns this plot of land?   That's correct. So is a plot of land we leased  out for a dollar and then now they outright own   it. That's correct. Did they purchase it or did  we just give it to them? It was transful. It was   transferred based on the first right of refusal  to repurchase. If the uses ever change, then the   city has the right to repurchase it for a dollar.  But so long as it continues to function as it was   constructed, then the transfer was approved. Okay.  is now I I have some plans pertaining to that and   this current contract. I'll save it for uh when  we get to that part. Sure. I have one follow-up   question to this very specific topic. I did not  understand that 99-year lease did not apply to   this the waterwalk condominiums. However, there's  public parking on there right now. So, how does   that work? So let me answer the first part of that  just to kind of frame the conversation. In 2002,   right, that original development agreement  set forth a 99-year development structure,   right? It wasn't until the land was leased as  part of a ground lease did the actual tenant   gain the rights to occupy that specific ground.  So you've heard me talk about the various ground   leases. Right now we've included ground lease one,  two, and three. any of the land that isn't under   a ground lease is still owned, operated, and  controlled sort of by the city even to today.   Okay. What that original development agreement  gave the developers were the development rights.   So once the developers wanted to exercise their  rights and develop on that city-owned land,   then that's why all of these sort of amended plans  and amendments to the development agreements to   then now include those ground leases for what  should have been at the time the remaining term   of that 99-year lease. Does that make sense?  So that's the first part of your question. The   second part of your question is so the garage was  built. The garage is a private parking garage as   part of some of the original agreements, perhaps  amendments there, too. There's a requirement   that a percentage of those spaces within that  parking garage be made available to the public.   That's how they were able to use sort of public  dollars to finance construction of the project   by making sure that a certain percentage of that  parking was sort of continually made available to   the public. But it is a private garage sort of  owned, operated, controlled by private entity,   right? It's only a percentage of that parking  that has to be made available to the public. Okay. And we do not maintain that parking  garage then. That's correct. And one more   question because I know we have we've been  talking about parking downtown. Yep. Will   this be considered at all as part of there  are spaces that are public spaces that are   available and what's that percentage uh from the  I don't even remember how many stalls there are,   but what's the actual percentage of public  stalls? I want to say the number that stands   out in my mind is they have to make 250  spaces of what I believe is about a 450   to 500 space garage. They have to make 250  spaces available to the public. So about half,   but I can get you that exact information. I don't  have that information available with me today,   but we have closely monitored. Will that  be accounted for when we talk about public   parking as we're talking about downtown parking?  separate conversation, but this is one of those   lots that has public stalls. Yes. So, it has been  included in some of our illustrations on the Park   Witchaw website. We have couple of illustrations  uh on that. It is identified as one of those and   there's a couple of others that there are private  parking garages where there are agreements that   those private property owners must provide a  certain number or certain percentage of public   parking. This is one of those and it is included  in the illustration on the Park Witchaw website. Okay. So, um, so then in January of '08, just  making sure I didn't miss it, January of08,   um, city council authorizes a construction  contract for some pavement and sidewalk   work out in front of, uh, building C.  Uh, it's about $500,000. Then there is,   uh, a change order to that sort of pavement  sidewalk work in August of '08, just under   $20,000. Um, so then comes December of 2008 and  there is yet another waterwalk master plan funding   and document amendment. This is referred to as the  fourth amendment. The fourth amendment proposes   yet another revision of the master plan. This time  now we're simply eliminating the amphitheater and   replacing it with a landscape area with a water  feature and a gazebo which can then serve as the   focus of an outdoor entertainment venue. and moves  the Walting Waters Fountain to a new location. As   a result, the fourth amendment revises the city  budget for public improvements, uh, increasing   the contribution for the parking structure by  about 1.5 million to a total of 8.5 million and   increases the public improvements generally by  about 2.6 6 million to a total of 6.1 million   just in those two uh changes to the master plan.  So then in December of 2008 there's a contract   amendment for architectural and engineering  services again with GSON Livingston uh it's   estimated at about $643,000 at the time. Again  December of08 there's a contract amendment for   an art consultant with Gretamman Group. They were  the respondents to that RFP for an art broker.   In September of09, uh there's a waterwalk revised  master plan funding and document amendments. This   one really uh uh revolves around the boat house  and the Kansas Sports Hall of Fame, although there   are revisions to site improvement areas one, two,  and three. And you can really kind of see those   in sort of this revised master plan. Area one  being that area between Main Street and Water   Street. Area two being those improvements between  Water Street and I think that's called Witchah   Street now. Um and then area three is those  improvements between Waw Street and the river. Again, waterwalk revised master plan funding  and document amendments from September 1.   The total budget for the waterwalk public  improvements is now north of $41 million. Consists   of general obligation bond dollars of a little  more than 19 million, tax increment financing   of about 17.6 million, special obligation  star bonds about 4.3 million, and a federal   EDA EDI grant of about 247,000. In October 2009,  there is a boat house lease. In January of 2010,   there's now a letter of intent relating to  development of Waterwalk Hotel. There's a   tenative agreement with uh 4G LLC wholly owned  by Jim Cork to include one a cash contribution   which was um in the form of uh issuance of general  obligation bonds that were intended to be repaid   by transient gas tax revenues that totaled about  $2.5 million at the time. There was also approval   of a community improvement district CI 2% sales  tax. Uh the value of that's undetermined. There   was no information available in the staff report.  Additionally, there was an issuance of a letter   of intent to issue industrial revenue bonds for a  sales tax exemption valued at about $328,000 and   an approval of a 99-year ground lease for a dollar  a year plus additional rent and approve a parking   agreement. Sure. I want to stay on that slide.  Yes, I think we have a couple questions. So,   how much was this hotel? And the city paid 2.5  million for this development, this specific   hotel. Can you explain that? The staff report  at the time suggests it's about a $12 million   uh project. And yes, uh the agreement would  have um did contribute $2.5 million. The city   sold general obligation bonds to help finance  the project and then they have since been using   transient gas tax revenues to sort of reimburse  that bond debt. Maybe I'll ask that question to   city manager. Can you explain that? How did the  city get into giving a cash contribution to a   private development project specifically that  already had at this point I think slide number   92 had hundreds of or tens of millions of dollars  that had already been invested by the public. I'd   like to know because this was January of 2010. You  were city manager at that time. Yes. Right. Um at   that time Mr. court came forward and said that  uh had proposed the hotel and the council wanted   to see some development because there hadn't been  much development other than the condos and gander   mountain at the time and so the uh problem was  that we were at the depth of the recession and   uh there was a significant project gap so uh it  he I believe Mr. Korak proposed that there be a   repayment of debt for the project through trans  transient guest tax which is allowed under state   code subject to a reverse referendum. So if a  petition is filed by residents then there that   um would go up for election before it could  be ratified. Um, so the council agreed,   recognized that we were in unique  circumstances and they wanted to   move forward with the project and so they  agreed to the $2.5 million contribution. The you used specific language when you were  talking that you said that it was intended to be   repaid. Is the full amount has it been repaid or  is just the intent still 15 years later? I don't   know. and the AR and that's why I I didn't have  a chance in in sort of just gathering all of this   information. I haven't had a chance to really  sit down with our finance department and figure   out exactly where we're at. So, if you go back to  kind of this slide, right, all of those general   obligation bonds, where we at on the tax income  financing, where we at on the star bonds, etc. I I   haven't had a chance to sit down with our finance  director and figure out exactly where we're at on   all of these. This is really just kind of painting  the history of the council action items as they   relate to Waterwalk. For only being here three  years, you've done a great job of going back   20 plus years with all this research. Thank you. I  have a quick question. Um, sorry. Yeah. Do we have   any other 99-year leases anywhere in the city?  I think I don't know for certain. I'm going to   guess we probably do. It's not uncommon. It's not  uncommon, right? Cities do these 99-year leases   for a a host of reasons. So whether we actually  do or not, I'd have to go do some due diligence,   but if we had one, it wouldn't surprise me. It's  It's somewhat It's not incredibly common, but it   is done within Bob. Do you know if we have any?  I I can't think of any and I can't think of any   since I've been here other than what was approved  here. Thank you. I have one quick question here as   well. Um, at the very beginning like 40 slides  ago, don't have to go there. Um, but it talks   about the 24 million uh guaranteed and private  spending on this whole project as well. Yep. Uh,   was that 24 million realized in the way that we  had anticipated at the beginning? I have a slide   kind of one of the last slides I have shows that  kind of where we're and we showed it a little bit   earlier in my previous slide deck that showed the  public and private investment up to date kind of   subtotals that and then um so maybe that answers  your question about the original 24 million   because it I'd have to go kind of go back and kind  of say we know exactly what was realized but just   being able to compare that to the original uses. I  I'd have to kind of go back and just make sure. I   I know some of the things like the condominiums  were realized, the apartments were realized. Um I'm trying to think there's not really any retail  out there. Um there is some office that was part   of some of the original. So some of it I don't  know if that Yeah. Okay. Thank you. I'm gonna try   and save all my other questions to the end, but  just going back to the intended to be repaid. I   know that you don't have that answer. Yes, Mr.  Cork, do you have that answer? I imagine that   you may be aware of it if our finance department  hasn't pulled that information yet. Has that been   repaid back? And has the city been made whole? I  don't have the specific answer on that, council   member. There's a lot more to this story. I would  say just was doing it the simple math. So this is   a hotel that again but for the development of the  hotel was 0% there was zero property tax being   paid since uh it opened in 2010 2011 it's paid  over $3 million in property tax again would have   been a goose egg zero if you do the basic math and  by the way it's it's the transient um uh guest tax   not the transient gas tax has uh been represented  so far if you do the basic math math which I think   Is it 6% is the transient guest tax? Who would  know? Roughly. Yes. Okay. So, do the basic math on   that. Uh 15 years of operation, roughly three to  $4 million a year in revenue. Um that would again   back a napkin roughly $45 million is generated in  that time. Take 6% I the way I do that is I take   10% because I'm not real smart. So that's $4.5  million. um uh over that $45 million. So half of   that is about that, you know, since that amount of  time. Again, that is very rudimentary, very back   napkin. There's a lot more to the story than,  you know, what you've heard so far, certainly.   Uh but that's that's how I would generally  answer your question, Councilman. Thank you. Yes, and thanks for bringing that up.  Uh yes, the slide says transit. It is   transient guest tax. So I appreciate that.  Thank you. Okay. So for whatever it's worth,   at the January 2010 meeting, that's deferred  to February 2nd. Ultimately February 2nd,   that letter of intent relating to the development  of Waterwalk Hotel is approved by city council.   Um in April of 2010, there are ordinances  authorizing the use of transient guest tax   revenues to finance the Waterwalk Hotel project.  In uh June of 2010, there's an extension of that   IRB letter of intent and approval of the hotel  development agreement, subsequent ground lease,   and related documents. Ultimately, then in August  of 2010, there are amendments to the Waterwalk   Development Agreement, uh at this point in time  known as the fifth amendment. These are now the   Waterwalk Apartments on the other side of the  river. um and the acquisition of a floating   stage to serve as the future amphitheater. And  in May of 2013, there's the ultimate approval   of the floating stage on the Arkansas River. That  was that EDI grant for about $247,000. There were   some additional funds that were contributed out  of the budget for a canopy on that floating stage,   but that's where that EDI grant went in May of  2019. There was an uh approving an amendment to   the waterwalk ground lease number one with King  of Freight. So at this point in time, Gander   Mountain is no. Sorry, Troy. I think Council  Member Hoheisel had a question for the previous   slide. Oh, after just after. So at this point  in time, there's now sort of this transition.   Gander Mountain is, and I don't know exactly when  Gander Mountain sort of goes out of business,   but there's this transition to uh King of  Freight LLC. Uh and so there's a separation   in that initial ground lease number one to now  be sort of ground lease 1A and 1B. Ultimately,   that was deferred to May 21st of 2019. Ultimately  in 2019 there's an approval of the amendment to   that ground lease and that is approved. I have  a question regarding that specific slide. So   does that mean well I guess we're talking about  King of Freight? Yes. Do they have ALS are they   under the 99-year lease agreement? They basically  assumed uh the previous terms and conditions of   the ground lease. So the amendment there's some  area adjacent to the building that was part of   the original ground lease number one. So this kind  of separated that out into ground lease 1A and 1B.   But for all intents and purposes, King of Freight  assumed the balance or all of the remaining terms   and conditions of the initial ground lease  number one. Do we have an amount of what was   paid for by King of Freight to purchase this?  I I do not have that information. No, I get it. Okay, we'll continue. So then in November of  2019, uh there's a public hearing considering a   reduction in the Eastbank Redevelopment District  and an expansion of the West Bank redevelopment   district. Uh there's a resolution setting  a public hearing. Ultimately, in December,   there is a public hearing. More specifically,  we start transitioning across the river. So,   we're getting sort of away from Waterwalk. We're  now talking about the ballpark and some of the   West Bank development. Right? So, you see the  area highlighted there in yellow or excuse me,   highlighted there in red. Uh the area between  Mlan and the river was originally included in the   Eastbank Redevelopment District. So, it had to be  removed from the Eastbank Redevelopment District   and added to the West Bank redevelopment district.  Um, and so that's what this these council action   items are about here sort of December 2019. So  this kind of goes back to Councilman Holisel's   uh question, right? So we went back and we kind of  looked kind of built upon the information that was   provided really from about uh that 2010 where we  identified the $41 million in public investment   and based on information provided to us by um  the waterwalk trustee. We haven't had a chance   to go do a deep dive into the private sector  investments, but just high level snapshot at this   point in time, the public has invested a total  of about $43.8 million and the private sector   investment has invested about 36.5 million. And  with that being said, I will stand for questions. Thank you, Troy. Um, and I do want to just make  mention you just got into your role. How long ago?   Uh, I got here in 22, so I've been here for about  3 years now. As council member Glascock said,   thank you for digging up a lot of this  information that again has spanned over   20 years. And I appreciate that we now have it on  the record. And I wanted it on the record because   I believe that's what the public deserves. And  so, um, I appreciate that it was detailed and   I know that there are multiple items that you  still have more information to provide. Um,   I know some people have mentioned that there were  some uh clerical errors including whether it was   transient versus gas or 2003 versus 2023. Um, just  wanted to make mention that you tried to pull this   all together in the last week and I asked for this  specific information. I've been asking actually   this very information since I got into office last  year because I believe that the public deserves to   know what has happened and why they believe that  there are things that don't currently happen on   this council. We scrutinize, we question because  we are trying to do our best in speaking on the   behalf of the public. And so I'm not going to  speak on the behalf of individuals prior to   me. I can only speak for myself and I just want  to say thank you for being transparent on the   information. It is very sad seeing the very last  slide before this questions and showing how much   public dollars have has been invested into this  property um and how much in private dollars have   been invested into this and still there are many  promises that were made that were not fulfilled.   And so to me, it was important to have the  community see all this information and it   is on record. It's in the minutes. It's also in  this video uh through YouTube. So, I appreciate   uh all this information from the past. Council  member Hoheisle. Thank you, Mayor. Um uh plenty   of questions. I'm going to jump all around  here. Uh was this property ever part of a C? We indicate that there were a number of them kind  of around there and there's not the only property   that's included in a C is the hotel. The hotel  the rest of the land was not included in a C.   Okay. So, um and just this general over overall  question you indicated if this LITC application   fails and then all of this goes away. Correct.  Okay. Um what happens if the pilot isn't paid then funding? Yeah, arguably they'd be in default  of the ground lease at that point in time because   that really sort of won't get addressed until we  get into the ground lease. Uh which there's been   some questions about the ground lease. Um, and  we've had these conversations with the applicant,   right, that there are a number of revisions that  are going to need to be made to the ground lease.   And so that ground lease is going to have to come  back in front of city council at some point if   council approves it today, if they obtain the tax  credits, if they obtain the development rights,   because we don't know who the lender is going  to be or lean holder is going to be. We don't   know who the investor is going to be. And so in  order to fill in those blanks, ultimately that   ground lease will most likely have to come back  to city council anyway. And at that point in time,   we can sort of talk about some of the other terms  and conditions associated with that ground lease.   Would you anticipate any major revisions to the  ground lease? So, in some of our conversations,   uh, some of the back and forth with, uh,  some of the attorneys representing, uh,   the developer, there are there was some language  that they wanted added to that ground lease based   on some assumptions or some presumptions of  what the lean holder would want as far as um,   kind of mitigating their risk and sort of their  liability. And so, uh, in conversation with them,   we've said, "We're going to sort of reject your  revisions to the ground lease at this point in   time." Um, because the suggestion was even they  didn't necessarily know what terms and conditions   the lean holder, the lender, the investors might  want to see in that ground lease. And so he said,   "Well, until such time as sort of you get to that  point where you know who an investor might be,   you know who a lean holder might be and they want  to make revisions to that ground lease. Does it   really make sense for us to kind of So we rejected  all of their revisions in order to continue to try   to protect the interest and and risk and liability  of the city." So what would happen if there's   a ground lease that comes before council and we  reject it? Then the project would die. The project   would die. Okay. Um, if we can go to the contract.  I don't know if you have a copy with you. Under exhibit D, um, section 2B, uh, exhibit the estoppel. D D as in dog. Dog. Yes, sir.  I'm looking at the form of lease   or estoppel certificate. Uh form of  IRB, letter of intent. Oh, the other. Okay. Section 2B. Yep. a provision regarding  the tenants's option to purchase the project   that states a firm option price and the obligation  of the tenant to provide for payment of all other   expenses related to the exercise of such option  to purchase. Um so what all would be eligible   for the tenant to purchase for the project? Is it  simply the infrastructure or is that include the   building? The building that's it correct. So does  that so that does not include the ground as well?   I'm sorry. I lied. The in the parking lot there.  Yes, there would be some private improvements that   they would be able to buy the the parking lot, but  generally the building and the parking lot. Those   improvements that they made to the ground would be  eligible for the tenant to purchase, but not the   actual ground itself. Correct. The the underlying  ground lease is that 99 Well, at this point in   time, 76-year ground lease on the remaining  ground. Yeah. Is there anything in here that um   gives them an option to purchase the ground? No.  No. Okay. Um All right. Now go to uh exhibit D15E. And this talks about the event the tenant moves  business operations or ceases operation within   Witchah within five years that the city will  be made whole for the property taxes abaded. Is   that all that that pertains to is just that they  cease operation. Right. So um yes because in this   there's no jobs that are required. They're  not using job creation right as a tech. So,   if we did do a five-year review, right, for all  intent, they would have made the initial capital   investment. We'll know that when the bonds are  issued, we'll know that they satisfied their   sort of capital investment. We would only really  do the five-year review. We'll do the five-year,   but the five-year review is really only if are  they there? Are they continuing to exist there   and operate? Did they satisfy the jobs? But  in this case, there's no job requirements. So,   it's pretty standard language that we  put into all of our letter of intents,   just depending on whether or not the the  commitments that were made, whether they   include job creation or whether they're still in  operation, etc. And if they so if they decide to   sell to somebody else, that will transfer the  contract transfers over. Yeah. There's a whole   host of uh rules and regulations because it's  a low-income housing tax credit project, right?   There's a whole host of requirements that  uh there's sort of 15-year um obligations on   the property and on the use of the property.  They might change operators, right? But for   all intents and purposes and if they build the  project, there's a pretty longstanding runway   that they'll continue to operate for at least the  15 years. Okay. Um I I have another question about   foreclosure. Um, okay. What happens if there is a  foreclosure on here? I look at section 1003. Um, it's a Yeah, it's a little further out. So, if there is a foreclosure, it goes to um the  bank essentially. Correct. Um, and they would   be held to the same standards that we're laying  out here. Correct. So all it would be was simply   the bank owns the property now, but they are  still obligated to stick to the same contract.   Absolutely. And again, because it would be a  low-inccome housing tax credit project, right? The   continued performance of that now I have tenants  and I I'm dealing with sort of state and federal   government. There's going to be a whole host of  oversight on this project. um that yes, the lean   holder would ultimately be responsible to make  sure that that continues because there's a whole   lot more writing on it probably than just even the  incentives that are being offered by the city at   this point. Okay. Um are are there any personal  guarantees on this project? There are no personal   guarantees. Uh again, we're kind of coming  at this from the perspective of it's entirely   performance-based, right? the the property tax  payments short of the pilot, but we'll address   that pilot payment as part of the ground lease,  right? And then as part of the ground lease,   then there will be default provisions that will  be addressed as part of the ground lease for   um if that payment in L of taxes is not paid.  Could you talk about some of those clawbacks,   I guess, if you would call them? Really, it's a  default of sort of the ground lease, right? And   so the default provisions generally start talking  about things like termination of the ground lease,   so on and so forth, which lean holders at that  point in time get get involved pretty quickly.   We send them a letter and then they got 30 days to  cure. Yep. Okay. Um parking. I I know there's some   consternation around parking. Y um how many  spots are they planning on having out there?   So they are providing about 70 spaces on site.  Um and then ultimately at that point in time   tenants would then if tenants are unable to  secure parking within the 70 spaces that are   planned for construction by the developer tenant.  Then they would need to seek parking elsewhere.   uh whether that be in a public parking garage  lot on street or in a private sort of condominium   owners association parking structure at that  point in time anybody else beyond those 70 would   need to find some other parking solution. Okay.  Um two questions for the developer real quick. Ryan Clark, uh, senior vice president  of development with the Annex Group. Hi,   thanks Ryan. Um, have any other projects  been brought to you for this plot of land   here recently? Any other projects? Um, no.  You mean somebody else trying to develop on   this site? Yeah. No. That's actually  a question from Mr. Car. I guess I'm   not the owner. Okay. I apologize. Mr.  Carac. Yeah. Yeah. The feed. Council member, uh, no, nothing specific. Of again,  the three what I would call significant lots   remaining at Waterwalk. This is, um, of  course, we've already negotiated our deal,   but the most the least desirable uh, of the  three. We have had uh interest in the other two   uh lots uh in particular, but wanted to hold off  on any further discussion with that until we had   the opportunity to to fully present this project  and about this this project. Okay. Um yeah, that's   actually it for now. Thank you. Thank you. I'll  have a follow-up question since the two of you are   already up here. Um, I apologize council members,  but I know that you still have some slides to   provide regarding the project itself. I know that  this was very lengthy. We talked about Waterwalk   and I think a lot of council members have  some questions regarding Waterwalk in general,   and I know that we're currently speaking about  the project, the new affordable housing project.   However, since you're already up here, I do want  to ask one specific question. Um, according to the   documents we received, and Jim, you could stay up  here, too. Uh, the total is $49 million. Is that   correct, the project? That's correct. Yes. The  hard cost is $32 million. Is that correct? Yeah,   that should be correct. So, there's a $17 million  gap. So, I would assume soft costs are about   $3 to5 million or so. What's the gap of 12  to 14 million? Where does that money go?   Yeah, I mean that's it's all included in soft  cost, financing fees, um all the other different   items that are pertile to a development. It's it's  typical for a project like this to have about 30%   be in in soft cost. The reason why I asked is  I want to know what is Waterwalk getting out   of this then? Do they got get a development fee?  If so, what is that number? Sure, mayor. Again,   back to the the basics of how this uh development  agreement was initially um ratified in 2002. The   way that this land works is that the the Deborah  estate has the development rights has been has   been explained to all of this land. They also  have the right to sell the development rights   uh to the land as well too. So that is what  happened here. That's what's happened in other   um developments as well too is the development  rights of this the lease hold rights specifically   are being sold to the annex group. What is the  dollar amount? Um I am not going to share that.   That's a private transaction and not going to  share that. The reason why I asked even more   specifically that number is because I'm looking  at the slide right now that is up on the screen   which shows $43 million in public dollars invested  into this property. So I want to know specifically   what is Waterwalk getting out of this in terms  of dollars. Again, Waterwalk is receiving,   as I explained, the leaseold transferring the  leaseold rights, and they are being paid a fee   to transfer those leaseold rights. You will not  disclose that fee. Correct. I won't today. Thank   you. You're welcome. Council member Glass. Thank  you, Mayor. I have a lot of questions. I walked in   with a few and I walked out with a lot more.  Um, first I'm uh also engaging probably more   um upset on behalf of taxpayers over the past  20 years and all the failures uh that this   development project has um put on taxpayers. We  talk a lot about the city. The public investment   is taxpayer investment in this. It isn't just city  tax dollars. It is tax dollars from citizens that   have been invested in this project and I think  everybody should be mad about it. So, going back   to some of the specifics of this, Troy, question  for you. How do we get out of a 99-year lease? So, I think what you're ultimately asking is the   terms and conditions associated with  the development agreement, right? Um there's probably a couple of  different scenarios, right? Um one one scenario, man, I I don't even  know if I want to throw this out there,   right? But one scenario might be to buy  them out, right? Um one option would be to   buy out the developer and buy out the development  rights. I would hate to even suggest that, right,   given the investment that's already  been, but that could be an option.   Um there's not really we've we've  done through our law department has Mayor um at the request of the mayor I've had  some conversations with Mr. Coral on behalf   of the estate and we have contemplated the  possibility of a uh a fee simple title for   a defined period of time. So they would there no  longer be a lease. They would own the property for   a defined period of time and if they don't develop  during that period of time the property would then   would revert back to the city. So we would then  have full control of the property. Okay. That's a   concept that we've talked about. We've um frankly  waiting for this project to determine where it's   going before we decide how we to go forward. So  were there no clawback? I don't know if the mayor   wants to talk more about that. We've Yeah. Yeah.  It's so the very question that has been raised   is this deal was cut 20 plus years ago. And the  question that I think council member Glascart   wanted to ask next is the very question I've asked  from the very get-go. Were there no clawbacks in   that agreement back 20 plus years ago? No,  we we've spent a lot of time law department   scouring through the development agreements and  the amendments to the development agreements.   Um yeah, short of uh a really lengthy and again  not even sure what the success or might be right   of a lawsuit to there might be some we suggest  maybe there's some opportunity to kind of daylight   some other things about some performance of having  to bring back redevelopment plans and those things   periodic studies and those kind of things really  really probably low success. uccess rate options.   For all intents and purposes, it is what it is.  I mean, there's short of renegotiating the terms   and conditions um of the development agreement,  it unfortunately we're kind of bound by the terms   and conditions that exist today, which is what  I have been upset about since the get-go. So,   again, this was 20 plus years ago. None of these  individuals on this council were then there during   that time. And when this deal was cut, which is  the reason why the community says sweetheart deals   in particular, is because of this very thing. And  so because there are no outs, there were no great   ways to negotiate on the behalf of the citizens of  Witchah, we just let the developers deal and say   this is what we're going to give you and we said  yes back then. That is not how we play here in the   city of Witchah now. So my question then to the  city manager has been what can we do now moving   forward? This has already been an agreement. It's  been signed. It's had 20 plus years elapsed but   it still has 70 plus years remaining. What can we  do to cut that amount of time so that something   does get developed there without further public  investment? Um, so that's when I asked the city   manager, what are other opportunities to move  forward? So, can you explain the fee simple title   and what could be negotiated to reduce that from  70 plus years to something more reasonable and   that we can move forward with actual development?  Well, the concept would be that the title would be   conveyed to the developer. we'd have to determine  um the the terms for that. And then what we had   just originally talked about and uh not been  committed to at all by the uh developer is   that it could be possibly a 15-year period. And  if that's the case that if nothing is developed   or it's not fully developed in 15 years, then it  would come back to us. But that was an initial   concept. not bringing something to you today to  review, but that's to give you just a context or   an idea of how we could restructure this. I would  like to know from Jim um what is Waterwalk willing   to give up to make this project happen, which is  affordable housing? Yeah, I'm delighted to have   this conversation, mayor. Thank you. Um, and I  would maybe look at it a little differently and uh   give you a little more context. As Troy mentioned  in his one of his slides several uh slides ago,   even the condo owners who many of them are here  today, back when they were uh buying their condos,   you remember that conversation that they had  trouble getting financing uh and so therefore   the building ultimately went under under fe simple  essentially uh ownership because what happens in   that situation is just like we have our own homes,  what if you went to the bank and as part of your   collateral all you had was the improvements  above the ground and the ground wasn't part   of that. Okay. So besides just some laws that  took significant collateral away from the the   financial institutions to finance those projects  which was a big reason that went to fe simple on   this particular project. That same thing holds  true and to be very direct and honest with you the   clock is ticking. So 99 years originally, 76 years  left right now. We will without again being very   honest, significant public economic help on this  project, it will be difficult to continue to move   forward in uh a structure, financial structures  like the annex group is agreeing to do today.   And what I mean by that is at some point whoever's  loaning the money to a significant development is   going to get left holding the bag on the lease,  right? And so at that point they know that that   lease it's not collateral today and at some  point I believe the way that this is all written   is all the improvements. So, as an example, the  Fairfield, we've talked a lot about that today.   At the end of that 99-year lease, all of the  improvements above ground on that ground that the   city owns reverts back to the city. So, it became  it becomes very difficult to get financing and   have those financing conversations and it's very  complicated for the banks to go through. We have   had developers come to us and when they realize,  oh, this is a land lease deal and never mind,   we've got other places that we can we can go fe  simple. So, what this potential proposal allows,   frankly, is it allows us as a developer to  have a lot more opportunities to be able to   seek development um on this ground. It opens up  the possibility just possibility of single single   family homes as an example. I mean, imagine going  and trying to get a mortgage on a single family   town home, row home, something like that that you  own and you don't own the ground underneath it.   It's a very difficult conversation with  the bank. And then the bank says, "Oh,   I'm happy to learn more. Um, tell me about this  land lease situation." And guess what? Troy's   got to come up with 50 SL. I mean, it's just  it's very complicated. And the bank will say   there there other people we'd rather be working  with or do something else. So to answer your   question partially anyways, we are open to that  conversation of moving into a feasible environment   where we believe we can more aggressively market  and develop the waterwalk area and significantly   bring that time frame down. And at the end  of the day, if we don't get it done, then   it reverts back to the city. We're open to that  conversation. a lot of details involved in that,   but we're absolutely open to that conversation.  I have one quick question to the city manager.   If we did this in contingent and be it contingent  upon an actual deal that would reduce the 76-year   um land lease right now because I feel  like these are two separate conversations.   We have a housing development that is asking for  approval. And then we also have this land lease   that the city entered into 20 plus years ago. And  I'm concerned about this portion making sure that   this gets negotiated prior to saying yes or no  to a housing development. So I'd like to know   what what type of time frame do we have? I know  that the developers that are wanting to develop   affordable housing also have a deadline and I'd  like to know what that deadline is in order to   apply for LITC credit from the state. So, I know  that this is all rushed, which I don't like,   but I want to know what are our options when it  comes to what he's saying. Well, we're open to   it. Well, we also have another opportunity  right now, which is affordable housing. So   can you explain to us what truly are our options  where we're not where we do get the better deal   for the citizens of Witchah but not get time  locked because of an application deadline. I think you're right to say that there's two  separate actions that are involved. I'll let   the developer talk about the time frame, but  I think they have a very tight deadline. I   think it's this week they have to file  their LITC um application. And so when   I've had my preliminary conversations with  Jim, we have talked about for the remaining   twothirds of property, they've already built  in a 76-year lease into their project. And   um it's how we go forward on the remaining  properties u and making sure that you're also   comfortable with the land lease if they do get the  land the uh credits that you're comfortable with   the land lease provisions before we finalize  those. Um and they conclude their uh project. Yeah. So the uh the project with uh KHRC in terms  of the deadline. So they have two application   rounds every year. Um so one was in February  and another one is in in August. Um so why it's   significant is those are the only two times you  can apply. But Kansas has the uh Kansas housing   state tax credit which was just been sunset.  So this is the last round that they'll ever   have this. So the financial feasibility totally,  you know, relies on on getting that additional   state credit um that KHRC provides and and this  is the past round. This was the same award that   we received for the the Purple Heart Trail  project on the uh east side of town. So yeah,   without being in on on this application, it  would the feasibility would uh go away. Ryan,   I know you still have some slides to provide.  Um, what I'd like I still see some questions   from council members. I believe it's regarding  the waterwalk agreement. Do you mind holding on   a little bit longer? Yep. Well, because there are  two separate conversations happening right now and   waterwalk. I think there's still more questions.  Vice Mayor Johnston. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, Troy,   thank you very much for doing all this work. Um,  I have a history on the front end of this before   this happened and it kind of brings up an old  wound that I am long over, but I would like to say   it just for maybe lessons in the future. Um, in  the spring of 2001, I went to council district 1's   uh representative. I think it was council member  Fury, I think, downtown six. I don't know who it   was. It was a lady. Went with her, went went  to lunch with her and told her of some plans   that I had uh for moving Johnston's. I'd  bought Johnston's in 1995. Had a 10-year   payout to my father. Trying to make plans for the  future. Um so I went to her and I said, "Listen,   I'd like to move the store into more of a central  location because our business came from about a   third out west, 2/3 out east. I thought thought  a central location would be good. So went to her,   told her our plans. Um I had the uh Tim Johnson  from the Better Bookroom who was a thriving   Christian bookstore at that time also interested  in the area. Um wanted to move his store from   Maine down to more of a central area. and uh  she was told by me that they wanted to the city   council wanted to create a district similar to San  Antonio's Riverwalk. They want to have a riverwalk   like San Antonio has and they have a a developer  that will do that. Would not tell me the name of   the developer. I learned later it was Jack D'vor  would not tell me that information. So I said,   "Well, okay. They won't work with me. Alls I asked  for was street and utility improvements because I   looked and there's lots of utilities underneath  that ground. A lot and street improvements. It's   all I wanted. Um would not do that. So when  I heard it was Jack D'Vorah, I said, "Well,   that's, you know, understandable. He had a  track record. Good guy." Um eight months,   nine months later, maybe a year later, I'm talking  to John Clevenger. He was president of Commerce   Bank and I told him my frustration of that area. I  said, "I'd like to move there." Had Tim Johnson at   the Better Brookroom wanted to move there, too.  He said, "You know what?" He said, "I wanted to   move there. I wanted Commerce Bank to be the  land essentially where the parking lot is now,   the city's parking lot." And they want he wanted  a walkway to the garage that is there now. And he   said we would we would use that garage during the  day. The hotel would use it at night or center two   use it at night. It'd be a perfect marriage. And  he said the city would not talk to me. It would   not do it. I said really? I said conversation I'm  having same time. He said they never connected us.   He says yeah. He said that's amazing. Why would  they not do that? So, I just want a little bit   of history there. Maybe maybe in future let's  try to bring people together instead of just   get put all eggs in one basket. Um I'm over it.  Things worked out fine. Uh it's fine. But uh I   will tell you that I do have Well, I'll save that  for later. So that's it. Council member Ballard. Sorry, it removed my name. Council member Glascock. Thank  you. Sorry. Thank you, Mayor. Um,   I believe both of these conversations are  tied. It's the same developer asking for   uh this requirement that's been involved in  the project from the start. So, I do think   the application before us and the conversation  about the water arc are tied in tandem together.   I take some offense to one comment that a project  won't happen without significant public help.   That is significant public help. $43 million that  have been spent on this property of public funds   I believe is already significant public health  help far more than the private investment that's   up here. And I also take offense to if you're  asking for public funds, private transactions   should be made public. So, I know I'm not going  to get an answer to this question based on that   question too, but how much did Gossson Development  get paid? Waterwalk LLC, Riverfront LLC, 4G LLC,   because in 50 slides, we saw multiple transactions  where they had development fees. Do we know how   much the city paid each one of those entities  during the course of this project that have   already been paid out and a lot of the same faces  are still part of the development deal today? So based on our just cursory review of  all of this, all of those um soft costs,   right? The design fees, all those were inclusive  of these fees that you see in front of you today.   So they're included in the $43 million that  we spent. All the money we spent to Gossan,   Waterwalk, Riverfront, and 4G. More specifically,  when you kind of go back to sort of this slide   from back in kind of late 2009, early 2010,  right, that the general obligate the $41.3   million went towards paying all of those that  again cursory view that's what we found, right?   Um again, we still need to if necessary  go and sit down with finance and work   through old sort of um archives of who  got paid what, where, when, why, and how,   etc. But our our understanding at this point was  that all of those contract the broker fees for the   art, the design fees for go were all included  in this sort of $41.3 million number. Okay,   two more quick questions. the I think it was  on page or slide 83. Maybe go back to that.   See if I wrote it down. Oh, nope. I did not  write the right one. Maybe 93. Let's try 93. Nope, there's not one. Okay. Um, regarding  the public investment was 41 million or we   spent 43 million. The original promised  public investment was 41 million based on   one of the last slides that I had seen.  The original promised development was   80 million for the private investment and  up to this date they had paid 36 million.   Correct? Yeah. If you look back at  the original development agreement, there was about $90 million uh 86 or $86  million of private improvements   and about 32 $33 million of private  improvements. So kind of 3 to oneish.   So, two more questions and then um I would love  to hear comments from the public too. Uh regarding   this is part of the East Bank TIFF, correct?  Yes. And so the East Bank TIFF currently has   about 4.6 million outstanding. Is that correct?  That sounds about right. We I know that in our   recent conversations we anticipate that the East  Bank TIFF district debt will be retired about   2627. 2627 two or three years from now. Yes. So  when you and I I think you and I talked Bob and   I had discussed this during our meeting this  week regarding why isn't the applicant using   maybe TIFF eligible expenses. Can you explain that  more? Yeah. So, um, under the state tax increment   financing laws, you have a 20-year window in  which you can create a project plan. So, if the   district was created in 1995, in 2015, you can no  longer create any new project plans. Subsequently,   the plan for this specific area within the  district, that 20-year plan has already run its   course. And when did it run its course? Uh 2023  last year. Yeah. So 24 just retired. So, a project   just happens to be coming up asking for more  incentives after a previous incentive expired just   a year prior with little development over the last  20 years on the project, but then it's brought up   a year after the TIFF eligible project expired.  Is that correct? The pro the redevelopment plan would have expired in 2023 2024. Yes. So shortly  after we couldn't amend that exist. So I can't   create any new plans and the existing plan can't  be amended. So tiff was not an option. Okay.   Thank you. I think that's all the questions  I have right now. At this time may I please   have Ryan uh provide the following the slides  regarding this project that is being considered. Um good afternoon. Um Ryan Clark, senior vice  president of development with the Annex Group.   And I swear I won't have 55 slides, so  we should be should be good. Um so yeah,   as as mentioned, we're the Annex Group. We're  out of uh Indianapolis, Indiana. Um we are a   Midwestbased developer primarily focusing on  uh pretty exclusively uh workforce housing.   Um you know, as mentioned, we have about 43  communities uh today. Um and and really a heavy   focus of a amount of our project is is really in  Kansas, Iowa and Nebraska as well as uh Indiana,   Michigan and kind of of those areas. Um  in in terms of Kansas as as mentioned   um we have an existing project that is under  construction right now uh Union at Purple Heart   that's 250 units. Um also a uh a workforce housing  project on the east side of town um that should be   opening up here in probably the next month or so  on on the first building. Um, and you know that is   doing really well so far. We have almost the the  whole first building is already pre-leased. Um,   and so the the uh demand has been really through  the roof. Over over 900 inquiries uh so far on   that project. Also wanted to mention uh we do have  a sister nonprofit called Impact Housing where we   provide services for um our residents kind of  meeting the demand of what the need is um in   that location. um want to show kind of some some  recent infill projects that are currently under   construction kind of regionally. Um you'll see  on the the lefth hand side union at anal valley   um that one just opened up in in downtown Lincoln,  Nebraska. So another urban infill project in a   uh you know kind of a pure uh city river's edge  which is in downtown De Moines. So that's located   right along the river that will open up in October  of this year. That's about 220 units or so. Uh,   another example in in downtown Lincoln, small  urban infill site utilizing a city parking   garage as well um on that project that's  that's currently under construction. And   then another example is a 250 unit project in in  Ann Arbor, Michigan for for workforce housing,   which was their uh first one in about 50 years. I  do also want to mention utilizing the program that   we kind of had previously discussed. Uh we just  broke ground in in downtown Topeka for 250 units   um as well and then have a project in in Lawrence  um Kansas also. um you know, as as you'll hear and   obviously you've seen a lot of the the different  studies that that you guys have done as a city um   in terms of the workforce housing demand, it's  it's really through the roof here. Um you know,   a typical capture rate for us from our lenders,  we need to be at about 10% of of the available   um you know, residents that would be coming in.  Uh the capture rate for this project would be at   uh 2.1%. So the the need is is really um you know,  pretty pretty through the roof. Um, as mentioned,   it's, you know, we're in a unique opportunity here  with with, uh, KRC, which is Kansas Housing, and   kind of this this last round of of funding that  makes, uh, you know, a project like this feasible,   um, kind of with some of the other things that  that we're talking about. Um, so getting into   the site specifically, um, if you'll see kind of  in that that black and white, uh, image there,   um, that kind of shows the, uh, in blue kind  of the massing of of where the our proposed,   uh, site would be. So, you know, right now we're  proposing it's a 186 units. It would be um a   fivestory uh elevator building. Um it have about  60 or so parking spaces. Um and as Troy mentioned,   utilize some of the existing parking around for  for the remaining um you know, all of our our   units, they come with, you know, clubhouse, office  area, on-site uh staff and management, um fitness   area. They'll have a, you know, a green uh kind of  central lawn out there with playgrounds and things   in in the middle um of the of the building there  in the green area. It's kind of a U-shaped. Um   and then we'll be proposing uh on the fifth story  closest to the riverside would be like a rooftop   kind of uh outside area um that is covered for  for residents enjoying and kind of the view. Um,   we specifically spent a a lot of time on on trying  to design this to absolutely minimize um, you   know, any disruptions from the existing water um,  condominium complex that's uh, to the east to to   preserve their their viewsheds um, into the river  and being cognizant of that. You know, as a as a   company, I would say we're we're uh, kind of our  niche is really focusing on urban infill housing   as some of the examples that that I showed. So,  you know, obviously we just went through the   the long history of of this site and why and  and that's what, you know, excites us um as a   developer and why we think this project will be,  you know, very um successful. It's, you know, it's   the it's the trails, it's the access to um you  know, all the amenities kind of in the area. And,   you know, hopefully with the the history that's  kind of been laid out in general, we're we're   excited to have, you know, an arrangement that  can bring a development like this to to fruition.   Um, next slide here. So, this is more the the  rendering. So, we did a uh a night view and a   uh a daytime view to kind of show what that looks  like as as along the top right kind of shows the   massing again. Uh, you know, next to the parking  garage and in the condo building and uh old Gander   Mountain site. Um, so, you know, all high quality  materials, brick and um, hardy sighting. You can   see in the in the middle there where the uh kind  of rooftop deck area is um you know units have   balconies really you know construction cost  and and what code is today is you know it's   pretty indistinguishable from from any you know  higherend market rate building for for how it   has to be designed in the energy efficiency of of  such units. Um so really you know as mentioned we   are our own property manager as well. Um we got  our start uh kind of back in the day doing really   student housing plays. It's a very intensive  property management structure and as we pivoted   um you know more into workforce housing, we  brought that you know management aspect with   us to to be more you know higher touch um on  these properties and and and be the manager of   of all our assets as as these are long-term holds  for us. Um at that time I can take any questions. Thank you Ryan. Um I do maybe just have one  question really. It's for the city manager.   Is this the highest and  best use for that property? Mayor, that's a great question and I that's  probably somewhat subjective. If you consider   the original master plan, it's not consistent  with that. So, it doesn't have a retail or   office component. If you look at today's market,  you look at what's happening downtown, the need   for housing, the need for affordable housing. Um,  it's I think it is an appropriate use on the site.   um is it the highest and best use? That's that's  really going to be hard to to indicate. If if we   were to hold out longer, the I can't judge the  market in terms of what it would take in order for   uh something closer to the master plan to  be developed. Um but given the conversation,   the history of this development, uh we're not  going to be in for a significant dollar amount to   assist with anything like that. So, um, I do think  and I do believe the master plan anticipated and   previous discussions anticipated an an apartment  use on a portion of the property. So, in that   regard, I'd say it is consistent with discussions  that we've had at least in the 16 years I've been   here. Jim, sorry, Ryan, one question for  you. Um, I remember this project, the union   at Purple Heart, which is in district number two,  Council Member Tuttles's district, and I think I   um may have asked the question, we would like to  see more workforce housing in the city of Witchah.   We've all talked about the need for housing um all  across the six districts. Um my question really is   have you considered other plots of land or is this  the only one that you considered because you were   approached or did you approach water walk? Um yeah  I I considered many many different opportunities.   There's a lot of different things at play in  locations of what's called qualified census tracks   and difficult develop areas. It has to do with how  the funding comes into play. Um but yeah, search   long and hard for for potential opportunities.  Um, as I mentioned, we really like doing urban   infill type of housing. Um, so I I sought this  out. So, as as I did in in a lot of the different   cities a lot of times, you know, it's not even  land that's available for sale. I just think,   hey, this is from what I'm seeing and what the  city's talking about, what I'm doing kind of on   my own independent research of of what I think  could be a great play. Um, it's ultimately a   lot of where I end up uh, you know, selecting the  locations. So, you know, the downtown Topeka one,   for example, was not a listed site. That was me  kind of, you know, proactively talking with the   the owner and and and finding that opportunity  and matching it up with the city's goals. Um,   so this was all my doing of being like, hey,  this area makes a ton of sense. Look at the,   you know, amenities and some of the things that  we've just got done talking about. Um, and and   knowing there's a competitive scoring aspect  to all this and having won several of these,   you know, competitive applications before and  knowing what works and what doesn't was how I   ended up at this location. And you also mentioned  that the application process or the application   deadline is this week, right? Um, and this is  the last round of this type of tax credits that   uh you could be eligible for, right? My question  to you then is if you don't get these tax credits,   will you move forward with this project? No,  there would be a fairly significant gap. Yeah,   I wouldn't wouldn't entertain it. Thank you,  Ryan. I see no further questions from the council.   We will now open it up for public comment. All  individuals are allowed 5 minutes per person and   you simply come forward, state your name and your  address and then the five minute clock will begin. Celest Witchah, Kansas. I wasn't meaning to  come here today, but I was watching this at   home and got so upset at where we're at that  here I am again. I applaud you all for the   thoughtful questions. Thank you so much. And for  talking about a failed development deal that has   cost taxpayers $40 million with minimal private  investment by the investors. It's it's just it's   a prime example of why we worked so hard on that  bipartisan committee to try to come to you last   Thursday and explain stop these sweetheart deals,  stop these no bid contracts, stop these handouts   of taxpayer incentives. And this is one of the  prime examples of what has cost taxpayers in the   city of Witchaw. Here's what I want to say about  it. And this is off the cuff, so excuse me if it's   not a polished speech. Jack Dbor took advantage  of the city's naivity. He used a high-power law   firm and an uninformed mayor, city council,  city manager, and city law department to push   through state and city funds into this 22 acre  development. It was prime riverfront real estate.   He got numerous incentives and economic  development dollars and there were various   revisions as you saw and I've got all the copies  of these deals in my office. They're about this   thick. There's supposed to be four office  buildings, high-end residential properties,   a restaurant, and Gander Mountain was supposed to  have a deck overlooking the river and a restaurant   for the public to use. Jim Cororic also took  advantage of the city's naivity and he pushed   through a change to one of our city's charter  ordinance to get the funding for the Fairfield   Inn in Waterwalk and it's more than $2 million.  It was two and a half for the hotel and we're also   being paid or we're paying one and a half million  in interest. In fact, we've paid so little on that   interest and that principle that we could almost  save $700,000 next year if we just got rid of that   debt for Jim Cork. In fact, when it was booked on  our books, they called it storm water utilities.   And the entries to pay off these payments was  falsely labeled convention center project. And   I believe there's no convention center in the  Fairfield Hotel. So all of this was misguided,   mislabeled, and misappropriated funds. And that  was a charter ordinance. The hotel guest tax was   created to take care of our tourism attractions,  our public buildings, and Century 2. So for him to   push through a charter ordinance change shows the  influence these developers had on city council at   that time. And it's so interesting now to see the  names that signed this contract, including, and   I'm not I'm going to call them out, Dave Wells and  Dave Burke, who were now suing for the $2 million   in the Kinmar unpaid development loan. They signed  this deal. So for 20 years, we've been dealing   with these same people year after year after year,  and they were given a no bid contract to build   Waterwalk, a no bid contract. And that was one  of the recommendations our bipartisan efficiency   group made was stop these no bid contracts.  They're called design build construction.   And that means the contract is handed to who they  think the best builder is. So key construction got   this contract even though Dave Wells signed off on  this agreement for Waterwalk. So this is so many   convoluted um influences in a contract that ends  up costing the taxpayers so much so much money.   I know it's a difficult situation because you're  facing a deadline, but I would not do this. I'm   sorry. I'll stand up here. I'll take the heat  for saying this because I know we need affordable   housing, but you have got to do whatever you can  to get out of this bungled development deal. FE   simple, great suggestion, whatever we need to do.  And you know what? If I was Jack Dbor or if I was   Jim Cororic and knew that I was getting this  kind of publicity about having taken advantage   of honest, hard-working Witchah taxpayers, I  would work with the city to make this happen.   So I challenge them. Jack Dbor's estate, Jim  Cororic, the developer, Dave Burke, Dave Wells,   any influence they have, let's get out of this  deal. Let's do fee simple so that if we want to do   development, we actually benefit from it without  any developer or any buyer or any residential   condo owner having to negotiate through a stack  of contracts involving CIDs, TIFFs, star bonds,   and all of the legal agreements. So, please deny  the application. Thank you. Thank you, Celeste.   I'm going to ask the city manager to address two  things she mentioned. uh getting rid of that debt,   specifically the $700,000 she mentioned. Can  you address that? And then also regarding no   bid contracts, design builds, what is the current  policy from this bench? May the uh first question   uh we have been looking at retiring that debt.  Uh actually our finance department looked at   it earlier this year. It's not quite as simple um  as just simply retiring the debt and claiming all   that money because we do have to also look at what  the time value of money is, what we would get for   our investment of of idle funds during that period  of time. So then you take that and offset the debt   service that you would uh avoid and then you come  up with an estimate. We think you still may have   a savings could be about $100,000. Um but we're  looking at that with our financial consultant   and bond counsel and that may be rolled into a  upcoming bond issue if that's the case. Um on the   uh second item, council has a policy that's been  adopted regarding um uh uh design build projects   and there's a specific process that we have to  fall follow um bring it to the council. It has   to be awarded on a competitive basis. a maximum  price is adopted. Um I'm sure there's some other   provisions and protections that we've built in  there. I can't recall off the top of my head,   but those are our projects. Um it's a again Troy  can correct me. I think the use of a contractor   on Waterwalk was de directed by the developer.  Not quite sure what approval process was involved   in all that. I don't believe that we were doing  the selection. Um but uh when we use this tool I   think we have a pretty welldefined process that  protects the city. So since 20 years ago do we   no longer do things especially when it comes to  developer agreements where all the rights go to   that developer and the city has no clawbacks. Can  you just address what has changed in 20 plus years   and what what steps are now being taken that won't  get us into this same type of situation? From an   economic development standpoint, our policy has  evolved significantly over the last 10 years   especially. Uh we're to the point now where almost  every project that comes to the council has very   little or no risk. We do a lot of pay as you go.  when we put TIFF in front of the council, we do   CID, the the protections are that those are pay as  you go and that the developer absorbs that risk,   not the city. And I think you all ask from the  bench almost every project for us to affirm that   because that's the current policy that we have. Um  if we look at a large project and compare this to   another project the city was involved in. If  you look at the K96 and Green Witch project,   uh again significant development in that case,  uh we have CI and starbonds used and the CI   um the first one that was put in place was with  Cabela and that was to help finance interchange   improvements that were needed to open up that  development. Um, the star bonds were used to   pay for some basic infrastructure, the main roads  into the development and, uh, I think we may have   had some general obligation bonds involved in  the, um, construction of the interchange as well,   but then all of the support roads and the support  network was put in by the developer. So, I think   that was it's a good example of another way to do  the a project and one that's much more, you know,   more recent and one that has been extremely  successful to the point where we've retired our   Starbond debt early and our CI the C debt early.  And that's a great example of leveraging private   investment um in order to be able to meet and and  actually exceed the city's obligation. In fact,   um I think we paid off the Starbond debt eight  years early and that will free up about a half   million dollars a year in sales tax revenue  for the city annually as a result of that. Thanks, city manager. We'll  continue with public comment. Hello, I'm Kyle Rickliffs. I'm here to represent  King of Freight. I'm a operations manager for King   of Freight. King Afraid is the tenant in the old  Gander Mountain building. We've been there since   2019. It's owned by a related entity, Always  Holden LLC. I just wanted to give the city our   perspective on things. Um I don't know if this is  the right time for that or if this is something   that needs to come later. I don't really know how  any of this works. I saw the article yesterday.   Um relayed the info to my older brother Mike.  He's the 90% owner of King of Freight. We just   wanted to make sure that the city was aware of our  current situation. Um, so our headquarters is in   the Waterwalk. We employ over 650 employees. Right  now 475 of them are in the Waterwalk building. Um,   I think next week we'll have over 500 with our new  training class. We're adding over a 100 jobs next   week across the US. We've got locations in Dallas,  Little Rock, and Tampa, Florida. But Witchah will   always be our home. We currently lease over  400 parking spaces from the city. This costs   our employees and King of Freight 70 to 75,000  a year. I'm here because the proposed 186 unit   development, at least according to the drawings  in the article shows around 70 parking spaces.   So that means um hundreds of additional cars  competing for the same limited shared parking   our employees rely on every day. We also employ  two full-time security guards to patrol the   area in addition to the city and the waterwalk  security. We're not here to oppose growth. Um,   we just want to make sure that this is a planned  responsibly because existing businesses don't want   to foot the bill or lose accesses to the resources  that we already pay for. So, Waterwalk parking is   already shared with the public. Adding potentially  hundreds of additional vehicles will overwhelm   the system. King of Freight already leases 405 of  these spaces. Average about 6250 a month. 6,250.   This is a significant investment. It'll reduce  availability. It harms our employees and our   operations. We're urging the council to require  adequate on-site parking proportional to the   units to avoid burden uh burdening the existing  tenants and businesses. According to the article,   the developer is being offered a 76-year lease,  a dollar a year full property tax exemption,   sales tax breaks, while the existing Waterwalk  businesses pay full freight, parking fees,   property taxes, HOA dues without comparable  incentives. This creates an uneven playing   field and sets a precedent for future developments  to rely on existing businesses resources without   fair contribution. The 186 apartments will  increase traffic congestion in and out of   the Waterwalk area. More residents and visitors  with insufficient parking will increase street   congestion and illegal parking. Increased density  without proportional security measures risks   uh higher crime rates, especially in shared  garages and common areas. We've already been   dealing with that quite a bit. the uh water  waterwalk owners association um the resources   landscaping maintenance lighting security will  inevitably be strained without prop proportionate   contributions from this project cost will shift  to existing owners and tenants. The waterwalk was   originally envisioned as a highquality mixeduse  destination. I really appreciate all the history   you provided that helped open my eyes to a  lot of things that I wasn't aware of. Um,   but we just think that a poorly planned  highdensity project with inadequate parking risks   eroding the district's brand, discouraging  future business investment. We would like to   urge the council to require a development  plan that protects the value, safety, and   functionality of the entire district. I understand  this is under a tight deadline. I didn't even know   much about this until a week ago. it would have  been better to talk directly with the waterwalk,   but here we are now. Um, so we were just hoping  that maybe we could get more info, postpone this,   and figure out what we need to do about the  parking situation, the safety, and hopefully this   won't come at the expense of all the businesses  that are already investing in downtown Witchah and   creating jobs. Now, thank you. Thank you, Kyle.  And I think you spoke up uh in the middle of   the presentation saying that you knew how much uh  was paid for that property. I didn't know if you   wanted to speak to that. So I believe we inherited  the lease for $1. We can't they inher They   inherited the lease for $1 is what he said. Have  to confirm through my legal team. He will have to   confirm through his legal team. He said thank you  very much. We will continue with public comment. Hi. Hi, I'm Dev Footh. I live at unit 503 at  Waterwalk and my husband is Kent V. And I know   yesterday and he's been quoted as we were not  opposing it. We like Jim. We we like working with   him, but this is does not mean that we support  this project. There's a difference between not   objecting and supporting it. We ourselves of  residents have had to sue the developer and we   did that in 1920. I mean did that in 2020 and so  we know how hard it is to fight for the quality   of our area and that we had to do that to protect  our own residents in our own parking area. And I   would applaud what Celeste said and I can imagine  King of Freight's concern that there is not enough   parking and when we were first told about this it  was 100 parking spaces and now it's 70 or 60 and   you know that 186 apartments are going to bring  a lot more people than parking available. So,   we need development and to be honest with you,  it's the most convoluted relationship that we   have with the developer, the residents, and the  city. And it's the most complicated system to work   towards when there is an issue or a problem. And  we've expressed some of those concerns before. So,   I would urge the council to look at ways that  this can be gotten out of that somehow we has   the city has some more control over what happens  in that area. Um because the route that we're on,   it's not going to leave a good result. And as  my husband said, the devil's in the details,   the devil's who you know, and the devil who's  you don't know. And so a developer could come   in and purchase that whole area and put up a  family store or a dollar store or something   that will not help attract the high quality of  people that we want to come downtown and spend   their dollars in Witchah. And frankly, we're at  the forefront of entry into the city of Witchah.   And I would hope that the city would want to  invest the dollars and the time in addition to   all that you've done. I'm not minimizing that  to continue the quality development of the   downtown riverfront area. Thank you. Thanks,  Deb. We will continue with public comment. Forgot to bring my reading glasses.  I'm Allen Hill 302 at Waterwalk Place.   I mailed you all an email last night if you've  had time to look at it or read it here, but I'll   highlight part of that. I'm in 302 Waterwalk  Place. My wife and I moved down here like 12,   2011 or 12. And we had a three-bedroom  brick house out in northeast Witchah.   The first time I'd ever even thought about  moving into an apartment or a condo, but my   wife's health, we had to move. Anyway, somebody  said, "Well, finally, we looked all over town.   Try that place downtown. They got, you know, a big  building and you can park right in front of your   door." And I said, "What?" So, anyway, we looked  at it and moved in. And I just wanted to I read   uh I quoted this out of visitwitchah.com. So even  in your one of your city websites that I emailed   you says Waterwalk is a premier unit multi-use  development located in the heart of downtown   Witchah. Luxury condos, offices, and the Marriott  Hotel anchor the development. Visitors and tenants   can enjoy the tranquility offered in our beautiful  courtyard complete with walking paths, ponds,   and a gazebo all located within steps of Century  2. and uh concerts and shows over interest bank   is a short walk away and I agree with that thing  said about our place but I also said do not let   this lowincome building happened 2 is only a block  and a half away the high regency is just across   the parking lot is only about a 100 yards away the  king of freight is less than that and they pay big   money to park right across the street as he just  gave the details the building will only have a   well I have down 100 like you said and he just got  through saying it's only going to be 60 or 70 and   I told you they'd have to if they're going to only  have that many parking spots and people that live   there are going to have to get out and drive a  block and a half up to on Water Street to Waterman   hanging right and get into the main street another  block and then down another half a block to use   what city spaces are in our waterwalk place which  not going to be very convenient. And so if you're   going to build 186 units and you're only going to  put put 60 spots, that is insane. That's obviously   not going to work. Even if it was not not with  King of Freight being short of spaces already.   And so anyway, I was when I look out the window,  we only the only view we have in Waterlock Place,   if you haven't been in it, is west to the east  of us is the garage. And I'm if you're on the   end north or south then you got subside views.  But so the only thing I can see is out west with   the sunshine and sunrise. And now I'm going to  be looking at a six foot sixstory tall end of a   building there hanging right in front of my deal.  So I'm Oh, that's a lot. Let me see able to see   the sky. But we invested big money and now we can  see if that happens then my property value I would   assume if somebody going to wants to buy it after  this thing is built I may be down $1200,000 which   means you're going to be down the property tax  is going to have to go down to match the value   if our property goes down the city's going to be  losing money. So anyway, as I said in my memo,   please vote no. Thank you. Thank you,  Harold. We'll continue with public comment. Hello. Uh, my name is April Brooks. Um, I  work at King of Freight, been with been with   them since 2017. Um, and in the move into the  Waterwalk building. Um, I kind of want to touch   on some things that Kyle has already said, but  I also want to bring uh to the forefront really   how much that we're paying the city for this  parking. Um, and also highlight the fact that,   um, whenever this developer was up here talking,  he was asked about parking questions. Um they   said that they're going to have what 75 parking  for the 186 units. He kind of brushed it off and   it was like, "Oh, they're going to find parking  around around the area." Um that parking around   the area is um the parking that our employees are  utilizing currently and paying for. Uh to date,   we have paid uh $238,000 for the parking in and  around that area. And as Kyle had mentioned,   I believe our monthly invoice is about  6,500. Um, as you can imagine, we also get   uh get complaints from our employees. They're  not happy about their 15 uh for their $15,   which is also increased two times over the  last year. Um, and I think actually it's like   $16.38. Um, I would like the city to take  that into consideration. While we're not   opposed to the growth of the area, I think  that it should be properly planned and   um the the residents that are are currently there  and utilizing the area. Uh to bring in 186 houses   and to expect only 75 people to park there. Um  that math is not math in as I would say. Uh and   really that that's all I want to bring to light  how much we're paying and um understand King of   Freight wasn't really mentioned in any of these  uh presentations. that we were briefly mentioned   and it was the old Ganer Mountain building.  We're not the old Gator Mountain building.   We are King of Freight. Um I think we've paid  over a million dollars in property taxes on   that building and we pay substantial amount to  the city each month for parking. Uh so really   just want that that noticed. Thank you. Thanks,  Miss Brooks. We'll continue with public comment. Good afternoon. Heather Schroeder,  executive director of Downtown Witchah. And   um I'm not here to speak on the merits of any  projects today. I just wanted to share our latest   market research with you in regard to demand  for housing downtown. uh as part of our ongoing   effort to update the downtown master plan. We're  calling it our downtown Witchaw action plan. Uh   it's the 10-year vision for uh how we want to  see downtown grow as a community over the next   uh decade. We commissioned an independent  market research uh firm to um give us updated   uh data for our market in fall 2024. Um what  they provided was that our market potential   um is to build up to 750 new housing units each  year over the next 5 years for a total of up to   3,750 new units over that 5-year period. Um  they looked at the population of people most   likely to move downtown based on demographics and  they found that uh 43.4% 4% of those potential   downtown market movers earn 60% or less of the  area median income annually. Um so our our AMIs   um our area median incomes at those levels would  be $19,250 a year uh for a oneperson household.   At 50% AMI it's $32,50 for one person  household. And at 60% AMI, it's $ 38,450. If you were to work um at our  minimum wage of 725 an hour,   you would only earn $15,80 annually.  So you you could not afford those units   um at 30% AMI, um which I believe was the low  threshold of of this particular LITC project.   um I'm uncertain on on what their percentage  affordability rate is. Um so I just wanted   to provide you with that information. We have  strong demand at all income levels for housing   downtown. Um where that h housing is cited um  and how it integrates into our urban fabric is   a question to be determined by the community with  our ongoing work on the downtown action plan and   with your input. Thank you. Heather, I'll have  one question for you. I asked this of the city   manager. What's the highest and best use of this  property according to the action plan so far? That's a great question. Um the this site abuts  the river and with all of our or I guess the the   larger waterwalk site abuts the river. um with  every kind of topic area where we've surveyed   the public um at our our community meetings. Um  whether it's uh housing, working, entertainment,   how people get around, um daily amenities,  everybody wants to see the river more active, more   densely developed. Um kind of incorporating all  the all of those various uses. Um, so there is,   you know, there is demand for housing along the  river. There's demand for dining, um, making sure   that people can, you know, enjoy the river view.  The river is, um, unanimously stated to be our   best asset. Um, you know, and very unique for a  city of our size to have that amenity in our core. Thank you, Heather. We'll  continue with public comment. I see no one else from the public. Um  before we move on from public comment,   thank you to the six speakers. Uh city manager  actually Jim, can you answer a specific question a   resident had which was um condos and the views of  their condos? In your in the waterwalk agreement,   does it say anything about what can or  cannot be built in front of their condos?   Mayor, which agreement are you referring  to? Um, with the Waterwalk uh condos. So,   are there any restrictions of what can be built  in front of them in their agreement that I guess   Waterwalk had with the condos? Thank you  for the clarification. To my knowledge,   there are no written agreements that  that uh talk about obstruction of view. Thank you, Jim. We will close public  comment and now bring it back to the   bench and we have a full board. We'll begin  with council member Glascock. Thank you,   mayor. I have a question for Troy before I have  any comments. So, we have the proposal. A lot   of what we talked about is history of it, but  we have the green sheet which talks about this   specific proposal. When we look at what's before  us today, what is the minimum that we have to   include in the development agreement so they can  attempt to get tax credits through the state? Uh so the the way that the development  agreement is constructed again today,   right? Um because they need to know sort of  what some of their um what some of the city   commitments are, particularly in regards to the  things like the property tax abatements and the   sales tax exemptions that that letter of intent.  That's why that's an exhibit in there. Um they   need to know and understand that stuff. But what  they need to be able to do is submit to the state   the development agreement. So the reason why we  drafted it the way we did was cuz we can continue   to sort of hold the ground lease until such time  as all of those preconditions are satisfied that   allows them to go do all of their due diligence,  put their financing together, so on and so forth.   If we don't have that contingency in place  and we sort of just approve the development   agreement and the ground lease, if for whatever  reason the they don't obtain the LITC tax credit   award or they don't obtain the development  rights or whatever that then there's really no   way to unwind it so to speak. So, we've put that  contingency out there that all the preconditions   have to be met and then we'll execute the ground  lease to make sure that if whatever reason they   they don't satisfy those preconditions that that  this can get sort of unwound. Probably not the   exact answer I was looking for. So, do we have  to offer the sales tax exemption, the property   tax exemption? Right now they request uh that  they wanted to do a pilot to be able to pay for   a portion of the property tax and they want to  not pay the property tax or they want to fully   pay the school district property tax. So what do  we have to offer in a agreement to the state as   part of a development agreement that the state  would consider to to award them litech credits? I'm going to answer that in a way of deferring to  the developer because they'll explain more of the   point structure. Yeah. So, it has to do with  project feasibility, right? So, you know, we   talked about the TIFF prior that kind of expiring.  You know, we approve wanted to go that route,   right? That would have been more simple. Um, so  this is a way to say, hey, we're still paying a   certain amount of those taxes. This hurt hits a c  certain uh debt coverage ratio. And so that's what   our investors need to see that that is maintained  throughout the um life cycle of the project. And   so there'll be underwriting standards that KHRC  goes through. So this development agreement and   kind of what we're talking about um you know with  the sales tax exemption um with a pilot that is   for the underwriting of the project because our  our rents are fixed, right? We're we're straight   across the board. You have tax credits coming  in. Um and then so limiting knowing what exactly   our taxes are is what allows you to hit that debt  coverage ratio. And that's that's the point of of   doing that as well as having showing the the land  control um is is another requirement. So let's say   this body chose to do sales tax exemption verse  property tax exemption instead of doing both.   Would you not be submitting the application  if we chose to go one path over the other? Do   you require both to move forward for for project  feasibility? Correct. It would be both. Right. And   then question for Troy. because they're requesting  4%. How many have been awarded uh LITC credits   uh in Witchah at the 4% rate? And again, I don't  have that information available to have that. I can add one one item on that. Um just  just knowing. So, you know, we we do what's   called 4% projects. So, these are the large  ones. I believe she can speak to the 9%s,   but um outside of our Purple Heart deal, um I  think there's been one other 4% project, but in the first round of 4% applications, there  were no awards here in Witchah. There's been   about eight award 4% awards here in the past seven  years. Um one of them is a stalled project that   isn't moving forward. the rest have actually  moved forward. But as said um previously,   this will be the last round that includes the  layering of the state tax credit on top of it.   So eight out of how many? Um you know because they  do urban and rural set aides that amount can vary.   The first round there were only four um urban  projects awarded all in northeastern uh Kansas and   obviously none of those were ours. So chances of  even being awarded the 4% tax credits pretty slim.   It is very very very competitive and that's why  hitting the maximum amount of points that you can   on a project is pivotal. And so one of the scoring  criteria in the QAP is your uh either uh below   market u loans and investments from this from  your local government into the project. Thank you. Council member Ballard, Council Member Tuttle.  Thank you. Um, I just wanted to make a few   comments and I had lots of questions, but people  got on the board before me and that's okay. U,   I just want to say thanks Troy for all of your  work on this. I wanted to say thank you to all   the speakers who were here today. Um, I have had  exparte communication with the applicant. I've   had exparte communication with the residents and  then also with the businesses surrounding. So,   just want to make sure that's for the public  record. I I this is a challenging one for me.   It truly is because we need workforce housing and  we know we need it downtown. These are the people   who work in our restaurants. They, you know, help  with all of the new flourishing hotels that we   have. Um, you know, they work in all of the new  amenities that we're super excited about. And   we know that we need all housing. And we need  all housing, not just in the downtown core,   but all through the city. But I just keep asking  myself if this is the right project at this time.   Um there's lots of questions that need to be  answered obviously about the whole development   but specifically even about this project. Um  I it's as mentioned it's not consistent with   any of the I think five master plans for this  area. And I think this really highlights that we   need to look at this area and you know not just  focus on the past. you need to keep, you know,   one eye in the rearview mirror, but most of your  attention on the windshield. And and I hope that,   you know, we've had a highlight today of what's  happened in the past, but really be thinking as   a community about our city's core and how we can  continue to make it vibrant and address the growth   and new additions that are coming in in a really  intentional and consistent way. Um, some of my   concerns I mentioned are about parking. This is  one of the lower return on investments that I've   seen. I know it's one to 1.1 and you know it meets  the criteria, but it's razor thin and with as many   questions as we have. That's just something that  worries me a little bit. Um I I do want to thank   all of the residents for sharing your thoughts.  I received multiple emails as I'm sure that my   colleagues did. I had several phone calls as well  and it it always is encouraging to me. I I had my   district advisory board last night and we had  a contentious zoning case and 18 people came   and spoke and I said I'm glad that people were  here and I'd be more worried if they weren't. So   in this case as well, thank you to the residents  who took their time to let us know how they feel.   Um I I just think there's too many unattended and  unidentified consequences at this time. So this is   going to be a really challenging vote for me. But  thank you for Troy and for all your hard work on   this. appreciate hearing the other comments from  my colleagues. Council member Ho Heisel. Thank   you, Mayor. Um I I agree with Council Member  Tuttle. This there's definitely a need for   affordable housing in this community, um including  downtown. It's got to be all over the place. Um   the unfortunate part of this is that this was so  rushed to try and get this in under the deadline.   And I wish we would have had a little more time  to kind of work this and understand the ins and   outs of not only the history here, but also of  the project. Uh the parking issues, that is a   concern as well. Um we got to make sure that we  have adequate parking uh downtown, College Hill,   all over the place. Um I I just I wish he did have  a little more time to kind of go back and forth   and understand the scope of this project. And  um yeah, this is a difficult one. So, thank you,   Vice Mayor Johnston. Thank you, Mayor. When the  city manager presented this to me, I don't know,   10 days ago or whatever, uh my initial reaction  was, is this the right place for affordable   housing? And I still still struggle with that,  question that. I'm I'm all for affordable housing,   working on it in many different facets, but I'm  I'm not sure this is the right place for it. Um   I do appreciate the presentation Troy gave.  I appreciate the history. Interesting. Good   to good to know. So, it's a it's a it's a tough  vote. There's no doubt. So, thank you, Council   Member Glasco. Thank you, Mayor Jim. I want to  thank you for taking responsibility we have to   trust for a lot of the conversations there. a lot  of people will come before this body that don't   take responsibility for previous things and so  I want to say thank you um genuinely for that. I   want to find a path forward to support and housing  whether that's affordable housing or housing just   housing in this area. Um but I don't know if I can  support incentives on this location based on the   history of incentives here previously. Not opposed  to development of land. Please do it. Not opposed   to housing. Please do it. Not afford opposed  to the affordable housing unit. Please do it.   But I know that's tougher economically to make  feasible. Um, and I want to see development. I   just don't see comfortable or I'm not comfortable  with it in this location. Um, Bob said something   um that stood out to me a second ago. He said  that many of these deals happen because the   council wanted to see development and I don't want  to because the clock is ticking or because we want   to see development move forward with something  that may not be the best use of taxpayer dollars.   And so, um, I won't be supportive of that, but  I do hope, Jim, that we can maybe move forward,   um, with an agreement to have a new day on this  development project in the future. And I think   that that's something that this council would  support. How can we move forward and how can   we press the restart button on waterwalk because  I think that we need to restart. Council member   Ballard. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'd just like to  echo my colleagues and thank staff and and Bob and   um everyone else that's been involved with this  long and lengthy uh history, but I'll be voting   no today because right now it's clear to me we  need to have a lot more conversations with the   parties that will be impacted. I'm not against  the affordable housing project, but we need to   look at the waterwalk development overall and  see what makes sense to fix this mistake. It's   definitely not selling the land, but we can't keep  doing the same thing because it's not working.   I'd like to see us find a way to look at our  riverfront property on how to make all of these   areas work together as an exciting public asset  along our river and not a developer's playground. There's no one else on the board. And um with  that, I will add my final comments. From the   very get-go, when I became mayor last year, I've  asked about history being told to this community   so we can have that conversation, but it's taken  a year and a half for that conversation and now   with a deadline in order for us to have the  conversation. And so I'm very grateful to   assistant uh city manager Troy who dug up a lot of  this history. I know it was not easy. There were a   lot of de development agreements. There were a lot  of contracts, amendments. And I think one of the   speakers, one of the residents actually said it  best. I mean, it's so difficult to even just get   an answer u for a simple question because there  are so many layers to it. So I also want to say   thank you to Jim for again saying you apologize  on the behalf of the estate. However, there   were a lot of promises. It was not hopes. It was  actually promises that were not kept. They were   not fulfilled. And this community has been lied to  many times. And that's why we cannot move forward   until we've actually addressed all the ills. It's  difficult for a new development to want to do good   for our community to move forward with that idea.  So, I hope that in good faith the state will come   and speak with the city manager and the law team  on how to move forward with not keeping us hostage   on a 99-year deal. And I understand that that  agreement was signed by individuals again who   are not on this council and by staff who's mostly  not on in the city of Witchah right now. So I'm   asking in good faith, can we come back to the  table because I know that this would require an   agreement to be dissolved and a new one to come  forward. So I'm asking in good faith. We need   something to move forward and I don't want the  city to bear the brunt of what has happened in the   last 20 plus years to happen again. And I would  like to see development happen responsibly. I I do   believe that there is an opportunity with a $300  million investment in downtown Witchah through   a new Witchah biomedical campus. There will be  a need there will be a need for housing. There   will be a need for other amenities. But I ask that  since you know there's going to be a need, can we   come back to the table and do something that is  right for this community? It really is difficult   because Ryan, I know Annex Group is making a  major investment in district number two with   affordable housing, workforce housing, especially  for seniors. And I like that type of housing. I   think it's important to have all types of housing  in the city of Witchah, but I don't believe this   is the right location. And so I ask, I know you're  under the gun when it comes to time, but there are   other plots of land even in downtown Witchah  right now that would want to have that type of   housing without the cloud, the negative cloud  that currently sits on this specific property.   So with that, I cannot move this motion forward.  So I I would move to deny uh this application.   Excuse me, mayor. If I can recommend that the  motion also include uh close the public hearing,   I move council member Johnson. Thanks, Mayor.  Um I'll take the minority position today.   Um, when we look at housing, all of us have  talked about the importance of housing and   I understand the cloud that continues to be  referenced here over this development. Mr. Korac   um was very um brave and did the right thing and  acknowledging that, apologizing, which we didn't   ask him to do. Appreciate that. But that cloud  is now potentially uh harming an opportunity for   workforce housing. We've heard affordable housing  and I think there's even some type of connotation   that has been alluded to with that. If we continue  to say downtown is everybody's backyard, why not   build housing for everyone? And just because  workforce housing happens to be close to the   river, I don't think that's a bad thing. That's  a space where someone who makes what we make,   six of us, I know the mayor makes double what  we make, but someone who makes what we make   could afford to live there. It's not paying 1,800,  2,000, however many dollars per month. This would   be something that workforce folks can um live in,  the people who may work at the biomand space, the   other people who may work downtown. It's not a bad  thing to be there. And as the riverfront continues   to develop, man, what a great space to have some  affordable housing where people can live by these   great amenities and it's not just folks who are  on the higher end of the wealth spectrum. So, I am   supportive of that. I think that everyone deserves  to have an opportunity to live downtown and as we   continue to look at the numbers of necessary  spaces, this puts more folks there. As we've   talked to large chain grocery stores, we need  more people downtown. We're still not there yet.   this takes us one step further to get there. I  understand the cloud. Um it's been apparent to me   over my eight years being on this body that we've  learned a lot of lessons from deals that may not   have been everyone's favorite back in the early  2000s. We do things differently. This is one of   those opportunities to also do things differently.  I do agree that we need to have a conversation   on those other north two parcels to look at  what can we do about this extended lease. Um,   but this opportunity right now with this being  the last year that the state is offering one   of those opportunities to make this workforce  housing happen, I think this is the right time   to do so. You often want your habitable spaces to  come online as something like Biomed comes online.   This would actually come online around that same  time frame. And again, if downtown's everyone's   backyard, and we continue to say that, and many of  us have, and we continue to have other leaders in   the city say it, then we have to act like it. When  we have affordable housing opportunities, if the   deal is not terrible, and I didn't hear that it  was, and from what I've read, it's not terrible,   then we should be trying to do what we can to make  sure that there's affordable spaces for people.   We know we're in a housing shortage. So, for me,  I know that there is a motion on the table. Um,   if it is seconded, I do have a substitute motion  because I do think that this deal should happen. It was not seconded yet. I did. I second it.  Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. So,   you have an amended motion that you would  like to propose, Council Member Johnson? Yes,   Mayor. I would like to offer a substitute  motion to close the public hearing,   approve the development agreement, and  authorize the necessary signatures. You have a mo a substitute motion with no second.  So that substitute motion fails. We're back to the   original notion of denying or closing the public  hearing and denying this project with a second   by Vice Mayor John Stunn. Any further comments?  I see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes for the denial at 621. It is 12:50 at this moment. We will  take a break. Um I will ask for a   recess of 15 minutes and we will return at 10:05. call the next item. 2025 trail  path and sidewalk repairs. Mayor, city council, uh Tim Kellum's public works  and utilities here to talk to you about trails,   paths, and sidewalks. This is a um newer CIP  item. So, we haven't had this uh totally locked   in as some of our other projects that we've had uh  in that in the CIP for decades or so. Uh such as   the athletic courts and athletic fields. So, um,  this one's a little bit new for us. Um, so in, uh,   again, this is for trails, paths, and sidewalks.  Um, the damage to a lot of our trails is primarily   due to heavy heavy usage, poor drainage, and  then just weather events. Um, it's almost   guaranteed that sidewalk or concrete's going to  crack. Uh, asphalt will eventually run through   its lifespan. Um and uh soft surface trails again  through through drainage and things like that and   erosion, they just need to be maintained  over time. Um one example and a main focus   uh for this year would be at Pawn uh Pony Prairie  Park. Uh the trail there uh you can see that some   of the gravel that exists now today is is quite  large and isn't really um conducive for for usage.   Um, you know, I think I think it was originally  intended to be a bike trail there. And I think   there are some hikers and people that do use  it. Um, and you can get away with a little bit   uh larger rock size with some of the bikes,  but uh not this this large. And we've seen   some of this just due to erosion and just some  of the fine settlements just washing away. Uh,   and again, this can create a a safety risk uh  tripping hazards and things like that. So again,   we don't want our our uh citizens getting uh  hurt in our parks. Uh so making sure that we have   uh proper trail systems uh and pathways uh uh is  important. Uh as I mentioned the primary focus for   this year will be at Pony Prairie Park. Um as I  kind of mentioned uh we are having issues there.   Uh especially when those fines do walk away.  We do have some of those shopper rocks that   are out there. Uh and you'll see in a couple  later in some later slides here that we have   done some smaller repairs just not in these big  large section sections that we're hoping to do.   uh you can see the difference between them. It's  pretty much like a night and day difference and   it's kind of you don't really think that gravel  size matters too much especially when you get   down to quarter of an inch uh differences  but that does make a huge difference and   uh is important for compaction and and just  maintaining the longevity of those trails. Um and   uh with funding if funding does remain uh  we'll be looking at continuing using uh or   making improvements to trails pass and sidewalks  with similar concerns uh as funding allows. So   financial considerations the 2025 2029 adopted  capital improvement program contains $300,000 for   uh in 2025 for trail paths and sidewalk repairs.  You can see over there on the right for that image   that that was one of the conditions before repairs  were made in 2022. Um you can see kind of the the   clump there in the bottom right of all those large  rocks. Uh when we get large storm events, these uh   if it's not done correctly, a lot of uh sediment  and these rocks tend to move. Uh so proper trail   uh construction is important uh regardless of if  it's uh a soft surface uh such as this or concrete   or asphalt. Uh making sure the grades and drainage  is addressed uh is a is a huge concern and uh can   help prevent issues long term. This is uh a little  bit further down, but this is what it looked like   after we made those repairs in 2022. And this is  uh what we plan to do over at uh throughout the   system over at Pawny Prairie Park. Um, if you've  been out there, it's nice and compacted. The the   rocks that we choose uh kind of bind together  so they're not as loose. There are some uh areas   where they do have these loose rocks. They can  shift, but having the right rock selection is   really important for these things. And we think  we found a good a good solution, especially here   at Pony Prairie Park. Uh so the recommended  action is that the city initiate the project,   adopt the resolution, and authorize the necessary  signatures. And happy to stand for any questions.   Thank you, Tim. Any questions for staff? I just  had one question. This is obviously going to focus   on district 4. Um, and I'm really glad that that  park is getting some improvements. Um, are the   other parks in the other uh five districts? Are  they also kind of programmed the same way when it   comes to the trail path and sidewalk repair? Yes.  Yep. So we work closely between park and uh public   works to try to identify. My goal and my hope  is is that um the funds for this project will   have enough to start tackling especially those  high problematic areas that we see click fix is   great because that helps us identify problematic  spots where we get repeat uh issues. Uh so we'll   continue to work with them. you know, I think in  many of these cases, uh, I think this CIP is is   really good for specific, uh, sections versus, you  know, doing like a giant, you know, new one. So,   like, uh, red bud trail, for example, that would  be completely separate CIP item. Uh, but this   is really great specifically for those repairs.  And I think that um with the specific CIP item,   when we have funds that do remain, we can strate  strategically target in different areas across   the park system or in just in general. I'm glad  to hear that. Thank you, Tim. Thank you. I see   no further questions for staff. We'll open it up  for public comment. I see no one from the public.   We'll bring it back to the bench. Council member  Glascott. Mayor with a motion the city council   approve the project, adopt the bonding resolution,  and authorize the necessary signatures. Second.   Motion and a second. Any further discussion? I  see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes. 70. Madame clerk, please call the  next item. Centralization of financial services   initiative contract approvals. Good morning,  mayor, members of the city council. Mark Manning   with the Department of Finance. Today I want to  talk to you about centralization of financial   services. And uh I know that may not sound like  the most exciting topic. So I'll try to give you   the highlevel version of it, but I'd be happy to  answer any more detailed questions if you have   them. Uh so as you may know, the city has a very  decentralized process in financial transactions.   And when I say financial transactions, I'm  talking generally about accounts payable,   which is when we pay vendors. I'm  talking about accounts receivable,   which is when we seek to collect money from uh  entities that owe us money. Even contractual   management has some aspects of decentralization.  And finally, payroll is largely decentralized. So   those are the four general areas that we're  looking at. Now ultra simplistically what I   mean by decentralization is there's a lot of  steps and a lot of documents to process to   get to the end result and the way our model is  now maybe the first half or so of those steps   and processes occur at the departmental level  and then those documents and transactions are   uh submitted to the finance department and we  do a lot of work on the back end to making sure   that everything is appropriate to uh final post  and final transact. So that's the challenge.   Some of our work is done at departments, some  of it is at the finance department. Essentially,   with centralization, we believe that there's a lot  of advantages to consolidating all of that work in   the finance department. And I'll go over some of  those real quick. Now, this is not to say that   uh our departments do a bad job now because they  generally do a very good job. It's just basically   to say that our model is inherently inefficient in  a few ways. I'll give you some examples. We have a   lot of small departments. they may have one person  who's only uses a fraction of their time to do a   lot of this work. So that inherently means that  they may not have the level of training or the   level of understanding of our processes that we  would like. Again, not a reflection of our staff,   just that it's a small portion in some cases  of the total work that they do. We have other   departments that are very large and we have an  opposite problem. they're so large sometimes   they have multiple people doing similar work and  it becomes kind of a maze to try to understand   where the documents are within their bureaucracy  and within their organization and if that's a   challenge for the finance department when we do  that I have no doubt it's a challenge for our   customers when they try to communicate with people  in departments too and we've had instances like   that so we believe centralization would provide  more of a singular point of contact and that I   think is particularly uh beneficial to our to our  customers, particularly the people that we pay to   uh funds to. I think they would definitely  appreciate that. Now, we have a variety of   policies and procedures, as you can imagine, and  everything we do in the finance world. And again,   uh we our departments do a pretty good job  of adhering to those. Uh but, you know,   let's be candid, we have 17 different departments,  and sometimes we have 17 different ways that they   interpret our policies and procedures. Uh usually  good, but sometimes maybe not quite as good as we   would like. uh that creates risk for us. We  do not like risk. So we think we could avoid   a lot of risk if we consolidated a lot of those  functions into the finance department. And finally   uh I think bullet number four may be the most  important reason. Uh finance department it's in   our mission statement. Our mission is to process  financial transactions essentially. That's what we   do. That's what we're trained to do. We have a lot  of staff to do it. uh you know it's not the police   department's core function to process financial  transactions to state the obvious uh it detracts   them I would argue from their core mission  it's what we would call a non-core function   and I would argue that anything that you can take  off an operating department that distracts them   from their core function is probably a good  thing so that's why we believe centralization   uh would be an appropriate idea so we've been  talking about centralization now for a couple   years uh we suggested the concept I think in 2024  four. Uh it was talked about last year. If you   recall during the budget process, we initially  estimated saving somewhere in the neighborhood   of 200,000. Uh again, when the council adopted the  budget last year, uh there was actually discussion   about accelerating the process, which was done  and it was incorporated in the 2025 adopted budget   along with some uh one-time funding for some of  the capital expenditures uh which is putting us   in a really good position right now to do what  we're going to suggest doing here in a few slides.   So this year in the budget process as you  know we accompanied the proposed budget with   a strategic plan and one of those strategies in  the strategic plan and this was aligned to the   pillar of well-run city was uh strategy 1.1.2  which is to seek opportunities to accelerate   and implement centralization of organizational  financial services. So that is in our strategic   plan. So in response as you know departments  were tasked to develop tactics to implement the   strategic plan and again that's why I'm here today  because one of the tactics we developed in finance   was to evaluate our current AP and AR functions  within departments and develop a more efficient   and effective model. So that's a that's something  that we're going to propose to you in just a few   minutes and provide you with the opportunity  to give us tools to do that. Now we in finance   have done some preliminary work. Uh we know that  there's somewhere in the neighborhood of 160 city   positions that operate in our space. That's  not 160 full-time positions. Uh some of them,   as I mentioned, you know, 10% 20% of their  job may be in our space. But there are a lot   of full-time positions embedded, particularly in  some of our larger departments. And incidentally,   probably about 40 of those 160 are in the  finance department. But uh we've looked   at all those positions. We have a variety  of ways to do that empirically. You know,   obviously we operate a computer system. So we  know who touches our system, when they touch it.   we know how accurately they touch it. So we have  a pretty good idea who does a lot of work in this   space uh who has high air rates and who does uh  lesser work in this space. I think that'll be very   helpful later on. So to help us we developed an  RFP because we wanted to find a consultant that   could uh look at our staffing levels and provide  some recommendations for a centralized approach.   So we issued an RFP in March of this year and  the project scope was relatively simple. uh   we told them we have about 160 positions related  to financial processes. We want them to evaluate   the duties of those positions and I think that uh  work is going to involve a lot of interviews with   our staff because we definitely want to involve  departments and departmental staff. That's very   important to us. Uh they're also going to study  our workflows and our processes again because   not only do we want to figure out how we can  shift staff, but we also want to look at our   processes and see if there's any opportunities  to uh make our processes more efficient or take   out any steps or anything like that. Uh perhaps  most importantly, uh they will develop models for   us and identify potential savings from staffing  realignments from perhaps the use of additional   technology or perhaps uh different procedures. Uh  so those are the basically three things we wanted   to have done. We formed a committee. We had uh  outside participation from other departments. Law,   airport and transit helped us out a lot. Uh  we conducted interviews with four firms and   the committee recommended McConnell and James LLP.  Now why did the committee recommend McConnell and   Jones? They have a lot of experience doing this  exact kind of work. Uh and in fact that experience   is with cities similarly sized to Witchaw. I think  they worked in Montgomery, Alabama, Milwaukee,   Wisconsin, Little Rock, Arkansas are the three  that come to mind. Uh but in addition to that,   they have a lot of experience in the government  space. Uh they also demonstrated a very clear   understanding of what we want. Uh this  firm is actually a large CPA firm and   uh that's what we wanted. We wanted to tilt  not only towards organizational structure,   but we also wanted somebody that understood  our processes from an accounting standpoint,   could pro provide recommendations on us on how  we could improve those processes if there's   opportunities to do that. Uh so that's one piece  of the uh one piece of what I'm presenting today.   Again, we want to hire a consultant to help  us examine our structure and figure out how   we can restructure better going into next year  and look at our processes. The second piece that   I'm going to talk to you about today is payroll  processing. Now, we mentioned that we've actually   mentioned that last year and we mentioned the  manualness of our payroll processes and the   incredible inefficiency that we have in a lot  of our processes and we talked about moving to   like an electronic timekeeping system. Uh so uh  again that's an extension of our efforts to uh   centralized services. We think there's a lot of  opportunities there and again we want to enhance   our timekeeping processes uh but we also think  there are opportunities to uh maybe find some ways   to realign staff in that process of automating  our timekeeping. And again I use electronic   timekeeping kind of generically that may not be  the best title but that's generically what I use   to talk about automating our payroll process.  So we actually started on this even earlier.   uh anytime you do software, you know, it takes a  lot longer it seems like. So, we actually issued   the RFP back in January. Our project cope scope  was again fairly simple. We wanted uh something   that was uh could implement consistent business  processes and best practices in our payroll   processing. We wanted it to be easy to use, not  only for staff that process payroll in finance,   but also for our employees when they enter in  time. That was very important to us. We didn't   want to buy a system that was too complicated that  nobody could figure out how to use. We recognized   we had a lot of varying departmental needs and  I'll talk about that in a second, but we didn't   want a we wanted a system that could accommodate  all of the various needs of our departments. And   finally, we wanted a a system that had scheduling.  Uh we do scheduling in a really disjointed fashion   right now. A lot of departments have various  different software solutions to try to schedule   their employees. So we wanted a a payroll system  that had uh scheduling built into it. So that's   what we wanted. So we formed a staff screening  selection committee. Now it was very important   when we formed this committee that we have  representatives from every department. So our   our committee was huge, probably the biggest  one I've served on in the time that I've been   with the city. But we did that intentionally  because we wanted representatives from every   single department and we really appreciate  their feedback. They uh spent a lot of time   asking a lot of questions particularly larger  departments. That's exactly what we wanted. Uh   so we conducted interviews with three firms and  then we narrowed it down to two firms and we had   even more exhaustive interviews and they provided  demos and when I say meetings I think these are   like two and three hour meetings. So we spent a  lot of time evaluating uh respondents. Ultimately,   the committee recommended time clock plus or also  referred to as TCP. So, what did we like about   time clock plus? It was extraordinarily adaptable.  You know, we told them, well, here's how we do   things in police. Here's how we do things in  fire. Here's how we do things in public works   and park. Those are by far our most complicated  departments. And police and fire in particularly   are very complicated. A lot of nuances in their  payroll processing. We spent a lot of time talking   to the vendors about that. Uh time clock plus had  a lot of very adaptable solutions and again I had   representatives from both departments on our  committee and they both uh were in concurrence   that time clock plus would adapt to their needs.  Uh time clock plus has a lot of uh work in the   public sector space that was important to us.  They're also very familiar with our ERP system.   Munis which also was very important to us as well.  Now, their name time clock plus I would argue is   a little bit of a misnomer. Uh really the plus  part is one thing that really attracted us to   them. And the plus part includes a very very  robust scheduling capability. And I mentioned   how that's very important to us particularly  in fire and in police and even in park to a   degree and even other departments. They have  a very robust scheduling package that we think   will be very advantageous to us and actually will  facilitate enhanced management decision- making.   So for that reason, the committee selected time  clock plus. So as far as financial considerations,   again, the city council included money in the  2025 adopted budget uh for capital expenditures,   which was fortuitous. So we do have that funding  available to us. Uh we may try to allocate some   under expenditures and finance this year to  provide us some supplemental funds to ensure   that we can take care of this appropriately,  but the funding for this is essentially already   appropriated. I mentioned earlier last year we  thought we might save 200,000. We've done a lot   of examination. Uh we think we may save as much  as half a million dollars by doing this. Again,   it will depend on how we implement it uh and what  positions we're able to identify for realignment.   But we think the the potential is fairly  considerable. The time clock plus as a software   program, as you can imagine, has maintenance fees  associated with that. We think those could be as   much as a quart million dollars a year. I can't  give you an exact number because it'll depend on   a couple things. It'll depend on how many licenses  we buy, which will of course will depend on what   our structure ultimately looks like. And it also  depend on how we choose to implement the time   clock technology because there's unit charges on  that. 250 is probably a maximum probably too high,   maybe closer to 200,000. Point is, we will have  a fairly sizable annual uh cost to implement   this program. Again, we think we can offset  a lot of that by getting rid of some legacy   software we have in the scheduling area, software  that has maintenance fees associated with it now.   And again, we think we will try to identify  some efficiencies in staffing and probably   through realignment uh or through not filling  positions when they become vacant, try to identify   additional savings to offset the uh cost of the  maintenance on this uh project. So, uh I know I   threw a lot at you. I apologize. Uh I could Well,  I could speak for hours on it if you wanted me to,   but you probably don't want me to. Uh, but the  recommendation of the two separate committees   is one to approve the McConnell and Jones LLP  contract uh for consulting services and the   other is to approve the time clock plus contract  uh for electronic timekeeping s uh system approve   the contracts and authorize necessary signatures.  And I would be remiss if I didn't mention before   I finished, uh, Nikki Papcock of my office is  serving as the project manager for the electronic   timekeeping software implementation, which will be  a significant job. She spent a ton of time on that   and I really appreciate her efforts along with  the other staff in the finance department that   have worked a lot in the past helping her and  we really appreciate the help of the operating   departments particularly on the selection of  our of time clock plus because that was a lot   of time for them. that their contributions were  invaluable to us as we try to move forward. So,   that's the end of my presentation. If you have  any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them.   Thank you, Mark, and thank you, Nikki. Council  member Hohheisel. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, thank you,   Mark. It sounds like you've been working on this  for quite a while, and yes, quite an undertaking.   So, I appreciate you and all of staff's work on  this. Um, in regards to the time clock, it's a   decent size that we're putting down here. How long  until we start seeing the the return on investment   there? Yeah, that's a great question. We would  anticipate implementation could be anywhere   from 6 to 12 months. Uh and we'll probably imple  implement in phases too. You know, we'll probably   start with smaller departments. So, some of the  smaller departments could be a little earlier, but   to your point, yeah, probably this time next year  hopefully we'll be fully implemented. Hopefully   sooner. Okay. Um and this is coming from the IT  innovation fund or part of the funding. Yes, sir.   We set a part of that I think we set it actually  aside in 2024 knowing that this was coming and   then last year the council approved additional  funding for uh the project as well. Okay. Uh do we   know how much is left in that innovation fund? How  much do we put in a year? I'd have to get back to   you council member. I'm going to say it's three or  400,000 is remaining but I I don't know for sure.   So I have to check. Also it's not an annual  allocation. We do it when we have some funds   available and we move that over, but we have been  the balance has been coming down over the last few   years. Okay. Is that the same fund that we paid  for the drone pilot project? Yes. Okay. Thank you,   Council Member Tuttle. Thank you. Thank you for  the presentation, Mark. Great job as always. And   thank you, Nikki. I'm a raving fan. You know that.  So, I appreciate all of your extra effort cuz your   plate's already full and we're adding more to  it. if this was infused in your presentation,   I'm sorry. I'm still, you know, trying to recover  from this morning. Um, but in slide 13, and you   don't need to go back, but in slide 113 and 115,  um, you mentioned some of the evaluation part of   it. So, is my assumption is that like this is an  opportunity to maybe gather baseline data right   now and then after the system is implemented,  we'll be able to look back and say cost recovery   for the 200 and some thousand or whatever. Is  that correct? I think we'll have a lot of data   that will allow us to evaluate the success of  the implementation. Yes, ma'am. Yeah. I love that   because you know there's an old expression if you  can't evaluate it why are you doing it? Um and so   this I think is a great opportunity for you know  160 people somehow are touching finance out of 17   18 different departments and they're not like  you said content experts and so I I think this   is fantastic and I really like it and I do hope  that we will go back then and say you know in 2025   between now and the end of the year however this  is where we were but this is what we were able   to save or to be more efficient. I think that's a  fantastic story to tell the community and we don't   always tell the community enough when we are doing  great things. So I'm looking forward to maybe a   year from now getting the report and saying these  are the efficiency efficiencies and savings we   were able to recover. I'll even go out on a limb  and tell you some stuff I would look for a year   from now if I were you. I think what you'll find  is the average number of transactions per staff   will increase significantly which is efficiency.  And I think what you'll probably find is the   error rate on transactions entered decreases  significantly, which means we're more effective.   But that's probably what we'll be looking for.  Okay. And can I just ask a follow-up question? So,   are there safeguards in the contract if the  software system doesn't work as promised? Uh,   there are as many safeguards as there are in  any software implementation contract. Sure.   Just always want to make sure we have a backup  plan, right? All right. Thank you for all you   do. Appreciate it. Yeah, Vice Mayor Johnston.  Thank you, Mayor Mark. Good job. Fully support   this. Um like you also see you'll find some  cases of fraud you'll not have also as far as   timekeeping. That'll be a risk that I think we  can reduce. Yes, sir. Yeah, I think so. Um so,   this really is a payroll service you're buying,  right? Not really. You're buying not buying the   whole program and you own it. It's it's more of  a service. We're We're buying licenses for the   program. Service cloud based. Yeah, I believe it  is service. Yeah. Okay. I think that's good. It's   cloud based. Yep. It's cloud-based. I think that's  good. Had to check with my expert. Sorry. Okay.   Good. Thank you. The only question I have, Mark,  um on your slide, I believe it's slide number 122,   um the expected savings is $500,000 annually.  That's half a million dollars annually. How will   you be able to benchmark? Uh kind of backtracking  with what council member Tuttle asked, but I know   you mentioned a year from now we'll be able to  know that there's going to be an increase in   transactions, but also a decrease in error rate.  How will you be able to track the savings? Well,   I think the way we're going to generate savings  uh for the most part is examine the positions that   are currently involved in this process and I have  a feeling that we will determine that if we can   operate more efficiently, we will not need as many  positions. Now we have a long history of doing   that through attrition in the organization. Uh but  that would be the primary way that we think we can   uh uh create efficiencies is by identifying  positions that we can consolidate the work   in finance. And I also point out there's  likely going to be some position transitions.   There's probably going to be some positions in  department that will have to transition to the   finance department. I don't think we're going to  be absorb all this work without additional staff,   but I think on a net basis, you'll find that  there's going to be a fairly significant number   of positions that we can transition out of the  organization. Thank you very much, Mark. I see   no further questions from staff. We'll now open  it up for public comment. I see no one from the   public. I'll bring it back to the bench. Again,  this is a great initiative. I am so happy to   see um that efficiency and just greater awareness  of these city resources. Knowing that 160 people   have a hand in some type of finance within the 16  departments of the city of Witchaw reminds me that   again you're the expert and your team of finance  individuals are the experts and you guys should be   the ones that really um focus on that effort. So  Nikki, thank you very much for leading the effort   and continuing to lead the effort. Um Mark and  entire team, uh again, thank you for getting us   to this position where we're talking about greater  efficiencies uh in the city of Witchah. So, it is   uh my turn to move that the city council approve  the contracts with Time Clock Plus and McConnell   and Jones LLP authorized the necessary signatures  and authorized staff to make the necessary budget   adjustments. Second. Motion and a second. Any  further discussion? I see none. Madame clerk,   please open the role. Motion passes 70. Madame  clerk, please call the next item. Quarterly   financial reports for the period ended June 30th,  2025. Well, hello again. I'm Mark Manning with the   Department of Finance. U I'll be much more brief  in this presentation uh for a couple reasons,   but primarily because everything I'm going to tell  you this morning is a rehash of what we've talked   about at workshops and budget presentations  for the last uh couple months. Uh and that's   a good thing because that means my message is  very consistent which means that everything is   occurring pretty much the way we expected. Uh  so I'm here today to present the second quarter   2025 financial report. As you know it's un audited  activity in this case through June 30th and we're   going to look at uh what we had budgeted for this  year but even more importantly we're going to look   at the 2026 proposed budget which includes some  revisions to 2025. But I'll I'll do that in both   context. Now, both those are very similar, but  basically I'll just give you a little context   of are we trending similar to what we've been  telling you in the budget process for the last   uh however many months that's been going on. Uh  the shorter answer is yes. Everything is trending   very similarly to what we have expected. Uh there  are a couple of exceptions that I'll go over in   just a minute. Uh generally to the good side, uh  I do want to highlight one other particular area.   Again, my job is to highlight things that are  worse than we expected or better than we expected.   Uh, I got to give golf a shout out here. They  continue to excel. You may recall last quarter   I pointed out that their first quarter was very  weak, primarily due to weather, which I obviously   can't control. Uh, their results through the  second quarter have been extraordinarily good. So,   uh, we're doing something right in the  management of our golf course system,   I would tell you. So, I need to point that  out. So, uh, our our messaging all along has   been court revenues will underperform.  That's what's exactly what's happening.   Uh we are seeing a little bit more growth on sales  tax uh which is very favorable uh you know an   order of magnitude it's not a lot several hundreds  of thousands but it's better to overperform than   underperform. So that's slightly better than what  we've told you about during the budget process.   Interest earnings we've continually mentioned  how that is a huge wild card. Uh we're still   waiting for monetary policy changes. Those have  not occurred yet. the longer those don't occur,   aside from the fact whether that's, you know, good  or bad from a policy standpoint, I would tell you   it is good from an interest earning standpoint  for the city of Witchaw. Uh so we'll probably   overcolct a little bit on interest earnings  particularly this year. Doesn't really change   our future outlook because we anticipate declines  at some point, but all I'm telling you is I think   that revenues are performing very well this year  and probably a little bit better than what we   expected. Let's flip to the expenditure side.  Public safety is where we spend all our money.   We've told you that repeatedly. Uh 65% of our  expenditures through the second quarter were for   public safety. Again, that's consistent with our  prioritization. Now, total salaries and benefits   expenditures are increasing. We've talked a lot  about that in the past, how we actually want that   to happen because we want to be more successful in  filling positions. Uh there are signs that that is   occurring. Not everywhere uh but there are signs  of departments reaching uh higher uh staffing   levels uh which hopefully will impact their uh  outcomes. You may recall in the budget we actually   increased shrinkage this year to ensure what  happened last year which is where we underspent   because we didn't fill positions successfully.  Uh we tried to make sure that doesn't occur this   year. Uh so I think we will be a lot tighter  at the end of the year but we should be in good   shape again for a balanced budget at year end.  Uh so just to summarize what are the some of the   tailwinds. Uh so when I come present to you there  our results for 2025 what will I likely tell you   work good or worked bad. Uh again sales tax and  interest earnings. If we see positive performance   it'll probably in those two areas. If we see  negative performance it'll probably be in the area   of overtime for public safety for example which is  hard to predict or in lower than expected turnover   uh savings in non-public safety areas. In other  words, if we just magically are able to fill all   our positions in Q3 and Q4, our results probably  won't be as positive as what we expect. So,   and again, those are just things that we'll look  for. I mentioned the golf fund already. Excellent   performance in the golf fund. Uh, I don't  usually talk about our water and sewer utilities,   but I thought I would, particularly given the  situation there. They are actually performing   pretty well considering the circumstances. Uh,  revenues actually were higher than last year,   and our expenditures are consistent with last  year. So, uh, both those utilities and actually   all our utilities are in very good shape. Uh, I  won't spend much time on this other than to tell   you it's the exact same theme. Our actual general  obligation debt, which is paid by property taxes,   is about 5% of our total, uh, $75 million, and  that'll decline throughout the year because we   make most of our principal payments in Q4. And  it's unlikely that we'll issue any more go at   large debt this year. All our growth is on the  water and sewer side, which is exactly what we've   been expecting for a long time. I mean, I think  next week you'll hear more about that when they   go for another SRF loan. Uh, but that's where our  growth in our debt is on the water and sewer side,   which is completely what we expected as we're  financing the uh infrastructure improvements   there. Uh, we continue to report on ARPA uh  hopefully for not too much longer, I would hope,   because hopefully we'll have it spent. Right now,  we're at about 56 million. recall we got about 72   million. So we've got what about 16 million to go.  It's all it's all obligated. It's just a matter of   getting it spent. Uh we're rapidly trying to do  that. We've got about 16 million more to go. Uh   again, that's pretty redundant, but I would tell  you everything is tracking pretty much the way we   expected. Uh recommended actions receive and file  and uh happy to answer any questions. Um Mark,   before they we go to questions, um you  highlighted um some headwinds and one of   those was our position count. Could you just talk  a little bit about what we're seeing because we   actually are retaining and seeing fewer vacancies  in the organization now? Yeah, we we track uh we   track position count by department. Uh and  you know, we're looking for whether they're   increasing or decreasing. I'll give you an  example, the finance department, for example.   Uh I think I've got somewhere in the neighborhood  of uh 62 general fund positions. Uh if you look   at the finance department throughout the year, we  started the year at 55. We went down into the 52   53 range. We hired a few people. We got it back up  to 54. And right now I'm at 53. So I'm not making   any progress. But you know, that's fairly typical.  You know, normal fluctuations. What we would like   to see is maybe the course of the library. library  now is fully staffed at 84 positions basically out   of the general fund and you can see that they made  gradual steady process progress towards that which   is exactly what uh they would want to do and what  we would want them to do. So it varies throughout   the departments but generally holistically I  would tell you most of our vacancies continue   to be in public works and the park department  although those levels are materially improved   from where they were a year ago. Uh I think for  example public works had about 50 positions not   filled in the last point in time that I looked  at. Park was at about 20 most of those I think   on the maintenance side and those are better than  what we would have seen in the past. Police is   better too for that matter. I think police I don't  differentiate between commissioned and civilian   uh and this is just in a gross measurement  but police had about 50 vacant positions last   time I checked and I think a year ago they were  north of 100. So you can definitely see progress   there. Again it's a good thing it's a bad thing.  I think it's a good thing we have more people. We   can produce better results. It also increases our  expenditures and lowers our turnover savings and   that we just need to be cognizant of that. Thank  you, Mark. Questions for staff beginning with   council member Hoisel. Thank you, mayor. Uh just  one quick thing, Mark. Um looking at the quarterly   financial report on uh CIDs, when they talk about  um other financing transfers to other funds,   is that debt? Are those the CIDs that have debt  attached to it? Yeah, you're probably looking at   West Bank Sid. I think uh that is transfers to  the debt service fund for the most part. Now,   some of them have smaller amounts where we uh peel  off portions for maintenance, too. And we're going   to transfer that into a maintenance fund. I think  the spaghetti the yeah the spaghetti works one   and maybe the I don't can't remember the names.  The NAF, however you say the park over there. I   can't pronounce it. But generally the transfers  are either to the debt service fund or they're   portions that based on the agreement we're peeling  off so that we can fund maintenance expenditures.   Okay. So the ones without are the ones that  are pay as you go and then the ones that have   the larger anyways the larger transfers are the  ones that we bonded out pretty much. Yes. And   that is primarily just the uh one at the baseball  stadium. Okay. That's the only SID that actually   has debt. That's the only one that we have debt  on. Again, the rest whenever the payments come in,   that's what goes back and pays the developers.  Uh the other ones, yes, we subtract a small   administrative fee, but the remainder of it  is uh uh is returned to the developer based   on our development agreements. Okay. Thank you.  Any further questions for staff? I see none.   We'll open it up for public comment. I see none.  I'll bring it back to the bench. I will move to   receive and file the quarterly financial reports  for the period ending June 30th, 2025. Second   motion and a second. Any further discussion? I  see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 70. Madame clerk, please call  the next item. Applicant appeal of HPC 2025-60. Good afternoon. Scott Wadel from the planning  department. So, for this item, uh, this is an   appeal of a decision by the Witchdaw Historic  Preservation Board to deny a building permit   for awnings to be installed on the Obla House at  102 and 104 North Pine Crest. The board determined   that the proposed awnings would damage or destroy  the historic building. The applicant is proposing   to install awnings on the second floor of the  building in order to keep water off of the flat   roof terraces/pattios on the top of the first  floor. And I'll show you some photos of that.   The owner intends for the awnings to help protect  the interior spaces below and to allow him to   make any necessary repairs. In terms of process,  this item is being presented today because the   2022 agreement between the city of Witchaw and  the Kansas Historic Preservation Officer. The   agreement allows for a local review of projects  that affect historic places instead of sending   them to Topeka. As part of the agreement, the  appeal of the local review goes to the city   council. In terms of the property and the property  background, the building at 102102 104 Pinerest   Avenue is individually listed on the National  Register of Historic Places. It was listed in   2009. It was listed under criterians B and C and  those are for its association with the original   owners, brothers Frank and Harvey Abla and uh  then also for its notable architectural design   and construction. So, here are some images  from the site and the surrounding area. So,   here's the house and different angles of the house  looking at some of the neighboring properties. And then here are some images that were submitted  uh by the applicant as part of their application   to the historic preservation board. So, with  this one, you'll notice the terrace that's   in the middle. I think it's got like a flower pot  kind of design up there. Uh just underneath that,   there's been some water intrusion into the  structure. And here's some of the water damage   that's resulted from that center portion. Here's  a look at the roof. Um and then here's a diagram   that was submitted that shows where the proposed  awnings would be located. Here's another terrace   that's on there and similar uh photos series.  So you can see damage that was on the interior,   what the roof of it looks like, and  then a drawing that was submitted   about what the cover would look like or the  awning. Here's another terrace. Uh again,   the roof some damage underneath what it  would dimensions of what it would be. And   there's another terrace on the corner. I think  there's just two more. This one again with some   more substantial damage on the interior, what  the awning would look like. And then here's   uh the aerial image. So, in terms of the  overview of the process, in June of this year,   the applicant submitted for an application to  the Witchaw Historic Preservation Board for   review of the project. On July 14th, the Historic  Preservation Board determined that the proposed   project to install the awnings would damage or  destroy a historic property and denied issuing   uh the city issuing the building permit for the  project. On July 22nd, the applicant submitted an   appeal to the city clerk uh and so therefore  the items here at the city council. Now,   a note about the historic preservation board  review. When they review an application like this,   they uh compare it with the secretary of the  interior standard. So, they have a a very   constrained window view that they take on these  reviews. Again, they found that it would damage or   destroy a historic place. and the notes from the  meetings are attached uh with the staff report. So, uh this item again is not a zoning item.  So, it is recommended that the city council   hear from the applicant and take any public  comments on this item. Uh the council actions   uh you've got the option you can deny the building  permit as the HPB uh did and adopt their findings   or uh second you could approve the permit. Both  of those votes require just a simple majority,   four out of seven for either one. And then you  also have a third option, which is to send it   back to the historic preservation board for  additional consideration. And that also would   require just a simple majority. So with that, I  will stand for any questions. Thank you. Scott,   are there any renderings of what this proposal for  the awning will look like? I do not have any. Um,   my understanding is that the applicant did  bring some with him, so I believe he intends   to distribute those in just a moment. Questions  for staff. Council member Ho Heisel. Thank you,   Mayor. Um, was the concern I I see in the notes  that they were considering uh how the awnings   would be attached. Was that the main concern that  they had is just how the awnings might be attached   to the to the exterior? Uh, yes. So, there are two  things to note on that. The one first one is that   um when planning staff reviewed it, there were  concerns about obscuring that the awnings might   obscure u some of the proportions and elements of  the structure itself. So kind of a visual impact.   Uh when the historic preservation board  reviewed it, they had that staff report   and really what I heard from being at the  meeting is that um they were concerned about   the attachment and what the impact would be for  the structure. Also what they would look like,   what materials, what design would they be?  Um there were just a lot of questions about   what exactly was being proposed. Okay. Would you  say that there if you're going to categorize it,   it's was there concern more for the overall  project or was it that it just simply did not   meet the state standards or that it I think  the overall project more of uh trying to get   an understanding of what exactly was going  to take place with the structure. Okay. Any   other questions for staff? I see none. It is an  opportunity for the applicant to come forward. Hello. Um My name is Mark. My name is Mark Marcus Turman  and um I reside at 102104 North Pinerest,   also known as the Abwa House. I'm here to act to  to I'm here to ask the city council to reverse   the HPC's denial and allow me to install  awnings above terraces at the Ablaw House.   This will protect the interior spaces below while  we strip away the many layers of tar and coating   down to the studs. After the rehab can begin,  there are four secondstory terraces. Some have   negative grade. All have soft spots underneath  the decking. All have leakage. Damage from the   recent ice storms has intensified the problem.  Decks range in size from 90 square feet to   200 square feet. At the Abla house, as noted,  the roof is flat. In other words, our ceiling   is our roof. Terrace decking serves as a roof  to the interior spaces below. Above terraces,   open sky, and this makes a significant difference  in how repairs happen. Unfortunately, it's not as   simple as throwing tarps on a pitched roof where  rainwater will naturally shed away. Instead,   imagine a large three-foot deep hole and about  200 square ft of a large space where rainwater is   collected and can only exit through one small hole  the size of a cigar box. The proposed awnings are   designed to be horizontally flat and streamlined  to blend with structure. Materials for framing   is wood covered with a tpo roofing material  and built to code. Framework is framework and   trim are to be painted to match the house and  emphasize the horizontal lines of the building.   Although my through my years of living at the  Abla House, I've interviewed many contractors,   including a a architect who specializes in  historical rebuilds about this specific problem.   The takeaway is it needs to be taken apart and  reassembled. I have selected two contractors   for this project. One of them has worked on the  Ablaw House regularly since purchased in 2002.   He has nearly 50 years of construction experience  and knowledge and both residential and commercial   builds and remodels. Both have excellent  reputations and most importantly they truly   care that the project is done correctly. Project  time is two years. The Ablaw House is 86 years old   now. This past spring, family members who grew  up there revisited the home as they sometimes   do. They remember by telling stories, one about  the fire and how they helped each other escape   during the night. And after the chaos, they  had to consider tearing down or to rebuild.   Most importantly, they noted and stated the same  problems that I'm having with the terraces now   existed. Then I close with a question. Whether  approved for temporary or for permanent use,   why not build a streamline awning that is  better in quality, will last longer, cost less,   and with dis and and with less disruption points  to the structure while at the same time respecting   my neighbors from a view of a makeshift, crude,  or temporary shelter. While we do this important   work, I ask the city council to stop the rot by  voting to allow this project to move forward. Thank you, Mark, and thank you for the  renderings that you provided. We have   several council members who have questions. We'll  begin with council member Glascar. Thank you,   mayor. Um, I appreciate the renderings,  but I am not entirely sure what the a is   it this structure and this structure.  So, you barely noticed. Okay. Yeah,   they're they're they are the only lines above  the terraces that are not colored. Okay. So,   it is just that and that. Correct. And that's  only the that's only a view from Douglas Street   looking north at the property. Okay. Thank  you. Council member Johnson. Thanks, Mayor. Um,   Council Member Glascock asked one of the questions  I wanted. Did Did you put this together? Yes, sir.   This rendering um did you have these same things  when you were at the historical preservation   board? Uh, no, I did not. Okay. I I learned  I learned a lot through that. So, Okay. No,   I did not. Did you um had you had conversations  with those contractors before that meeting? I've   had the conversations many times over the years,  but yes, before the meetings. Okay. I I will be   honest with you. I think it's good to do the work  to protect the the space. I don't have an issue   with that. Um reading through the minutes and  kind of looking at maybe what that discussion was,   I think more of the concern was about protecting  the building. Yes, sir. Throughout this process.   Yes, sir. And one of the questions I think was  around having a professional doing this work, but   it sounds like you've talked to someone who could  do that for you. Oh yes. Okay. Do you have any um renderings or plan of what it will look like,  how you can do this while also protecting that   building, putting this on whether it's  temporary or per permanent because I   know you said you may have to take some things  off. Was all of that process described through   historical preservation board or just kind  of hinted at it like today? Uh, you know,   I I I don't know if I I don't remember talking in  the details that I'm talking to you in today. Um,   a lot of it was presented through the historical  board, a young lady there. Okay. So, uh, it's my   first experience with them. Um, I learned from it.  Okay. No, I I get that we have a lot of different   processes. Um I just wanted to know that piece  because that answers some of the questions I had.   Um so I think that's all I have for now. Thank  you, Vice Mayor Johnston. Thank you. Question.   These these awnings are are flat. Yeah. Uh uh  blade flat. Uh we're trying to get them down to   about 3 and 1/2 in. Um we have a design ready.  Um of course it's going to need to be approved.   make sure that it's all kosher with coating. And  where does it drain then? Um the there will be   um some gutters like normal around normal houses  and I think they're usually about three three and   a half inches deep and they will run around  the awnings and the awnings will in addition   the the awnings um will mimic the curvatures of  the terrace itself with about a one foot hang   overhang but they'll be totally flat with a tpo  roof. So, the awning will go over the roof about   one and a half feet. I'm sorry. The awning will  extend over the roof line. Yes. By one foot. By   a foot. Okay. And how far above the roof line is  the awning? Um, as far as how long it is? Well,   you have the the roof line here and then is  it right on it a foot over or is it above? Oh,   it's it's about a foot over. I think overlap but  but heightwise is it the same height he heightwise   um is it right on it? Uh it's there I guess there  it's probably right around 8 and 1/2 square feet   from the floor of the deck to the roof of the  ceiling and the awning comes right over the doors   and the windows. And what you don't see is when  you step out the door onto the the terrace deck,   you actually step down about 10 in. Okay. So, you  could actually step in between the awning and the   the rooftop. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And there's drain  pipes that come down. There will be. Yes. Then   all the way down the house. Um it will join an  existing uh existing gutters because at the same   Yeah. the awning. There are some existing gut  uh gutters and and drain piping nearby and it   will be joined to those. Okay. Okay. Thank you.  You're welcome. I see no further questions for the   applicant and this does not get public comment.  Uh this does reside. It does get public comment.   It does get public comment this time. Okay. I  apologize. Um, no questions from the bench right   now. We'll open it up for public comment. There's  no one from the public. We'll bring it back to the   bench. This resides in Council Member Johnson's  district. Thanks, Mayor. Um, I appreciated the   presentation today and conversation on how you  intend to do this work. I think it should happen.   Um, but I think with all the work that  you've done to come up with some plans and   um, process and everything you just explained to  the vice mayor, I would like to see this go back   and you explain that to them. They kind of look  more at the historical preservation piece more so   than I'll just speak for myself on that. um they  like details and I think the more detailed you   could be with that and how you intend to preserve  this um the facades of this while putting this on   to protect it and preserve it I think will  help out and they'll hear it again and send   it back if the council agrees they'll hear it  and then send it back to us. I think with the   details that you've described today and maybe some  additional renderings and talking through that   you'll probably have a more favorable chance.  Okay. Thank you. Um, with that I would move   that the city council um send this back to the  historical preservation board for review. Second   motion and a second. Any further discussion?  I'll just add just two comments really quick.   I really appreciate that someone is trying to make  sure that an 86-year-old home still is maintained   and is thinking how to preserve its beauty but  also its functionality so it doesn't continue to   deteriorate. So I just ask that the preservation  board be cognizant that this individual, this   applicant is trying his best to make sure that  this house uh maintains its u availability in this   uh community as housing but also um not make it  overburdensome. I feel like this applicant now   has gone to the preservation board. Uh now it's  coming to the council and now it's supposed to go   back to the preservation board. I feel like this  is very cumbersome for someone who literally is   just trying to make sure that there's housing and  housing that um again preserves history but at the   same time needs to be functional so it doesn't  deteriorate further. Um and since you're paying   out of pocket on this and this is your property, I  am very conflicted in voting yes on this because I   would like it just to get approved. I think this  gentleman uh Mr. Mark has gone through multiple   hoops already and I feel like he is trying  to be very prudent and he understands that   he cares about this property. He doesn't want to  tear it down. He simply just wants to make sure   that he can make those uh improvements as soon  as possible so that again it doesn't further   continue to deteriorate. So stop the bleeding.  Um, so I know that there's a motion in a second,   but I would like to do a substitute motion  and I would like to approve this. Um, so deny I would like to have a substitute motion to deny the appeal. Is that how I can move forward?  If if you want to if you want to approve an   deny the historic preservation and allow this  gentleman to move forward. It would be under um   legal considerations number one, the city council  on appeal of the decision. Okay. Um, my substitute   motion would be for the council on appeal of  the decision of the historic preservation board   uh to approve the certificate of appropriateness  if it and determine the feasible and prudent   alternatives do not exist to al alteration,  demolition or moving of the proposed project. Before I would consider seconding that,  I have quick question for Scott with   uh Council Member Johnson's motion. What is the  timeline for the individual? If we're talking   about two weeks it could come back before us or  are we talking about two months that could come   back before us? Uh the first step would be the  historic preservation board. They meet on the   second Monday of the month. So I am looking that  up. So approximately a month from from now. Uh,   so that would put it into September. And  then let's see if I can get my calendar here. That would put it on to September 8th if  I'm looking correctly at the calendar.   And then from there, it typically takes we  would submit it. There would be review. Uh,   then it would be somewhere in the week of I don't  know if there's a council meeting on the 23rd,   but somewhere in that time frame. Yes, sir. I excellent point which is if it is approved by  the historic preservation board then essentially   the appeal goes away because they have approved  it. So unless you specifically want it to come   back to you uh it it would not need to if the  historic preservation board approves it. So   council member Tuttle. Thank you. My question,  concern, um, sorry to make sausage from the bench,   but what if it goes back to the historic  preservation board and they say no again,   then it has to come here and we have to go through  the process. I'll be very honest, I just want you   to have your awnings, right? I I think that's  what should happen. Um, I'm asking a question   and Jennifer, I'm not making a motion or offering  a motion. I'm just going to ask my colleague,   Council Member Johnson, may ask you a question.  How would you feel if this approved today and   then we requested that the gentlemen go back to  the historic preservation board and just show   their renderings and say this is what I plan to do  or something so that they still fill in the loop   and that they still can see that progress was made  and understand the justification for why we voted   the way we did. But my fear is that if we delay  it today then it goes back. They could say no,   then it has to come back to us again. And you just  need your awnings. So, Council Member Johnson,   can you I hate to put you on the spot, but  what would feel good for you for today? Um,   I would feel better if they had an opportunity  to approve it. One, like we just found out it   wouldn't come back, so it' just be approved at  that point. um if they hear the plans kind of   like they heard these and I understand that was  your first time going and I've never been before   the historic preservation board so they had some  concerns I feel were legitimate about protecting   the historic nature of the space. Um it would  kind of depend on if they denied it again what the   denial was. If it wasn't something that completely  damaged the structure or the historic nature,   I still would feel better about approving it  than I do right now. But that's just me. If if   um we went ahead with this motion and approved  and he just went back and gave a report,   that's great. I'd love to hear what they have to  say. Um, but then if they say that the changes,   if they were slightly modified, could have  preserved it and we didn't, then we just   had a historic building or home that lost some of  that historic nature. If that makes sense. I will   second the mayor's motion um with justification.  If this goes back before the historical board,   they deny it. They come back, you present the same  thing. I'm still approving this. So, um, I will   second the mayor's motion and I apologize, but  that motion to be accurate would be I move that   there are no prudent or feasible alternatives to  the request override the decision of the historic   preservation board authorized the mayor to sign  a letter to the SHPO and approve the building   permit. That's fine. Thank you. So, I have a  substitute motion presented by the mayor, seconded   by council member Glascock. Any further comments?  I see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion is denied 4 to three. We're  now back to the original motion.   And that motion is a motion by council member  Johnson and seconded by Vice Mayor Johnston. Yes, this is to send back to the preservation  board um for their determination and they will   meet on September 8th with the earliest time  to come back to the council if it is denied on   September 23rd. Council member Johnson. Thanks,  Mayor. And just again I want to uh encourage to   share as many details as possible and working  with that contractor um just to talk through   those things. I think it would go good and again  they approve it you don't have to come back. Okay,   it's done. Thank you. Thank you. Um, last  comments. Again, I really appreciate uh Mark for   coming forward and trying to preserve a historic  building and trying to make the most out of an   innovative idea, just awnings, so that it doesn't  continue to further deteriorate. And I appreciate   that you've already gone through multiple hoops  and we're asking you to again go through another   hoop. Um, I just want you to know that I'm for  your property rights and that you're trying to   still preserve it, preserve the historical nature  of this building, but I don't like that you have   to go through so many hoops yet again. So, I will  be voting in favor so that you can move forward,   but um I really would would have liked if my  substitute motion would have passed. Vice Mayor   Johnston, thank you, Mayor and Mark, too. I  want you to see I want to see you have it. I   do. I really do. Um, but I also want to trust the  person I appointed to the historic preservation   board and talk to her and and see where she's at  and other concerns and uh and maybe they want to   know who the contractor is. Maybe they want to  know things like that. So maybe provide some of   that information to to them. But I would like to  see you have it. Well, I I appreciate that and um   yeah, it has been something I've been talking  to them for now for about two three years. Um,   so yes, I'm I'm I welcome uh their comments and  their direction on this. Thank you. One last   comment before the vote now knowing additional  information, which was he has been trying to   talk with the historic preservation board for  two to three years. This is cumbersome. There   were major rains and also snow that happened in  the last 12 months. Yeah. And that means you've   had to h suffer further damage to this property  without having this awning. So I'm going to be   voting not in favor of this. Not because I don't  want this to move forward, but simply because I   think you should have just gotten your awnings  today. Council member Glass Cup. Sorry. This is   more of a question for legal. Just let's say this  were to fail. Let's say it deni or let's say that   Councilman Johnson's motion failed today. uh or  PA failed and so it didn't get sent back to the   historic preservation board then would it just  die? You're in um a gray area there because we've   made a motion to grant his appeal that's failed.  We we would have if this motion fails that'll have   failed. I would have to think what we would do  at that point. On the prevailing side yes some   somebody on the prevailing side of either motion  could bring it up again in this meeting. on either   motion. Bring it back up. On either motion. Okay.  Thank you. We have the original motion again uh   with a motion in a second. Any further discussion?  I see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 61. Thank you. Thank you very  much. Madame clerk, please call the next item. Con 202573, conditional use request in the city  to have vehicle and equipment sales outdoor and   property zones limited commercial located within  one block north of West 25th Street North and on   the east side of North Amidan at 2666 North Amiden  Avenue. Hello, Scott Wadel again from the planning   department. So for this one, uh the applicant is  requesting a conditional use in order to allow for   vehicle and equipment sale at the site. His case  is being heard today because the district advisory   board and the planning commission recommendations  are different. In terms of the site, the subject   site is located at 2666 North Amidan. As you  can see here on the aerial subject site is   just over a quarter of an acre in size, consists  of one ownership parcels developed with a vacant   building previously used for a self-service  car wash and is zoned LC limited commercial.   In terms of the request, the applicant has  indicated they would like to util utilize the   property for automobile sales. The applicant's  site plan shows spaces for 11 vehicles uh for   sale. In terms of context, properties to the north  are zoned LC and developed with a gas station and   retail strip mall. Properties to the south, east,  and west are zoned SF5 single family residential   and are developed with single family dwellings.  In terms of the staff report, the staff report   for this item contains information on parking,  landscaping, and screening. In terms of review, on   June 26, the planning commission held the public  hearing for this item and recommended approval of   the application with the conditions that are  listed in the staff report. In its findings,   MAPC determined that the site is suitable for the  intended use and would have no detrimental impacts   on nearby properties. And no members of the public  spoke on this item at that meeting on July 14th.   The district advisory board reviewed the request  and recommended denial. Uh DAB members expressed   concern the applicant uh was not present during  the meeting and that vehicle equipment was already   being had been seen on the site before the  zoning and licensing was approved. And again,   no members of the public spoke on this item. I  would also add that uh in support of what the   DAB's action was, the staff report at that was  for denial, recommendation was for denial. So   they did not articulate that because a lot  of that was already in the staff report.   Um, no protest petitions were received against  the conditional use. Therefore, the request may   uh be approved with a simple majority vote or four  of seven votes. So, the recommended action coming   to you from the MAPC is to adopt the findings  of the planning commission and approve the   conditional use with those conditions that were  listed to authorize the necessary signatures and   to instruct the city clerk to publish a resolution  after approval. Again, requires just four of seven   votes. Alternatives include the following. You  can override the MAPC adopt alternative findings   and deny the conditional use as recommended  by the DAB. That would require five of seven   votes. Or as always, you can return the case  to the MAPC for additional consideration. And   that requires just four of seven votes. Again,  note about a process that city council policy   is at the public hearing and public comments  take place at the planning commission. So,   uh, with that, I'll take you through some of the  graphics. Here's the aerial. Here's a zoning map   again showing LC and then uh is the red and  then single family residential SF5 is the   white. Here's the map from the comprehensive plan.  Here's the graphic that was submitted as part of   the application by the applicant. Uh here's  the protest and the notification map. Again,   no protests were received. Here's photos  of the site and then the surrounding area. And with that, I'll stand for any questions.  Questions first. Scott, I see none. This   resides in council member Maggie Ballard's  district. Thank you, mayor. I move to override   the MAPC and deny the requested conditional use as  recommended by the DAB. In support of this motion,   I offer the following findings. The conditional  use would remove restrictions and would allow   a use that would have detrimental impact on  the nearby residential uses and the proposed   conditional use is not in compliance with Witchaw  places and people plan recommendations. Second   motion and a second. Any further discussion? I  see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 70. Madame clerk, please  call the next item. Zone 2025-28 with   con 2025-80. Zone requests zone change  requests from single family residential   to two family residential district to  allow duplexes generally located on   the northeast corner of North Gow and West  11th Street North at 122 North Ga Avenue. Good afternoon. Scott Wadel from the  planning department. Uh, as you heard,   the applicant is requesting approval of a zone  change and a conditional use. A zone change would   be to go to SF5 to TF3 and the conditional use  to allow for multif family. This item is being   heard because the DAB and planning commissions  for recommendations. Both are for approval,   but uh the DAB has one additional condition that  they are recommending. In terms of the request,   the applicant has indicated they're requesting the  zoning change and the conditional use in order to   be able to use the site for multif family. They  intend to develop the site with two duplexes   for four total dwelling units on the property. A  subject site is located northeast corner of Gow   and 11th Street, generally located to the south  and east of 13th and West Street. A subject site   is approximately 0.67 acres in size, consists of  one ownership parcel, and is currently vacant.   Uh although you can see that there was a single  family house uh fairly recently on the site. In   terms of context, properties to the north, south,  east, and west are zoned SF5 and developed with   single family dwellings. Although one note that  there is TF3 zoning in multiple duplexes one   block to the southeast of the subject site as  you can see here on the zoning map. In terms   of the staff report, the staff report provides  information about the proposed site layout layout,   screening and landscaping. on in terms of review  on July 10th, the planning commission held the   public hearing and recommended approval of the  zone change and conditional use. Uh and that was   uh 11 to zero was the vote on that one. Three  members of the public spoke in opposition at   that hearing uh citing lack of space for parking,  additional traffic to the immediate area, and   concerns with paving west uh 11th Street. On July  14th, the district advisory board reviewed the   request and recommended approval uh and of both  the zoning and conditional use. Uh the vote there   was 8 to zero. No members of the public spoke  on the item at that meeting. The conditional use   request was approved with an additional condition  and that was that the structures must have gabled   uh roof design. No protests were received against  the application. Therefore, the zone change and   conditional use request can be approved by  a simple majority of four of seven votes. So   the recommendation coming to you from the planning  commission is that you adopt the findings of MAPC,   approve the zone change and conditional  use, authorize the necessary signatures,   and instruct the clerk to publish the ordinance  and resolution. Would require four of seven votes.   Alternatives include the following. You can  override the MAPC adopt alternative findings   and deny the requested zone change. That would  require five of seven votes. Another option is   that you can override the MAPC adopt alternative  findings and approve the zone change request and   conditional use with the additional condition  recommended by the DAB. That would require five of   seven votes. Or as always, you can return the case  to the MAPC for additional consideration. Four of   seven votes would be required. Again, city council  policy that public hearing and comments take place   at the planning commission. Here are the photos  and the graphics. So, the aerial uh the zoning   map. Here's the map from the comprehensive plan  recommending residential. Here's the protest and   notification map. Again, no protests on this one.  Here's a site plan uh that was submitted as part   of the application showing two duplexes. Here's  the site uh more recently and the surrounding   area. And with that, I'll stand for any questions.  Thank you, Scott. Glad to see u more housing. So,   this is in council member Maggie Ballard's  district. Thank you, Mayor. I move to Okay,   sorry. Override the planning commission,  adopt the alternate findings of the DAB,   approve the zone change with conditional  use, authorize the necessary signatures,   and instruct the city clerk to publish ordinance  after approval. In support of this motion,   I offer the following findings. The additional  condition for gabled roof design will help to   ensure that any new development at the site  will reflect the character of the surrounding   neighborhood and will reduce potential detrimental  effects um on the incompatible designs. Second   motion and a second. Any further discussion? I  see none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 70. Madame clerk, please call  the next item. Zone 2025-26, zone change   request in the city from limited industrial  district to general commercial district,   generally located between South Laura Avenue and  South Patty Avenue and within 350 ft north of US   54400 at 428 South Laura and 427 South Patty  Avenue. Good afternoon, Scott Wadel again. So,   as you heard, this applicant is requesting his own  change from LI limited industrial to GC general   commercial. This item is being heard today because  the DAB and planning commission recommendations   are different. In terms of the request, the  applicant has indicated they're requesting   the zoning change in order to be able to use the  subject site for multifamily residential. They've   indicated that they intend to develop the site  with housing made from former shipping containers.   The applicant owns and operates an existing  housing development of this type across the   street and to the east of the subject site.  And I believe you can see them in the subject   photo just a little bit to the further to  the south. In terms of the property itself,   subject site is located at 428 South Laura and  427 South Patty. It is approximately a quarter   of an acre in size, consist of two ownership  parcels, both under the same ownership,   and is currently vacant. Uh to the north,  properties to the north are zoned LI and   developed with single family dwellings. So you can  see that kind of bluish purple color. Properties   to the east are zoned LI and developed with single  family dwellings. And across South Patty Avenue is   an office/warehouse combination. To the south  is zone GC. So that more purple color and is   developed with multifamily dwellings as a former  school site. Properties to the west across South   Laura are zoned LI and LC limited commercial  and developed with single family dwellings. In terms of the staff report, the staff report  provides information about development standards   and parking. In terms of review, on June 26, the  planning commission held the public hearing and   recommended denial of the request. The MAPC  discussed being in favor of using shipping   containers for residential use in general, but  felt that the request in this particular location   does not fit with the neighborhood. Three members  of the public spoke in opposition to this request   at the planning commission, citing concerns of  compatibility with the surrounding properties.   On July 7th, the district advisory board reviewed  the request and recommended approval of the zone   change. Three members of the public spoke in  opposition to the request, citing concerns of   compatibility with the surrounding properties. No  protests were received against this application. So, the recommendation uh coming to you from  the MAPC is that you adopt the findings of   the planning commission and deny the requested  zone change. That would require four of seven   votes. Alternatives include the following.  You can override the planning commission,   adopt alternative findings, and approve the zone  change request as recommended by the DAB. That   would require five of seven votes. Or as always,  you can return the case to the MAPC for additional   consideration. That would require four of seven  votes. And just a quick note about the process   at the public hearing and public comments take  place uh by per council policy at the planning   commission. So with that, I'll take you through  some of the graphics and aerials. So, here's the   aerial image showing the subject site, which  is two parcels. Here's the zoning map. Again,   limited industrial and GC in the area. Here's  the map from the comprehensive plan. Here's the   notification and protest map. Again, no protests  were submitted. And here are photos of the site   and the surrounding area. So, currently  the site is vacant. Looking to the north. looking to the school in the south. And so with  that, I'll stand for any questions. Thank you,   Scott. Council member Glasco. Thank you, Mayor.  So, I just want to synthesize the MAPC denied it   because they didn't believe it fit in with the  neighborhood, but then the representatives of   the neighborhood said yes, and there was  no protest. Is that correct? There. Uh,   so I'll go backwards. There are no protests, so  zero protests. Uh the DAB recommended approval.   Uh the and there were three members who showed up  and members of the public who spoke in opposition   to the application at that meeting, but the DAB  voted to recommend approval. The MAPC voted to   recommend denial. Okay. That's the first time  I think I've seen where MAPC denies something   and DAB says yes. Usually it's the reverse. So  I just wanted to verify that. And then um this   is more of just a procedural question too. And  maybe I look at most of the minutes from these,   but is it typical just to have DAB and not have  who in DAB says comments or just public and not   who in the public says? We we defer uh to the  DAB liaison on who crafts the minutes. So they   can vary from dab to dab and Jennifer that's  appropriate based on open meetings. It meets   any requirement. There's no legal requirement to  even keep minutes. Believe it or not, it's not a   legal requirement. It's a best practice. Okay. And  there's no further requirement that we identify   the speaker for purposes of these minutes. Okay.  There are other minutes required for things like,   you know, bond hearings, but that's a different  story. Thanks. I see no further questions for   staff. Do we know exactly how many more  units this would produce? Um, yes. So,   excuse me. at the GC zoning, it allows uh up to uh  a minimum of 580 square ft per dwelling unit. And   so calculated out against the size of the subject  site, that would get you, which is a quarter of an   acre in size. I ended up with 18 dwelling units. I  don't believe that they intend to have that many,   but that would be the maximum. Do you happen to  know how much they're renting for? I know you   mentioned that there's some containers also to the  east of where they're at. They were even in the   photos. Sure. Yes. Uh I do not We typically don't  get into that to that level of detail. Thank you.   This resides in Council Member Johnson's district.  Thanks, Mayor. Um just to highlight what the mayor   just said, uh for Council Member Glasscock, some  of the conversation at DAB was the fact that there   were similar containers across the street. So,  while there was kind of the argument that this   didn't fit the character of the neighborhood,  there was also an example across the street   of the same thing. Um, with that, I would move  to override the planning commission, adopt the   alternate finding alternate findings, approve  the zone change with the protective overlay,   authorize the necessary signatures, and instruct  the city clerk to publish the ordinance after   approval. The protective overlay consists of the  following conditions for any residential structure   created from and or including one or more  shipping containers located on the subject site.   The exterior of such structure shall be painted a  uniform color. Each structure may have an exterior   color unique from other residential structures on  the site and the exterior color of each structure   shall be an earthtone color. In support of this  motion, I offer the following findings. Approval   of the request would allow all uses permitted  in the GC commercial district on the site,   which are generally less intensive than those  permitted within the existing limited industrial   district. The requested zone change is in partial  conformance with the community investments plan   as discussed in the staff report. It is in  conformance with the Witchah Places for People   plan and the central northeast area plan update as  discussed in the planning department staff report   for the MAPC. The protective overlay will help  reduce the potential for detrimental effects to   nearby properties. Second motion in a second. Any  further discussion? I see none. And I'm not asking   you to repeat it. Any questions? Oh, questions.  Okay. Uh, Madame Clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 70. Madame clerk, please  call the next item. Zone 2025-30. Zone   change request in the city from single  family residential district to two   family residential district to build single  family and two family dwellings generally   located north of East 39th Street  South and east of South Rock Road. Scott Wadel from the planning department again.  So, as you heard, the item uh before you is that   the applicant is requesting a zone change from SF5  to TF3. This item is being heard today because uh   one protest was submitted against the application.  In terms of the request, the applicant has   indicated they are requesting the zoning change  in order to be able to use the site for duplex   and or single family uses. About the property  uh north and it's located to the north and east   of the intersection of Rock Road and 39th Street  South. It is approximately 57.4 4 acres in size,   consists of one ownership parcel, and is currently  vacant in use for pasture and agricultural lands.   In terms of context, property to the west is  owned by the applicant, currently zoned SF5,   and the applicant is requesting a zone change  to LC limited commercial. Property across South   Rock Road uh to the west is own zoned Air Force  Base and is part of McConnell Air Force Base.   Property to the north is zoned TF3 and currently  undeveloped. Property to the east and south are   zoned SF20 and are developed with single family  dwellings. In terms of review on July 10th and   the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission held  the public hearing for this item and recommended   approval of the zone change request and that  vote was 10 to zero. Six members of the public   commented with concerns of increased housing  density and traffic in the area. On July 14th, the   district advisory board reviewed the request and  recommended approval per the staff recommendations   similar to the MAPC and that vote was also 10  to zero. There were no public comments at the   meeting regarding this application. One protest  petition was received for this case. It uh added   up to 1% of the protest area which does not meet  the threshold required for a 3-4 majority which   requires a three-4 majority. So the recommendation  coming to you from the MAPC is to adopt the   findings of the planning commission, approve the  requested zone change and authorize necessary   signatures, instruct the city clerk to publish  the ordinance and resolution after approval.   And that requires just a simple majority, four of  seven votes. Alternatives include the following.   You can override the planning commission, adopt  alternative findings, and deny the zone change   request. That would require five of seven votes.  Or as always, you can return the case to the MAPC   for additional consideration. Requires just a  simple majority of four of seven votes. And just   a note about process. Again, the city council  policy that public hearing takes place at the   MAPC. So here are the photos and graphics.  Here's the aerial. Here's the zoning map. Here's the map from the comprehensive plan showing  new residential recommended in the area. Here's   the map from the protest map and the notification  area. And you can see the one red square there   that uh was a protest that was received. Here are  photos from the site and the surrounding area. I think we have quite a few. There we go. And with  that, I'll stand for any questions. Thank you,   Scott. Council member Tuttle. Thank you. I tried  to get your attention because maybe we could have   even saved some time and not gone through this.  That's okay. Um, I'm I'm just going to make a   few real quick comments for the council just  to understand. First of all, the and Jennifer,   please always correct me if I'm when I'm wrong.  I appreciate the speaker coming on public agenda   today, but her comments need to be disregarded  because they can't be part of the decision   process because comments have already been heard  at MAPC and at district advisory board. So,   I'm glad she came and but we can't take those  comments into consideration. Am I correct,   Jennifer? That's correct. the MAPC hearing is  the official public hearing and so that's where   those comments are directed. Um her comments in  general can be you know just public comment but   not used for this decision and and we might want  to think about that in the future if somebody else   does do that just so they don't take their time  and then there's confusion and then everybody   starts doing that and so that's just a food for  thought something to think about. Um, I do want   to state I've had no exparte communication with  the applicant and I received no communication from   community members. This was approved unanimously  at the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission,   approved unanimously at the district advisory  board. It was approved by staff because there   was one petition filed 1% within the area. It  got pulled off of consent to us. And so Scott   and staff and I have had a conversation of again,  is this another opportunity for an efficiency in   terms of procedure because this really didn't have  to come to council considering every entity that   reviewed it approved unanimously. So that might  be something that we think about in the future,   but we decided to bring it today um just  so that we could kind of set the tone of   this may be something I'm looking into in the  future and would like to hear others feedback.   All that to be said, I move that the city  council adopt the findings of the MAPC and   approve the requested zone change, authorize  the necessary signatures, and instruct the   city clerk to petition the ordinate to publish  the ordinance after approval. Second motion and   a second. Any further discussion? I see  none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes. 70. I think Scott is done.  There were items in districts 1, two,   and six for housing. So, thank you, Scott, for  helping with additional housing in our community.   Madame Clerk, can you please call the next item?  Affordable housing fund program plan updates. Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My  name is Carmen Hoffine. I'm the real property   section manager for the Department  of Housing and Community Services,   and I'm here to present on the affordable  housing fund program plan update. For a little bit of background, in  May of 2021, the city was awarded 72.4   4 million in American Rescue Plan Act, which is  also known as ARPA funds to support the response   to and recovery from CO 19. Investment  in quality safe affordable housing was   identified as a high priority for ARPA funds  following extensive public engagement. The   council allocated $5 million for creation of an  affordable housing fund. On April 12th of 22,   council approved the affordable housing fund  program plan and enabling ordinance staffing   resources were assigned to implement the project.  Since that time, council has appointed board   members to serve as the affordable housing  review board. Staff monitored additional   US Treasury guidance. Affordable home ownership  initiatives presented major challenges including   lengthy affordability periods. resulted results  would have been homeowners upside down. Nonprofit   developers were consulted in two stakeholder  engagement sections, but no viable solutions were   identified. Budget office since identified other  qualifying ARPA expenses citywide. $5 million   allocated out of ARPA revenue replacement  for affordable housing fund. Funding change.   Funding change allows affordable housing fund  program plan to better interface and align with   existing programs for enhanced accountability  program equity and monitoring strategies.   On September 10th of 24, the city council approved  an allocation of $1,320,000 in affordable housing   fund to three organizations for the preservation  of 33 former public housing single family   homes following a request for proposal, also  known as an RFP, process. Following the RFP,   applicants inquired about applying the affordable  housing fund dollars to the acquisition cost,   but were denied as it would have been a  substantial deviation from the RFP as issued. On   November 5th of 24, city council approved $25,972  increase to the affordable housing fund, 3,696,272 in affordable housing fund allocation for the  acquisition of 56 single family homes from   the Witchaw Housing Authority public housing  portfolio. The properties were made available   through a competitive application process,  also known as CAP, for development of quality,   affordable homeowner and rental units, subsidies  up to $40,000 per unit for acquisition and rehab.   On May 13th of 25, city council approved  the sale of 47 of the 56 single family homes   acquired from the Witchaw Housing  Authority, allocation of 1,86,000, $86,51 in sales proceeds to four entities. The  allocated proceeds support the acquisition and   rehab of the 47 homes following completion of a  CAP and in accordance with the recommendation of   the affordable housing review board. The  affordable housing fund program plan has   been updated, but the goal continues to be to  improve the quality of existing housing stock   while expanding quality affordable housing  options and promoting stability in Witchah's   core. Low to moderate income households and  families are the beneficiaries of the program.   Key updates to the affordable housing fund program  plan include the following. Of the 56 properties   acquired with affordable housing fund funds and  offered through the CAP, 47 were selected by   developers. The remaining nine properties will be  listed for sale in the open market via the city's   real estate broker. up to $21,400 from recaptured  a affordable housing fund funds will be used as a   dollar for-dollar match up to 20% of the purchase  price for the acquisition of seven Witchaw Housing   Authority properties currently occupied by fa  larger families that need at least four to six   bedrooms. These properties will be preserved as  affordable rentals under a 15-year projectbased   voucher, also known as PBV contract, maintaining  housing for existing large families. All remaining   affordable housing fund funds will provide up to  $40,000 per unit in subsidy for the acquisition   and rehab of targeted Witchaw Housing Authority  properties. Priority will be given to properties   facing repositioning challenges such as  location in a flood plane, environmental   mitigation requirements, and other market related  barriers. The city will make affordable housing   fund funds available for identified properties  through the cap. Through the CAP, developers can   request affordable housing fund subsidies, applied  for limited PBVS for rental projects if needed,   bid on specific available projects for purchase.  The city council appointed the affordable housing   review board reviews proposals related to  the affordable housing fund and other housing   programs. Program updates were presented to  the board at its July 28th, 2025 meeting.   The affordable housing review board voted to  recommend the updated program plan to city council   as proposed. For financial considerations, no  funds will be distributed or awarded to developers   or nonprofits as a result of the program plan  approval. Following the solicitation of CAPS,   submitts will be reviewed by the affordable  housing fund review board. Affordable housing   fund review board recommendations for funding  will be presented to the city council for   final review and approval. Individual funding  agreements will be brought to the city council   for approval. Legal considerations. The proposed  plan has been reviewed and approved by the law   department. Recommendations. It is recommendate  recommended that the city council approve the   updated affordable housing fund program plan and  authorize the necessary signatures. And I stand   for questions. Thank you for the presentation,  Carmen. Council member Hoheisel. Of course,   it's me. Uh, thank you, mayor. Just one  real quick question. Um, the funds so far,   I I I see every time we sell a house that it's  at least at market price, but there's been some   that have been quite a bit above market price.  How are we doing on the fund above kind of our   expectations when we put this out? I'm not going  to try to answer that question. I am going to ask   Miss Sally Stang to come and respond to that.  I want to make sure it's accurate information. Uh thank you council member Hisel. Sally Stang  Housing and Community Services Department for   the record for the properties that have been  offered through the competitive applications   or the RFP there. We've only had 13 properties  where they came in $1,000 over appraised value.   the sign all of these other properties have  been selling at appraised value when they're   connected to the affordable housing fund. I think  I mean that kind of makes a little bit of sense,   right? They're not going to ask for money and then  say I'll pay you more money, right? In the end,   we are seeing certain properties um when we're  selling them on the open market are selling some   of them pretty significantly above above that  appraised value. And some of that is dependent   on how long ago that appraisal was done because  HUD really would took seven or eight months on one   of our applications. And so those appraisals were  done four to six months before that application   went in. And so where we're seeing things that  are are actually selling significantly above the   appraised value is because of that time delay, but  I wouldn't say it is extraordinarily above those   appraised values. It's always great when those um  additional funds come in. They still go into that   restricted pot of funds that has to be invested in  affordable housing project going forward. And so   that just helps to bolster that fund. Okay. Yeah,  I appreciate that. No problem. Sally, I actually   will add on top of this since I was looking at  the consent agenda and that was one of the items   that caught my attention. The property value for a  specific property in district 3 on Delmare Street   uh appraisal was 85,000 and the selling price  what the developers paid for was 150,000. So,   um in some situations it is much higher than  $1,000. And I'm glad to see that because again   it goes back to that fund to provide that low  to moderate income um individual that needs this   type of housing. So thank you to the open market  that is trying to buy these above appraisal price   so that we can have more dollars to help more  individuals. Yes. Council member Ho Heisel. Thank   you. And and one other thing on that point uh  that was bought by the Hope Community Development   Group. Yes. Could you just touch real quick on  that one? Sure. So, um 12 properties down in South   City. Um those 12 properties had been rehabbed  since 2023 using the public housing uh capital   fund program. That th that those properties hit  the market and within an hour I had received um   we had received an offer to purchase all 12 by uh  Hope CDC, Hope Community Development Corporation.   They are partnering with Stand Together, which  is an affordable housing trust. And um their   goal for those properties actually is to provide  additional um rental opportunities for those very   large families that are being displaced out of  Park View. Um right now, we are hoping HUD will   turn those declarations of trust quickly so that  they because those are actually movein ready units   unlike many others that we have sold. And that's  part of the reason why um even the one that went   significantly higher was because we had invested  in it. So Well, that's good to hear. Thank you,   S. Thank you, Carmen, and thank you, Sally.  I see no further questions for staff. This   item gets public comment. Is that right? Would  anyone from the public like to speak? I see no   one. We'll bring it back to the bench. Um, I will  go ahead and move this item. I move that the city   council approve the updated affordable housing  fund program plan and authorize the necessary   signatures. Second. Motion and a second. Any  further discussion? I see none. Madame clerk,   please open the role. Motion passes. 70.  Madame clerk, please call the next item. Council member appointments and comments. Council members, would anyone like to  make appointments? I see none. The board   is not cleared, so I can't request, but I do  have appointment. Go ahead, council member   Glasco. Okay. Um, my appointment uh is to the  library board and that is Lugene Schneider. I see no other appointments. Oh, council  member Ballard. You may Thank you,   mayor. I would like to appoint Charlie  Wilks to the accessibility board. Thank you, Council Member Ballard  and Council Member Glascock. I see   no other appointments. I move to approve  these appointments. Second. Motion and   a second. Any further discussion? I see  none. Madame clerk, please open the role. Motion passes 70. We'll move to council member  comments. Council member Hohheisle. Thank you,   Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Johnson.  I appreciate the uh dialogue here. Um just   want to say we're all about to start  our sprint on National Night Out,   one of my favorite days of the year.  Um, so everybody please go online,   look and see where they are in your neighborhood.  Try and make it out to one. It's a good uh way to   build a sense of community. That's definitely  something we're missing out um on it. I know in   my district we have um Hilltop has a big event in  Friendship Park, Plain View in Plane View Park,   uh me down there in Clat Park, and Sosi is having  one in Lincoln Park. So those are the big ones.   There's some other small ones as well. Please  try and make it out today. Council member Todd,   thank you. I'll be brief. I just want to give  a a shout out to an event on Friday. I know   I've mentioned it, but just have a cool update. um  the Witchaw Coalition for Child Abuse Prevention,   the Society of Professional Engineers Witchah,  Greater Witchaw Partnership, City of Witchaw   Childart, and the Workforce Alliance of South  Central Kansas is hosting the business of care,   tackling child care through workplace innovation,  sorry, this Friday. Um we have a national speaker   coming. This is funded completely through  a private p public partnership. An entity   reached out to us and asked if we wanted to have  this because of the success of an event we had   last year. So no city city funds are being used.  Um we're also going to have interactive sessions   that will help us develop our childare legislative  agenda for coming in 2026. But our goal was to   have 50 folks attend and as of just a few seconds  ago we're at 165. So so excited to see that so   many of our work sites across the community and  now we have across the state understand that   this is an economic and development and workforce  issue. So um next Tuesday I'll give you updates   on the success. Council member Glascock. Thank  you. I have District 4 breakfast 9:30 a.m. at   Prairie Homestead on May Street. I will not have  the best breakfast in the community. Any further   comments? I see none. Again, enjoy neighborhood  night out Witchah edition and look forward to   uh going to all six districts this evening. With  that, I move to adjourn. Second. Motion in a   second. Any further discussion? I see none.  Madame clerk, please open the role. Can we   make it? Who's the contrarian? 61. Council member  Hohheisel wants to stay longer. One more question.