Buenas tardes, bienvenida a todos.

Welcome to the meeting.

Our meeting will come to order.

All who are present, please stand for the invocation and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Good afternoon.

It's an honor to be here with you on this day, September 11th.

We pause to remember one of the darkest days in our nation's history.

Twenty-four years ago, thousands of innocent lives were lost in a matter of hours.

Yet from that tragedy, we also saw remarkable courage.

First responders ran toward the danger.

Neighbors who cared for one another and a country that do strength from unity.

We honor their memory today, and we are reminded that each day is a gift.

As the psalmist says, teach us to number our days.

As we prepare our hearts to pray, remember at times like these.

Pray for unity and peace.

And hold fast to faith and love.

Let's bow.

Heavenly Father, on this solemn day of remembrance, we pray for those who still grieve the losses of September 11th.

And for all those impacted by recent tragedies.

We ask for your comfort, your healing, and your peace.

Lord, give wisdom to this council as they serve our city.

Please make them instruments of unity and compassion.

Teach us all to stand firm in faith, to love our neighbors and even our enemies, and to be peacemakers in a world that so desperately needs you.

I pray for each person here to receive your grace, mercy, and peace, while they offer their best for our city.

We pray this in your name.

Amen.

Amen.

Pastor, thanks for coming.

Appreciate it.

Please be seated.

The clerk will call the roll.

Yes, sir.

Raya.

Raya.

Bunch.

Present.

Parkshaw.

Here.

Who?

Here.

Duncan.

O'Neill?

Here.

Will it?

President.

Present.

Rogers.

Here.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

Here.

Here.

Twelve members present.

Will the clerk please call the special actions?

Yes, sir.

250717, recognizing Vamos Casey Employee Resource Group during the Hispanic Herriages Month.

Karen Lopez and others who have present to receive special action.

Oh hey.

Councilman Duncan.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

It is my great privilege to honor Vamos Casey, our uh Latino and Hispanic uh employee resource group.

Um it might surprise some of you to know that they've only been around since 2024.

Um, but the fiesta that will kick off on September 17th has shown, and I've talked to other employee resource groups, they're like we have to we have to we have to get our game up on all day to pick it our buttons I will say that in it is incredible I was able to sit with you all and see just the absolute um great dedication and care that you provide to so many Latino leaders who make the city run.

Um September 15th, Marx Hispanic Heritage Month.

Um, and I think now more than ever it's important that we stand tall in our full full personhood about who we are as Latinos and Latino leaders in the city who make this city run.

Thank you so much for everything that you do.

Um we're excited to uh to to join the fiesta and recognize you.

Thank you, Councilman Duncan.

There are others who wish to speak to the resolution.

Hearing now, the resolution is now before council.

All in favor indicate by saying aye.

Aye, all opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Good afternoon, mayor, council members, city manager, and colleagues.

My name is Karen Lopez.

I stand before you today as the chair of Vamos KC, our Hispanic Employee Resources Group, officially formed on July 19, 2024.

I'm honored to work with our wonderful team by my side, serving this city and our community together.

Today, as we begin Hispanic Heritage Month, we celebrate the richness and diversity of Hispanic and Latino cultures.

Cultures woven from centuries and resilience, art history and tradition.

From music, food and language, to science, public service, and leadership, our contributions have shaped the history of this nation and continue to shape the futures of Kansas City.

But we must also recognize the time that we're living in.

Across our city and across our country, many in the immigrant community face fear, uncertainty, and the weight of being misunderstood.

Those struggles are not decent.

They affect our co-workers, our neighbors, our families, and even ourselves.

That is why this celebration matters.

It is about saying clearly, Kansas Cities is stronger when all communities are value.

Protected and supported.

Through Vamos KC, we commit to creating belonging inside our government and beyond it.

We will continue to open spaces for dialogue, for learning, and for advocacy.

We will stand shoulder to shoulder with the immigrant community, reminding them that they are not alone, and reminding all that us, the diversity is not a challenge to overcome, but a gift to embrace.

On behalf of Vamos KC, I thank you for joining us in this special action.

May this month be a reminder of the beauty of our culture, the importance of unity, and the courage it takes to build a city where every resident, no matter their origin, feel safe, respected and celebrate.

Gracias.

Well said.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

Thanks very much, Alberta.

We should have done this the first time we're helping.

Thank you.

Next action.

250726.

Recognizing honor and municipal employees sports league on the occasion of his completion of its second annual kickball league and continue growth and success in bringing city employees from different work sites and city departments together to help the competition and camaraderie.

Jonathan Phebberton and others are present to review these rest of actions.

So I thought I would find some really great athletes who can compete with the Chiefs or any team on the field.

This was also started in 2024 by Reginald Francois with the Parks and Recreation Department.

Our municipal employees sports league is intended to bring city employees together around the sports of kickball, volleyball, and basketball by creating recreational interdepartmental competition.

I will also note for all of you, a lot of our city leaders used to play golf a lot too.

There's a city golf league.

The manager may try to compete with some of y'all in that if you get the chance.

Since its founding, the municipal employees sports league, or the MESL, just call it that, has returned recreational sports as a leisure option for city employees that have been absent largely for the last five years.

The Sports League encourages employees to be active and try new sports, and it provides an affordable outlet for our employees as well, as we recognize that playing spaces are a challenge for everyone.

Pride in departments has increased with participation in the sports league, resulting in elite championships with winning parks and recreation department teams for kickball and volleyball, and a winning team for the 2025 kickball championship for all y'all gamblers out there.

Which department did you put your money on?

It'll be legal in Missouri soon.

But managers office now.

We know better.

City planning and development.

City planning and development are our kickball league champions.

I see Melissa Cooper of the Aviation Department back there, and she's like, oh, we're gonna catch up next time.

So uh but we want to thank you all for bringing spirit to what it means to be an employee at Kansas City, making sure we have these outlets and opportunities is outstanding and making sure that you know you're part of the Kansas City family.

And the other thing that's exciting is when you get to know folks from throughout other departments.

So hopefully you encourage even more people to be a part of the municipal employees sports league.

Congratulations to Parks and Rec and planning a development.

Uh I remember Councilman O'Neill, actually his brother, I think helped organize that game we played against Jackson County a little while back.

So maybe City Council will get something together again soon.

Congratulations to you all, and thanks for being part of all this.

Are there others who wish to speak to the resolution?

All right, I will also note this.

Remember when we played our softball game against Jackson County.

Y'all may not know the best softball player in this room, Councilman Eric Bunch.

Uh you missed your chance to be drafted by the Cardinals or something, but it's not too late, my brother.

So I'd have to argue just because you say you're the best player, doesn't make you speak to the resolution.

Oh, go ahead.

I I take offense to the Councilman O'Neill for even questioning my softball prowess.

But uh I just wanted to say uh it's sports can be fun.

Uh they're amazing way to get away from our troubles.

Uh and it's also a good way to get physical activity and just be around be around friends.

So uh great to see you guys participating.

And yes, if you ever need uh a backup player in any most sports, some I won't be able to keep up, but glad to pitch in if you ever need me.

So we'll call for the eyes and nays in a second, but I just want to say this.

I mean, look at our staff too.

I love seeing y'all and seeing just the broad amount of work that you do.

Um we celebrated the opening of the new pool at the Tony Aguirre Center, and this young woman was there working her tail off when I was there with my family, making sure things were running right.

I see so many of you around the city and in presentations, and we're just frankly proud to have your service and commitment to the people of Kansas City.

So also proud that you get to have just a little bit of fun.

If there are no others wish to speak to the resolution, the resolution is now before council.

All in favor indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Resolution is adopted.

Whoever would like to speak.

Well, I I was voted to speak now.

Um I wanted to say is uh thank you for for the resolution.

But um, this I know you guys put my name on there as the person who started it, but um, it wouldn't be possible without some of these guys, all of them uh behind me, some of them did a lot more than I did.

Um, so I wanted to take that opportunity to thank them.

Uh really I really appreciate you guys for being there.

You have Jonathan, which is okay.

There's two things I'm gonna say to ask me to say.

One is that uh parks literally led them in just so they can be here.

And I'm not gonna name who says it, it was Donald.

He said it.

And the second thing is I was told to let you know that health department actually have two trophies at their departments.

So um it's really competitive.

We do have volleyball in uh basketball that's about to start.

So um, if you guys are interested, you can reach out to any of the person you see up there.

Don't reach out to me.

I don't know what's going on.

But no.

Thank you, guys.

I just wanted to say thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Good to meet you in the elevators.

Good to meet you.

Thank you.

Thank you guys.

Good to see you.

Thank you, sir.

See, I am up here.

Thank you, sir.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

I don't know who won and who didn't.

I know you won.

Thank you.

Good to see you.

Congrats.

See you, sir.

Hello.

How are you?

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

That's one thing.

Congratulations.

Congratulations.

Plan baby project.

Oh, yes, right there.

Right.

Congratulations.

Always.

Congratulations.

Oh, yeah.

The winners get a medal.

Congratulations.

Hello.

15 years ago, I might like it.

Right?

Plan overall.

They don't have all right.

Next action.

250783.

Recognizing Guadalajara Days in Kansas City, Guadalajara Sister City Week.

Jean Chavez and others or presents from BC Special Action.

Yeah.

One second.

You're fine.

Councilman Rea.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

This is a resolution that recognizes September 12th through the 17th as Guadalajara days here in Kansas City, Missouri.

Partly because we are celebrating Hispanic Heritage Month, but also because we're going to have a delegation here from Guadalajara during during those days visiting Kansas City as one of our fellow sister cities.

It's a city that we've had a sister city relationship since 1991, and it is one that we cherish.

Not to mention many of the proud Kansas Citians who we have in our community that are either folks who have immigrated from Guadalajara or who have familial roots from this part of the world.

And Luis Padilla, with Fresco Marketing, who has uh uh is a resident, uh not a resident, was originally born in Guadalajara, right?

Uh in the the highlands of Jalisco, correct?

And uh brings all his talent and hard work to Kansas City.

Uh he has been very important in strengthening this sister city relationship and uh even bringing this delegation here and working with all the folks that we need to make that possible.

So I thank you all, thank you, Luis, and all those who are gonna be engaging with these folks uh and showing them what Kansas City has to offer over the next couple days.

I think there is one more thing to add that is gonna be really important, and that is uh Canelo Avarez at a very, very big fight Saturday night.

Uh he is the great Mexican champion of our time, and he is also from Guadalajara, so hopefully when the delegation is here, they're gonna find one of our local bars or uh locations to watch the fight, and we could all celebrate together.

So um for all those reasons, uh Mr.

Mayor, I present this resolution to the council for consideration.

Thank you, Councilman Rea.

Is there any further discussion on the resolution?

I just want to say what an honor it is working with each of these folks.

I never knew so many connections to Galajara.

Uh and fresco marketing, by the way.

I see you all in everything now.

Street car opening video, major events, businesses, an outstanding Kansas City business.

So as you grow, obviously you can go back to Alice Co and say hello to your family and all of that, but make sure you keep doing lots of business here too as well.

So thank you all so much for being here.

We look forward to an exciting week.

Councilman Bunch.

Yeah, I just want to uh a bit of a coincidence that we have an ordinance discuss that that will be discussed in committee next week that uh thankfully you've sponsored and uh co-sponsored, and I maybe council Rayo's co-sponsor regarding South West Boulevard, among other things.

And uh and I know Luis was instrumental in the community engagement component of that, and just kind of uh just shows what a great community uh we have here in Kansas City, especially in our Hispanic community, and uh so excited for that project, and it's undoubtedly better because of the work that you put in on that.

So thank you so much.

Absolutely.

If there are no others who wish to speak to the resolution, the resolution is now for council all in favor indicate by saying aye.

Aye, all opposed.

Resolution is adopted, sir.

Thank you, Mayor, appreciate it.

Uh council persons.

We're happy to be here today to represent the Guadalajara Committee of Sister Cities, started in 1991.

There are 14 cities uh that uh our sister cities with Kansas City, and uh one of the things that we much enjoy is the opportunity to bring individuals to our great city, Kansas City, Missouri, uh, to enjoy all of that that uh the city has to offer and also to connect with individuals from Guadalajara in 2024.

We brought a scholar from the University of Guadalajara to be here in Kansas City.

She did a series of lectures uh as well as presentations and uh brought some of her art as well as an artist and architect.

So uh those are the kinds of things that the Guadalajara Committee does.

We are thankful for the support of uh the um de Mexico, and we're happy to have uh Soyle, um uh Padilla Mayer, uh Consul Titular, the main principal uh council of uh Mexico and Greater Kansas City and and in um regions beyond uh to be our supporter and and we thank the city of Kansas City, Missouri for uh supporting our efforts to develop what uh Dwight D.

Eisenhower had in mind when he established the sister cities uh programs across the nation, and that is to develop relationships, not only uh commercial but social, academic, uh as well as um an opportunity for people just to enjoy people-to-people interaction across cities.

And so, on behalf of the Guadalajata Committee, I uh would like to introduce uh Luis Parilla, who is bringing up a group.

Uh and uh we we will be supporting their visit here in Kansas City, and Luis will tell you more about that.

All right, thank you.

Well, thank you.

I think everybody already said it all, but good afternoon.

I'm Luis Padilla, and uh I'm proud to call Guadalajara in Kansas City home.

Um like Consulman Royal say they're not only sister cities, they're both hosting cities of the World Cup.

Uh and I'm honored to be able to show my city, Kansas City, to people that I grew up with, uh, and to to show them what we have to offer and what we're so proud of what we do here in Kansas City.

Uh I think this proclamation is not only symbolic, but uh is it represents a committee, a commitment to build bridges on cultural, economic, uh, and social that will uh benefit both communities.

Uh I'm proud to communic to to contribute to this moment and uh you know to show to show these business owners what we have here to to make this relationship more strong and to make sure that they don't only visit once that uh these relationship keeps going and and uh um goes for the future to create more opportunities for both cities.

So thank you, Councilman Raya, thank you, Council members, thank you, mayor, for making uh this this happening, and uh yeah, thank you everybody.

No, I just wanted the mayor.

I just wanted to say thank you, mayor, thank you, council, the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Greater Kansas City, uh Hector Berato Sr.

Our founder, uh called Guadalajara his hometown.

So a lot of ties to Kansas City and Guadalajara, and I know he had the vision and the dream back in 1977 when our chamber started, that there would be that relationship, that relationship with business, commerce, and and social as well.

And so I know he would be very proud to see uh that relationship continue to grow.

Mexico is the United States' number one trade partner of products and services.

So this relationship is gonna help Kansas City businesses as well as Guadalajara business community.

And so we're very, very pleased to be a part of this, and I'm a firm believer in history, and I know again Hector Barreto Sr.

would be very, very proud of this moment.

So thank you, Mayor.

Good to see you, Congress.

Good to see you, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Yes, you wouldn't have a question.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, sir.

Loved your words.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Good to see you.

It's good to see you as well.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

I love your shoes.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Uh Councilman O'Neill moves that under Council Rule 602.

It's all right.

That we uh docket this special action.

Is there a second?

You can't read mine.

It's been moved in second.

All in favor indicate by I'm sorry, we have to call the roll.

Uh no further discussion, Clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Pearls.

Aye.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Boo.

Aye.

Duncan.

O'Neal.

Will it?

Franch?

Aye.

Roger.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

Lucas.

Aye.

Eleven eyes.

Motion passes.

Councilman O'Neill will request the clerk receive docket and read the additional special action be included on today's docket.

Go ahead and receive the resolution assignment number and read the title.

Yes, sir.

The number is going to be 25018.

Recognize the OHM concession group and their outstanding achievements at the 2025 Airport and Food and Beverage Hospitality Awards.

Oh, I don't know.

Yes, sir.

Well, it took y'all out of work.

All right.

Councilman O'Neill.

Oh, you're not gonna steal these lines too.

I'll be good.

Um it is uh my great pleasure to invite you guys here to because as a frequent visitor to the airport, I have had the pleasure in the last two years.

Uh how long have we been open now?

Two years?

Two and a half years.

Uh to see the trans uh transition that we've gone through out there, which is incredible.

The restaurants, the number of people that are flowing through the terminal.

Uh it's been such an exciting um, I think we did a great job in selecting uh some very good uh restaurant tours and some very good uh management.

Um so now I'll get to the facts.

Um your outstanding achievements for the 2025 Airport Food and Beverage Hospitality Awards is noted, and thank you for all that.

Um we take great pride in celebrating the achievements of the business and partners who bring international recognition to our city.

OHM Concession group, a nationally recognized airport concessions operator and key partner in Kansas City's award-winning concession program, concessions program has grown into one of the nation's leading airport food and beverage concessionaires at the 2025 Airport Food and Beverage Hospitality Awards in Barcelona, OHM's the barbecue experience.

That's always good news to hear from Kansas City at the new Kansas City International Airport earned both the America's Regional Division Award and the Global Air Award for Best Airport Casual Dining Restaurant for Airport serving up 20 million passengers.

This marked the first time an American airport, restaurant, or concession operator has received the FAB Global Award, underscoring the historic nature of this win.

So I mean, for that, thank you.

That was fantastic.

This recognition spotlighted Kansas City's famed barbecue barbecue culture and the Made for KC Pitmaster in Residence program, which enhances visitor experience while elevating local culinary talent.

And I think you have the gentleman that you were selected.

If you could uh introduce him.

So we have uh Josh and Ashton were the OG Bandits barbecue pitmaster during the win of our award.

We also have Joel Flipwood with uh our new pitmaster.

If you would have traveled recently, it said meet Rushmore team.

Thanks.

The meet Rushmore team has taken over the pit master duties at five bars set already.

Fantastic, thank you.

And we uh and I thank you all of you, and I will shut up now.

So uh I don't know what I do next.

Great job.

Thanks.

Are there others who wish to speak to the resolution?

I want to note this about uh this whole process and Councilman O'Neill was with me for that.

Uh I think uh a few uh others uh were too, but you remember the concessions process.

Was there a process?

Yes, I do.

Right.

Yes, and as it as it wound its way through City Council, I want to thank our staff, uh Pete Fullerton, Melissa Cooper, everybody in aviation, who I think just gave us the bare bones facts about a group that is exceptional.

And one thing if I can commend our staff is that removing all the noise in the world, they just kept showing up and saying, nah, we made this recommendation for a reason.

And in the two and a half years since we have seen those reasons, you are absolutely right about the night and day experience of our airport compared to some others.

And there are some facilities that are also modern and all of that, but none that I think show off their city and the culture of their city that well.

To our pitmasters, I want to commend you.

And I'll admit, right?

We are Kansas Cities.

We are tough judges on your barbecue.

I remember before you went and be like, oh, they're trying to do barbecue.

I will even admit, I'll probably at one point talk to aviation like for real.

You not having us pick one of our favorites, and by the way, in case you're wondering, I'll never admit to a favorite barbecue.

But y'all did a wonderful job, and you do a wonderful job treating people well, and then to the head of the team and leadership.

There has not been a time when we've called that you haven't said we can address that.

There hasn't been a time where we said we need more Mizzou product there, and you weren't there for it.

You have answered everything, it's not just Mizzou.

But Jayhawks, Tigers.

Where's the samples at what's on?

But you have been exceptional work with, and frankly, you are a model for what a strong concessionaire is for our entire organization.

So, congratulations to you.

We're proud to work with you, and we're looking forward to your ongoing success.

Otherwise, we should speak to the resolution.

Hearing none, the resolution is now before council.

All in favor indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

All opposed, resolution's adopted.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilmember O'Neill, thank you, sir.

On behalf of OHM Concession Group, I want to thank, I want to extend my deepest gratitude to Mayor Quentin Lucas and this member of City Council.

The Kansas City Department of Aviation for their support in helping us.

Vantage Group for uh believing in us and our vision.

Uh winning the both American uh regional award and the global best casual dining restaurant at the 2025 Fab Awards for Kansas City Barbecue Experience is not just an honor for OHM, it's a proud moment for Kansas City and a true res recognization of the spirit of the community.

Let me be clear, this makes this marks the first time in the history of global awards that an American restaurant or an American airport or an American city has received a such a distinction honor.

And special thanks goes to our incredible Pitmasters, the OG Bandits team, Josh and Ashton, whose craft and passion for Kansas City Barbecue brought this vision to life and helped us secure this award.

To our new pitmaster team, Mitt Rushmore, we know you will carry this momentum forward as we head into 2026.

Most importantly, I want to recognize our outstanding OHM team at Kansas City International Airport for their dedication, creativity, and commitment to hospitality, made this achievement possible.

And they uh represent the very best of OHM stands for outstanding hospitality management.

This recognization, uh this recognization belongs to all of you, and together we have shown the word, the world that Kansas City is a true global culinary destination.

Mr.

Mayor, it is my honor to present you uh and the city of Kansas City, Missouri, the award we received, so it may proudly be displayed in a prominent location for all Kansas Cities to see and take pride uh in their city's recognization as the barbecue capital of the world.

Thank you so much.

I would also like to uh present Kansas City Department of Aviation, Miss Uh Melissa Cooper and Pit Fullerton with an exact exact same replica award, recognizing their partnership and making this happen.

Thanks.

Well, be all right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Congratulations on Teach of Ark.

No, not yet.

We're going to thank you so much for the very much.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hold on.

I got an inbox here.

Hey, they get to work before four o'clock.

I don't know.

Okay, our question.

So it'll be sure.

Congratulations with all this.

We look young.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I don't like you.

I can't remember, but I'm going to try to be reporting.

Thank you.

You can put that your own two.

All right.

Oh, it's empty.

We will proceed with our regular docket.

Although, Madam Clerk, I do want to ask.

We have a new member of the staff of the clerk's office with us.

I just wanted to make sure you introduced her to us.

She may not be brand new, but Bertha Ross is one of the she's actually the clerk for Transportation Committee.

Okay.

Well, pleasure to meet.

I want to say she has done a great job with a great tutor in Monica, and I I am just blessed with two.

What a transition.

Thank you so much.

It's a pleasure to have you with us.

For our same day adoptions motion, we'll go to the mayor pro Tim.

Honorable mayor, I'll move that the resolutions listed on today's docket as resolutions for same day adoption be presented to council for consideration for immediate adoption today.

Second.

Raya.

Aye.

Bunt.

Aye.

Earl.

Aye.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Moo.

Aye.

Donc?

Aye.

O'Neill.

No.

Franch?

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

All right.

Lucas.

Aye.

Eleven eyes, one nay.

Resolution passes.

Will the clerk call the item?

Yes, sir.

250807.

All right.

This motion passes shortly item.

Yeah.

Legislative priority is all managed before.

The second extraordinary session of the first district first session of the 103rd Missouri General Assembly.

Councilman Raya.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

This is a resolution expressing the city council's opposition to the current and ongoing efforts in Jefferson City to redraw congressional lines as well as making or establishing it as one of our major legislative priorities.

Thank you, Councilman Raya.

There are others which speak to the resolution.

Councilman Willett.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I appreciate the councilman's resolution that he's proposed and appreciate some of the changes and wording on it.

I think the challenge that I have is seeing how it's been reported amongst a lot of individuals in the community saying that Kansas City needs to be united by a single uh congressional voice.

I know this resolution does not say that, but other people, including business leaders to put together saying that.

Truth of the matter is Kansas City has never had one single congressional district ever since the annexation of the Northland.

We've always had a minimum of two.

My problem of this resolution and using legal resources in this is the fact of the matter is our own council districts do not meet our own definitions of how they should be done.

We, according to census data, we already have Council District 1 at 91,000 individuals, which violates the 10% rule.

Council District 4, 91,000, which violates uh the 10% rule.

And if you go back to redistricting done back the first uh not this last time, but the time before that, they put growth allotments in there knowing that the Northland was going to grow and other parts of the city that were primed for it was going to grow.

Even though we did that, those maps are own council ordinance standards became obsolete in 2014.

It was District 4 that became obsolete in 2014, then district one in 2015, and then district two in 2016.

We already know with the data by permitting numbers and all that information that we probably need to redistrict our own council districts prior to the 2027 election.

And I would like us to see our focus on that.

Now I understand uh the concept that um councilman Rhea is doing.

I will not be in support of it because us as a city, we need to focus on our council districts, make sure we get them right before we be talking about um this.

And as an in-district council person who has um a council district that's already violates the 10% rule, I cannot vote for this resolution.

Thank you.

Councilman Raya.

Ms.

Mayor, thank you.

Um I've heard this argument, and I do think it is worthy of a response.

Because I don't run into many folks that are satisfied or happy with how our own council lines are drawn, how county lines are drawn.

Uh I don't know folks that are happy with that at all, but for me that is not a reason to uh uh um you know not oppose what they are trying to do in Jefferson City.

I mean the fourth district is probably the most fragmented council district in the city.

I think we're in three counties, north of the river, south of the river, east side, west side.

Uh and so I I think we feel that more than anyone.

But the difference is the difference of having uh municipal lines that are drawn that way is that I know who the other council representatives are, I know who the county legislators are.

We live in the same city, I have access to them, I can get a meeting with them.

They answer to a lot of the same folks that uh others in the city answer to.

You have all of that consolidated in Kansas City.

You don't have that in Washington, D.C.

If you have three congressional representatives in Washington, D.C., we don't have the level of access that we have to ourselves here municipally.

And so, yeah, I think those lines uh are not always helpful, but I don't think they are anywhere near as detrimental as having these congressional lines redrawn the way that they are proposing.

Councilman Bunch.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I want to echo many of the things that my colleague representing the fourth district, which will be broken into three congressional districts under this current map.

Um the district that the newly drawn potentially district that I will be potentially living in uh will share a boundary with Pulaski County, with Barton County, with uh with Fort Leonardwood.

These are places that have far more in common with rural Missouri because they are rural Missouri than they do with any urban environment.

And a sliver along state line just to capture a bit of midtown and and downtown uh is is just absolutely ridiculous.

And to say that that is a fair map is complete is a complete falsehood.

And I am here supporting this this resolution because the Kansas Citians deserve representation in Congress, and under this map, they will not have representation in Congress.

Uh they will be sharing a representative with people with people who have very little in common with them.

Um maybe we share values, and I I grew up in rural Missouri, and I certainly s have common values with many of my people, my family members who still live in rural Missouri and friends who stayed behind.

Um but the needs of this urban environment, and I feel like I can speak to this as way in the way that some of my colleagues may, uh who are also from Southeast Missouri, um, the needs of Kansas City, Missouri and the need for representation in Washington, DC, are so different, so vastly different from an urban environment.

And to and to for someone to be able to understand the needs of Kansas Citians and to to potentially live in Pulaski County is nothing short of an injustice for the city and the citizens of Kansas City.

So I just want to continue to echo my support, and I would like to be, if I'm not already listed as a co-sponsor, I would definitely like to be added as a co-sponsor.

Um and not that this is necessary, this not that this resolution is gonna make a hill of beans difference uh for those of in Jefferson City, but uh I feel it's important for us to say something and to stand up for the for the Kansas Citians who deserve adequate representation, to deserve representation from people who understand their needs.

Um so uh thank I want to thank Councilman Rea for bringing this to us, and thank everyone else who uh who stands up for Kansas City here, regardless of your party affiliation.

Thanks.

Councilman Duncan.

Couple things.

The difference between the map uh being passed in Jefferson City ran down the people's throats uh without without their approval is that Kansas City maps were drawn by Kansas Citians, and that map was drawn by the White House, directed by the President of the United States.

Our maps were drawn pursuant to our city charter.

State map is being drawn in violation of the state charter.

I happened to go to Jefferson City yesterday and was struck by a number of things, the outpouring of support, not only from St.

Louis, Kansas City, and other municipalities, but from rural Missourians who were upset about being marginalized and not having representation and a voice.

A Missouri farmer stood up to the microphone and he said it will be a cold day in hell before I let my little girls, this old farmer let his little girls become marginalized in the state of Missouri.

So this is not just about Kansas City, this is not this is about all Missourians.

Uh thank you, Councilman Rea, for for bringing this item to us because I think it is important for us to stand up for Kansas Citians and call out what is a racially biased map that disenfranchises predominantly poor, black and brown folks.

Councilman Curros.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I was going to refrain from making a comment, but I feel like I I have to, and I agree with a lot of the sentiment that's been said because the map that's being proposed in Jefferson City will really disenfranchise the African American community.

It's been it's being targeted for one congressional seat, and that's the fifth congressional district, which encompasses the majority of Kansas City and the African American community.

And that is really disheartening to me that somebody in Washington DC or somebody in another county or another uh aspect of this state would disenfranchise an African American community who they really have no connection with, don't know anything about, and don't really probably care too much about.

Also, when you look at the way that this map is drawn, it's drawn down truce, which has always been a defing factor in this city when it comes to racially divided lines in this city.

To me, that's very discouraging and very disappointing as well.

So somebody really was I mean, they really were definitive in their definition of this boundary when they drew these lines to go down truce.

I mean, that really says something to me that uh I would definitely be opposed to because we are trying to break down barriers and stop redefining our city by truce, especially, but this is one that does that and continues to do that.

So I would definitely be supportive of this resolution, although I know that uh I I forgot who it was said now that it probably is not gonna mean a bill of beans to those in Jefferson City, and I think that the voting has already taken place in regards to the maps being drawn, but I think it's it's very important that we go on record as a city and as a body to say that this is not real conducive to our city.

Thank you.

Councilman Bunch.

I also want to add that you know it was heralded as a map that didn't split counties as much as the previous congressional map, and I want to highlight the fact that the counties that it did split, Jackson County, Clay County, St.

Louis County, Boone County.

What do those four counties have in common?

They have a lot of Democrats in them, and they also represent urban environments where there is far more diversity.

And as my uh colleague from the Fifth at Large District said this will be absolutely disenfranchising to our voters, uh especially the voters of color who exist in these communities who deserve that that representation.

So I just want to point out the hypocrisy of that map and the statements made about how it didn't split counties up as much as it did in the past, but just take a look and see which counties it did split up.

Councilman O'Neill.

I hate to go here, but you know, three years ago we redistrict the Northland.

And similar ideas were thrown out then.

And so I I find some hypocrisies here because uh all of the things that we talked about three or four years ago are are now being looked upon as okay, but you're finding I mean I don't I don't agree with all of this either, but I would have liked to have these challenges these challenging decisions when we were uh chopping up the Northland.

So I just want to add that.

Councilman Bunch.

I voted to support the the map that the Northland folks supported.

So I just wanted to point out that as the as a person who voted for that amendment and probably uh riled up the mayor a little bit.

Um I I went out on a limb.

Uh so I just want to point that out, Councilman O'Neill.

Thank you, sir.

Map drawing Kansas City.

Yeah, let me let me just say this.

I'll hop in briefly on that map.

Councilman Duncan already made the point.

What happened on that map was not that Joe Biden called me and said, let's go mess with Heather Hall, let's get her out of office.

No, Kansas Citians actually said, how do we want to organize Kansas City?

That is that is in many ways foundationally different.

What's more, we did it actually right after a census.

We didn't wake up someday in 2025 and me say, I really don't like what Wes Rogers is up to, and let me figure out how I can try to re-jigger a majority to get my way that does all these things.

I think to your point, Councilman, in 2031 or 2032, some of y'all may be around, I won't.

We will get a chance to do it all again.

And if somebody wants the sixth district to stretch from the airport down to Cass County, they can propose that, come up with a way, come up with all the reasons.

And Missouri legislature, three years ago had that exact opportunity, and in fact, did some of that work.

The Kansas legislature tried to re-jigger a district to get out the Congresswoman and failed.

That is a part of politics.

I understand gerrymandering is a part of politics.

They're not following the Missouri Constitution.

They're doing it in a way that I think is trying to, as Councilman Curl's notes, hit traditional dividing lines.

And let me just note two things.

I wasn't going to speak either, but that are particularly offensive.

Before I walked in, I saw a picture of our congressman, our former mayor, the former Fifth District City Council person, who was sitting there spending his day today, sitting in front of a Missouri Senate committee.

Of all of the problems in this world, of everything that a Kansas Cityan may want a federal official to be doing.

He has to spend his time to basically try to stand up for respect, in my opinion, of himself and for the people that he represents, which is at least half of this councilman.

The other thing that I find insidious, and I will just double down on the point, is the fact that we spend time every week at this city council trying to bridge certain divides.

Right?

I actually grew up east of truce, miss, have still spent most of my life life east of truce.

But now I live close to Lynwood and Southwest Traffic.

If I go to Lynwood and Jackson, right, life expectancy goes down by about 10 years.

Property values go down by about two or three hundred thousand dollars.

Our blight is increased, our fake lots are increased.

And so what we're gonna do is actually exacerbate the not we, what they're gonna do is exacerbate that problem.

We are trying to spend all of our time to bridge divides to improve communities, and this is a step back.

Not only do I appreciate the resolution, I note that each year we do pass legislative priorities.

This to me is actually more of an affront than most anything the Missouri legislature has done in some time, and that's saying something.

And to me, this is actually more important than our next set of legislative priorities where we'll say, give us funding for a bridge, keep LightTech around, do all of that.

Because not only is this something that does not come from Missouri, and I know maybe we can't be honest with ourselves.

This wasn't crafted by somebody sitting in Kingsville one day who wanted more representation.

And my final point will be aligned with what Councilman Duncan said.

I was just watching the news.

I came up in the news store.

They interviewed a bunch of people at a farmer's market in Peculiar, Missouri, and they asked all those people in peculiar, do you want to share a district with Waldo?

And they all said, no, I don't want to go to Waldo, I'm scared to go to the plaza.

I hate Mayor Quentin Lucas, and that's fine.

That's absolutely fine.

I get it.

And what we're instead doing is saying, let's just force them all in.

This is a disrespect to them.

It's a disrespect to us.

It's a disrespect to the people of Missouri and our Constitution.

That's why I appreciate the resolution.

Is there any further discussion?

Councilman Rogers.

That's a hard thing to follow, but I feel like I gotta say a few things.

You know, I I was in the legislature during the last redistricting that we did actually following the Constitution.

So, first of all, I'm gonna support this.

I'm glad we're doing it.

I appreciate the Councilman for bringing it forward.

Uh it's an easy espo for me.

I am sympathetic to some of the concerns from the Northland.

We've been in two meetings today, in fact, that are frustrating, frankly, but they're different conversations.

We're not gonna go there.

I will tell you there was talks of a 7-1 map when I was in the legislature three years ago.

No one won it then.

I can't imagine any of the people that are voting for it now want it now.

I'm mad, I'm frustrated too.

I'm gonna support it, but uh let me I'm gonna compliment Councilman Ray and Councilman Willett, who I say this pretty frequently too is I spent four years in the legislature before I came to the city hall in the minority party, and sometimes honestly I feel like I'm in the minority party here too, but just getting my teeth kicked in and losing on almost every single vote.

And so at times that makes you a little bit jaded about politics, and so I appreciate the fight from Councilman Raya here, and I tell Councilman Will all the time he fights fights that that I probably wouldn't at this point, and he wins them sometimes.

So there that's gives me some hope, even if I don't always agree with what he does.

But there's something to be said for fighting hard fights.

Thank you for fighting this one.

I'll support your resolution.

Councilman Willett.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

My my thing just goes back to representing the first district on this.

There is times that the city has redistrict mid-decade.

I will admit there's not a time that the state has done that.

But my my thing is why are we using city resources and the law department there when we know in our own data that we violate the 10% rule within our own council districts using that?

That's what I'm mostly concerned about because that's what goes down to, and I did the data last time around back in the day.

But if you are over 10% over the close course of the decade, you lose out on roughly close to 10 million dollars of payak dollars for your council district over the course of the remaining time.

That's the stuff that it makes me the most frustrated with, and that's real stuff and facts of our own numbers.

And it says even on our principles redistricting, if we know that there's a council variance of 10 percent, we must redistrict ourselves.

And that's where I'm mostly coming in at on this stuff.

Um, but by the way, you know, I saw the resolution ahead of time.

I even made my own comments and some changes to it, even though I'm not voting for it.

I want you to know that I'm not up here trying to just fight to fight to sound like a red meat kind of guy.

But I I am definitely very concerned about the Northland's share of tax dollars because of redistricting and how it was handled three years ago.

Councilman Bonege.

I I I uh with all due respect, Councilman Willet.

The number, the population numbers that I saw when we voted on the maps in 2022 or whenever that was, um, they were the the highest one was somewhere on 88,000, the lowest one was around 83,000.

Those numbers might be a bit off, but at the time when we voted on the day that we were given, the populations that we were told on each one of those boundaries was well within the 10% range.

So I'm not sure the numbers, the numbers that you're saying sound a lot more like the fourth district prior to the redistricting and last term.

The 91,000 was that's about what the fourth, first, and second districts were back then.

So those numbers might but uh whatever.

I don't want to split hairs.

Um, but I think the main point is the one that Councilman Duncan made was that at the end of the day, it was Kansas Citians who are in the room making those decisions.

It was this city council, the last term, who decided to vote on those maps about who was representing the people of Kansas City, the Kansas Citians were in charge then.

In this case, right now, we're talking about taking that representation completely out of Kansas City and and moving it back out to the rural communities to give them more representation.

So I think that that is the problem that we're dealing with here, and the one that I'm continuing to say is the problem that makes me want to shout this from the rooftops and and support this uh resolution.

So thank you.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

Just a few uh comments that I have.

Um first of all, I have to agree uh with the sentiments around the redistricting that uh that was Kansas Citians that did that, and it followed the uh census.

This does not follow a census.

Well, definitely I have great respect for you, and I understand where you say I think we'll just have to respectfully disagree.

The the challenge, the issues that I have with this, are that federal dollars follow our are represented by the representation that we have, and our priorities, Kansas City's priorities, are different than priorities in a rural area.

Housing, transit, the amount of federal dollars that we get for transit, uh, their public safety, they're different in a rural town.

And so not only are definitely our black and brown communities, we're being disenfranchised here, but also when you look at the needs of of a urban city versus a rural city, they do not compare.

And to say that someone potentially outside of Kansas City is going to understand and be able to support what Kansas City needs would be ludicrous.

They don't have the lived experience that we all have.

And that is what is most frustrating to me.

In addition to knowing that, you know, as my colleagues said, as our colleagues said, that we know that the truce dividing line has been to disenfranchise and has been disenfranchised for many years, all of us on the east side, and this only will make it worse.

Uh, but not only that, you know, Kansas City is the economic engine of the state as the largest city in the state of Missouri.

We drive health, the health care, technology, sports.

We drive the state's economy, and I believe that this decision will undoubtedly have a negative impact on Missouri itself over the long term, because when you when you look at the potential cuts that we will have in Kansas City from the federal perspective, ultimately that is going to mess up the Kansas City economy long term.

And for that, I want to thank Council Morea for bringing this forward.

I would also like to be added as a co-sponsor on this.

Um, and you know, while definitely it probably doesn't mean a hill of beans to what's happening in in Jefferson City right as we speak.

Uh I think it is important for this body to show that we are standing up for all the residents of Kansas City.

Thank you.

Councilman Curls.

I'd just like to be added as a co-sponsor as well.

Councilman Ray.

I just will add this last comment.

I feel that we are in a dangerous moment for our democracy right now, not just for Kansas City.

I know we're all talking about how this is going to impact Kansas City, but this feels like a dangerous moment, like an inflection point in our democracy that's gonna have repercussions across the country.

I just want to say, I think those of you who are supporting this and doing what's right for for folks in Kansas City, it's not gonna make a difference in Jeff City.

We know that, but when this is viewed in a different way decades from now, we're gonna be able to say that we made a public record of where we stood on it, and we're gonna be able to go and find video of where we stood on it, and I think that matters.

Amen.

Any further discussion on the uh ordinance?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Bunch.

Aye.

Curls, Parkshaw.

Aye.

Boo.

Aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

Will it?

No.

Crant?

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson?

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Eleven eyes, one name.

The ordinance passes.

The clerk proceed with the final readings debate document.

Yes, sir.

250631.

Except the recommendations of the housing trust fund board, reducing appropriation of nine million, um, six million nine hundred and eight thousand three hundred and forty six dollars and appropriating the same from previously appropriate funds.

Balancing the housing trust fund authorizing manager of camera service to execute various funding agreements in accordance with the ordinance, authorizing director of housing trust housing and community development committee department to expend that amount from funds appropriating housing trust fund neighborhood needs to pass.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Uncle Mayor.

This ordinance authorizes funding agreements for seven uh housing projects that were recommended by the housing trust fund.

And I I actually won't read through all this because I know you actually have a committee sub, but ultimately uh the recommendation came from the housing trust fund and will appropriate uh six point nine million dollars.

And as I stated, I know there's a um amendment.

I think I will uh move that ordinance two five zero six three one be amended so that it reads in the document entitled Ordinance 250631 is amended, which has been distributed to all council members.

Second, it's been moved and seconded is that the ordinance is meant to be amended.

Discussion on the motion.

A few things that I wanted to note in connection with, I'll just read this point.

The amendment removes for the the funding for Benton Apartments project and approves funding for ninth and central laws.

The ordinance also covers the appropriation of recaptured dollars from three projects and spread those dollars to increase funding to the Sanford B Lad School Redevelopment Project.

The city manager is also directed in this to reevaluate round five unawarded applications using any reprogram dollars from this round or previous rounds.

Rounds background as relates to the Benton Departments project speaks to the gap at issue in that project, which is near 10 million dollars.

Recognizing that the housing trust fund award, which is a much smaller amount, roughly about two to point eight, um, would be part of that.

We saw that that funding could not necessarily be effectuated in a short time period and look to another laudatory project that is building affordable housing, importantly, affordable housing that's not just centralized in one area of our city.

And the Sanford B Ladd project is another strong project in connection with it.

The final point as to the amendment speaks to round fund round five unawarded applications and reprogrammed dollars.

What that really means simply is to the extent that there are other projects that may not be going forward but have received housing trust fund dollars.

This speaks to them being reprogrammed to go towards projects that allows us to get more money on the streets for more housing ultimately, which is a goal of our housing trust fund board.

We'd welcome your support.

Is there any further discussion on the amendment?

Councilman Currels.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I just have a question.

Is this if am I reading this correctly in this uh committee sub that we are reducing funds for the Marlborough Town homes uh prospect at 35th Street and Parade Park?

You know, I uh I do see the portion you're saying.

I don't understand that to be the case, but I understand that Mr.

Chirelli is here from the housing department to tell us a bit about it.

Section three.

Section three.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh thank you, Councilman, for the question.

For the record, Evan Shirelli, division manager over local initiatives for the housing and community development department.

Uh yes, we will be uh redu this ordinance is or the amendment is reducing the allocation for those three projects.

Uh Prospect at 35th and Parade Park Homes, those two projects were voluntary rescinds.

Those funds were voluntarily gave back to the housing trust fund, and this is the procedural mechanism that we are utilizing to reduce the appropriations in those account strings, take them back into the housing trust fund unallocated account to be used to cover the awards for this for this pro for this ordinance.

Um you're suggesting the developer remitted those funds back to the city.

Correct, yeah.

Um for a couple different reasons, um, mostly project feasibility, and they voluntarily came back to us.

Marlborough Townhomes is a little bit um you've answered the question thus far, sure.

Unless there's a follow-up question.

Sure.

Yeah.

Um to the uh parade park homes.

You saying that they were the the developer returned those funds?

Yeah, yes.

Um that was awarded to Parade Park Homes in round one several years ago, uh, before the current development team with Parade Park was in place.

Um and so that award was for a different scope to a different development team and for a different project than what Parade Park is today.

Uh it in no way kind of impacts or implicates the uh 1.7 million dollars that was awarded to parade park in round four, or the twelve million dollars that was awarded to uh parade park earlier this spring by this body.

Okay, and and and if it has no effect on it, then that's fine.

But I just know that we have allocated money to parade park on several different occasions.

I just find it interesting that they are refunding money.

Uh I I think the answer here is that it's more administrative.

Parade Park Homes, the earlier recipient, either ceases to exist or doesn't have control of the property now.

So we've awarded money to the development group, 12th Street Heritage and uh the other private developer, and that's those are the ones who received the millions in funds for the redevelopment.

This seems more structural that we just had money still left in account from probably a 2022 or 23 allocation that isn't going anywhere.

So it's putting it back into the fund.

Okay.

And then uh uh Marlborough, you were getting ready to do.

Absolutely, thank you for that.

Um so Marlborough Town Homes is a a is unique from the other two projects.

Um that was a a project that actually had made it through the contracting process with the housing department.

They received their written agreement.

Uh that written agreement lapsed and the project never started.

Uh, in the awarding ordinance uh for that round, uh it states very specifically, and it states in the municipal code as well that uh when a project does not start within 12 months of receiving a written agreement from the city, those funds have to go back to the housing trust fund.

Um so it was a matter of of them not complying with that ordinance and not complying with the municipal code.

Uh this was communicated to the developer in July, and they understand where they stand at the moment.

Uh Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Uncle Mayor.

So just to clarify, uh, when was the uh 12 month time frame?

Because I know we've had several ordinances where we've ex we've extended the timeline for other developers.

So what was that timeline?

It was I believe the uh contract was executed in January of 24 and it lapsed in January of 25.

January 25.

So we're now uh so you they were you said uh informed in July, so at that point it had been uh seven months beyond.

And we we informed them and we had that conversation with the developer in an attempt to recognizing this step was gonna have to take place at some point.

We had that conversation with them so that they could preserve the right to reapply in round five if there had been some update or if they needed more funding or or whatever was required, uh that development project did not apply for round five funding.

Okay, all right.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Uh one question I have, I don't know if this is for you, uh, but um so in some of the discussion that we've had, even at committee, uh, and I believe in even on the floor, we talked about uh the process talked about um updating the actual process for how the the trust fund works, and uh clearly there's been additional review of other projects.

And um I don't know if I've just have maybe have missed that information, but we have requested information come to us uh and possibly even additional uh an additional session to talk about the actual process because I know one of the suggestions we had come out in committee was to uh look at funding the projects similar to how we do our CIP process where we don't necessarily remove the project off the list, but we align it where those that have been approved align it where they um are shovel ready, where they're actually ready to begin.

And I don't know if in this amendment, if you take that into consideration, or these projects is totally being removed, or are we and it sounds like they are just being removed rather than maybe still allowing them as they've been approved to ultimately be able to seek funding as they are ready later, or will these projects will they have to reapply?

And so those are some of the questions I have in terms of process moving forward.

As I understand from this amendment in particular, it addresses the point you raised in this way, which is that the proposed projects for this round all are the ones that are eligible for future reprogramming money.

So if you've done all the work and you've gotten your award, but your project has too much of a gap, you are first in line for a future set of reprogram funds.

I mean, you don't have to go through all the work again on the application process.

I think that's how it's addressed and thought about here.

So it doesn't necessarily just save an amount of money for shovel ready, because indeed the project may never come.

This is using the uh 43rd and Benton example.

If you're at a 10 million dollar gap, this award was two million.

You have a decent amount of work to do, so it's not letting them hold on to the appropriation.

That being said, they do retain their status position um in a rank for reprogram funds that would come back should they correct the other issues that are keeping them from completion.

And I would say just slightly reason it's probably different than a CIP issue is because in those, right, we are making it's still gonna be a city funded project.

So usually it's will we decide to fund it an extra eight million dollars or not on a let's say a 10 million dollar city project.

On this one, I think we would be making the policy choice that we're interested in supporting you on your two million dollar gap, but we're not gonna solve your ten million dollar gap, and we probably won't at any point.

Now, if you find a way to solve it when funds become available, you still have that priority position.

But that's I think at least the spirit of the amendment at issue is I understand it.

Okay, thank you for that clarification.

Can you uh specify which section that is in?

Because I don't I don't interpret that in here, but maybe I'm missing it.

I would think there is a section in here that does.

I would look for wherever the word reprogrammed is, which would be section nine that most likely looks at it.

Section nine is gonna be the last page of text.

I believe.

Uh it now is, yeah, it's section nine.

And my interpretation of this is that the uh city manager will work to reevaluate unawarded applicants using those reprint program dollars.

Uh any okay the part that I'm not understanding is or that I don't see.

I don't think this speaks to those projects that are now being reprogrammed.

If we're pulling those dollars, it doesn't state that they then will be, you know, have uh be top on the list as you just said.

I would think that it speaks to, so it would suggest to me that all round five applicants who are unawarded do have access to those reprogrammed funds.

So I would think it speaks almost directly, at least to the Benton example for it.

Okay, and I'm um and I'm speaking more so in terms of like Marlboro Townhomes.

Now those in another that was in another trust in another award.

Right, and I think that, and that as far as I know, this isn't actually a new section, so I may not be as informed on this.

This just sailed with the prior ordinance, but um these yeah, I think those are just more clearly parade park homes, more or less the entity just doesn't exist.

Prospect of 35th, I don't know enough about the project to articulate it for you, and then Marlborough Town Homes, I think he's expressed it.

So I'm just speaking to the round five, which is really who we're uh endeavoring to draw real money from.

It's that we have 2.8 million or so extra in the Benton project, and that's the issue.

But as to earlier rounds, uh I don't articulate that that section speaks to it either.

Right, it doesn't speak to it.

And and so I understand the ordinance really is about round five, but in order to get to the number you're trying to get to, you're pulling fund, we're pulling funds from other rounds from other projects and other rounds.

And while definitely uh parade park makes sense to me and that that entity doesn't exist anymore, but if the other projects, if there's you know, those projects are still trying to move forward, uh, we're not addressing that, but we're pulling money from those projects that have been previously awarded without necessarily addressing or in writing, it's not in the or what you said is not in the ordinance.

And so if what you say is accurate, I can support that, but it's not actually in the ordinance that those these projects that money is being pulled from still have an ability to be able to receive access to those dollars at a later time once they get closer to being shovel ready.

That's the part that I believe is missing.

I'd like to see if we could add that into a separate section.

I think a fix that we would make.

So as for those three projects in section three we're describing, I believe, right?

So parade park homes will never need it because they've probably gotten 12 million dollars from city investments elsewhere.

So it would strike them anyway.

I don't know the story of prospect at 35th is go ahead and what's that?

I'd be happy to explain, Mr.

Mayor.

So that is a project that had been awarded through multiple rounds.

Uh it was a project that first started with the whole person being the nonprofit entity working on the project.

Uh the whole person dropped out of the project, another nonprofit um Metro-Lutheran ministry kind of took the lead, took the reins on that one.

Uh, it had been offered uh these awards to help them with uh low-income housing tax credit application, uh that the project never received the tax credits, and it was deemed determined to be not a feasible project in its current form.

Uh MLM, the the second awardee that received a million dollars in a in a subsequent round of housing trust fund has voluntarily kind of written us a letter saying, hey, these funds are are being returned.

Uh this is a procedural move to do the same for the whole person who is no longer involved with the project.

So it just seems so I I hear you, and we could always just drop an amendment that says they have priority for it, which maybe is the easiest way to solve it.

However, I would say that it seems like two of three of the projects just don't either exist, don't want to go forward or anything of that sort.

So perhaps it's just unique to Marlboro town homes.

Go ahead.

What would keep them from applying in a later round is my question.

Problem none.

I mean, I wouldn't see anything precluding them from doing that, which would be I mean, if if they're at a point right now where there are funds that are being repurposed from their project because they're not ready to move forward, why would they then be eligible at that same moment for those funds?

Unless I'm not understanding the issue, I think it would be a later time when maybe they are ready to go and there is another round open for them to apply.

The the issue that I'm trying to cure is the fact that um the the mayor made the statement that uh they will be uh top on the list because they've been they've previously been approved, uh and you know, and what you're saying would be they would reapply, then they would go in the funnel with everyone else.

And because they've already gone through, they've spent the money to go through the application process, they've been approved.

I'm I'm simply trying to make sure that if if the intent of is to ensure they're top on the list, that they don't have to go through all of those additional expensive steps again to reapply and that they they can then come back and seek this additional 450,000 dollars that they've already been approved for rather than totally pulling them off the list and making them start over.

And so just wanted to make sure that we get that documented in the ordinance if that is the true intent.

Hey, I I mean, pardon me for misspeaking.

I mean, I I think that the issue really here is that 45th and Benton is having trouble going, but it's a non-Ds three projects issue.

And so it's more to our round five app it's a round five issue.

These round, I don't know what round they are, the prior round people, either one doesn't really exist as an entity anymore, the other one doesn't seem to want it, and now I don't know.

I can't speak to Marlborough, but they've also returned the funds.

I think they're just in a different status position than the other round five people.

I would argue I would suspect all of them, whoever applied for round five wants money.

Um and so they still do want funds would, and that is allowing them to be at a priority point as compared to anyone random, and that's the pattern.

But Councilman Curls.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Yeah, I and I understand that you know, maybe the uh other two projects are different circumstances compared to the Marlborough townhomes.

I just want to make sure that we are not again, and I'll get on my soapbox.

In regards to the fifth district losing out on 450,000 that was there and allocated at one point.

So if there is a way that it can be allocated in the next round and there at the top, and that money is gonna be there, uh then I I would have no problem with that.

But if we've got or if they've got to go back through it again and then are competing for this 450,000 again, which they may or may not get again, then I feel that the fifth district once again is being disenfranchised with dollars that we have been trying to get for a period of time.

Now, whatever that case is in regards to the time frame running out and all of that, uh I mean, I would hope that if that's the case, uh then we are they are still eligible at some point for this 450,000 dollars.

Or uh Mr.

Mayor, maybe you could look at another 450,000 dollars coming from some other fund as opposed to the Marlboro.

That would be uh my suggestion or my thought in regards to this.

I just don't want us, the fifth district or the Marlboro uh neighborhood to miss out on this opportunity of this money.

I I would just say this for the policy discussion just to welcome it.

Theoretically, right, there may be a very good other fifth district project that will not get access to the money if we have something sitting in an account that is kind of blocking it.

I I take your point, but if we use, for example, the parade park example, right?

We've had $350,000 sitting in a third district pot for these years while separately appropriating 12 million, right?

And so it's really just trying to make sure that you have money that is going to projects that will get done and be accomplished.

And I don't know everybody who's applying for projects in the fifth district, but if there's imagine we got applications from the fifth district or fifth district projects, if there's a good one there, you don't necessarily want to knock them back too, and that's just where the I think the issue starts to come from.

But I I mean I hear you.

It's just I do think at a certain point council needs to decide how long we'll keep money in a pot where something's not going forward.

Because it's not your district, but we're looking at 1.3 million dollars of third district money has just been sitting there for some years not going to other third district projects that could do some good with us.

Y'all y'all look like you're chopping at the bit, but if you're the okay, if everybody's good, we'll just do, yeah.

Mr.

Mayor, just to you know, Section 9 tasks me with the uh duty of evaluating unfunded projects in round five to be programmed or eligible for programming if with either reprogram funds from previous rounds or from anything that maybe doesn't go forward from anything that's funded in round five going forward forward.

I guess my question is um how long staff wrote the amendment.

So I don't I mean I don't need a question.

You should just not just I I guess the clarification from the council is for that I'm adding here is I'm only focusing on round five and I'm or maybe to address the council members' concerns from district five is to say look plus I'm I'm gonna hold this.

If you all don't know what you want from this amendment, then I don't know why I'm articulating all of this.

I mean, your staff drafted an amendment that suggested a path for how this could be best done.

If that is not the way it can be best done, then we've just spent 25 minutes here.

I'm no I'm not sure that it's not the best the best way to get this done.

I'm just trying to understand exactly uh the concerns of the we'll hold it till the end of the docket and um then we'll deal with it from there and you all can discuss on it.

All right, we'll go to the next item.

Or is it committee advances?

I move that the charter requirement for reading of ordinances on three separate days be weigh for the ordinances on today's docket listed as committee advances, and that these ordinances are advanced for final reading and consideration at this time.

So it's been moved in second.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

Hearing on the clerk will call the roll.

Raya, aye Bunch, aye, pearls, aye, Barkshaw Boo, aye.

Duncan Willet, aye.

Branch, aye.

Rogers, aye, Harrison Hasley, Robinson, aye.

Aye.

To advise.

Motion passes.

We'll proceed with the items listed on the committee advanced debate document.

Yes, sir.

250673.

Amending chapter 64, Article 5 by added new section 168, 170, and 171.

Code of ordinance for purposes of establishing a temporary moratorium on annual permit fees and site wall cafes, park books, and street cafes, and directing city manager to provide an annual report to the council related to the program.

Finance committee recommends due pass.

Councilman Boo.

Honorable Mayor, this uh is an ordinance brought to us by you and Council Rogers.

Um, the City of Kansas City recognizes the vital contributions of small businesses.

Access to outdoor dining spaces is essential for the many restaurants seeking to expand their operations, improve customer experience, and increase revenue.

The current combined annual permit for street cafes, sidewalk cafes, and parklets is $850, which is in addition to I believe a $250 uh initial application fee, which can present a financial burden for small businesses.

This amendment establishes a three-year moratorium on those annual permit fees representing a targeted investment in small business recovery and growth that will generate increased economic activity and tax revenue.

Finance governance public safety reviewed and recommended advance and due pass.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Ray M.

Bunch.

Aye.

Aye.

Parkshaw Boo.

Aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

O'Neal.

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

Franch?

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Nine ayes.

Ordinance passes.

Two of excuse.

Excuse me.

250709.

Amendment chapter 66 code of ordinance by repealing and replacing sections 289, 423, and 427, and men in chapter 70 code of ordinances by repealing and replacing sections 273.

For the purpose of amending regulations relating to the toll truck operators within the city and providing for a delayed effective date.

Finance committee as you can ask.

Councilman Boo.

Honorable Mayor, uh Councilman Curls comes through once again with TOW Ordinance 2.0.

This ordinance will require tow uh operate this ordinance says four things.

It requires tow operators to provide a copy of the bill of rights to a vehicle owner when the owner is present.

Requires tow businesses to display the bill of rights at service desks in a conspicuous manner, requires tow operators to report toes to the city via an online platform.

Apparently they were doing this by fax previously.

And it establishes a prohibition for towing from the scene of an accident if the tow operator had not been called by law enforcement, public works or a driver unless the tow is for emergency public safety purposes.

Thank you, Councilwoman Boo.

Is there any further discussion?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya Varge?

Aye.

Aye.

Markshaw Boo.

Aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

O'Neill?

Aye.

Will it?

Sure.

Frank?

Sure.

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Harrison Hasley.

Robinson?

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Ten ay's.

Ordinance passes.

250530.

Amendment chapter 88 zone development code party building placed in section 881203.

881304 881403 related to permit uses in office, business, commercial, downtown, and manufacturing zone district.

Establishing a new section 88372 to create special permit requirements.

Just try to grab the mayor pro tem who I see through the banch can do it.

Requirements and establishing a new operational standards for used motor vehicle sales lots.

Section 8880504 to refine commercial use classification, then adopting a new definition in 8818, 11 and 12 to distinguish between new and used motor vehicles.

You'll lose neighborhood committees of class.

Councilman Bonge.

I'll just say this is used car lots.

Oh.

Oh, shoot.

I'm apologizing.

I started off with the right one and I switched over to the wrong one.

Um used car lots, some more restrictions, and you probably want to chime in.

Neighbor Planning Development Committee recommended advanced that you pass.

Councilman Willard.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, I understand the uh origin of this um ordinance, but I had a couple people reach out to me, um, business owners of my council district that would like to review how it may impact them, especially in near the industrial areas.

I understand this is more geared towards used car lots near um neighborhoods and other main arteries, but there may be some unintended consequences for used car lots that are completely isolated in industrial areas and a couple up by the airport.

They just asked to have more time.

I obviously voted to let this go out.

I would just like it to go back to committee just next week, and I promise we'll give you a vote next week if we could do that.

I would oppose that request, and so are you converting that to a motion?

Yeah, yeah.

How do I do that?

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved in second.

If the discussion is whether this item should be re-referred to committee, I think I would argue this to your point, whomever is actually covered by this regulation is grandfathered in, and so it would not affect existing operations for these types of products uh or sellers in Kansas City.

Instead, we're in a situation where we're looking to address future blighting issues and giving some direction that does not curtail any existing operations in Kansas City.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

The clerk will call the roll.

Raya, no pearls, uh Duncan?

No.

O'Neill?

No.

Will it?

Print.

No.

Rogers?

Aye.

No.

Lucas?

No.

Seven nays, three yeses.

The ordinance remains before us.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance?

Councilman Willard.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I would like to make sure that this is not affect areas away from neighborhoods.

And I there are some folks who maybe be contemplating expansion even away from neighborhoods.

And so I would just would like this to be held.

If you don't want to refer back to committee, maybe hold it for next week.

I just there's some folks who've emailed me that I want to do due diligence with.

Um, obviously, I was not originally opposed to this at the beginning, um, and I'm not necessarily opposed to it right now.

I just want uh due diligence.

Uh councilwoman fringe.

Uh just for clarification, because I've received several um letters as well.

This does not affect current plots.

Okay, so it's only future.

This would be future uses, future applicants.

This is your grandfathered in with the existing operation wherever you are in the city.

Councilman Willett.

Okay.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, how I understand it, the current business in terms of how their current layout is grandfathered in.

Correct.

But if that layout is, let's say, near industrial area, away from a neighborhood, they have plans that they're about to expand, you know, then it would then apply to their expansion, even though it's away from the neighborhoods.

That's where I'm trying to go about for and get some clarity.

I haven't had obviously no, there's a lot going on right now.

Hadn't had the time to have a in-person meeting with with them, and I will have one prior to next week.

I just want to do my due diligence because I don't think that this was talked with those stakeholders.

I understand the area where we're trying to the corridors that we're trying to address this from.

And I want to make sure that if they want to expand, and honestly, that might be a good thing because we want probably expansion of used car lots away from neighborhoods.

We don't want, you know, near and so that's what I want to talk about with some folks before voting on this.

So I'd ask for this to be held until next week.

I would oppose the request for a hold.

Will we convert that to a motion?

Mr.

Mayor asked me to hold one week, please.

Is there a second?

Same discussion from before.

The reason for the opposition to the hold would be the following from my perspective.

I would just ask on on this particular um situation.

I understand what my colleague is saying, but I would also uh imagine that in the case of uh uh an extension, somebody wants to build out in an industrial area, a waiver could easily be correct, you know, requested and I I don't think any of us would object to a to something like that.

So I'm not sure, other than a waiver, I'm not sure how we you know predicate or build this ordinance any differently than it is.

I think that's correct, and you absolutely know if that through the special use permit process you would have a path, much like many do in Kansas City to continue to build on the industrial site.

I would articulate at its core though, you also can still build, it's just asking you not to have these blighting influences on what you build.

So you can expand your parking lot, you just need to make sure you have fencing cars not parked on sidewalks, weeds, those sorts of things.

Councilman Bunch.

Yeah, I just want to add there was a question about about zoning and how it can affect current business.

I just wanted to highlight that matters of zoning.

Uh you uh we can't take uh a legally, even if it's non-conforming, if it was legally created and uh under the previous zoning.

So just I wanted to maybe add that context.

Like there's that that's the way zoning works.

Um and uh those who uh are lawyers could probably explain that better than I could.

But I and also it my recollection of this, I think you just said this, it's not that it's gonna preclude uh expansion, it's just simply it's providing some extra extra design criteria for for lack of better term uh to ensure that the blighting factors aren't there.

So it's this isn't like restricting anyone under current base zoning from doing expanding these car lots.

Councilman Willard.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Again, I yeah, I understand that it's that folks certain folks are grandfathered in, but if someone wanted to, let's say double their size away from a neighborhood, then this these rules would then apply to them.

That's where I am want to talk through about it because I understand close to neighborhoods.

I didn't know I don't know if there's a provision in here where we can if you're within away from a neighborhood um or you're not I don't know, put a radius in there that these may not apply to you.

That's kind of what I was trying to work for to help um a constituent out.

Um to your comment on the um hold request.

Well, I understand that your point, it may just be a difference of opinion on this.

First of all, this I think the ordinance was introduced roughly 10 weeks ago.

Uh there has been discussion with folks in the industry.

There's disagreement, of course, with folks in the industry, but this does not prohibit expansion, it doesn't prohibit any other steps, it just requires you, if you do expand, to actually follow frankly good design principles that do not allow for a lot of the blighting influences that exist on major thoroughfares.

To your point on neighborhoods versus industrial, I'll give one example.

Stadium drive.

I don't know how many of you all often drive it.

You have a number of used car dealerships in that stretch that is industrial, that's zoned industrial.

I will note, by the way, industrial zoning doesn't mean that we don't have residents near it.

Often multifamily residents and others are in those spaces.

And in that area, I think that is substantial blight that does a disservice to Kansas City.

Everyone driving to Arrowhead Stadium often will drive by those stretches on 40 highway on Stadium Drive and see some of those different types of issues that arise.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I understand where this developed, and it did not necessarily develop from concerns right in the first district.

If I understand you did some walks of like what 10 mile walk, did you do or something?

Yes, 10 mile walk.

Yeah.

It's pretty impressive.

Um anyways, so I understand where the origin and kind of the community engagement.

My folks who I represent in areas uh up north, they found out about it yesterday, and I I didn't understand how it would affect them.

They just have a couple quick concerns.

Every corridor, like every area is built off differently.

We just did the KCI area plan, and as you know, I beg on no truck traffic on Cookingham in certain corridors and keeping it that way.

And as much as I as I am, you know, keeping certain industrial need for neighborhoods, and I have a strong record on that, but if it's already something that's already cut off up there in that area, I just want to make sure it's applied to them.

I'm not a lawyer.

I did ask some questions to to the lawyer during committee that I then have some follow-up questions from.

Obviously, I voted this out.

I was just asking for a week.

Obviously, it doesn't sound like colleagues want to honor that, so you guys can go ahead and vote it through, but I'm gonna vote no because I just would like to have a conversation just with my constituents.

Councilman O'Neill.

Just a quick question.

In deference to my colleague, um, if this has no uh serious implications of one week, I I would I mean I do think uh an uh a citizen is entitled to some answers and and and regardless of what they are.

Um but I would I would encourage anybody to give it a week just to bring it back next week.

Here's what I might say, because we can do a motion to um reconsider in the next week.

I've been around long enough to see the lobbying efforts that arise over a certain amount of time.

I don't I don't know if a week is for information seeking.

I think it would be more for lobbying and all of that to your point.

That's why I encourage us to vote on this ordinance that has been with us for 10 weeks.

I I think that we have laid out a few spaces for someone who's upset or concerned that they could do.

One, if this passes, you can still just expand your used car lot under the law in a way that addresses and prevents the type of blight at issue.

That's one simple approach.

The second is special use permit being a very valid basis.

And I served on the Board of Zoning Adjustment, so I recognize that if you are absolutely in the middle of an industrial lot near no one, no one cares, and I have a point at the BZA.

I would assume that they would find in your favor that yes, you can expand whatever use in that space.

So I don't think this suggests that we're curtailing their opportunity to grow to expand, and there are lots of outlets.

I don't think it's a final thing that just says you're forever stuck with what you are in Kansas City.

And then Council Neil's point, that would be my real thought.

All right.

So are you withdrawing the motion for a hold and want a regular vote?

I'd I'd like a hold.

Okay, so still there's a motion to hold motion to hold the item.

Uh no does not hold the item, and we consider our consideration.

A yes holds the item.

The clerk will call the roll on the motion to hold.

Raya.

Aye.

But pearls.

Aye.

Um Duncan?

I vote no, not to hold the item.

O'Neill?

Oh, I yeah.

Will it?

I and I promise to vote next week on it.

I'm not trying to hold it up.

Print.

Aye.

Rogers.

I'm Hasley.

Robinson?

No.

Lucas?

No.

Eight yeses and four nays.

Even if some were confused, it I don't think it would make them.

Well, go ahead.

Go ahead.

I can't reconsider until next week, right?

Can I reconsider a vote now?

That again?

Can I reconsider uh to reconsider?

I was catching Councilman Reya up on the situation, and I accurately explained to him that we were voting on uh a hold, and I in the process of that forgot that that's what we were voting on, even though that's what exactly what I so I I misspoke and is there some other way to re poll short of a motion to reconsider.

Uh not that I could advise you to do no.

Yeah.

Well, you have a motion to reconsider.

That's fine.

Are you okay with this whole uh with the outcome of this?

I I know what's gonna happen, right?

We're gonna hear from folks who won't use car lots who are gonna say that it's in calamitous.

Um and we'll just deal with that for a week and we'll come back and we will debate the exact same points a week from now.

I that's why I'm content with um and and what I would offer is if we want to just remove the first district from the application of this ordinance, I'm fine with that.

And I wish to reconsider my vote.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second, so moved and seconded a motion to reconsider motion to reconsider allows us to continue the debate on the ordinance on the item today.

A um that's it.

All right.

Any discussion?

Clerk will call the roll.

Mayor, are we voting on the same amendment?

Right now you are voting on the motion to reconsider the opportunity to consider the hold.

Oh my gosh.

Yes.

Clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Aye.

No.

Parkshaw.

Boo.

Aye.

Aye.

O'Neill.

Aye.

Will it?

No.

No.

Rogers?

I mean, sorry.

Uh French.

I don't need a no.

Rogers?

No.

Hasley.

Robinson.

Aye.

Aye.

Seven ayes and four nays.

Motion passes.

The item on the motion to hold is before council.

I would note once again if we want to just vote on the ordinance.

That provides us an opportunity.

And we don't have to vote on the hold again, because I I I would predict we see where it's going, but we can do a motion to the motion to hold is before the council.

Do you have any interest in withdrawing the motion to hold and just voting up or down on the item?

Mr.

Mayor, um, this was just I I'm I know that we're accused of lobbying efforts or stuff like that.

This is a constituent who reached out to me.

Understood.

That I wanted to have a conversation with before I voted.

That's why I asked for this to happen.

I'm someone who went in committee and voted affirmative to get this out of committee.

I have more questions about it, and it's something that I was just wanting to sit down and chat with someone over coffee about and see if there's any uh type of because they actually believe that they are good actors in our city, because I there are some good actors in this industry.

Now I do understand that this might present some time for bad actors to come up here and and say and lobby other people, understand that to happen.

That's not what that purpose or per for this.

I just promised someone that I would try to have a cup of coffee with them before I voted on this, um, because this is not something that was obviously developed with how regards to um use car lots near the airport.

It's more conversation towards there.

At the end of the day, I I just would like one week, and I'm not trying to hold it up more than one week.

So understood.

Councilwoman French.

I just want to say in supportive of this ordinance, but I'm also supportive of my colleague, and I really think that getting some time in order to have these conversations, that's what I'm about, making sure people have voices and conversations.

I got several letters myself just that I was able to look at today that I haven't had any conversations.

Um so I think that's why I would be in favor of the hold.

All right.

I appreciate that, Councilman Willard.

And I would never accuse you of lobbying efforts.

It is probably some um external actors.

As I see it, I mean to stand by the city planning commission that reviewed this probably um six five weeks ago.

The ordinance itself was introduced ten weeks ago.

This received a hearing in the neighborhood planning development committee, as we laid out even in discussion already.

There is the process where you can just build an expansion if you follow the rules.

If you don't want to follow the rules and you want to build a lot, I don't know where the cars are right next to who knows what.

Um, then you can get a special use permit.

The city has that process.

But here we are.

The motion is a motion for a hold.

A no vote means we won't hold it and we'll consider discussion and consideration.

A yes vote means that the item will be held for one week.

The clerk, and so just letting the people who are going first know the clerk's about to call the roll.

On the motion for hold, no means we continue in a potential vote.

Yes means the opposite.

Clerk will call the roll.

Raya?

No.

No.

Yes.

Parkshaw.

No.

Boo?

No.

Duncan?

No.

O'Neill?

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

Ranch?

Aye.

Rogers?

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

Um, no.

Lucas?

No.

Seven.

Five yeses and seven nays.

The motion fails.

The ordinance is now before council.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance?

An aye means it passes, an A means it does not.

The clerk will call the roll.

Raya?

Aye.

Aye.

Pearls.

No.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Boo.

Aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

O'Neal.

Aye.

Will it?

French?

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Actually, Edison Hasley.

Robinson?

Lucas?

Aye.

Ten ayes, one nay, and one abstention.

Ordinance passes.

Next item.

Yes, sir.

250598.

Accept the recommendation of the Central City Economic Development Tax Board to increase the funding for two projects in the amount of 771,680, reducing existing appropriation in that amount and appropriating that amount from appropriate fund balance of the Central City Economic Development.

Authorizing manager of payment service executed necessary documents to amend the funding agreements and expend that amount from funds appropriating the Central City United Development Fund.

Neighborhood committees to pass.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

Can I sorry this uh accepts the recommendation?

Thank you.

Uh, from the Central City uh economic development board for additional funding in the amount of 771,680 dollars for the uh manager uh procurement to execute necessary documents to amend funding agreements to expend the additional funds for and there the detail is uh the one project is developing seeds of love, uh which was initially rewarded 153,900 to rehab two single family homes to create seven independent living spaces for individuals with disabilities during the early stages of renovation.

It would discover that additional repairs are necessary to complete the project, so they are requesting an additional 210942 dollars, 210,942.

Also, uh Central Families was originally awarded $355,355 for the construction of its new office building.

However, however, due to the age and deteriorating condition of the existing structure, significant unforeseen repairs had been identified, and they are requesting an additional $560,738, which uh gives the total of $771,680.

The neighborhood planning development committee reviewed and recommended due pass.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim.

Is there any further discussion?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Ray.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Boo.

Aye.

Donc Willett?

Aye.

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Addison Hasley.

Robinson.

Lucas.

Aye.

12 eyes.

Ordinance passes.

250637.

Amended chapter 48, code of orders and title nuisance, prior to filling one definitions.

30 ranked weed and noxious plants.

Amending chapter 56, code of ordinance and title property maintenance code and repealing section 433, Noxus Weed and acting a new section light number and subject matter.

By enacting a new section 116, excessive growth of vegetation, invasive and noxious plants and poisonous plants to the touch.

Amending chapter 34, Court of Ordinance, title of Health and Sanitation by repealing section 7, weed and noxious plants, and amending chapter 262, Code of Morrison title Solid Ways prior to filling articles eight nuisance.

Neighborhood committees to pass.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

The proposed amendments to the city code would expand allowances for native plants and managed natural landscapes, meaning a premise, lot, tract, or parcel of land that consists of intentionally and continuously managed vegetation, allowing growth to its natural height for the purpose of benefiting the city's natural environment.

In order for these managed natural landscapes to maintain their appearance, they must also meet additional requirements, including no turf grass, 10 inches or more in height, noxious plants, invasive plants or rank weeds.

The defined landscape must have defined boundaries, no veget vegetation, may encroach onto neighboring property for the right-of-way and at least one unobstructed safety corridor, three feet in width and seven and a half feet in height must be present.

These requirements will help maintain the aesthetics associated with life in a large urban metro area while still allowing for native plant yards and gardens so long as they are intentionally maintained.

Do pass.

Thank you, Mayor.

Tim, is there any further discussion?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Ray?

Aye.

Aye.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Boo?

Aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

O'Neill.

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

French.

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson?

Aye.

Lucas?

Aye.

12 ayes.

Ordinance passes.

250639.

A minute.

Zone development code by filling section 881203 uses 881204 lots and building standards.

888 395 country club has an act and move that section light number and subject matter to adjust the area, including the area known as Country Club has a neighborhood community passed.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

This was brought to us by our sixth district colleagues and the mayor.

The and I don't know if you all want to say anything, but um the area defined as country color plaza area regulates building height and uses within part of the district.

The sponsors seek to amend the boundary of the country club plaza area, removing the subject site and updating the definition to reflect change.

City staff uh with the property owner in collaboration presented a revised text amendment that uh only allows office related uses and height regulations for the specific site.

City staff recommend approval for the revised text amendment that uh was reviewed in neighborhood planning development committee and um the neighborhood planning development committee reviewed and recommended due passes any further decisions?

Thank you.

Is there any further discussion on the item?

Just for the people following this story.

This is a great day for the plaza.

I think it is a good opportunity for our future, and we look forward to more development and more growth in that area for years to come.

Thank you uh for your sponsorship, Council members.

There's no further discussion.

The clerk will call the roll.

Raya, aye, bunch, aye, Earls, aye, Mark Shaw, aye, Duncan, aye.

O'Neill, aye Willet, aye, aye, Rogers, aye, Hasley, Robinson, aye Lucas, aye.

Ordinance passes.

250695.

I mean it accepted an approvement of one year, three seven hundred and thirty-two thousand nine hundred ninety dollar growing work, Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services by four public health functions.

As a main appropriating that amount in the health grants fund, designated requisition authority recognizes one as having accelerated effective date.

Neighborhood is due pass.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Amble Mayor.

Uh this will extend the uh Kansas City Health Department's contract with the state uh by an additional year's the annual certification or annual uh renewal and allocation from the state that supports the chronic disease prevention activities such as educational classes, inspections of child care facilities, and disease investigation and contract tracing, neighborhood planning development committee review recommended to pass.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim.

Is there any further discussion?

Hearing none of the clerk will call the roll.

Aye Mark Shaw aye Duncan O'Neill Aye Willet Aye Rogers Patterson Hasley Robinson Aye Lucas 12 ayes.

The ordinance passes.

250638 amending chapter 2 article 6 code of warnings entitled boards and missions and committees by repealing division 16 titled body sequences pedestrian advisory committee, including sections 2-970, 11 and 12, and by repealing and replacing division 18 title parking and transportation committee, including sections 970.16 uh through 21 and a new division in title 18 multimodal transportation commission, including the true uh sections 970.16 through 21 for the purpose of establishing multi-modal transportation commission parking policy review board to coordinate the conference and multimodal transportation planning policy development and parking management within the city.

Transportation committees to pass.

Councilman O'Neill.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, this legislation repeals the bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee and the parking and transportation committee and establishes the multimodal transportation commission commission, which will be charged with identifying, studying, and making recommendations for addressing multimodal needs within the city.

This legislation establishes the duties, members, staff responsibilities, rules, and designating meetings for the commission, transportation infrastructure and operations committee recommended advance and do pass.

Thank you.

Councilman Bunch.

Real quick, I just want to say thanks uh to you, Mr.

Mayor, and uh and your staff.

Uh Miss Nase was very uh thoughtful in the approach to getting this right, so I was able to work with her a lot, and I was on the chair of the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee many years ago, and um I think this is uh this is an appropriate direction to take this, and so thanks for all the work on it, and thanks for my colleagues for supporting it.

Thank you so much, Councilman Bunch.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya, aye Bunt, aye Burrells, aye, Arc Shaw, aye, Duncan, aye, O'Neill, aye Willet, aye, French, aye Rogers, aye, Patterson Hasley, Robinson, um Lucas, aye ordinance passes 250680, authorizing manager of community services executed in agreement with Smart City LLC for the installation maintenance and programmatic services with digital kiosk on city property for a term of up to 20 years unless there's a cause for termination.

Transportation committee to pass.

Councilman O'Neill.

Mr.

Mayor, this ordinance uh seeks to enhance public access to information, improve connectivity, and promote digital equity throughout the deployment of smart city infrastructure.

Ike IKE Smart City LLC is a provider of digital kiosks that offer interactive services, including local wayfinding, public service announcements, and energy alerts.

I believe in committee we we learned that there are going to be 31 to 33 kiosks placed around the city in a very uh a manner of of separation that uh majority of that is in the fourth and fifth uh fourth and fourth district actually um but that's for uh initially for uh the World Cup and 100 different languages that will be able to be utilized on each kiosk.

Uh transportation infrastructure and operations committee recommends advanced due pass as a committee substitute.

Thank you, Councilman O'Neill.

I understand there's uh from the staff side of things a request for a hold as it relates to a um other contractual arrangement in on that issue.

Is there an objection?

Harry none, the item will be held, I assume one week.

Item be held for one week.

Next item.

Yes, sir, 250701, appropriating 160,000 dollars from the non-appropriate fund by the capital improvements fund for the northwest Old Tiffany Springs Road and Northwest Skyview Avenue traffic signal improvements project and recognizes ordinance is having cellular factor date.

Transportation committees to pass.

Uh interesting story on this one.

Uh about four days ago, someone called me and said we need a uh stop light on this intersection, and I was able to call public works and they said, oh yeah, that goes in next week.

So uh we respond quickly when we need when we're needed.

Um the ordinance will improve traffic control infrastructure at a developing intersection.

The new signalization will help prevent accidents, reduce congestion, and support traffic flow efficiency in the area, which is growing at a rapid pace in that area.

Transportation infrastructure operations committee recommends advance and du pass.

Thank you, Councilman O'Neill.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Bunch, aye, Earls, aye.

Markshaw.

Boo.

Aye.

Aye.

O'Neill.

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

Brent?

Aye.

Rogers.

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Twelve eyes.

Ordinance passes.

250702.

Authorizing manager of province services to execute a five-year contract with SP plus LLCs to provide parking management services at the airport.

Authorizing management procurement services to amend the contract and exercise two one-year renewal options with further council authorization.

Authorizing Director of Aviation to expand 11,269,633 for the fiscal year.

Transportation committee records do pass.

Councilman O'Neill.

Mr.

Mayor, this contractor operates and manages all parking operations consisting of approximately 28,000 spaces with nearly 140 employees to provide parking services to all the public parking facilities at the Kansas City International Airport.

There's a 24 hours a day, seven days a week operation, which includes the terminal garage, B garage, which is employee parking, C garage, which is valet storage, two service slots, terminal valet, and an off airport valet operation.

Contractor is responsible for this cu for the secure and accurate collection of an anticipated $75 million in annual parking revenue and managing the operation operating budget to maintain all parking equipment, cleaning of all parking facilities, maintaining off-airport valet shuttles, service vehicles, and snow removal and the lot.

Transportation infrastructure and operations committee recommends advance and do pass as a committee substance.

Thank you, Councilman O'Neill.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance?

Harry, none the clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Bunch.

Pearls.

Aye.

Markshaw.

Aye.

Blue?

Aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

O'Neill?

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

French?

Aye.

Rogers?

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson?

Aye.

Lucas?

Aye.

The ordinance passes.

250704.

Reduce and continued appropriation in amount of 1 million five hundred thousand dollars in a capital improvements fund.

Or that amounts to the stadium drive street scrape east 31st Street to Raytown Road Project.

Authorized recognizes 27 effective date.

Transportation Committee to pass.

Councilman O'Neill.

Mr.

Mayor, this project is considered important due to Kansas City's role as a host city for the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

Infrastructure improvements such as this bridge widening are essential for efficient transportation for both residents and visitors.

Thank you, Councilman O'Neill.

Any further discussion on the ordinance.

Harry now the clerk will call the roll.

Aye.

March.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Boo.

Aye.

Thank you.

Aye.

O'Neill?

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

No, sorry.

Go for more.

Will it?

Aye.

French?

Aye.

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Twelve eyes.

Ordinance passes.

250705.

Authorizing a 3 million 984,646 construction contract with Lethal Sons for the water main replacement in the area of Chelsea Avenue and Blue Ridge Boulevard.

East 17th Street to Race How Road Project and authorized a maximum expenditure of $4 million 383,111 and recognizes $278.

Transportation.

Councilman O'Neill.

Mr.

Mayor, this this work will include the transfer of customers, water service connections from existing water mains to new water mains.

It will contribute to service impacts by replacing aging, break prone water mains with new water mains.

This is project number five.

Goals were set at number 11% for MBE and 11% for WBE Transportation Infrastructure and Operations Committee recommends advance in due pass.

Thank you, Councilman O'Neill.

Any further discussion?

Hearing now, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Aye.

Pearls.

Aye.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

O'Neill?

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

Print.

Aye.

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson.

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Ordinance passes.

250706.

Estimated revenue and amount of 335,039 dollars in a capital improvements fund.

Appropriating that amount for an unappropriate fund balance of the capital improvements fund to the Northwest McCombage Drive and Northwest England Road to Northwest 68th Street project and recognize this ordinance is having solar effective date.

Transportation Committee to pass.

Councilman O'Neill.

Remaining funds on earlier joint projects will roll to the next project.

Both Northwest 7 2nd Street and North Green Hills were completed in cooperation with the county.

And funds for those projects currently held in escrow accounts will be transferred to the project.

Thank you, Councilman O'Neill.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Bunch.

Aye.

Aye.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Aye.

Duncan.

Aye.

O'Neill?

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

French?

Aye.

Rogers?

Aye.

Haddison Hasley.

Robinson?

Aye.

Lucas?

Aye.

12 ayes.

The ordinance passes.

We'll return to the motion to amend on ordinance 250631.

The motion to amend.

We were in the middle of the discussion on that motion to amend.

Recall that is the housing trust fund project, and the amendment is before each of you in print form.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor.

Uh did have an opportunity to talk with uh staff and city manager and uh colleague uh Councilman Rea as well.

Um and learn that the uh and I actually took a moment to call uh the Marlborough or it's now Kansas City Community Land Trust regarding the Marlborough townhomes, which was a significant concern for me.

Uh that project still has such a significant gap.

Uh he's uh a very significant gap that these it's it's been five years because this was first round, and so I will support moving this forward without holding those funds aside because even with this, there's still a significant gap, which is why they haven't been able to move forward.

Um I would, however, like to um suggest or ask that we do have other policy discussion about how we move forward, how we handle our process with the housing trust fund because in situations like this with the significant gap that some of the projects are having, we need to look at how we handle the difference so we're not just holding on having dollars sit there for years.

Uh but with that, I don't have any additional changes that I would recommend.

I would be happy to sponsor the or support excuse me, the amendment.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim, and thank you, staff for that work on it.

Is there any further discussion on the motion to amend?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya, aye, aye, pearls aye.

Parkshaw, aye.

Boo, aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

O'Neill?

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

Aye.

Rogers?

Aye.

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Twelve ayes.

The motion to amend passes.

The ordinances amended is now before a council.

Is there any further discussion on the ordinance as amended?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Raya.

Aye.

Bunch.

Aye.

Pearls.

Aye.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Boo.

Aye.

Duncan.

Aye.

O'Neill.

Aye.

Willet?

Aye.

French?

Aye.

Rogers?

Aye.

Harrison Hasley.

Robinson?

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Ordinance passes.

Uh Mayor Pro Tim.

I'm a mayor.

I move that the charter requirement for reading of ordinances on three separate days be wait for the ordinances on today's document listed as first readings and that these ordinances be introduced as listed to the committee so designated.

Second.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

Hearing none, the clerk will call the roll.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Parkshaw.

Aye.

Aye.

Duncan?

Aye.

O'Neill.

Aye.

Will it?

Aye.

Rogers?

Aye.

Patterson Hasley.

Robinson?

Aye.

Lucas.

Aye.

Twelve eyes.

The ordinate of the motion passes.

Councilman Willett.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I request that the clerk receive document read ordinance prepared too late to be on today's docket.

The clerk will receive the ordinance, assign a number and read the title.

Yes, sir.

That number is going to be 250811.

Amending chapter 3 code of ordinance is contracting and leasing by refilling and replacing section 425, 505, and 622.

And amending chapter 74 code of ordinance is Kansas City Redevelopment Ordinance by refilling and replacing section 11 to modify the provision of certain city policies to economic development areas tax increment financing plan.

Referred to finance governance and public safety.

Um do it.

I request that the clerk receive document read an ordinance prepared too late to be on today's document.

The clerk will receive the ordinance, assign a number, read the title.

That number is going to be 250812.

Reducing $15,000 from an appropriation in fund number 3518.

General Obligations Series 2018 A, question one.

59,292 of appropriation in fund number 3519.

General Obligation Bond Series 2019 A, question one, 46,766 on the appropriation of fund number 3520, journal obligation bonds series 2020 question one.

Appropriation and fund number 3436, special obligation 2017 taxable bonds.

From appropriation and fund number 3439, 2020 28 question taxable special obligation bonds, 494,820 from an appropriation fund number 3430 2012 B special obligation taxable bond fund 183,823 appropriation fund number 3441, special obligation taxable bond.

2021 B.

418,264 of this appropriation capital improvement sales tax fund appropriating 1 million 900,000 dollars for the purpose of relocating general obligation bond and special obligation bond project proceeds for capital improvement sales tax fund for 89023056 roadway by no Broadway bike lane 31st to 43rd reducing 1.5 million dollars from the appropriation of Southwest Boulevard 31st Street to by way study recognizes 20 as having seller effective date referral I know I'm just deciding if I want to uh use my mayor pro ten role and say uh because while this there's uh a lot of funds here established this actually has to do with the TIO issue so I was gonna recommend that this be referred to a joint committee next Thursday one committee one next Thursday a committee of the whole a significant number of uh funds that you're pulling from which represents finance but it has to do with the transportation infrastructure ordinance and so I was gonna recommend we have a a committee on Thursday I know that's not I might try to convince you of a different one why don't you just pick one even if it's transportation infrastructure and operations rather than a committee of the whole because remember the last time we tried to do a committee of the whole it became a okay uh we can do finance I'll I'll follow what you have on here finance okay that's anybody who's wanting to go somewhere else but okay is there any further business to come before council hearing none we'll stand adjourned