Is approval of minutes for business session of February 26?

Is there a motion?

So moved.

Second.

And moved and seconded.

All in favor of approving the minutes say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion passes our first item today, the 2026-2027 annual audit plan presentation, our interim city auditor.

Okay, Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council, Mr.

City Manager, good afternoon.

My name is Mark Shaw from the Office of the City Auditor.

I'm here this afternoon with Bailey Keller, who you all have not met, but will be seeing a fair amount of.

She is one of our exceptional new hires who is the brains behind so many things in our office.

Bailey joins us from the Dallas area, where she served in various roles in the Louisville School District that included directing an extensive state level audit on special education, which was the subject of her PhD.

She also directed program evaluation and performance monitoring as assistant principal at a high school with a student body of 4,162 students.

This may explain why she is totally unflappable, why she can multitask so effective effectively, and how she dutifully keeps us on track in the office.

We are delighted that she's relocated to our great city and has chosen to join our leadership team here in City Hall.

Thank you for the opportunity to present the Office of the City Auditor's annual audit plan for fiscal year 2027.

As you are aware, each year, our office develops a plan that reflects both the priorities of this governing body and the needs of our community.

Our work is rooted in one central purpose to independently assess city operations so that Kansas City can continue to deliver effective, equitable, and transparent services.

With an annual municipal budget of approximately $2.5 billion, which covers 20 departments and approximately 7,500 employees, the scope and complexity of city operations require continuous evaluation.

Our audit plan is designed to identify risks, improve performance, and support long-term organizational success.

Today I will provide an overview of the audits currently underway, the audits we intend to initiate, tentative audits, and operational review cycle audits scheduled for this fiscal year.

We currently have three audits in progress.

At present, in the process of finalizing an audit we initiated in the fall of 2025 to determine whether parks and recreation is complying with its pricing policy for establishing entry fees for community and aquatic centers and whether it is properly administering and monitoring facility use agreements.

Separately, we are currently evaluating whether the Water Services Department is properly implement implementing the city's human resource policies and procedures.

The third audit in progress was initiated in 2025, before my arrival on tax increment financing deliverables.

It sought to determine whether selected tax abatement projects create projected impacts or promised outcomes.

Our team is in the process of assessing the data collected to determine next steps on this audit.

In FY 2027, we'd like to initiate several new audits.

Among them are two required reports mandated by the council.

The annual women in the workplace report, which we will complete within 90 days of receiving the requisite data from the city manager's office, and a comprehensive wage disparity study that will evaluate compensation across all city departments.

Other planned audits include the Linwood Shopping Center, in which we will examine compliance of the center's leases and cooperative agreements.

In addition, we will look into enforcement of the Healthy Homes Rental Inspection Program, the use of parks managed housing units by city employees, the fire department's internal complaint mitigation efforts, and the police department's allocation of budget and expenditures.

We have incorporated into our audit plan several tentative audits that we will initiate as resources permit.

These audits would include evaluating the accessibility of public spaces during construction, street resurfacing strategies, management of city-owned real estate, fire department training and safety practices, police department staffing and organizational structure, homelessness response coordination.

Finally, under our operational review cycle audits.

We will conduct general reviews of the departments of aviation, convention and entertainment facilities, general services, and neighborhoods.

The intent is to conduct a review of each city department once every four years.

Each review will assess departmental effectiveness, alignment with charter and code mandates, transparency, public access, and regulatory performance.

Apart from audits we initiate, we will follow up on audit recommendations from previously published reports approximately six months after their publication to assess the extent to which audited entities have implemented our recommendations.

This will allow us to track progress and report back to you, the council, ensuring accountability.

Our audit plan reflects our commitment to enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of city operations.

That is one reason driving our efforts to complete the majority of our audits within approximately 120 days of initiation.

Limiting the scope and time frame of our audits provides council the opportunity to make relevant and timely policy decisions.

We acknowledge that we are presenting an ambitious plan.

We hope that you will consider it in parallel with our budget proposal, which includes a request for additional FTEs and resources.

We appreciate your support and encouragement as we move forward with this essential work.

I welcome any questions you may have.

Thank you, Mr.

Shaw.

Any questions for Mr.

Show?

Harry None, sir.

Thank you.

You're off the hot seat quickly.

Appreciate it.

Thank you and welcome.

Next update is on the Roy Blunt Luminary Park.

ACM Martin.

So you can do it that time if we want someone.

Background for those who weren't in finance committee.

This topic came up in connection with certain bond obligations for the city that will be voted on later this afternoon.

There was a question as to progress, fundraising, and other issues that were last discussed by city council in October.

And so we asked for this update in advance of our vote this afternoon.

So Mr.

Martin, honorable mayor, members of the council, Mr.

Manager, Jeff Martin with the city manager's office.

Uh thanks for allowing us time today to reset an update on the work that we've progressed through on the Luminary Park project to date.

So as you all probably remember back in October of last year, uh authorization was provided to move forward to 100% design on this particular project, the Roy Blunt Luminary Park, uh, formerly known as the 670 South Loop Project.

So with that, our design consultant HMTB has uh been diligently working on that final design, working uh with our construction manager at risk um CMGC uh joint venture with uh JE Dunn and Clark's Construction to look at constructibility and also to price the uh work as we continue on with uh with design of this.

So we're currently have done uh redesign and uh uh basically design refinement uh for all the blocks of the park so far.

We've also been looking at efficiencies within the uh tunnel systems as well as the uh the tunnel itself, working with MODOT and FHWA.

So our goal with this project is to be able to commence construction in July of this year uh following the completion of the uh FIFA World Cup here in uh in Kansas City, and uh we'll have uh closure on the interstate uh following those those times.

So we've also been coordinating very closely with the Kansas City Streetcar Authority as we have to relocate a portion of their equipment that currently resides at the northeast uh corner of or excuse me, northwest corner of uh Truman Road and Main Street, and we'll be in the way of the construction as we go.

So we're currently working on pricing and an agreement with them for the relocation of that.

Uh utilities are actually underway on the the corridor already, relocating uh fiber optics and other communication utilities uh within Truman Road.

Um and we've been uh working with City Planning Commission uh for a uh submittal to go through the planning process for the new parcels that will be uh created by us creating land, basically constructing land uh over the interstate now.

So um a lot of work has been underway and uh a lot of progress has been made since October of the last year when you guys gave us that go-ahead.

So uh we'll walk through a few renderings of uh of what the redesign looks like.

So as you all probably remember, this uh particular project spans on the west from Wyandotte basically abuts the convention center uh just to the south, excuse me, just the North of Lowe's hotel, and then continues all the way over to Grand Boulevard.

So this is the first block.

This is actually the most western block between uh Wyandotte and Baltimore.

It's over a 30-foot elevation change in here, so you can see we've uh we've uh refined this design, the ADA pathway through it, um, the uh the landscaping uh uh boulder areas and other improvements to allow for uh some nice uh park like amenities through here as well as gathering spaces, uh places for for people to enjoy the the weather, and really a little oasis in uh in downtown where there's very few trees and other other grass areas.

So the next block, which is uh between Baltimore and Maine, is what we refer to as our play block.

And so uh you can see here we have a uh large play structure on the uh towards the uh main street corner.

We've also got some uh smaller play amenities as you uh continue to the west along that block.

Um there will be a water feature in there for uh play for for children, and there's also a restroom area or excuse me, a restroom building that will also have a uh small retail space in as well that's that's there on the uh the southern uh side of this picklet block, and that's actually where that uh streetcar TPSS unit uh sits.

So a lot of refinement on this block and uh and getting this uh area within our budget uh for for the overall project.

And uh this these next two blocks will be referred to as our super block.

So this actually goes from Main Street all the way over to Grand Boulevard.

Uh it has Walnut Avenue in the middle, so Walnut Avenue, that bridge will be re be replaced, but will not open back up uh for vehicular use.

It'll be open for pedestrian traffic only.

You can really see it here in the uh in the the right-hand side of this picture.

So um with this on the main street side, we have a place structure that uh that we're visioning here, as well as a performance pavilion that butts up against that pedestrian area where the uh Walnut Street Bridge is.

The Walnut Street area will uh be set to allow stormwater the flow across it still.

This is actually one of the major stormwater flow corridors from the downtown as it continues south.

But obviously, with the uh the green infrastructure being uh put here in this area, the grass, the trees, actually, some rain garden and other story underground storage areas along the southern edge will really uh help with that uh that stormwater flow and keep the the water from uh landing on the interstate and ultimately ending up in the in the combined sewer system.

Um as you continue on across the super block, uh you'll see we've actually relocated the uh once uh marketplace uh to the eastern end of this uh of the park.

So this is envisioned to be a uh a potential restaurant operated facility.

We'll also include rest uh restrooms in it for the park users and uh served for the restaurant as well.

Also has our great lawn area, which will really be a great gathering space uh for folks to uh to come enjoy the outside, enjoy the amenities, maybe view a concert, maybe view other activations within this park uh throughout the throughout the the day.

So I don't know if Ann or Bill have anything to add to these renderings.

Okay, so I'll I'll plow ahead for now.

So um so project budget on this.

So um this same slide you all have seen before when we presented back in October.

So current uh budget for this particular project is three hundred and fifteen million dollars.

So we've really been uh working really hard uh with our project partners, downtown council and the port authority um on the budget on the uh the funding needed for this.

So um, you know, with the uh with the current commitments, uh we've got commitments of uh 200 basically 225 million.

Now that does include the uh the 65 million dollars of bond funds that are contingent on the additional fundraising that uh of uh 21 million dollars to get that private funding level up to 50 million dollars.

But um we have been uh working very diligently on that since uh since we last met.

We've also applied for a federal build grant uh for this project.

We're also pursuing other federal grant funds through uh the Mid America Regional Council um call for projects and have been uh discussing potential uh funding through Jackson County as well.

So um Ann Holiday and Bill Dietrich are here with me today, so I really thank them uh for being here to help out with this presentation, members of the uh representative of the downtown council and really the uh the key uh folks instrumental in the uh the fundraising, the private fundraising and the uh the public fundraising that's gone on with this through the the grants, the earmarks, and the other funding uh that's come along.

So I'm gonna turn it over to Bill to talk about the uh the private donations a little bit here.

So great.

Uh thank thank you, Jeff.

Um, and thank you, Mr.

Mayor, City Council members, Mr.

City Manager, for the opportunity to provide you with a detailed fundraising update on looking back at phase one, where we are in phase two, and what the final phase three looks like moving forward.

Bill Dietrich, President of the Downtown Council with me today is Ann Holiday, Vice President of the Downtown Council.

Anne has done an incredible job as our project lead uh on the Roy Blunt Luminary Park project, and it's just an amazing job for us.

Um, this transformational legacy project was first looked at in the early 2000s, uh, but was not advanced.

Uh, initially explored in the Orcheston, this transformational legacy project gained new momentum in 2017 2017 when the downtown council was asked to reassess its feasibility through strategic planning and extensive community engagement.

Uh, we confirmed it had strong public support.

Um, following the pandemic, the vision gains significant traction, leading to the development of a memorandum of understanding between project partners, the city of Kansas City, Port Casey, and the downtown council.

This agreement established and and since the development agreement, which has moved forward.

Uh, this agreement established specific roles for the working groups.

An executive decision making committee, a design bill group led by Jeff, a fundraising team, and a communications group.

Each working committee has an established monthly schedule and has representatives from the project partners, the city, Port Casey, and the downtown council on each group.

Our intent was to establish a structure which would provide accurate information to each organization's leadership.

If this current structure has not met and provided the information necessary for your decision making, we apologize.

Our project partners are ready to implement any reporting system you require to ensure that you have the data needed to make informed decisions.

Your leadership is critical to this project's success.

The downtown council began leading public and private onto the fundraising.

The downtown council has really been leading public and private fundraising since 2020.

Through our outreach, we secured the opportunity to present the project to Senator Blunt and Congressman Cleaver.

Following extensive due diligence, the center successfully secured 28.3 million in federal support, which was announced at the downtown council's 2022 annual luncheon.

In 2022, former HR Block CEO, HR Block CEO Jeff Jones facilitated a meeting with Governor Parson and Lieutenant Governor Keough.

They immediately grasped the vision.

Our fundraising team engaged the state legislative leadership and our local delegation.

This resulted in broad bipartisan support, securing 28.3 million in the 23 allocation, followed by an additional 15 million in 2024.

We were honored to have the Governor Parson sign the appropriation legislation at both downtown Lowe's Hotel.

Further, in 2024, our coordination with MODOT and the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission resulted in a 31.5 million dollar cost share agreement ratified at their annual meeting held here in Kansas City.

This represents the largest cost sharing agreement in MODOT's history.

Notably, uh in 2022, our applications for federal mega and tiger grants reached the finalist stages without award.

This process has provided us with a strong founded strong foundation, which we built on for the recently submitted bill grant application.

Notably, all fundraising efforts to date have been financed solely through privately raised resources.

With 103 million dollars and federal and state support secured, we then pivoted our focus to private and philanthropic funding in 2023.

Anne will provide you an update.

We'll provide you a detailed update on our progress, those areas to date.

Anne.

Thanks, Bill.

Can everybody hear me?

Yes.

Great.

Um so today I'm actually here on behalf of the DTC Community Development Inc., which is the 501c3 charitable nonprofit organization charged with the philanthropic fundraising and future operations and management of Luminary Park.

This is a community-based board consisting of members of the downtown council, the city, and other uh project partners.

The current focus of the board is fundraising, and today we're pleased to share our donor honor role on the slide in front of you, where you can see represents many of our civic leaders and organizations.

As their next slide states, the our fundraising is a combined team effort.

Uh, and our public-private team has been actively involved in partnership with the city, identifying and advocating for state and federal funding for the last five years.

As Bill mentioned, most recently supporting the build grant application and also helping pursue opportunities for county support.

We also greatly appreciate the city's uh existing and past financial support and consideration of future financial support.

Last October, we were in this room.

You challenged the team to raise an additional 21 million dollars in philanthropic support, in addition to the 29 million we raised prior to October.

As you know, private fundraising requires a high level of diplomacy and discretion, but we are pleased to provide the following update.

Number one, we have uh raised we have a hundred percent commitment from downtown council leadership and are implementing a strategy to ensure the commitment of our entire board.

Number two, we have active, we have 30 active leadership prospects in the pipeline, including eight corporate and philanthropic proposals pending and 22 additional potential prospects in process.

So our fundraising efforts are specifically tracked and reviewed through dedicated meetings and committee updates, which all include city representation.

We have weekly fundraising strategy meetings with city representation.

We also have an executive oversight set up through our monthly uh Luminary Park executive committee meetings held here at City Hall, which also include uh leadership from uh variety of levels within City Hall, where we do fundraising updates and discuss strategy.

And then finally, we're focused on wider cultivation right now, meeting with all of our existing donors to maintain their engagement and identify additional prospects.

So here's where we are.

The the philanthropic fundraising strategy is a phase approach.

Phase one initiated in 2022, was completed last October, raising 29 million dollars.

Phase two has we have the goal of raising 21 million dollars.

We're pleased to share that we have four new donor commitments totaling 1.75 million, and proposals pending from eight major prospects totaling 20 million.

This leadership level fundraising requires multiple points of cultivation, communication, even a little creativity.

This is a time-consuming effort requiring lots of attention to detail.

We're pleased with our work to date and appreciate the city's participation and partnership in these fundraising efforts.

Finally, there's a third race of private fundraising that from 27 to 2027 to 2029 that includes additional private funds as well as additional county, state, and federal funding.

So there is a path for moving forward.

Project funding all hands on deck.

That's the only way we're going to get this done.

So, in summary, collectively, there's been a significant effort for Luminary Park fundraising from both private and public sources through internal cultivation and intense coordination between the downtown council and the city and our experienced fundraising resources and the project team.

We appreciate the city council's critical support and passage of ordinance 250809 last October.

We were honored to be part of the successful navigation of the integrit public-private cost share agreements with MODOT and MDFB.

MDFB.

And we continue to expand our campaign ambassadors, most recently, including Senator Roy Blunt, and from a more long-term perspective, uh local community organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce and Greater Kansas City Community Foundation.

As one of our co-chairs often says, lasting change comes from collaboration, and Luminary Park truly exemplifies this as a great public and private partnership.

We look forward to continuing that partnership with you all.

Thank you.

Back to Jeff.

So as you've heard, a lot has been going on, a lot of work has been done, both from a fundraising standpoint, uh, both on the private and public stand, um, as well as on the design and constructibility standpoint.

So as you can see, here is our project milestone chart showing the activities that have been completed in white, and then moving forward as we're in quarter one of 2026 now, what we have uh to move forward with.

So we're rapidly advancing to uh final design and uh anticipation of coming back to you all here in the next month or so to uh request authorization for uh construction uh to move forward on this particular project.

So uh that will include uh temporary shoring that will be installed prior to the closure of 670, and then after the World Cup, um that closure and then full construction for the next three years uh on the particular project.

So it's as Ann and Bill uh expressed, it's really been a collaborative effort from uh folks long before my time in this in this seat and this role with the city, but it's been a real pleasure to to work with the group and and really advance this as we get uh very very close to uh to fruition on this and really see this becoming a reality.

So be happy to answer your questions you all may have.

Thank you, Councilman Duncan.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

Uh Jeff, thank you, Bill, good to see you, and is it Ann?

Nice to meet you.

Um question about funding and timeline.

Um quick math here.

The total project target budget is 315 million dollars, and I'm assuming that's to include everything in the rendering.

Yeah, the the 315 million includes all cost for that project.

So it's everything in the rendering plus all our design fees, uh soft cost, uh construction management fees, everything.

So okay.

And then currently commitments are 224.7, 224.7 million, correct?

Correct, yeah.

Um, and like I mentioned before, so that includes the uh 65 million dollars of additional special obligation bonds being provided by the city.

Oh, that includes the obligation.

It does now.

I understand that that is contingent on the additional fundraising of 21 million dollars uh to get us to the 50 million dollar total uh for that.

So uh while that that 224, 225 number does include the 65 million, it does not include additional 21 million within.

And includes a portion of it with uh to date that 1.75.

And then so let's say that we get the you have 1.75 million committed for phase two, and it looks like another 20 million in potential prospects.

So if we get all of that, we're still 68 and a half shy.

I guess my question is like what like where do we fill that where does the gap get filled?

What's the timeline?

Is it 2029 that that you're looking to have this completed?

So the the 2029 would be the completion date if uh with the start of construction this year and 2026 being a three-year uh construction period.

So we have uh pursued uh some relatively large grants with the build grant.

Uh if we are successful with that, that'd be 25 million towards our yeah, towards that uh that needed, and then we will continue fundraising and uh continue to close that gap and look into other funds as well, other federal state uh grants that are available.

So I'll let Bill and that expand a little bit.

Exactly right.

Uh phase three begins when we uh after phase two is completed here in April, we hope, um, is the goal.

And the phase three would include the bill grant, would it would include pursuing other grants?

Uh it includes another 202 million in private donations.

So there's a third phase on the private side.

Uh and we're working currently in negotiations and conversations with Jackson County for a contribution from the county, and that would give you your 100% budget.

And and the neat thing is we get going here and after FIFA, so we don't disrupt FIFA in any way.

Uh you have that two-year period to complete that phase three of the fundraising.

Um, and we are just entering into a phase where the park itself has a meaningful number of naming opportunities in it.

That in other markets, um, whether it's Clydeborne Park in Dallas, Jean Lake Park in Omaha, uh Park and Tulsa, um, are extremely desirable to donors.

So we're really excited and think we have uh very solid kind of plan for phase three to get to that 100%.

And then my final question is so what does 200 and well hold on, let me back out here.

224.7 includes the 65 million.

So I guess what is 159 million 750,000 get us, I guess you know, where we are today, right?

Um or two, I I guess, yeah.

Yes.

Correct.

So so that that is not enough to get us a safe operational tunnel, which is really the uh the starting point for for this project.

So uh approximately 220 million would get us the tunnel construction, the safe life safety systems, and uh paths, trees, grass amenities on the top.

To actually cap the thing exactly like that.

Yeah, it gives you the tunnel and the cap particularly.

So I'll I'll I guess I'll ask uh and just for clarity of it all, we break it out the different KCMO funds, but the bonds would be backed by the full faith and credit of the city of Kansas City as well, correct?

The city bonds and so the rhetorical point I'm making is that the 64 plus 15 plus 10 is really just a ninety-ish million dollars city commitment.

Yeah, I think the 10 million was cash, if I'm remembering that was from a few years ago.

The 15 million is the subject of an ordinance you have before you today, and then a 65 would be subject to future appropriation and approval.

Um the distinction I would make is not full faith and credit because it's not a general obligation bond, it's a special obligation bond.

We treat it the same way.

We're gonna use any legally available revenue source to make the payment.

That's actually um interesting somewhat.

So the difference in our payment obligation is what though?

So on a special obligation bond, what does that mean for us?

Special obligation bond is an annual appropriation bond.

So that means that in a given year, you could decide to say, you know what, all that money that we've got appropriated for debt service in the budget, we are not going to do that.

We'd rather do something else.

We would never tell you to do that, obviously, because it would wreck the city's credit, probably for decades, I would suggest.

Um, because vote uh bondholders are relying on the city's willingness and ability to make that appropriation every single year.

Understood.

And so back in October, when we made the commitment as to uh, I guess we added the section of the ordinance relating to the additional fundraising that now I think is 21 million dollars or 20 million dollars.

Um there was some hope, I think on the committee's part that we might see an even more accelerated fundraising path.

I just want to make sure I'm hearing um Councilman Duncan's question and all of them correctly in the presentation matched with it.

At what point do we expect to have the full $50 million fundraised?

The phase two, the full $50 million is our debt, our target is for April of this year.

So in a month.

In a month.

Okay, so we expect to have our commitments on all of that in a month.

That was the challenge that the city gave us on the private fundraising side was that we needed to raise an additional 21 before the ordinance went forward on the special obligation bonds.

I believe the ordinance actually states a deadline of April 2027, but uh I think we're we our an internal target is April of this year.

Right.

The theory of the case by committee, and I might have been one of them who put it in, or councilman curls.

I think the goal was that the private fundraising before we put in more city dollars.

And so whenever whenever the city dollars were done, we would think that's a condition precedent uh at least as to it.

And then on the councilman Duncan point, there's an extra 68 million that we're will look for other sources to help fill.

Correct, yeah.

And that'll be the pursuit of other other federal state grants, county money, what are additional private funds, whatever is available.

And sorry for being redundant, but in the event that we never obtain those extra funds, then what do we have?

We just have the is it the tunnel with no fund stuff on top?

Is it the fund stuff on top and no tunnel?

We can't yeah, you can't build the fund stuff on top without the tunnel.

So the the tunnel is obviously the the first so we do we would have a uh an operational and safe tunnel that would have uh limited amenities on the top of it, but would definitely have pathways, grass, trees.

So you would have a green space, a functional green space in the center of downtown with us.

So I think that's all I have for now.

Councilman Curls.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor, and I um agree with your comments.

Uh when we had this in committee, I thought that that was the discussion that we had.

Um I don't know what happened.

But anyway, and I just want to make sure I understand what are the funding mechanism also.

So we are saying, or you guys are saying that you're still in the process of obtaining an additional 68 million dollars on top of this 224 that you've got.

Um that is correct.

Yes, and if you don't get that, are you still planning to the mayor's point, still proceeding with the project, but by the time you get to that point and you don't have that additional money, we're just gonna have a park with not all the other bills and whistles or whatever it is that you want.

Okay.

That's um, and then I think my other question is this 64 million.

Have we voted on that already?

No, the the 64.9 has has not been approved by council.

So the approval of of those uh special obligation bonds would be brought forward to council once the total private dollars of 50 million uh commitments have been made, and then at that point we've been ready to move forward with uh the start of construction, in which case we would want the the access to the additional 64.9 million.

So that requires a future council action.

And my other question is you've got an a total budget of 315 million by the time you get four or five years out, obviously, construction costs will have increased.

I mean, probably due to inflation, due to tariffs, due to whatever.

Uh is there any built-in cost on this?

Yeah, you right, right.

So the the construction dollars have those inflationary costs built into them at this time.

Um, and so they will they understand that it is a three-year construction project, so as they're pricing it, they're pricing it for that three-year term.

So if the project were to be delayed for some reason, there could be some additional inflationary uh cost to that.

However, we would definitely work to address that, um, look for ways to uh to to offset it either with uh with value engineering or other additional fundraising.

So all right.

I and I've I've had a conversation with Bill and and we've talked uh I I've shared with you guys the project is fine.

I just have some concerns about the total cost of it.

I've shared that with you.

I've I'm full transparent about my comments uh because as I I said in our meeting that a lot of my constituents who live in South Kennedy City are not going to be able to uh take advantage of this park.

And when we put in that type of money, and my district doesn't have a sit-down restaurant, doesn't have any places to go for entertainment, doesn't have a lot of amenities that the other parts of the city has somewhat concerning to them, and and I get beat up all the time.

So uh I just publicly want to say that because uh like I said, full transparency, and I just have some concerns and and I'll probably continue to have concerns about this project.

So thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Curls.

Councilman Willie.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you all for your presentation and being here.

Um it was one of the amendments that I crafted for the uh 50 million um total of commitments.

Um but I even heard previously on the private commitments.

Um that's not necessarily money in hand.

There's a difference between commitments and money in hand.

How much of that uh previous fundraising phase one is money in hand?

But some of those commitments are dependent or conditional on construction starting.

I can't give you the exact number, but I can tell you that.

Um and then you know, saying yes, because we're talking about the next or 65 million.

Obviously, we we supported the um design portion of this.

Saying yes to the 65 million is saying no to other things that we can be doing with that money, especially when it's coming from uh certain taxes collected from restaurants and tourism all throughout the city, and echo councilman curl's part.

Um, I mean his constituents in that his district are getting taxed on that, and that money's gonna be spent um somewhere else.

Um I have a problem with with making a decision and moving forward without seeing the actual full 50 million.

I know there's a plan to get there, um, but I want to see that money actually fully there before we even consider even going forward uh with this, especially with uh other additional things coming down the pipeline in the city, and we could be using those resources for maybe something that's higher priority um than that.

But uh I mean it's a nice project.

Um, but uh I'm not comfortable with moving forward with issuance of of 65 million um anytime soon.

Yeah, may I clarify something just for what we have today um on the floor uh 260238, I believe is the ordinance authorizing the issues of special obligation bonds.

You know, back in October, the council advanced appropriate 15 million dollars to finance the design.

That means that we promised that we would issue bonds to cover the 15 million dollars in design costs and those gonna be paid for those bonds are gonna be issued in April.

Uh 260230238 today does nothing with the 1665 million dollars.

Those 65 million dollars are not gonna be requested until the 2521 million dollars in and in cash and private funds are raised and in hand.

I just want to make sure that there's you know a clear understanding of you know what the conditions were on the fundraising, uh where we are and the necessity of having to uh proceed with 260238 because in essence advanced appropriated those 15 million dollars, and if we don't do that, if we don't issue bonds to pay ourselves back, then we create a hole in the budget.

And so I just want to make sure that people understand uh what so we're not authorizing 65 million dollars today.

That's that's that's the the important message that I want that want to convey.

Matt Councilwoman uh Patterson has thank you.

Um so I think that thank you, Honorable Mayor.

Um so I think to Councilman Willis's point, we um I too would like to see what actually finances you have in hand, checks in the bank.

And so I know you don't have that today, uh, but if you could bring that back to us, even if you can send that to us electronically, um I think that will give us a better idea of your fundraising progress.

So that's number one.

Please do get us that money uh that information of what money you have actually in hand.

And then secondly, um, I think what's missing from your presentation is a pro forma about ongoing expenses for maintenance of the park.

And so I'd like to see uh what are you projecting it's going to cost um cutting grass, pruning trees, cleanup, security, um, all of the things.

What is that gonna cost on a monthly and yearly basis to maintain the park?

Um also on that um document, please do talk about your anticipated income, and I'm sure you're gonna want to offset it to zero, but um let us know how you're going to make the park self-sustainable.

I don't think I have to explain to you that we have parks all over Kansas City.

We are this, I mean, instead of being a city of fountains, we really could be the city of parks.

We have so many of them.

And in my district, we have a big problem with um um financial ability to maintain parks.

Um, you know, my constituents have asked for parks improvements prior to back to when Melissa was on the school, councilwoman Robinson was on the school board, and we still haven't realized some of those parks improvements.

Having a brand new park to this magnitude, I anticipate will be a strain um on other parks budget if you have a short file.

So I think electronically, uh please do send us the expenses and income rate related to the maintenance of the park and ultimately who's gonna be responsible for that from your perspective.

Another comment I just want to make is it's sometimes unclear to me whose project this is.

Is this a project of the downtown council and your partners, or is it a project of of the city of Kansas City?

Um so sometimes I don't I don't know the difference between that because we have an ACM doing most of the presentation and the city manager clarifying different um financial questions, and so um I that that confuses me, frankly, about whose project this is and if and if that impacts our ability to get objective financial information.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

And and to the city manager's point, I I get it about the bond issue on the 15 million.

My point is that by the time that this project is said and done, the city will have invested about 90 million dollars, roughly, is what I'm understanding it, unless I'm mistaken with those numbers.

It wasn't good in math, but I think that 90 million is the total cost that they are asking for the city.

That's my point.

If I may just respond to a couple of the questions.

I'm sure you're all very familiar with this, are multi-year commitments.

So often there'll be money in the first year, money in the second year, maybe third years.

What corporations and philanthropic groups give out their private kind of fundraising dollars.

So we can clearly show you those kind of conditions and and where they are and where the totals kind of come up on.

On the programming piece, one of the things that we've been asked to work on by the city uh is creating well, we have this 51c3 in place and really building on the Clyde Warren Park and model in Dallas as well as the Jean Leahy up in Omaha.

Um, is to include uh in this operating pro forma uh management of Barney Alice Plaza.

Barney Alles Plaza opens January 1 with no plan of management in place.

So we've been reaching out and working with the convention center to design a plan that that would enable us to bring on 501c3 staff, your your executive director, your operations director, and your programmer, because one of the things uh your person in charge of programming, one of the things that's different in in these public spaces from any other in our community.

I mean, we do have a couple examples actually, is that it will be doing it it has it has and will continue to develop program partners, so it'll reach out to every neighborhood uh proactively to create opportunities for neighborhoods to do free events in the park that benefit the citizens of our of our city and every district.

Um and uh which which is something that uh we want to bring to Barney Alles Plaza as well.

If it opens in January, um we know what Barney Ellis was before.

Um and the difference between before and the future is having this private public partnership where the city owns the park, the city owns Barney Alice, and a 51c3 charitable foundation manages the manages the public spaces uh in the ben for the benefit of the city and for the citizens.

Councilwoman Patterson has the honorable mayor.

I'm sorry, but that just sounds like another way for us to pay you to manage Barney Ellis Plaza.

So I think I don't know that that actually addresses the question of how are we going to have new revenue to manage a new park?

And I think you guys have thought about that because you've looked at the other parks.

And so I know the other parks are very active and they do lots of activities.

Um, but I hear you on Barney Alice Plaza, but it it does it does sound like we're contracting with an entity to manage it, which could mean we're on the hook to make sure that you can do that.

And so I'm really looking for new revenue for your own for the for the Luminaire Park itself.

So just to clarify this, what I was looking for.

Yeah, I just I I wanted to respond briefly to that and say that one of the value adds to having an organization take on that role of programming and creating um and and management is is not so much that we would be paying them, is that they are able to fundraise to help support that and programming program it in a way that helps generate more revenue for for the space.

So I just wanted to add that component and I um so so it would be and that's all how you craft the the the contract is you know you you don't get paid until you raise enough money to make sure that you get paid.

Uh but those details I think are still being worked out.

Councilman Willard.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh I want to go back to similar question what Councilman Duncan talked about earlier.

Um what and it says tar target budgets uh 315 million.

This project was around 200 million previously for it, obviously inflation happened and other expenses as well.

Um could there be a potential for this to even jump up past that 315 million um over the next three years for this?

And then that's one question, and then the other question is what would be the minimum amount right now for you to complete a park, maybe not to the you know five-star, but three star with an ability to come back later at a different time and and add other components.

So once we start construction, we'll be locking in those prices for for the uh for the the construction.

So um we will not have increases beyond uh you know your typical contingency type things run unforeseen in there.

So that actually lock that price in at the start of that construction, just like any other long-term project.

So um that will uh essentially negate the inflation once the start of construction goes.

When is construction date if everything goes to plan?

It really goes to plan.

We will start construction later this year or so um summer of 2027.

And there's no and there's no movement guarantee for that 315 between now and then.

No, we're we're designing to that budget, is what we're what we're working on.

That's what the design team has been working very diligently on since um really since last June, we started a very extensive value engineering exercise, really uh got it getting it down to that budget, getting it down to that budget for the uh with the final design.

So councilman Raya followed by Robinson.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um this is probably a question for the city manager.

What would the timeline be on the issuance of the bonds if we approve this today?

Boy, I mean, I I I'll be I'll let the five the ACM Queen answer, but I think we're probably in this spring, probably April, and we're already to go to market.

I think other bonds we have already done through the rating, we're going to pricing coming up soon.

Uh sort of been packaged because if we with the with the previously uh authorized mass appropriation in October of 15 million dollars, we're package it with everything else with it.

ACM Queen, go ahead.

Yep, you basically said it all, it'll be sometime later this month or um the middle of before the end of April is when we need to close that gap in the budget.

Okay, and question for the downtown council folks you all believe that you'll have the additional 21 million raised by April.

That is certainly what we're working towards, and we feel we have a strong path to get there.

And one clarification so the the bond sale that ACM Queen mentioned is for the 15 million that was previously appropriated.

So the additional 64.9 million would require additional council action following that.

Yeah, yeah.

I wanted to be clear for my colleagues who had concerns about legitimate concerns about the 21 million not being raised and when money will be going out of City Hall towards this project.

It seems like there is ample opportunity for you all to still raise the additional 21 million by April before any additional council action is even required to release additional funding back to the project.

Okay, good.

That's correct.

Um and then uh just one other point that I would make about the management of this space.

Uh I actually actually prefer this model because I think it it prevents us from placing an incredible burden on our parks department.

I mean, we've heard uh our parks department's latest budget and we know the ongoing challenges, but this would be the biggest project that they would have in the portfolio.

And uh I think it is it is important to make sure that this does not become a burden to the parks department but becomes additive to not just the city but the region as a whole.

Councilwoman Robinson.

Um thank you.

Uh so I just want to I looked at the schedule for the bonding, and this is only for the 15 million, which helps to clarify a lot of the concerns that I had.

So thank you, um, Mr.

Manager, for clarifying that.

Uh but the 15 million, did you say that's for design only?

That's correct.

Yeah, the the 15 million dollars that was previously was for 100% design, it was for project management costs during the 100% design, and it was also for pre-construction services by the joint venture during $30.

Okay, so that does um eliminate my concerns uh with this because we do have to be a body if we say we're gonna do something we need to follow through, we need to do it.

Um now as relates to the additional 64 million, yes, we don't want to see this 2025 to ongoing.

Ongoing is not a date.

So we want to make sure that we have some specificity around like when the 21 million is um going to be raised.

The other the the only other thing is around the whole ownership model, which again is a conversation for another day, quite frankly.

Um oftentimes what we say is it's a city-owned asset.

So for example, like the zoo, and we spent 10 million dollars of our sidewalk money on putting in ADA for the zoo.

Okay, and what do we say?

Because we owned it, although that they're raising funds themselves, which we get that.

So um I just think we need to be a little bit more thoughtful about how the city isn't going to be continually um burdened with these amazing assets that we're building.

But I'm you know, in support of this, I kind of hurt a little bit in finance, but if we've already appropriated the money, we need to move forward with what we said we're gonna do.

I may just add uh briefly.

Actually, it may not be brief, but um I I appreciate all the points.

Part of the reason I thought it was worthwhile for us to have discussion today is to councilman curl's point.

Uh and we get it, we get that today is about the 15 million, but if we get a bite at the apple every six months, and if every six months that bite at the apple is eight pages of wonderful renderings, and don't get me wrong, they look fabulous.

And I don't know if I'll still be around by then or one, because you say there's still that extra 68 million dollar gap.

It's actually kind of the most alarming part to me.

Yeah, and while we want to be nice people with our obligations, assuming you raise the 21 million or get commitments within four weeks, and you come to us with another ordinance that says here's 64, but what we're saddling our successors with is a 68 million dollar gap that's dependent on, and I love everybody, but dependent on the federal government, Jackson County, and more contributions from somewhere.

That's where I I get really substantial concerns.

And so um that's a why we're here.

I think the next part that I would love for us to assess is uh, and I think Councilman Willett asked this question.

What is your um, you know, this may be the Cadillac brand, I'll use a different brand.

What's the Pontiac?

Um, what are the other steps?

And I understand that the 15 million design is going to a 315 million dollar project.

But assuming that we stop at 250 million, would love to know, you know, what do we get out of that?

Will we have design for that?

Will we have a position at which we wish to proceed?

And so that's kind of the the broader point and concern.

I do appreciate Mr.

Dietrich, your point on updates and all of that.

I would ask this.

I've been here for a while now.

One off updates are always good, but the public body updates are really the great ones, right?

When everybody gets to ask the questions from each other.

And I will co-sign with Councilwoman Patterson Hasley.

Councilman Ray, I very much get your point, but we what we do this with assets a lot, and the zoo's a good example, which is that if we have someone else operated, right, and I get why.

We don't, in fact, the former zoo director, Randy Wisthoff, if we didn't give him his budget, used to say, you take the keys and you feed the elephants.

Histrionics and all of that.

That being said, um, yeah, you can do big fundraisers, you can capture great revenues, you can do things that old city government doesn't, right?

We still have to fix potholes, we still have to do all of that, and nobody's doing a fundraiser for the potholes.

This is all we get.

So this 65 million plus 68 million gap, whoever does it, right?

There is a trade-off for us.

And so I do hope that we spend time thinking about to the extent we see good revenue generation opportunities from sponsorship, that we see other ways to make this cost neutral.

It is something that comes back to defray costs, if any for the city in perpetuity, frankly, to councilman Patterson Hasley's point, um, so that we can keep things moving.

Because I think we do want to make sure the city, you know, doesn't contract out all the nice stuff, and we're the ones just left with the things that are broken.

That frankly was the Detroit bankruptcy example where they had a really fancy art museum, which is one thing that helped the business community invest in saving them, while they said we're broke and we have houses abandoned and everything else.

That that's I know you're trying your best to get to all of it, but maybe use our encouragement as a little extra pressure to donors who can move faster.

Councilwoman Robinson.

Well, um, you mentioned in a previous meeting that you know we need a little tension, so rarely let me say let me give you the attention you were asking for.

My issue with your statement, Mr.

Mayor, is that we can't continue, we can take all the body to Apple.

We can we can when we when this comes back, we can debate it over and over again.

But what we should not be doing as a professional body is changing the goalpost and changing the goals.

And so when they came to us, and this is a project, quite frankly, that you know, I never got on top of a pedestal and said, you know, this is something that is a major priority for the city because I I represent the third district, and it would be irresponsible for me to do so.

So but now what we're talking about from a process what from a process standpoint, you can't tell a body to come and oh, if you raise 24 million dollars or 21 million dollars, then we'll um look at giving you the rest of the money, and then when they come back, it's like okay, well, no, maybe you need to do you need to raise more.

Like, yes, we have to make those decisions, I get it, but it's unfair, we need to be clear in our expectations.

It's unfair to external bodies to say that we want you to do something and then we want you to come back and do something else.

Like when we voted on this, we told them we wanted them to raise 21 million dollars, and then we need to deal with it.

So I mean, we can just agree to disagree, but um I don't think it's right for us to continue to change the goalposts on the downtown council.

Like if we're saying that their investment needs to be 21 million, it needs to be 21 million.

My only response would be that I think if there's a material change in the cost and the obligation, then I do think that raises a difference.

I think you would agree that if they said it's 500 million dollars more, then we would say, okay, someone needs to consider some sort of material change to what we're stepping into.

And so I don't think we're saying for the I don't think we're saying that for the project at the cost at which it was and I forget whatever cost it was originally laid out at.

Maybe one of you knows, and maybe it's always been 315 million.

Has it always been 315 million?

They I let Jeff speak because they've been doing some really great value engineering that has gotten us to 315.

So it's that's that's a as Jeff pointed out, that's a very solid number with an inflationary clause in it over the next three years.

But you're right, if this gets delayed goes on, those figures could change over time.

The 315 million is the number that that has been in place since I've been working on the project.

So what I might fair, fair, what I might note, and maybe it's just something that we need to Councilman Robinson's point more clarity in the earlier obligations, because I actually introduced I believe the 10 million dollar ordinance, which seems like child's play now, right?

And then we have a 15 million ordinance, and then we change the nature of how we were looking to handle the debt as to the 65 million.

I believe we were gonna use a different program, whether it was Tiffy or something like that, uh, for the 65, then it came back to a city bond obligation.

All those points to suggest that if the nature of the ask in some ways changes, right, and the obligation to the city.

I do think that there is a material consideration for us, and that's something that we have to say, just in fairness to our taxpayers to the point that Councilman Curls raises.

I will also note that I think someone at some point, and maybe you all would be the ones or or it's us and or it's all of us together, just say how much will we spend in total?

If one of the federal grants doesn't come in, which is just frankly very possible, right?

Or if Jackson County doesn't contribute, which is also very possible, right?

What do we do next?

And I think that's what we're looking to, not saying that you're all bad and it's now a bad project.

All right, Councilman Willem.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, when you go back to the original ordinance that we passed, well, for me, original, not I wasn't here when we did the uh the the first part with the 10 million, but if you go back to how it was written, I believe it was sponsored or written by staff for it, and in there implied the 65 million was going to be guaranteed at a later date, and that was part of our our compromise to get the 25 million moving forward is that's not necessarily promise, but we will have that conversation once that money is raised.

And when we're evaluating that decision to issue the 65 million down the line, it's also looking at is there potential other opportunities beyond the 50 million um in in uh fundraising.

So I do feel um a little bit from the very beginning of how I've been introduced to this project, it was with the staff member, city staff member.

Um it's always has been, it was never an individual conversation.

So I uh like councilman or councilwoman uh Patterson Hasley has mentioned previously, where is staff on here?

Where is downtown council, where's the institution's gonna manage that it was kind of um blurry to me?

So um I so if how things were crafted in the very beginning, um I just want you to know the intentions is it's not necessarily a rubber stamp, yes, if you get to that amount of number, but it would be a serious consideration.

Um Raya, do you still have I think what I was gonna say has been said council woman Patterson has yeah, this would be my last point.

I think um I asked a lot of questions about the financials on this project, and I never really got good clarity on it, and I still haven't like I'm asking about operations and and like who's for the life of the project, and so it's not I don't want you to take my comments as you know, adversarial and against a project.

I think it's a fantastic project.

I'm just trying to understand what is the financial commitment over the lifetime of it, giving given that there's lots of other things that we could be spending um 90 million dollars on.

I mean, it's it's a lot of money.

Um, and I could only dream of a project getting that level of infrastructure support in the third district, and so obviously I need to ask questions about it, so maybe I can get 90 million dollars um soon.

So I think I still don't have those questions answered.

When I asked those questions of the staff, I honestly felt like it was their project, you know, kind of a defensive posture of of really defending it, and it's not I don't want you to feel like you have to defend it.

I'm just really trying to understand what I'm getting into, and I never considered the vote on the last legislation to be a promise of votes in the future.

I didn't know that we operate it like that.

I thought that we always get to review what we're gonna do at any given moment and make a voting decision.

So I didn't know that I committed to voting yes in any future vote, and that we will continue to try to do our due diligence as we move along.

Um so it's my point.

Councilman Raya then councilman O'Neill, and then we'll never council.

Sorry, Councilman.

Um I guess the only point I'll make, and I think it's worth saying that, although I am extremely proud that this is an incredible project in the fourth district.

It it is a citywide asset that's gonna benefit the entire city, much the same way that Ain't Eeth and Vine benefits folks in the Fourth District, and you know, Starlight renovations benefit folks in the fourth district.

Uh and so I would just encourage my colleagues to not look at it as a fourth district specific project.

It is going to be something that enhances the economic engine of our city and our region and creates tax revenue and and other spillover effects that we all get to benefit from and hopefully put into the general fund and go build more sidewalks and fill more potholes and do all those things with.

We'll go to councilman O'Neill.

I know Councilman Robinson uh we'll use it.

You want to be quick?

Because O'Neill was looking at me quick.

Go ahead, go ahead, Kevin.

No, I always sound better after I go after okay, he's probably not no, so just no, I I just want to be really clear.

Is we every time we take a vote, every time something's before us, we have to evaluate those things and make the choice.

Well I'm saying to our public-private investor is that we said if you raise this money, we will then consider this ordinance.

And so what I'm saying is we can't continue to move the goalposts and say, oh, you know, arbitrarily this is wrong, that's wrong.

So I wanted to make that clear.

The other thing that I want to make very clear is that our power and light district that is connected to this has been very challenging for third district residents to access, and that's the truth.

Okay, and we have a nickname for power and light.

We call it powering something else.

And so um, so let's not forget that oftentimes we build these things, and people that are most closest to it cannot access it, and that's where our issue lies.

Um, where when you put in these rules, like you can't wear a color t-shirt in order to access, and this is right next to this district, right?

Um and so we don't oftentimes feel like this this asset is for our community, and we need more place making in the third district.

We need more play asthma is a huge concern for our community uh because of the congestion and um all of the the cars that go through 71 highway, and so we need more of this in the third district, right?

So I just want to make sure that we're really clear that yes, these are things that are citywide assets, but brass tax of it is oftentimes people in the third district and um can't access these councilman O'Neills.

Um kind of had an issue with this for some time.

I I think my my biggest issue is um timing is everything, and we are in a financial I don't call it a crisis, but we're in we're having to deal with lots of issues.

We have a lower budget this year.

I've been on the council seven years, and we've always had a larger budget prior the next year over the last seven years.

This is the first year I've seen where we have a budget that's lower than last year's.

With that said, um I've asked uh, you know, what is our deferred maintenance cost in the city when we talk about all the new assets we all the assets we have in the city when you speak of the starlight, when you speak of the zoo, when you speak of the uh convention center, the arena.

Where what does that cost?

And when you add up all of our assets, you're looking at 400 million dollars of deferred uh maintenance.

Um I don't see where 65 million dollars out of our out of our uh I think it's coming out of the uh hotel tax uh hotel and uh restaurant taxes, I believe.

I don't see how we uh it's fair to our entertainment industry to take away a lot of that money that they would be using for upgrading all of our various assets.

I I just don't this is a this is a hit to our assets all over the city, and and I think adding a new one to those assets is not preparing for a maintenance schedule.

It's you know, so those are the the issues I just want to raise.

And I and I also think that we're being very premature here, and that we asked for we asked you to show us your private fundraising of 21 million dollars.

It's not there, but you're coming back and saying it's gonna be there.

I mean, you know, at the end of the day, uh there aren't many deals made on it's gonna it's gonna happen eventually.

So those are my concerns.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Curls.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um this first came before this council, I voted no.

So I'm gonna be consistent in my votes because I was not uh and I shared my concerns, my concerns are still the same.

Uh and when we talk about a citywide park, my point still is is that go talk to my residents who live on 112th in Blue Ridge Boulevard, who does not have transportation to get down to enjoy this citywide park.

We talk about we're one city all the time.

We talk about we uh are doing this for the city, but my constituents don't feel that way.

My constituents pay taxes, and they want to see something done in their part of the city as well as what takes place downtown, what takes place north of the river, and I'm not trying to point out my north of the river friends either, but I'm just saying that when you look at what takes place in this city, there hasn't been a lot of investment made in South Kansas City.

Had a conversation with the city manager yesterday in regards to a development project that the developer wants X amount of million dollars for.

We don't have it for that development project, which is gonna benefit the fifth district.

But we are looking at projects now for downtown.

We don't have a street car that goes out to South Kansas City so that my residents can jump on a street car and ride down to the plaza, ride down to downtown and ride down to River Market to enjoy those amenities because we don't have none of those amenities south of Bannister Street, that Bannister Road.

That's my point, and that's where I am consistent in my position in where I'm at and where I'm gonna be, regardless of whether it's a bond, regardless of whether it's 60 million, whether it's 80 million, 90 million, it is not benefiting my residents, and that's what I'm here to and it got elected to do.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Councilman Rogers to follow.

Darren offering alternative perspective, but I'm going to.

So I think I've like Councilman Crows, I've always always been consistent on this project, but I'm on the other end of it.

I mean, yes, I think this is a great project, and I want to talk about it a little bit.

Um for starters.

My wife's a doctor at children's mercy, and I spend a lot of time recruiting other doctors that come to children's mercy instead of picking some fancy hospital on the east coast or the west coast.

And we've got a lot to offer in the city, and when we actually get people to our city to show them what we've got to offer, uh a lot of times we're able to convince them to stay here and bring their family with them.

But what I like to do is take them to the top of City Hall and point out these different things that we've got going on.

This is not it's yes, it's a park.

We're gonna have access to this for anybody in the city, including the Northland 2 council money.

We don't have any we don't have a lot of this stuff either, but we but we all benefit when we do these really big things and add more than a fifth.

And I'm a I'm a big believer that when we do these big things, it benefits the whole city.

Like Councilman Raya said, it's a citywide asset, and it's frankly it's a regional asset.

And so we can we can build housing and we can create economic opportunities all over the city, and we can also have things that put us on the map and we create a reason for people to come here and stay here, especially something like this that's gonna be right next to the convention center, it's gonna be right next to the new Barney Hallis, it's gonna be on the streetcar line, you're gonna be able to go to the riverfront, you're gonna be able to go to meet you know, maybe some other things downtown too, and and all the way down to the plaza.

Our city's home places, and it's gonna benefit us all, so I look forward to supporting this.

Mayor can I just very briefly very briefly as your finance chair, I'm going to say there's an ordinance on this agenda that councilwoman Robinson sort of mentioned, and I think the city manager did.

It is our bond issuance.

We already voted on this.

This $15 million for design.

We've agreed to it.

It's the contract's been signed.

We have an obligation to pay for this.

If we do not pass this ordinance, we are going to have to find $15 million to pay for it somewhere.

So I'm just gonna say that we can debate, we will have a time to debate this later.

Um the merits of this project, which you know we can do that, and we will have time to do that.

And I think we should do that.

I'm just gonna say on this ordinance that's on our docket for later.

Um we need we need to pass this bond ordinance.

Mayor, I I get distracted from my primary point.

I do want to say one more thing.

Is we worked really hard to get this money from the state two different fiscal years.

That's not easy money to get.

We stuck to make up big time for that.

Same with we got some federal money, and when we're not good partners on that, it creates all sorts of problems.

So that's one more reason that I think that's really important that we see this through, and now I'm done talking.

Further discussion on this item.

All right, very known.

Thank you so much.

We look forward to a April.

You can solve it all.

All right.

There actually is a request for a closed session, but we do have we're backed up on our legislative session.

Um let's do it this way.

We'll go to regular legislative session.

I think it's a short docket.

Um, I do find the closed session discussion to be important.

Uh, and so we'll just ask you all to stay for that, but we'll adjourn for legislative session and start that up here in just a moment.