Sorry, a little enthusiastic there.

Good evening.

Welcome to the March 3rd, 2026 meeting of the Manhattan City Commission.

Would you please call the roll?

Mayor Adam Track.

Here.

Commissioner McCollow.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Here.

Commissioner Morrison.

Here.

Commissioner Von Lintel.

Here.

Mayor, we have five commissioners present.

The quorum of three is met.

Thank you.

Would you please rise and join me in saying the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States.

And to Republicans, one nation under our individual with liberty and justice.

We have a proclamation to issue tonight honoring International Women's Day.

You should ready, the president of and Barbara Gatewood, web coordinator of the American Association of University Women, are here to accept the proclamation.

Oh, I couldn't see you back there.

Whereas in 1911, International Women's Day was first honored in Austria, Denmark, Germany, and Switzerland, when more than one million women and men attended rallies campaigning for the women's right for women's rights to work, vote, be trained, hold public office, and for an end to gender discrimination.

And whereas in 1977, United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution calling on member states to proclaim a day for women's rights and international peace.

And following the United Nations lead, each year, the United States President issues a proclamation calling on all citizens to observe March as National Women's History Month, as well as a separate proclamation on International Women's Day, which is March 8th.

And whereas advancing the rights, opportunities, and full participation of women and girls is the great unfinished business of the 21st century.

And whereas International Women's Day is a day to celebrate the collective power of women, uphold women's achievements, recognize challenges, focus greater attention on women's rights and gender equality, encourage and mobilize all people to do their part to bring about positive change.

Now, therefore, I, Susan E.

Adam Chak, Mayor of the City of Manhattan, to hereby proclaim Sunday, March 8th, 2026 as International Women's Day in the City of Manhattan to motivate and unite friends, colleagues, and the community community to actively give their support in order to advance and gain gender equality.

To give to give to gain.

In witness thereof, I have set my hand and cause the seal of Manhattan, Kansas to be affixed.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor Adam Chek, um for the proclamation.

This is our 11th year celebrating International Women's Day.

I'm president of AAUW, which is the American Association of University Women.

It's an organization for everybody, of course, not just uh women and not just from universities.

But we are celebrating on Sunday, March 8th at the Holiday Inn on campus, and we have five wonderful panelists.

Uh three of them are AAUW scholarship recipients, and all of them are from K-Straduate School.

We have Barbara Baker, she is a first generation college student.

Miriam Gassimpore from Iran, and she is in uh mass doing her master's in photography.

Nicole Kuturov, who is doing a doctorate in entomology, Megan Rice, uh, she is a doctorate in organic chemistry, and Minutia Vikaramsing, and she's from Sri Lanka, and she's doing a doctorate in biology.

Uh, this is open to the public.

We have social hour at five.

Six o'clock is the program, sorry, dinner, uh catered by Nikos, and at seven o'clock are the panelists.

And it is like I said, the program is free to everybody.

Dinner is $30.

But this is something we want to celebrate in our community.

We have a lot of women that do wonderful things and are very inspirational.

But we also want to recognize our youth and our future leaders from Kansas State University.

So we are excited about the program and hopefully you can come and participate.

Like I said, it's open to the public.

And you can still come go to AAUW Manhattan website and you can RSVP and join us.

It's open to everybody once again, not just women.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay, there we go.

Thank you.

We are now open for public comments on any item which is not included on tonight's agenda.

Is there anyone who would like to make any remarks?

All right.

Seeing no one approaching, we will close public comments.

Commissioners, do you have any comments?

Andrew.

Jim?

Larry?

No.

Just like to say that Manhattan Public Library sale was once again.

Your distinguished mayor was working there.

And he did success.

It was fun.

I would like to call attention.

I think we we distributed some of these reports several months ago or at the beginning of the year, but we have more in stock.

I would like to encourage you to take a look at it.

It's a very um packed snapshot of what we accomplished during 2025.

It's also available on our website at WWManhattanKS.gov slash year end report.

I've been distributing them around town and have gotten some really positive feedback.

Commissioner Morrison Fox and myself attended the legislative coffee on Saturday morning, at which our state legislators talked about some of the issues they are dealing with at the state level.

Yesterday was very exciting.

We finally had the groundbreaking for Sunflower Flats, a project which has been in the making since 2021, had some fits and starts in the last six months due to the government shutdown, due to some other bureaucratic issues, but this will bring 62, I believe, uh new housing units for seniors online in Manhattan.

It's the first project in what is envisioned to be a campus of low-income housing in our downtown area.

The event was very well attended despite the uh not fabulous weather yesterday, uh, but it was very exciting to finally see that project go forward.

Uh finally, several of us from city staff and myself had the opportunity to tour our wastewater treatment plant this last week, and it was incredibly interesting.

The staff there are willing to offer tours if you want to get together a group to do that.

Um it was a really interesting learning opportunity.

I know some of the other commissioners visited last year, yeah, been there, but well, I was the last one, so anyway.

Thank you.

Um we'll now move on to the consent agenda.

Um commissioners, do you have any comments on this?

I'd like to remove item D one and two from the consent.

Move it down.

Okay, thank you.

And um, do we have can we just have a show of hands of people who intend to speak regarding the Roger rights uh okay?

All right, so I will ask that we also pull item E1 from the consent agenda so that we can have a more robust discussion about that.

So is there a motion to approve the consent agenda absent those items?

So move.

I move.

Mayor, we need to open up public comment for the rest of the consent agenda.

Sorry.

Um is there anyone who would like to make any comments on any of the other consent agenda items.

Seeing no movement towards the podium, I will close public comment and ask for a motion.

I move we approve the consent agenda accepting item D 1 and 2 and item 3E and put those at the end of the agenda.

Uh the end of the agenda or the end of the consent agenda, thank you.

Second.

Okay.

Chelsea, would you call the roll, please?

Commissioner McCullough.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison.

Yes.

Commissioner Von Lentel.

Yes.

Mayor Adam Chak?

Yes.

Motion carries five to zero.

Thank you.

Um I would like to point out and uh that we have the consent agenda includes the appointment of 11 individuals, I believe, to various boards, community boards that advise the commission, and I would like to very much thank those individuals for their willingness to serve in that capacity.

All right.

So now let us discuss item D1 authorizing the city manager to execute a grant agreement with Habitat for Humanity of the Northern Flint Hills in an amount up to 150,000 for the 2026 home rehabilitation and repair assistance program.

Mayor, I raised the question from one of in the documents.

There's a typo.

It says we're giving them 100,005.

And the written part is correct, but the numerical part is not, so we need to change it.

And I think when we had the presentation, we discussed the mortgage, whether there would be a mortgage and it's included in the document.

But I we also had discussion whether it should be five or ten, and I don't know that we made a decision on whether it should be a five or ten year mortgage on those grants.

And I would suggest that we amend that to a 10-year mortgage on the grant request.

Maybe Stephanie could um Stephanie, can you just refresh us on that?

I I did read the minutes, but I don't recall that item.

Sure.

Um so I can kind of give a little bit of background of why we settled on the five years.

Um that is how the existing mortgages that we have under the CDBG home rehab program, they um they now have a five-year mortgage on them.

Previously they did have 10 years, um, that was a really long time for people to not be able to make any additional improvements to their house.

Uh the way that worked is if you had a mortgage, an existing mortgage on your home, you weren't eligible to receive any further assistance.

Um, and so we know that homes uh rapidly decline and there's a maintenance that needs to be done, so that was why the five-year was recommended.

Okay, it's it's ultimately up to you guys what you want to do that and to be clear that five-year we're kind of reclaiming 20 percent each year.

We would forgive 20 percent each year, or if they moved out within that five-year period, we would collect 20 percent for each year they didn't fulfill.

Right.

So if we change it to 10, then it'd be like 10 percent.

10 percent each year.

And during that period, you can't do anything else, you can't.

Uh correct, you wouldn't be able to have an additional uh an additional mortgage or an additional uh home rehab.

Um it would also um we we can change that if you want to allow for multiple mortgages to be there.

Um it just means that when they go to sell their home, they would have to pay back multiple mortgages that are held against that property rather than just one it also puts a longer reporting burden on the homeowner and on staff.

And on how it's really would be habitat for humanity.

Um they were our only response to the RFP we put out, um, so habitat would have to keep track for 10 years versus five of those mortgages and the maximum anybody can get is 25,000.

Correct, right?

So I believe that's right.

I mean the most you're talking is five thousand a year with a five year yes, twenty-five thousand.

Yes, 25,000.

I th I think I would feel I don't think I would feel comfortable hamstringing a homeowner for 10 years to not make additional repairs if they are needed.

So I'm not sure that I would agree with your suggestion to make it to be 10 years.

Well, we in my opinion, we didn't make a decision, so that's my purpose of coming up with it.

Coming in, I did ask Josh if they could live with a 10 year since they've been there.

He acknowledged to me that that was a doable thing.

If there's some prohibition, I don't know why there'd be a prohibition for another mortgage.

We don't do we.

Oh, right now we just say that you can't, I think it's every five years.

I'd want to check on that.

Um, that you can only be a recipient of this grant every five years, and that kind of corresponded with the mortgage.

We could certainly keep that a five year that you can't be recipient like uh so you would be a recipient every five years, but you would have a 10-year mortgage.

We could certainly structure it that way.

Well, as I recall, what we're trying to do is make sure people have a safe home and they stay in their home, and we're giving them a boost to do something that they could not do otherwise, most likely.

And so the the mere fact an extra 10 years is making to me they have a safe better secure home for 10 years rather than five years selling it and doing something different for our money, and that's the only reason I bring it up.

We just need to make a decision whether it's five or ten.

And my idea would be to do ten, but that's up to the the commission.

Yes, I feel like given the relatively small amount you know, probably they're not all gonna be 25,000, they're gonna be 1015.

That probably five years is adequate for what we're trying to do here.

Yeah, so Katie, would you like a motion to establish that period is five years?

Or it's it's in there.

Yeah, that is the five years currently in the agreement.

Yeah, and then we will make the um Commissioner Morrison, you pointed out the one thousand or yeah, the one thousand and fifty will we'll make that adjustment in the agreement.

Okay, thank you.

Andrew, do you have a opinion on the duration?

Five seems fine.

Five seems fine.

All right, thank you.

Um with that consensus being reported, can we move for a motion to approve item D1?

We also need to see if there's any comment on this.

Sorry.

Uh public comment on item D1.

Is there anyone anyone who wants to make any remarks?

All right, thank you.

Public comment is again closed.

Do we have a motion?

I would move that we authorize city manager to execute a grant agreement with habitat for humanity of the Northern Flynn Hills Incorporated, an amount up to 150,000 for the 2026 home rehabilitation and repair assistance program.

Second.

All right.

Chelsea, would you please call the roll?

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison.

Yes.

Commissioner Von Lentel.

Yes.

Mayor Adam Track?

Yes.

Commissioner McCullough?

Yes.

Motion carries five to zero.

Thank you.

Randy, do you have a presentation on this?

I've got a few slides if you want to pull them up.

I I don't really have a presentation.

Um, but I can I can go through some of the basics.

I guess if you have specific questions, I'll I'll entertain those and see what I can I can do.

Well, mayor, I raised the question and asked it to be withdrawn.

Not that I have any particular concern, it's that the information that I read did not indicate a clarity of what we are doing and what we're doing.

They're signing up to enter a lawsuit.

And that is something that would be of significance.

These kinds of lawsuits go on forever.

Um if you see the TV ads where they got 30 billion dollars for the asbestos folks that go on forever.

That's one of these kind of cases.

And it's just according to the document, there is no liability to the city.

The lawyers only get paid when and if they recover.

And I gather it's probably a defensive move more than an offensive move of thinking we're going to get a bunch of money.

But if there are problems, at least we may have some smoke screen to defend ourselves.

But I just wanted to make sure it's clear.

It's just not hiring lawyers to do contracts.

Or we thought we had an issue, so we contacted them, but you're right.

We were solicited for this.

For us, it's really more about peace of mind and having the opportunity to get the sampling done.

If we wanted to participate, it's really about meeting a de meeting a deadline to participate.

Which requires us to have that sampling completed and put by March 31.

I will say that from our perspective, we don't particularly have any concern that they're going to find the contaminant.

And you know, if it is found, then we could potentially be eligible for those for that claim to to recapture any funds that become available.

Again, you folks had to educate me on what all they're looking for.

Could you give us a quick idea of what the concern is?

The companies, the nature of what they're looking for for liability.

Pretty major settlements for PFOS and PFOS related microplastic chemicals that are starting to become more heavily regulated by the EPA.

They're establishing rules on the water and the wastewater side.

So this the next round is with companies that developed the foam the firefighting foam chemicals that also contain these PFOS chemicals.

And so we already know that there's some settlements out there available, and there could be more.

Sure.

We'll make it into the wastewater treatment system.

Well, I mean, it's pretty much given, isn't it?

That all those plastic.

Not necessarily in the source water.

Okay.

We obviously we've our source water is groundwater.

There's no known contamination sites.

Okay, so we're testing the groundwater.

This is the water we're gonna drink.

Okay, I see.

Not the water, but isn't there the danger at some point when they're going to ask us when we put things back, the sludge back if it's full of P FO?

On the wastewater side, yes.

There it's it's becoming more and more evident that there will be some regulations we'll have to abide by in the future.

But this only deals with the water that comes from water.

This particular one is for source water.

Okay, thank you.

Yes.

And at this point, this is there's no financial obligation on the part of the city.

Zero.

The um the testing will be done by the a lab recruited by the law firm, and we will just be a named entity within the lawsuit.

Correct.

There are several other Kansas municipalities that have signed up for this as well.

Um in our opinion, there's not a lot that could be negative when it comes to this.

But if we if we find out that we have some, it's better to know than not to know.

Yeah, yeah.

All right.

Thank you.

I think I appreciate our being proactive with this.

Um as Commissioner Morrison indicated, this could be a very long process.

We've seen it with uh to litigation against tobacco companies about against uh opioid distributors, and uh this could be years in the making, but I think it's uh no burden on us, and we do have that benefit of getting this benchmark testing done.

So I think that's a positive.

Is there any other comments from the commissioners?

Is there anyone in the room who would like to make public comment on this item?

Seeing no one approaching, we will again close public comment.

And do we have a motion to approve item D2?

I move we authorize the city administration to finalize and Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract for legal services between the city stag Louisa Louisa, LLC and Perry and Trent L L C for the representation related to PER and Oh wow.

Polyflor light.

What is that?

You didn't know polyflora alkali substances defaz litigation.

I'd second Chelsea.

Commissioner Morrison.

Yes.

Commissioner Von Lintel.

Yes.

Mayor Adam Chak.

Yes.

Commissioner McCullough.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Motion carries five to zero.

Okay, thank you.

Um our final item from the consent agenda is approval to develop a recommendation for Dr.

Roger Wrights at Union Pacific Depot.

I'd like to clarify that this is not going to be renaming the depot.

It will be uh recognition of Dr.

Wright's fascination and appreciation of trains and a commemoration to uh a local citizen who has served us for decades, both in his capacity as a very compassionate physician and as a public servant.

So with that clarification, uh please make your presentation.

I don't know what I'm gonna present on now, Mayor, but uh no.

Uh you can sit down.

Yeah, thanks.

Dr.

uh Roger Wrights, the memorial recommendation.

Um staff received a request from uh Mr.

Mike Madsen, and I'm gonna have him uh come up here and speak to that request, uh other than kind of the factual overview that I have here.

Um we reviewed that request, presented it to the the park board and uh historic resources board, both boards were very supportive in creating some sort of uh recognition at the depot.

Um as you mentioned, uh Dr.

Wrights served the community as a physician and educator, state legislator and a city commissioner.

Um he's a significant contributor to the restoration of the depot as it uh underwent that registr uh restoration.

Uh so it is fitting that this location be the site for uh that recognition.

And what we're asking the commission for tonight is basically the permission to proceed with the process to bring you an official recommendation of what that recognition could look like.

Um we want to form kind of an internal committee of historians, uh, the Wrights family, as well as city staff uh to create what that recognition looks like at that site.

We would put those options before the park board and the historic resources board for their recommendations, and then the commission would be presented with a specific recommendation for approval at a future date.

Thank you.

And with that, sorry for stealing.

Uh Madam Mayor, Commissioner, Mike Matson, 3947 High of L Place here in Manhattan.

This started with some friends of Dr.

Wright's and family encouraged me to uh invite Roger onto my radio show on Veterans Day, which happened to have been the man's 93rd birthday.

And so we had a wonderful conversation, and from that dialogue sprung this idea to have some sort of a recognition of Dr.

Wrights publicly within the community.

And I do want to point out that that words have meaning, and this is not a memorial per se, because the man is still with us, and we hope he remains with us for for a number of years.

And so, as Aaron mentioned, we we started the process, uh started conversations.

The family asked me to run interference for them uh throughout the various uh city committees, had conversations with Aaron and his team.

He suggested we touch space with the historic resources board, had some wonderful conversations there.

They had really good ideas.

Uh it's amazing uh the sort of institutional knowledge that that exists within these advisory boards.

And so that's when we struck on the idea of some sort of a recognition to be determined.

There have been conversations about a bronze plaque, about a stone marker, and I think those are the things that we hope the committee comes up with and then comes back uh to you with a formal recommendation in terms of paying for it.

I've had we've had a number of friends of Roger Wrights who had said, yes, I'm willing to donate.

We've had conversations with the Parks and Rec Foundation.

I don't think anyone envisions any any city taxpayer funds going toward this.

I think it's all friends of Roger Wrights and through the foundation.

And so I know there are a number of people here that would like to say a couple of nice things about Roger, but before we get to that, uh Sharon, your family, would you guys stand up?

This is Roger's family, right?

And they wanted to make sure that they were here, and we wanted to make sure that they've come from far and wide, and they're eager to have their to have Dr.

Wright's uh recognized.

So I'll be happy to stand for questions, or I'm happy to stand down and let some other folks talk.

Uh I think I saw there was someone else who would like to make a comment.

A number of people, yes.

Thank you all.

Sure.

Um, Mike, I'm sorry, can you sign in over at the podium?

Were there any other questions for me before we move to public comment?

Okay, thank you.

Don't you appreciate how well I studied the materials you provided?

Okay.

My name is David Lewis Guthels.

Uh, Madam Commit uh, Madam Mayor, Commissioners, good to see you.

Thank you for the opportunity to visit with you about a man who is just I think he's just one of the the icons of the community and Dr.

Roger Wrights.

The fact that he was born on Veterans Day before there was a Veterans Day, I think uh should not be lost on this.

Yes, he was born on November 11th, uh served in the U.S.

Army and served our community in so many different ways.

Um I can think of no greater honor to recognize him with something at the depot as has been mentioned, the work that he did in getting it restored.

But if you have never been in his basement and seen his gigantic Lionel Train collection, you've missed out on something special.

And he and I have this common bond.

His collection is vast.

Mine is not, but it gives me uh uh a great appreciation for his love of railroads because that's something that both of us grew up with, and it was something that was very important to us and that we continue into our longer years.

But um he is um he's been a wonderful man, a great friend to this community, uh not to mention the state and the nation in so many ways.

And so I'd like to endorse this opportunity to recognize Dr.

Wright's.

Dave, would you sign in, please?

All that.

Yeah.

Thank you.

And let's talk later about trains.

I have a couple of boxes in my basement.

Very later.

I'm still moving.

Good evening, commissioners.

Uh, my name is David Kreller, uh, PO Box 417 here in Manhattan.

Uh, long time association with Dr.

Dr.

Wright's.

Uh, my my bride has the has had the privilege of working with him in private medicine uh earlier in both their careers.

Uh one thing I think that's that I I think is especially meaningful here in my endorsement of this um recognition for Dr.

Wrights is when we look at his public service, a lot of focus, of course, is on the train depot where this this uh recognition might be placed.

But um a lot of my interaction with Dr.

Dr.

Roger was during his time on the commission, and I was asked to be involved not in the aspects of the train depot, but another facet of something that was important to him, and that was the animal shelter.

And not the most recent, but the first expansion of the animal shelter, I was I was involved in in that aspect on on his behalf.

Um the animal shelter, of course, goes to his Roger's father's legacy, of course, is how that all came about, and that's quite an interesting story.

Uh, if you're not familiar with that, ask Roger, and and you'll you'll get a quite a history lesson on that as well.

Um, one thing that I especially admired about Roger again is is his public service, and and one thing that I have always admired and tried to strive for as I worked in in various volunteer aspects of public services.

Well, he might go into a conversation with some sort of preconceived idea or outcome.

He was always open-minded, and in today's world of partisanship and and us against them.

Roger is one of the rare elected officials, true public servants that could be persuaded when provided the facts.

He was willing to listen, he was willing to learn, and I think that's something admirable and certainly worth recognizing him in some form at the uh the train depot.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Jackie McClaskey, 3947, Heilville Place.

I was just thinking back to the very first time I met Roger Wrights was when a mutual friend told me when I was a college student that I really needed to go to the doctor.

And so I met him in his office as a patient one morning at 8 30 and had no idea at that point the impact he would make on me, and probably vice versa.

There's probably days where Roger thought I wish Jackie would have never walked into my office.

But I had the opportunity to become Roger's friend, most importantly, and then work with him on his city commission races, his state house races, and his state senate races.

And one of the things that just stands out to me is how that they just don't make people like Roger anymore.

No offense intended, anyone setting in those seats.

But he is a very special man in a very special public survey.

And we were at the Krellers in the basement watching the election results come in in one place and then watching the city commission race.

And someone gave Roger the early voting tallies, which had top winning.

So Roger basically conceded from his seat on the bench that he had lost the race.

And I'm pretty sure I drove from the Krellers to here in about 37 seconds to pull him back from pull him back from a seat and said, You did not lose.

The race is far from over.

And that's one of my favorite Roger memories, and that I can't help but think about when I stand in this room.

But one of my other Roger memories is was during a debate.

And some of you who played in Kansas politics for a while might remember or know a reporter by the name of Tim Carpenter who worked for the Topeka Capitol Journal.

And I'd known Tim a long time, and and Tim knew some of my background in playing in politics, and he saw that I was there helping Roger, and he he came up to me and he said, I don't understand.

And I said, You don't understand what?

He said, Why are you helping someone who you have to disagree with on a lot politically?

You two just don't, you can't necessarily agree all the time.

And I said, Well, we don't, but that's not what this is about.

Roger is the reason I support Roger, the reason I will work hard for Roger, the reason so many people support Roger, is that he is a true public servant.

We know he is going to work as hard or harder than any other elected official, that he's a true good, genuine human being, that he is humble in the way he represents others.

And in the end, he's very principled, and he's going to tell you exactly what he stands for.

He's going to tell you exactly what he's going to do, and then he's going to go do it.

And I told the Tim that night, I said, I would rather support someone who disagrees with me when I can lick him in the eye and he can be honest with me and tell me what he stands for, than someone who's gonna just um switch positions with a whim, or you really don't know who the man is.

And one thing I think everyone in Manhattan knows is that he is a good man and he deserves to be recognized.

So I encourage you to pass this recommendation.

Thank you, Jackie.

Is there anyone else who would like to make a comment?

I'm not really so um I'm Russell Rice, Rogers, oldest son.

Good to see you, Karen.

Jim.

I don't know anyone else, but um you you treated my husband.

Oh, okay.

I'm sorry.

That's all right.

I recognize you now.

Um so anyway, different memories I have.

A lot of what Jackie says I can um attest to as well.

He never really wouldn't look and see, you know, what is the popular stance on this, but what is the right thing to do.

He never was a guy who was looking out for his interest, like how is this gonna benefit me?

Or how can I, you know, gain from this.

He was always looking out for the underdog or the person he thought needed to be looked after.

Um another memory I have is when I was probably 10 years old, and he was up at his desk, he'd be writing checks, and I learned about like what is that for?

Oh, this is tithing, and this is you know something you just do.

And the other was about his A issue politically.

It wasn't abortion, it was Amtrak.

And so he would write as senators and say, you know, you need to do a better job supporting Amtrak, and um then when he was getting this grant for federal funds for the train station, he donated money, and it was a matching grant.

And you know, we can get this thing done, we can get this thing um brought up to Snuff.

And they were falling short, and he called me, he said, Russell, this train station thing's important or short X number of dollars, and I need you to take care of it or chip in or whatever.

And um is important to him, so that's what I did.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you.

Russell, would you sign in, please?

Yeah.

Sorry.

Uh anyone else who would like to make a remark.

Well, thank you all for sharing those uh I don't want to say memories, but um those observations about Roger.

I I'd like to make a remark.

Sure.

Yeah.

Having spent four years sitting next to Roger on this right here.

Um I would like to say that along with doing this wonderful thing to remember Roger at the depot.

I would urge, and I see Ann Christian's back there, I would urge the foundation to possibly look into improving the depot a little bit.

It's the noise, the noise level in there when you have meetings, is significant.

And if there's some way we could put some baffles up, or I don't know what you do to get to improve the noise, but Dave could agree with me.

And so, as part of this, as you're raising money, um maybe just add that on to the to the brass thing or something like that, because I do think that would um there would be more usage of the building and it'd be a much more pleasant place to have meetings.

Thank you.

Other commissioners, do you have any remarks?

So I would just point out I've known Roger for many, many, many years.

I think I went to him uh as when he was a physician, but uh in addition to all the public service everybody has mentioned, I used to live in the neighborhood next to his.

Uh for a long time.

Uh, but even when he gave up that paper route, he would walk the neighborhood, and the paper boy, if he had thrown it in the street or by the curb, which they usually did, he'd throw it up on the porch so that people didn't have to walk very far to get their paper.

So I mean that's a true public servant to deliver your paper to the front door.

So I I strongly endorse this idea.

All right.

Would you like to make a motion?

I would make a motion.

I have one more paper voice for you if I can tell it.

Sure.

So I was probably in college at the time, and my wife and I would go over to their house for Sunday for dinner, and it'd be like the first of the month, and he'd say, you know what, today is it's payday that the paper money would start coming in.

He said, so and so didn't pay.

I'm gonna go to his house, and I'm gonna say that'll be four dollars and thirty-five cents, and I'm gonna sock it to him.

All right, uh Larry.

Okay.

I am I move uh approval to develop a recommendation of recognition for Dr.

Roger Wrights at the Union Pacific Depot.

Second.

Uh Chelsea, would you call the role?

Commissioner Von Lintel.

Yes.

Mayor Adam Track.

Yes.

Commissioner McCullough?

Yes.

Commissioner Fox?

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison?

Yes.

Motion carries five to zero.

Thank you.

Um we will now move into a public hearing to consider approving ordinance number 7815.

Goodbye, you all vacating the platted front yard setback line of Baltis Rawl addition lot 13.

So as the mayor just said, this is an item to hold a public hearing and approve an ordinance.

Uh vacating a platted front yard setback.

I'll pull this up.

Uh there's a couple of these that you'll be seeing in the coming weeks.

So I wanted to give a quick background.

Uh quick background on why we would vacate a setback.

So this can be one of two ways, either through the public hearing, which we're having this evening, or it can be through a replot.

The replot is a much longer process, hiring a civil engineer, so this is a much more straightforward route.

Um, the so the until about five years ago, um, when we would have a subdivision, their uh people would show their platted setbacks for whatever reason.

Um we no longer have that practice for exactly uh why we're here today.

So this plat has an existing 25-foot um platted front yard setback.

The Manhattan Development Code in the RL district, the front yard setback is only 20 feet.

So in order for this lot to be developed, I'm guessing they're going to put uh want to use part of that front yard setback, that additional five feet.

That's why they're requesting that vacation.

Um so I I don't know if there's any questions on that process that you have for me, um, but this is just one of two ways in which they can go about uh vacating a setback.

My question is that lots on the cul-de-sac, right?

Correct.

Do all the other lots around that call of sac have the same 25 foot?

They would.

Um most of these are not developed right now.

There's a lot quite a few vacant lots in this subdivision, um, but they would be able to come forth to the commission with the same request.

Well, it seems to me that you have probably plenty to do.

Would it not be wise to vacate all of them from 25 to 20 on that call of sack?

Well, that would take all the property owners, they're all different at most of them are different at this point.

It would take all those property owners getting together to bring forth a replat, which would be a little bit cumbersome to try to organize.

So this was done before the new building code uh outlined.

Yep, correct.

The Manhattan Development Code.

Okay.

So how many other developments do we have like this that most of the ones in the city?

Uh the platted front yard setbacks will not meet what the development code is.

Um but anything that's been done since about 2020, 2021 will no longer have platted setbacks for for this very reason.

Commissioners, any other comments or questions for Stephanie.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Uh do we have any public comment on this item?

Seeing none, I will close public comment.

Do we have a motion to approve uh this ordinance?

I move that we approve a considering approving ordinance number 7815, vacating the platted front yard setback line of baldus roll addition, lot 13.

Chelsea.

Mayor Adam Chak.

Yes.

Commissioner McCullough.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison.

Yes.

Commissioner Von Lentel.

Yes.

Motion carries five to zero.

Thank you.

Um we would now move to our general agenda.

We have one item tonight to consider approving the 2026 amendment to the move MHK comprehensive parks and recreation master plan.

PR 2023 CIP number CP406P.

Eric.

Evening again, Mayor and Commissioners.

Uh, tonight we're talking about the 2026 amendment to move MHK.

Um, just as a reminder, uh this the move MHK was adopted on June 18th of 2024.

Um it has the four primary goals uh for the development of the parks and rec system.

We do annual goal setting processes, and then we do uh amendments as needed uh to update the plan.

So we want to make sure that we're responsive to the community needs and uh address shifts in public interests and trends and system requirements.

So again, we are trying to update this annually a minimum with just the goals, but also amending it as needed.

So the four goals enhance the level of quality in parks, focus on the quality improvements that consider future needs and growth, enhance the delivery of programs and services, enhance operational efficiency and uh financial health of the department.

So this amendment for this year um really contains kind of three documents.

The first one being the uh survey for indoor aquatics and the CECO park um kind of uh concept that was put out through that uh survey.

The riverfront concept that was developed by a private group of citizens and brought to the well, both the city and both counties, and then the Flint Hills Discovery Uh Center Sculpture Trail.

Indoor Aquatics, uh we sent out a statistically valid community survey conducted in uh the last half of 2025.

Um widely received quite a bit of results, over 1300, so an error rate of uh error margin of 2.6% at a 95% confidence level.

Um so that's really good traction on that.

Especially when you're only seeking 400, so lots of responses.

And what that means is the majority of people did not want us to pursue indoor aquatics.

So anywhere from 55%, depending on what question was asked, up to the 80 percentile was suggesting that we don't pursue any new taxes, any location, any of that for aquatics.

So based on those findings, we are uh recommending that we do not pursue indoor aquatics at this time.

Um and our future focus would be prioritized on reinvestment of this existing parks.

So that final question kind of brings that last bullet point, which we asked top priority, which streets came back at plus 80%.

The number two on there was reinvestment into our existing parks.

Riverfront, uh long-term conceptual vision of the uh access and engagement with the Kansas River.

Just to be clear that adopting this into the plan does not commit the city to any projects, funding, or timelines.

It simply adds the concept into the plan and then allows for us to go get public engagement on it and future uh surveys, which we plan to do about every two years.

Um that's that we committed to that when we did move MHK because that's part of the uh frequent updating of it, and then of course any public meetings or stakeholder outreach that comes with that.

This allows the city to uh evaluate the riverfront opportunities incrementally and responsively, so based on the priority that the citizens would put on it.

So and then the sculpture uh trail plan.

So the the picture here is kind of the the sculpture that's been approved, and uh Commissioner McColl.

I know you've mentioned we've had a few extensions on that.

Um art art uh operates on its own timeline sometimes, but uh I've seen pictures, they are making progress.

So but that would be the first piece of this, and then the sculpture plan would obviously uh be a framework to incorporate the public art around that.

Uh the Discovery Center obviously supports placemaking, cultural engagement and education, and provides intentional guidance for uh the donated uh donor initiative and partner support of public art over time, as the uh the Discovery Center Founded Foundation does a lot to support the uh public art and amenities that surround the Discovery Center.

With that, I'd be happy to well, so uh parkboard action.

They did recommend the uh adopting the amendment, and so kind of what that looks like if approved or adopted, we'll officially amend that uh uh the plan with the aquatic survey, riverfront concept, and the sculpture uh trail plan that will be put on the website.

We'll obviously push that out through our social medias, which includes the survey, those findings, uh the riverfront concept, and the trail plan.

Um it's uh it would be included along with the goals uh that we kind of reported out for the annual report.

So that would be the appendix for moving HK for 2026.

Any questions?

So the MHK document is rather lengthy.

I haven't read the whole thing, but is there somewhere in there that says we're going to do valid community surveys every two years?

That was our commitment when we talked about it.

It wasn't necessarily put in the document, but it is uh it is something that we intend to do to get public input and continue to have public input within that document.

I I just I don't particularly like having that particular sentence included with the riverfront.

It's just part of the presentation, it's not necessarily going in uh the amendment was included in the item that doesn't necessarily mention that.

So I think go ahead, Jim.

Well, my observation is why are you including the results of the survey has been published as far as I can tell in the immediate future, it's a dead duck.

So why do we keep reporting that number one as a part of the MHK movement?

Um it seems to be redundant.

Um I would hope as we send out surveys, they are better quality surveys than we saw on the water aquatics deal over the last series of times, and a lot less money.

Um I don't know if that was one of Larry's concerns about doing a survey every two years, but I would hope between the commission, your staff, and the public, you can get enough input to know whether you're out in left field or you're on the bench on all of these topics without spending that kind of money for a survey.

So I I'm with Larry.

I think the reference of every two years is not an appropriate one at this point for where we are and what we need.

Um number two is a critical person.

Critical, not in necessarily in thinking at times, but critical.

I don't see that there's a real future in any foreseeable future on riverfront with the control that we do not have on the river, the river flow, the maintenance of it between the core and flooding and those things that will ever be viable.

I know there's people that have worked hard for a long time to make any entrance to our town more attractive, including the the old bridge and those things.

But my 70 years here and having owned land along that river.

It's always going to be a dirty river with trees, logs, and crud, batteries and tires coming down.

And I just don't see any focus being worthwhile on riverfront in the foreseeable future.

So I one would be asking take it out.

And as to the sculpture deal, as I understand that our city has done nothing to come up with or within the community, not just at the at the Discovery Center, but there's not been a committee created to do or to talk about sculptures are elsewhere in town.

Is this an opportunity to add that to this program and only have one group looking at art so we can have some consensus?

That's my three observations about these things.

Thank you.

Commissioner, I believe there had been a public art board or committee in the past that the prior commission did away did away with.

Well, then maybe it's time we bring it back, but we give it to one group that's going to be talking about art, and I'm not concerned just with the Discovery Center.

It's a good facility, but I think other places when the community, and if we're going to have art critics, let's have art critics do one thing.

I love that you brought up public art because that's been one of my things for a long time.

We did have a committee, a board of art, and one thing we tried to do was get a um procedure so that if we had any buildings, a certain percentage would go to art, you know, one percent of the gyms or that kind of thing, so that there would be a fund.

Um sadly it was done away with.

We did that committee did put up the sculptures um in 2020.

Then we had COVID, so it didn't, you know, but there's also the deal committee um for arts and humanities, and I sit on that, and we have done a number of murals in town.

We um participated in the sculpture on on the um landmark bank.

I think you've probably seen that.

Um, there's also the sculpture as you come in the the concrete circle.

Um we did also the bronzes that are in front of the Douglas Center, the you know, small and so and of course the zoo has done all kinds of, you know, so there is a lot of movement to do art earlier, excuse me, um, with the chamber I visited some university towns and Mazoo, for example, has incredible public art, and you know, something should be done.

But I'd like to um to talk about the water study.

Excuse me.

Um I think that study was seriously flawed.

First of all, in 2023, there was a survey that showed 77% of Manhattanites wanted to have indoor water.

Then of course, the the great huge whatever it is, um, MHK thing came out.

And the only um, and I thought that a lot of this was really good.

Went through every park in town and talked about where they ranked and if they're good, bad, what they needed.

The only one though that they went forward and developed something new was the enormous public swimming pool, indoor water, and gym in City Park.

And as I told you, Aaron, that won't fly.

And I think that's part of it.

And so I don't, you know, sticking that study in, which really doesn't prove much of anything.

I don't think we asked people if they're willing to pay 30% more taxes to have something.

Nobody knew exactly what they were getting, um, why it should cost 60 million dollars, what we might do to partner with other people, what we might do to get the foundation to help help us, as Ames did.

They got a third of theirs from private funds.

So I am concerned with the shift we're seeing to pay for play.

And the models that we're seeing are only benefiting, benefiting sport clubs.

Do we have a clean and transparent reporting of what's happening with public art and public participation?

I have asked repeatedly for the usage for the first three months at the gyms.

I asked for that in November, and then I asked for the next for all six months in January, compared to what it caught what kind of attendance we had before we started charging.

I think those attendance numbers are really important.

I also asked that the Park and Recks Board would under would be given the HUDL report, which the chamber gave, which I thought was infinitely better as far as what we should do in the future and what we should develop.

I and I've also asked that all of these parks that we have here have some various small things we could do to improve them.

And what you know, what's our what's our list of things we're gonna do?

Warner Park, for example, is not ADA compliant.

How could we make that with with having some area that's paved 88 compliant?

We can't make the whole thing 88 compliant because it goes up and down and in and out.

But I'm just very frustrated that I don't see um coming from your department, what I think the public really wants.

And I asking people if they would vote for 15 mil increase on their property tax is death for any project.

I wouldn't, you know, no way would I ever do it.

So I I really want to see if we have transparent and there, and there were a lot of really good things, really, really good things in this report.

Um thing is they talked about a quality of life sales tax may be needed.

Well, our quality of life sales tax is sunsetting, and I think this group ought to start right now talking about could we continue that tax?

Not a new tax, but can you tax?

I think Park and Recs needs that tax for for running it.

Um another thing is um one of the things that said in this report is that adults have the least satisfaction with our parks and ricks.

There's substantial gaps in senior programming.

Also, they said many programs are filled to capacity.

They talked about breakfast with Santa.

Well, that's two mornings.

Why don't we do it four mornings if there's that many people who want to have breakfast with Santa?

Both the mayor and I have been there to serve.

Um there was great um criticism about our activity guides, and they have all kinds of things that they felt you should be doing to improve those, and maybe you've uh done some of those.

But um things like allow payments for other than credit card.

I don't know what that was all about, but um they're just there it seems like we got move MHK, and we haven't really used it.

We have the chamber doing this absolutely fantastic thing, I thought, you know, they showed the fishing was something people wanted to do.

Well, so what can you fish in Animar Park?

I mean, why aren't we doing some of these things that individuals can do with our kids, not just sport teams, that kind of thing.

So I I'm as I said, I'm concerned about the shift to pay for play, and that's how I feel.

Okay, uh, so I'll take a few of those things.

Um the rec center uh participation was actually reported out in our annual report that was sent out to all the commissioners.

It was also presented to the park board, so it's available there that talks about the the participation uh, and I don't have those numbers on the top of my head that is in that report.

Um there's no question I can say not to be.

I wanted to see a comparison.

It it compared to prior years, and I will tell you that there is less participation this year than there was last year.

I mean, if you move from feed to a charge, you're gonna have less participation.

Um as far as uh trying to tap into uh programs that's identified in that.

Um we absolutely do uh try to expand programs and look at different times.

We continue to work through that year over year.

Um we have seen 10% growth year over year in participation for the past two years.

Um so that um I would say we're growing in the right direction.

That doesn't mean we don't have other opportunities.

Um the huddle up, which is about sports tourism, um, really recommends um adding a few things into these components, and one of the things that we are trying to do based on that study is partner with Visit Manhattan to increase the tournament play here as it was recommended in there, and and one of the the areas that we're looking at right now that's helping us build that is actually Steel and Pipe Ballpark.

Um so I believe I don't know that we've finalized it, but we have increased between from 10 to 20 tournaments in this upcoming year, and we're looking to continue to add based on that.

Um so we are continuing to work with Visit Manhattan on that report uh to engage in what our piece of that partnership is.

Um there are certainly opportunities for fishing uh that were identified in that report.

We do have a couple um local fish fishing ponds, which would be Dishman and Annenberg, and then of course Stonehaven uh up off of Miller Parkway.

Um so I think when they're talking about a fishing derby, they're speaking of a larger location, Tuttle Creek Milford, maybe.

But if there was a partnership to be had, we would certainly entertain that uh depending on what that would look like for parks and rec.

Um so I do think uh we are trying to offer that information to both uh park board, the commission, and the public uh in the form of those reports, and uh obviously we'll see what happens once we've got a full year of data mid-year this year with uh uh rec centers and attendance.

Um but uh yeah, we're certainly uh trying to pursue these things, and we are certainly trying to pay make uh the small improvements that we can that are within our budget.

So it'd be great to see a list of those though, to see and not to have to go through this genormous bunch of facts and figures, just to have a a readout of this this park.

Here's what they need, this park, here's what they need with some dollars next to it.

So maybe we could have a capital improvements thought on what we want to designate our parties our payments to.

It it is actually the last uh chapter seven within Move MHK has the priority list and the each park and yeah, for each part the estimated value of the cost of those improvements.

So A being the most needed, B being mid and C being uh the long term.

So I I agree with Karen on I would like to see us some smaller things happening kind of at every park.

Um dog parks is one of the ones that I think the community could use a few more dog parks.

Um I and also I would I think that the three rec centers should be free, and that it was a it's uh it really hit a lot of the community hard when that when that what they felt was a promise was broken.

Um so I think me and I think me and Karen would agree on that.

Um I think too that you know sports tourism is really important, and we can do things that we've got this wonderful CICO, you know, layout.

But perhaps the gyms should we shouldn't try and have big uh basketball tournaments.

I mean you said it's hard to do it with two things, and if I paid my 40 bucks to so my kid can go, you know, play in the gym, then on the weekend it's closed because there's a tournament.

I mean, it's just kind of a you know problem because I'm I'm worried that we're getting away from as I said this.

I'm seeing this shift to pay for play, and if I'm already paying to go to that gym and I can't play, yeah.

It's just a balancing act, and I understand you're trying to make as much revenue as you can and bring people into town, and I think that's super.

But I do think we're also subsidizing many rec many different sports because we think it's important for our kids and our adults to have leisure activities to be healthy, to be occupied and busy, especially kids, you know, doing something constructive, not doing something that's not constructive.

And I was especially amazed that they said that adults have the least satisfaction.

Perhaps adults don't need some of the things that park and rec provides.

We've got the MAC, we've got you know other things that adults can do, but that was brought out pretty strongly in the Move MHK plan.

Yeah, so I mean we've certainly worked to uh adult sports programs.

Uh we've uh the partnership with the MAC uh expanding their Clay Studio into uh CPAC and City Park.

Um are areas of uh where we've tried to, you know, some of that's youth as well, but um areas where we've tried to expand that.

Uh we've worked uh um members only basketball for the rec centers where we're actually running that at a uh time that we are normally shut down so that they can have access to the courts in the winters when they're so packed.

Um so that was something we just kind of started out of the idea.

So when we do the rec centers, our our commitment was to have a court open for drop in play.

And um, you know, there were a couple uh I'd say scheduling mistakes this year that we had to make amends for, but um you know, our that commitment stands firm for me that we need to have an open court every day, including when we have tournaments.

Sometimes that's Douglas.

Um so I I do think that uh we are trying to satisfy both ends of that.

Um removing fees obviously has a budget impact.

Um, we've successfully reduced our subsidy by um over a million dollars over the past two years.

Uh we offer the scholarship fund, so those that can't afford, and we issued 83,000 in that last year.

Um thankfully the foundation backed that, so they made us quote unquote whole as far as those registration fees go.

Um we've expanded our day camp program.

We've got further expansion this year, so there are always opportunities that are out there that we are continuing to try to take and fulfill, and when things are brought to us, our immediate answer isn't no, our immediate answer is is this something we can do?

And we do try to do that if it's brought to us.

So commissioners, I think we have strayed, I think this is an important discussion, but I think we've strayed somewhat from our topic of the evening and the the body of this particular item ahead before us.

I would like to suggest that we schedule a work session with Aaron, perhaps uh in late April after another quarter of data are available for use of this of the rec centers, and we can continue to have this dialogue, give Aaron a heads up about what type of data we would like to see so that he can.

It's clear from his explanations that he does have information to provide a checklist of what has been done at the parks over the last two years.

I know equipment has been replaced, uh the the Blue Earth Plaza water feature is being redone.

So I would like us to refocus on the discussion at hand, whether we agree with amending the MOVE MHK with the addition of these three documents.

That being said, I do have a question for you, Aaron, which is I was also a little bit puzzled about including the results of the survey in there.

Is that in part to provide the reader with a rationale for why that particular item is not being pursued?

Yeah, so the intent of that is to bring that item to a resolution.

Um we were tasked with doing the survey.

We completed that survey regardless of how we would move forward.

This is a point in time that that would go into that document to inform that overall progress over time.

Um it's really about record keeping, so to speak, that more so than uh, I guess maybe whether we agree with the methodology or not.

I think this goes to the point of, you know, we've been talking over the last several years about some very ambitious visioning plans for our community, and I would highlight the MOOC MHK, and as well as the East Gateway Plan, the work that's being done to look at expansion along Highway 24.

These are all living documents.

These are visions.

They're they're a plan in my mind, and I think this is accurate.

This is laying out what we want to do, what we hope we can do, what we it's a roadmap to get somewhere.

Some of these things will not ever see the light of day.

Some of them will, and for that reason, I would approve putting all three of these items in the plan.

I think that the riverfront, I we can disagree about whether we see that as something that would ever be developed, but it's an excellent report.

Um it shows a real commitment on the part of members of our community who shepherded that project uh into fruition, who made had a number of uh community engagement opportunities to gain feedback on that.

It was very professionally done, and I would I would like to see it as part of our record with the idea that we're not committing at this time to any expenditures related to that, but that we do have a vision for what that part of Manhattan might look like.

I think Commissioner Marson raises some good points about you know, we can't control what the Army Corps of Engineers is doing five miles up the road, but we that's another discussion for another time, I think.

Aaron, have we had discussions with the Army Corps of Engineers or Union Pacific about going over the levy?

No, I mean uh I I would suggest that we're we have not as city staff.

Um I wouldn't have to have uh uh potentially Tracy who is in the audience uh who worked on the plan could maybe answer that question.

But we we basically took this uh citizen generated report.

It was presented to previous commission and um and both for the city and uh both counties, and the recommendation was uh for adoption into the move MHK to capture further feedback later on.

So I have a more crass question.

In the first survey for the pool, had you told them what you expected the cost to be.

Do you think you had gotten a 77% yada boy to it?

No, uh the the intent of this survey was to ask based on the um the amenities that they selected in that initial survey, which were included in the development of the pricing, if they wanted to pay for it.

And the next thing it seems to me is I'm concerned about CECO is going to be the Taj Mahal and a wonderful facility.

You're not short of vision of quality.

But the financial issue is like when we had the the retreat and we were talking about needs at the cemetery, both of them.

That number of 13,500,000 or whatever it was was staggering.

And when I talked to one of your people on the cemetery board, they said, Yeah, we talked about all those wonderful, never heard a number.

And he said, had I heard that number, I'd have said no on most of it.

I'm thinking our marketing, you are not giving people in our committees what they need to do to help us and you make a comp decision.

Now, I I mean I'm so old, I remember getting to go down to City Park and we'd show up and play ball on the ball diamonds, whoever showed up, and Mr.

Baker's down there kind of a quasi-informal referee making sure we played fair.

I don't see that there's any encouragement for kids to show up, and there certainly won't be any of Sequo Park, it would appear to me if their gates aren't open.

So I'm just saying that's a transition on how we treat, and quite truthfully, I'm not interested in increasing or continuing the sales tax for parks and rec unless there are some stringent requirements on what, when, where, and how, and who gets to approve what's being done.

I think it's been way too loose, and we really have no control over where you spend the money.

So just for one, as you prepare what you think you need and want in the future, be prepared for me to say no unless we're substantially restricted.

And I don't think we can afford one more blooming thing that's even close to the pool or the other ideas.

And we do need to maintain what we've got.

And if you can't do it for whatever your budget is, nine million dollars, then we may need to readdress what is being done.

And that's all I'm saying is your swimming pool might have might have succeeded if you had had a number that some people could have comprehended.

Sixty million dollars was just, I mean, the the horse jumped the fence and went in the race anymore.

That was crazy.

Had it been eight, nine, ten, and it had been a some kind of other park water, it might have passed.

But there isn't anybody at this table, I think it was uh 60 million was even the practical number.

So I think you need to back off and pay attention to what money we can afford, not what would be nice.

Well, uh, Commissioner, just for your reference, uh, the cemetery board did uh vote to recommend approval of that uh item last year.

So they did.

Do they know the number 135?

Yeah.

Well, the fill of that talk to must not have been at that meeting.

They I mean they had all that information.

We brought it to them and uh we even reported it out to park board as well.

So a lot has been said here, and and I'm all for amending amending the move in MHK if it needs to be amended, but um I'm not sure why, but I don't really like the wording in these proposed uh amendments, uh particularly with the aquatic center.

It's a the survey findings indicated limited community support for constructing a new indoor aquatics facility.

Well they had limited support for paying $60 million for it, is what they had.

Uh I think there's a lot of support for one, but it's how do we pay for it?

And uh the community has not been given the option of uh developing a smaller type facility with less fancy stuff and looking at uh paying for it with philanthropic dollars.

As I've said in the past, uh you know, we build a lot of facilities in this town with donated money, and I don't know why that couldn't be one as well.

Uh maybe even raise money uh to operate it.

So I I just I don't like that language in that paragraph because I don't I don't think that's accurate.

Um Commissioners, may I remind you that we are considering approving this amendment if if we do not feel the amendment should be made, we can table this motion and you suggested a workshop, so maybe we need to I I'm just suggesting we are straying from the c the task in front of us.

I'm not diminishing the importance of what opinions are being expressed, but we're not accomplishing this goal.

And so do we want to I don't think we're straying.

I think we're saying that we don't think that the survey should be added because I think it's seriously flawed.

You know, I mean, if we put it down there in black and white, everybody's gonna think that's exactly what we, you know, nobody in Manhattan wants an indoor pool.

I'm not trying to sell a pool, I'm just trying to give it a fair shake.

If 77% were asked in 2022, and you know, that said they wanted indoor water.

Now maybe they were never told what it would cost, and therefore 77.

But I I think to say there's no support for indoor water is totally wrong.

And I just think nobody's gonna be able to have an opinion unless we have some numbers, and you know, flesh this out.

I don't know what pools cost, but well, Mago seems to have built one, and I don't think they spent 60 million dollars.

We can also redo the amendment and say we would prefer to exclude that survey from an addendum to move MHK, include the sculpture path and the riverfront project, and omit the survey at this time.

Or we can table, as I said, yes.

I move that we table this motion until we've had a work session where we can at least have a more open venting of what we really want and need and can afford second Chelsea.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Is there anyone who would like to make a public comment on this item on the agenda?

Amber Starling, 408 Houston Street.

Thank you, Commissioner Morrison.

I make the suggestion.

Oh, sorry, Sue.

Uh Sue Mays, 428 Wickham.

Uh I'm on the parks board.

I'm not speaking as of the parks board, but I uh Mr.

Morrison's comment needs to be fleshed out because I don't quite know what that means and how you would include members of the park board and assisting uh with these efforts, but uh it it was very vague.

So if I would go back to the park board to try to tell them what I heard tonight, I guess I would need more clarification.

I imagine Aaron does too as to what the commission would like to see for parks.

I'm Phil Anderson.

I live at 1719 Fairchild Avenue, and along with uh Tracy Anderson of Anderson Knight Architects.

We have spent the last year developing a riverfront master plan and have shown it to many dozens of Manhattanites.

Uh the three new commissioners have not necessarily I don't know that you've seen it, but we would like the opportunity to show it to you.

We can do that in uh Tracy Anderson's office or somewhere else.

It takes about 45 minutes.

These designs were put together by a Kansas City landscape architecture firm.

The firm's name is MCLV.

The owners are Derek Hootmer, Kevin Cunningham, both K State Architect landscape architecture grads, very skilled.

Uh I could tell you very quickly.

Oh, my time is running out, I won't.

Um I will contact the three commissioners who are new by email and and offer the uh the opportunity to to see these designs.

I the former commissioners have all seen them.

Everybody who has seen these designs, I think my interpretation is that they were enthusiastically optimistic about the opportunity that river provides.

That is, by the way, the longest prairie river on earth at 173 miles.

In 1854, it was described as crystal clear and teeming with fish.

Other riverfront developments in Kansas, including um even a small city like Council Grove.

If you've not seen that, I would urge you to look at it.

In Wichita, that project started about uh 10 or 12 years ago and has already generated over 800 million dollars of private investment money.

Salina, which has a ditch for a river, has already generated 250 million in private investment money in an attempt to develop the riverfront in an ecological way, but also a way to engage uh green space and recreational opportunities.

So I will contact each of you by email and hope that you will give us the opportunity to show it, show this idea, uh, which we are of course enthusiastic about.

Um perhaps perhaps we could have uh our city-county meeting.

You talk to that group because we uh if we're talking about the riverfront, the county, Fairmont Park, it would be a natural addition to it.

And the county has a number of parks.

And it might be good just to hear what they're doing with parks and what parks.

Obviously, they even have you know Seaco Park and they have the playground there in Seaco Park is theirs.

Appreciate that, Commissioner McCullough.

Um Tracy and Phil actually was my first um city-county meeting um as the Manhattan City Manager when they did present the riverfront.

We haven't seen any turnover um on the uh county commissioners, so I'm not sure if they would be interested in in hearing that again, but I do think it would be an excellent opportunity um for our three new commissioners to sit down with Phil and Tracy and and see those concepts.

So I've seen it.

I think the young man in the back presented at the optimist club.

It looks familiar and it sounds familiar, and I've seen the drawings and the schematic.

Were you there, Larry?

I I have seen it as well at that Optimus Club presentation.

So it's a great idea.

I I just think the idea talking to the county about keeping this on the back burner would be a good idea just to see what their input is.

And obviously, um we do share CECO Park with them, and they have other parks throughout the the county.

And you know, sometimes it's a good idea to have a an idea of where you might want to have a park so you can develop that slowly.

Tracy.

Hi, Commissioners.

Tracy Anderson, 116 EJ Frick Drive, and yeah, I remember both of you being an optimist.

And Phil and I uh have presented to probably every service club, every commissioner, every county commissioner, the county, and everybody in between, even Tom Hawk and Sydney Carlin and others, right?

We've we hit the gamut with it.

So almost everybody has seen it now.

And I just do want to reiterate, Susan, you kind of alluded, Mayor Adam Chak, you kind of alluded to this.

Uh it's it's an aspirational vision, just no different than K State's master plan for their campus, no different than the East Gateway study.

Um but it's if you don't have a vision, you don't have an idea of where can we go?

And that's my goal for the community of Manhattan is what's possible?

Where could we go?

If all of a sudden we see a lot of companies relocating, people relocating to Manhattan, that would be a wonderful problem to have.

Well, then all of a sudden that relieves our tax burden as much as we would like it to.

And now we have some vision, and that's what move MHK is all about too.

It's a living document.

None of that is going to manifest exactly as drawn.

Um did we contact KDOT or the railroad about a pedestrian bridge going up and over that?

No, we didn't yet.

It's it's a vision that would all have to be dealt with.

And as somebody said, if anything were to ever happen with that, just like the East Gateway study, there's going to be future committees and everybody involved to help direct that.

Um I did want to address something I thought I heard uh Commissioner Morrison say about the 2017 quality life sales tax and it not maybe doing or was wild spending or something.

I feel like the four items that that was intended to do, it did very well, and it's getting ready to sunset, whether it gets extended or not, but the four items that were set out that that sales tax was meant to do, it has done, and it's provided additional opportunities and quality life amenities in our community.

So I just want to make sure that was fairly clear because I I do think it worked out well for our community and it did exactly what it was intended to do and what we promised the citizens that it would do.

So thank you, Tracy.

Is there anyone else who would like to make a comment?

In that case, we will close public comment.

Chelsea, can you poll the commission, please?

Commissioner McCullough.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison?

Yes.

Commissioner Von Luntol.

No.

Mayor Adam Chak.

Yes.

Motion carries four to one.

I would move to adjourn it unless Danielle has something she'd like to.

I have nothing to share this evening.

Thank you.

All in favor of adjourning, please say aye.

Aye.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Would you like to look at this?