Good evening.

It is now six o'clock, and we will open the Tuesday, April 7th meeting of the Manhattan City Commission.

Jared, would you please read the role?

Mayor Adam Chak.

Present.

Commissioner McCullough.

Here.

Commissioner Fox here.

Commissioner Morrison.

Here.

Commissioner Von Lennel.

Here.

Mayor, we have five commissioners present.

The quorum of three is met.

Thank you.

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

I pledge of the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

Thank you.

Thank you again.

And whereas we acknowledge that in order to solve the public health issue of abuse and neglect, we must work together to change the hearts and mindsets, to change hearts and mindsets through storytelling and sharing, centering the needs of families, breaking down bias and barriers, and inspiring action from expected and unexpected partners in prevention.

Whereas prevention remains the best defense for our children and families.

Now, therefore, I, Susan E.

Adam Chak, Mayor of the City of Manhattan, Kansas, do hereby proclaim April 2026 as child abuse prevention month in Manhattan, and I call on all citizens to increase their participation in efforts to prevent child abuse.

In witness thereof, I have set my hand and cause the seal of Manhattan to be a fixed on this seventh day of April.

Thank you very much.

Do you want to review?

Sure, I can just break the way.

Thank you so much, Mayor.

My name's Alicia Hardman.

I am a member of the board of directors for the Sunflower Children's Collective.

Carson, who is our executive director, was unable to be here tonight, so I'm here representing the Sunflower Children's Collective.

And hopefully this month you'll be seeing a lot of blue and blue pinwheels around the city of Manhattan.

That is the sign of child abuse prevention across the nation, and the Sunflower Children's Collective does a lot of work working with children who have experienced abuse and neglect, and our staff know that it does happen here in our community as they work to serve those families and those children who have experienced abuse and neglect.

And so please check out the social media for the Sunflower Children's Collective.

They're going to be posting all of the different events and things that we'll have happening throughout the course of the month of April.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And our second proclamation was requested by the staff of our crisis center here in Manhattan.

Whereas sexual violence is widespread, preventable, and a public health problem in Kansas communities and across the United States, and whereas sexual violence is any sexual assault that is perpetrated against someone's will, which includes sexual assault, rape, sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, threatened sexual violence, exhibitionism and verbal sexual harassment, and all types of social of sexual violence involve victims who do not consent, who are unable to consent, or who refuse to allow the act.

And whereas the CDC's national intimate partner and sexual violence survey data show that nearly half of all women and more than one in men, one in six men experience some form of contact sexual violence in their lives.

And whereas one incident of rape is reported to Kansas law enforcement every eight hours, 57 minutes and 58 seconds, and more than 2,500 people reported sexual assaults to Kansas law enforcement agencies in 2024, and whereas the majority of assaults are not reported to law enforcement due to underreporting, the true prevalence is unknown, and whereas sex offenders often target people they perceive as vulnerable, less powerful, or less credible, whereas the offender is known to the victim in the vast majority of cases, at least 80% in Kansas, whereas the effects of sexual violence can be long-lasting and impact survivors' physical health, mental health, safety, stability, and overall well-being, whereas the Flint Hills Sexual Assault Response Team is a multidisciplinary group of professionals who collaborate to ensure a coordinated victim-centered response, promote best practices, and strengthen policies that support victims and survivors of sexual violence in Manhattan, Kansas.

And whereas it is essential to support victims and survivors, hold offenders accountable, and work together as a community to prevent sexual violence.

And whereas the victims and survivors of sexual violence are not alone and free, confidential, 24-hour services are available through the Crisis Center Inc.

by calling 1-800-727-2785 or by texting the word heal to 4741.

Now, therefore, I, Susan E.

Adam Jack, Mayor of the City of Manhattan, Kansas, to proclaim April 2026 as sexual assault awareness month in Manhattan, Kansas.

And I urge all citizens to become more aware of sexual violence and the services available for victims and survivors.

And I have hereunto set my hand and cause the seal of Manhattan, Kansas, to be affixed this seventh day of April 2026.

Thank you, Mayor Adam Chack, for the Sexual Assault Awareness Month Proclamation.

My name is Kathy Ray.

I'm the executive director of the Crisis Center, and Tyshelle Jones is here with me.

She is our deputy director.

Sexual violence, unfortunately, is prevalent in every community, and Manhattan is not immune from that.

I think a lot of us you know saw some of the news of some very prevalent cases that we had in our community.

We provide 24 hour services to victims and survivors, and we want survivors uh to know that they're not alone, that we have services available, free and confidential services available, and to please reach out for help.

We have a number of activities this month.

Um they're available on the Crisis Center's Facebook page.

We are having a film screening on April 18th.

Uh we are gonna uh do that at the College Avenue United Methodist Church Fellowship Hall that is open to the community.

Um we are gonna do a film screening of a film, it's a documentary called An Army of Women, and then that will be followed by a panel of survivors and experts from the prosecutor's office, law enforcement, RCPD, the Crisis Center, um, where we'll really be able to engage with the community about sexual violence and how that impacts us as a community.

So we hope everyone will come out and uh take part in the activities we have this month for Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

So thank you.

Thank you, and I hope we all take uh cognizance of these proclamations and do uh our best to recognize the importance of battling this in our community.

Uh with that said, um, are there any public comments this evening on an item not included on the regular agenda good evening?

Sorry.

Don't know if it's an allergies or cold or maybe it's smoke in the air.

Uh my name is Gary Oles.

I live at 3308 Frontier Circle.

I've probably been there since the mid-90s, I guess.

So it's been a while.

I got, like all of you, I got my valuation statement from the county like a month ago or something like that.

And uh about a couple weeks ago when I was playing with the numbers, I had uh an epiphany with which is a realization.

And um that realization boils down to the fact that since, as you know, I attended the um commissioner retreat for the the couple two days or whatever it was, and as I understood, the consensus of that retreat was that this commission has the desire to keep the mill levy flat, which is admirable.

Um unfortunately at flat, in my case, I get an opportunity, or I should say my wife and I's case.

Uh we get an opportunity to contribute about not quite 7% more to the overall bill that will come next year, assuming that you and the other taxing entities stay at the same mill levy.

Now I'm really not complaining.

Uh only because I fared better than our mayor did on her assessed valuation, and perhaps fair to better than some of you all as well.

But it is the fact that property appreciates, that's just the reality of it.

I mean, that's that's just the reality.

Um but I will say that it's important, and I think I've said this before to all of you, and I say this to the public as well.

When you look at your tax statement, and you look at specifically the cost of living in Manhattan, the reality is, even though in my case I pay about 1,600 a year to the city, the city only gets to keep about 350, and I'm rounding of it.

So I will say for city services for a house that's about 270,000, 350 dollars in a year, I'd call that a bargain.

So my hat's off to you if I had one on.

Um because it's hard to provide fire service, keep the roads up, um, take care of staff.

It's that's a tough one.

Um my contribution is relatively small to others' contributions.

But as I've pointed out before, um the difficulty is the fact that RCPD is killing us financially.

My wife and I that's a lot of money.

Now, granted, you all don't really have input on that.

Just Jim through you.

So I would just encourage you.

Do something about it, whether it's your level or whether it's RCPD.

Thank you again.

Gary, did you sign in previously?

Yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anyone else who would like to make public comment on an item not on the agenda?

Seeing none, I will uh close public comment.

Commissioners have you.

Uh I just want to say thanks to everybody that's working on the citywide cleanup of all the branches, leaves, and all that stuff.

Um also Doctor's Week or Doctor's Day was last week, so thank you to all our communities' doctors.

And I think that's about all I got.

Thank you.

Commissioner Morrison.

You know, I've been um here a few years, and I've been here for the proclamation for the Crisis Center and the homeless shelter and those groups, and a pick particularly the crisis center.

I wonder why do we have to proclaim this every year?

You know, this has been historically.

Women have been had violence thrust upon them.

Now, of course, there are some men, but generally it's women.

If you look back to the Greek play Les Estrata, that's what they were talking about in the 600 BC time.

So I just wish we could all kind of put our minds together and see how we can limit the number of dollars that have to go to support this, but it is a good thing.

Also, I would just point out taxes are coming, and everybody has knows that they're on the 15th.

Um, as much as we all want to go, oh my gosh, here come the taxes again.

I would point out that Kansas gets a dollar eighty-five back for every dollar they send off to Washington.

We just saw four million for the vet school come in, so it's a pain to pay taxes, but that's how it is.

I would like to recognize two city staff members.

Um Bill Heatherman, who is our stormwater engineer, has been selected as chair of the Kansas Water Group.

Uh I don't see Bill here tonight, but please convey my congratulations.

Our congratulations to him.

Um Chelsea Johnson, who normally is sitting at the uh over here, has been designated as a certified municipal clerk.

And please convey our congratulations to Chelsea as well.

Um I think that's all I have for this evening.

So we will move on to the consent agenda.

Commissioners, uh so items on the consent agenda.

Yes.

We don't have it on our text.

Um items on the consent agenda are those of a um ongoing nature, ongoing or routine nature, and uh we typically do not discuss each one individually.

Um but a commissioner may request that an item be moved for separate discussion and consideration.

So do any of the commission members have that request for this evening?

Yeah, I would like to take HD appointment of Peter Opel to the Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board off of the consent agenda.

Anything else, Commissioners?

All right, is there a motion to approve the consent?

Oh, sorry.

Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make public comment on any item on the consent agenda?

Seeing no one approach the podium, I will close public comment on the consent agenda.

Uh is there a motion from the commission?

I move we approve the consent agenda except for HD.

Is there a second?

Second.

Are there any comments or discussion?

Jared, will you call the roll, please?

Commissioner McCollow?

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison?

Yes.

Commissioner Von Lennel.

Yes.

Mayor Adam Chach?

Yes.

Motion passes five to zero with the exception of item HD, which has been moved to after the consent agenda.

Uh as this was a mayoral appointment, there is no presentation associated with this.

Um can commissioners, do you have can you state your yeah?

Um I just feel that Peter Opelt's vision for zoning doesn't align with my vision or a lot of the communities.

Um so some strong neighborhoods felt threatened by some of his decisions as commissioner.

So for this reason, I will vote no on his appointment.

Um I would encourage Peter to apply for other boards.

I would happily approve for him, but for this one I wouldn't.

Are there comments from anyone else?

I move approval of Peter Opel.

Yeah, oh, we've got other comments?

No.

So is there anyone from the public?

No, we don't have I don't take public comment on this just like we would any of the other consent agenda items.

Is there anyone who would like to make public comment?

Seeing no one approach the podium, I will close public comment.

Is there a motion?

I moved to approve the appointment of Peter Opelt to the Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board.

Second.

Jarrett.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison.

No.

Commissioner Von Lennell.

No.

Mayor Adam Chak.

Yes.

Commissioner McCollow.

Yes.

Motion passes three to two.

Thank you.

Um I would like to note that we have made five appointments and reappointments this evening.

And I would like to extend our gratitude to Garrick Baker and Michael Hoover, who will be serving on the Historic Resources Board.

Um, Debbie Nuss and Peter Opelt, who will be serving on the Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board, and Doncha McDonald, who will serve on the Partner City Advisory Board.

Thank you all for engaging in your with your community in this way.

We will now move on to the general agenda.

And our first item is to consider adopting policy manual resolution number 040726b regarding governing by the policies and procedures and repealing policy manual resolution number 052025 F.

Yes.

Thank you, Mayor, and good evening, uh City Commission.

Uh this item before you this evening is regarding uh primarily uh public comment uh during commission meetings.

During the governing body's retreat in January of 2025, that sitting governing body wanted to experiment with reducing the public comment uh individual time from five minutes to three minutes, and then they also put into place a ther initial 30-minute public comment period um for those items.

Um they wanted to experiment with it, they didn't want to make it official into policy, they wanted to see how things went and how the community responded and how public comment flowed uh during meetings.

So uh I will note that there was only one time uh when we had to extend that initial initial uh comment period from 30 minutes, and there was only one additional speaker.

Um so far we have had a um I would say that uh the governing body was responsive.

The community has been responsive for the most part uh to the three minutes.

And uh when the new governing body came on board in January, they wanted to make sure that the practice that we had in place was reflected in the policy that had been adopted.

So the primary uh this is really just adopting uh those practices that we have and putting them into policy.

There is one change uh that we did make that wasn't discussed during that uh January retreat of 2025, and that is um we will the policy will be to allow public comment on work session items, um which is a change from our current default that the majority must vote to allow public comment, um just reducing that clunkiness and just making it the rule instead of the exception that we would allow public comment because that's what we do.

Uh the governing body is very um engaged with their uh public and they want to hear um from them on our work session items.

Uh a couple other things that were cleaned up.

Um, just making sure that adjournment motion can be a voice vote and clarifying that special meeting agendas um are limited to the items called, which is required by City Code Section 217.

So happy to stand for any additional questions.

Danielle, the one question I would have in dealing with that 30 minute limit in section D line item or section D3D.

It says total time limit for all speakers for open public comment shall be 30 minutes unless modified by the mayor.

Some might construe that to mean reduce.

Um is that what is meant?

It's not what is meant to it's not what is meant.

Um it could be reduced or extended.

Um, but uh really just the intent of the governing body there was if there is additional comment and we're not able to get to it in that 30 minutes that it could be extended by the mayor or with a vote um of the commission.

Uh one of the things I did want to clarify that I did not um we removed that uh there would be an initial comment period um from general agenda items, all general agenda items there is no um initial public comment period.

So that is really only that initial comment period is only for those public comment items at the beginning of the agenda.

So that was a little confusing.

You want me to say it again?

Yes, please.

In different words, trying to different time.

Yeah.

So um when we originally uh the governing body originally uh worked on this policy, we limited the period of time to 30 minutes for each public comment opportunity.

So for the uh public comment uh on items that are not on the agenda.

So for example, um Mr.

Old's comments about the um assessed valuations this evening, that is your public comment that's not on your regular agenda.

So the current policy would limit those initial period to 10.

So if we had 10 people who spoke for three minutes each, that would be 30 minutes.

Uh we have four general agenda items that are on this evening.

Um so we would allow uh public comment for anyone who wants to comment on this particular item for any period of time until the governing body decides they want to turn it off or until the public has um exhausted themselves talking about this policy.

So not limiting it to 30 minutes is up your standard.

For general agenda items, yes.

Um I was somewhat hesitant when we went from five minutes to three minutes, but I think having seen the past year it really works, then people were a little more succinct and and um I think you've left enough wiggle room if there are many many people who want to speak to say after the 30-minute period who else would be interested.

The mayor has the ability.

I'm sure the commission can ask the mayor um if they think that's important.

So I think that we've really done a good job here and and made the evening kind of move a little faster, but still got everybody has a chance to express their opinion.

I was fine with it as well.

So I thank you for taking making that effort to clear things and do the housekeeping around this policy.

Absolutely.

Commissioner Mr.

Mayor, I'd move that uh item A being manual change resolution 040726-b adopted and the termination of the policy that was set out in resolution 052025 F accomplished.

Second.

Thank you.

And please excuse me, I can't remember already.

Did we have public comment on this item?

Did I ski?

I think I skipped it.

We did.

Sorry.

We need to have we can take public comment.

Um so we will hold voting for a moment.

Is there anyone who would like to make public comment?

We did receive written comment from uh Mr.

Joe Knopp.

Thank you very much.

And I believe that uh Commissioner Fox's question addressed one of your concerns.

Reintroduce reintroduce.

Yep.

Okay.

Gary Holes, 3308 Frontier Circle.

Um I too um pleased to see that you're gonna codify this in the in a policy.

It's a step in the right direction.

I I I don't know, I know you can't answer my question, but maybe then you can the commission and the mayor have the ability to extend from three minutes to five minutes those comments within that.

It is the governing body's prerogative to make any changes to their policy at any time that they wish to, so yes.

Okay.

And the reason I asked that is so as a as a public comment commenter whose whose clock has not been turned on.

Is it appropriate to step up initially and ask the question?

May I have an additional two minutes?

Or do I have to justify that two minutes prior to speaking or stop at three and then ask for more to finish?

Do you see what I'm asking?

Procedurally.

So thank you, Gary.

Is there anyone else who would like to offer public comment on this item?

Seeing no one else approach the podium, we will now do the roll call on the proposed uh motion.

Commissioner Morrison.

Yes.

Commissioner Von Lennell.

No.

Mayor Adam Chack.

Yes.

Commissioner McCollum.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Motion passes four to one.

Thank you.

Uh we now have a presentation from Aaron Stewart, our director of parks and rec to consider authorizing our city administration to issue the request for qualifications and proposals for construction manager at risk for Sunset Zoo, the Lemur and America's exhibit project.

PR2510.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioner.

Uh tonight normally these are consent agenda items to try to go solicit for these kind of things, but we wanted to introduce the project to the commission, so they knew what we were uh attempting to uh secure uh a CMR uh agreement with.

Um the overall Sunset Zoo plan uh came out with uh four phases.

Um Expedition Asia, which was completed in uh April of 2022, which included kind of the sloth bear area, uh land tigers, red pan, and gibbons.

Um many of you have probably been in that area.

It's a great upgrade for the uh for the zoo.

Um and thanks to the uh zoos trust, we're ready for phase two, which originally was the Americas, but we're also including lemurs.

Um so we're we're seeking uh approval to go see solicit uh construction managers.

This would include the ringtail lemurs and an interactive barn and the trail of America's phase three, just for future knowledge, uh is the Africa, and then phase uh four would be Australia, and those would be uh those would be future endeavors.

So kind of the scope of what phase two uh would be would be uh the ring tail lemur exhibit.

It's right next to the nature education center, so right where you walk into the zoo would be one of the first things that they encounter uh that guests would encounter when they walk in.

Uh the Sunset Barnyard, which is an interactive experience with animals.

Uh this is designed to provide educational experiences with local agricultural animals and their practices.

Uh so this is a in my opinion, a really good thing for Kansans to be involved and can educate them about our local kind of economic uh endeavors that a lot of people participate in and AG.

Um and it's just fun to be able to go be able to touch uh animals that you wouldn't normally see uh in your home.

Trail of Americas.

Um there is a presentation that I've seen that calls the Bobcat the Wildcat, and we do certainly do need a wildcat exhibit here in Manhattan.

Um then, of course, we would uh renovate the existing habitats that we have.

Other improvements, community and event gathering space, obviously restrooms, uh infrastructure improvements, including utility connections, ADA walkways and lighting, and of course the site improvements, grading, uh, which uh there are some pretty strong slopes out there as well as uh updated landscaping for a better look.

So this is right now we have a 30% concept uh design, and so this is the ring-tailed lemur conceptual building, the Sunset Barnyard, and so you can see the list of potential species that could be uh included in that area, and then Trail of America's this would be a potential Bobcat exhibit.

So tonight we're seeking authorization to issue the request for qualifications and proposal for the construction manager at risk.

Um the phase one of that would be pre-construction services, so we would move from a 30% design to a 70% design.

Phase two, uh, which would come back to the commission for another round of approvals, uh, would be uh the GMP.

We would in that phase we'd finalize design and then move to project construction.

So our current timeline uh for the solicitation is ideally if it's approved tonight, we would advertise the RFQ RFP uh starting on April 10th.

Those submissions would be due May 13th.

Hopefully, we'll have a recommendation back to you on June 2nd, and then if you approved uh that recommendation at that meeting, we would move into that phase one services to move to that 70% design.

Uh the estimated cost of phase two uh in total, um, or excuse me, estimated cost of the master plan phase.

We got a lot of phases in here.

The Lemur in America's phase of the master plan, the estimated cost is right around 8.25 million.

Uh the Sunset Zoological Park and Wildlife Conservation Trust has committed funding for that project up to 8.25 million.

So it's fully funded by the zoo trust.

When we bring back the initial agreement, we will bring back a funding agreement with the trust for phase one services, and then we would also have another funding agreement when we bring back the GMP.

Questions.

So the trust were that's all fundraised money or yes.

And we have, I believe, several trust members here tonight.

Quite a few.

Thank you.

Thank you for showing your support this evening.

Uh Aaron, I was at a meeting at the zoo this morning.

Uh, as we broke up, there were multiple adults of rather mature age peering into the cases in the lobby, looking for the toad and the centipede that were hiding.

Um I was also entertained from my vantage point.

I could look out the window and see several storks uh flopping around.

So I think the zoo is a real gem in our community.

I would remind people that just recently we celebrated the zoo having received its uh another five-year accreditation.

And the zoo has been recognized as being continually continuously accredited for 25 years.

Um we are one of fewer than a hundred uh zoos across the country that have this designation.

And congratulations to your team for maintaining this property for us.

They work very hard to do that and do a great job doing it.

Um I have a good daughter of a good friend of mine who teaches in a um urban area in St.

Paul.

It's rather low income, and she took her kids to the Como Park Zoo there, and what they liked best were the farm animals.

They just loved the farm animals.

You know, you could show them a tiger oil, that's a tiger, but the farm animals were really hit.

So I think it's great that we're expanding there.

So just for full disclosure, I want to uh point out that my wife and I have been members of the zoo trust for 20 years.

We joined in 2006.

We were heavily involved with the last project, the Expedition Asia, uh, which proved to be a great success for the zoo, and uh we have were initially involved with uh the long-range planning for the future project.

So I don't feel a need to reacuse myself of anything because we're all working for the benefit of the city here and uh and nobody's benefiting personally, so uh just want to make that clear.

Thank you, Aaron.

We'll see if anyone from the public would like to make a comment.

Always confuses me when somebody gets up and leaves when we're asking for a comment.

Uh seeing no one approaching the podium, we will close public comment on this item.

And uh Commissioners, do we have a motion?

I move we authorize city administration to issue the request for qualifications and proposals.

Second and Jared, will you call the roll?

Commissioner Von Lennell.

Yes, Mayor Adam Czech.

Yes.

Commissioner McCullough.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox, yes, Commissioner Morrison.

Yes.

Motion passes five to zero.

Okay.

Thank you.

Can you come back and do that a little more frequently when we have other resolutions?

Thank you all, and thank you for your support of the community.

We won't have anybody to talk to.

We'll just pause for a moment while the room empties.

Thank you.

All right.

The third item on our agenda this evening is consider approving a professional services agreement in an amount not to exceed 63,984 with Bartle and West for the crosstown water transmission main phase three project WA2518.

And we're joined by Director DeWitt making the presentation.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Mayor, I expect applause for this item.

Okay, so tonight we have an engineering service agreement for phase two of the cross town transmission main water project.

Uh this is a rather routine and ordinary item uh to hire Barclay and West to do the design for this project.

However, this is just one phase of a very large project that would happen over well.

We have a project ongoing right now with phase one associated with Anderson Avenue, which we'll talk a little bit more about.

But this is a potentially a 10-year type project, 10-phase project that would have some pretty significant impacts to our community, uh, depending on the routes we choose.

And just in general, uh they're they're going to be a very costly project when you look at all 10 of them combined.

So we thought it would be a good opportunity to present this overall project to you and provide you a little history and background and what to expect maybe in the future.

So background and history.

Uh this project really started around 2010, 2033 2013.

We hired Bartland West to conduct a full water system model.

Um they came out with uh a report with numerous recommendations, and one of them was a cross-town water transmission main.

That was a 2013 report.

Uh leadership at the time within Public Works Department ultimately ended up uh programming a CIP CIP plan project in 2015 for what was the was then called the Northwest Transmission Main Project.

So recognizing that a crosstown route would be a significant challenge.

I'm making the assumption that this was what happened because I was not, I was very new at that time, but they opted to go for an alternate route that would have been along Tuttle Creek Boulevard, K Dot Rideaway, Marlette Avenue because it's a little bit more wide open and less less in the way.

So in 2020, we hired Bart Lutton West to conduct the design of the first phase of that project.

And this map, I'm sorry, it's a little small, but uh that would be the blue section here.

Uh it also included uh significant uh traffic study to look at route and alignment with the assumption that that road would be improved as a city road someday in the future.

We wanted to double check and make sure the water line was gonna be installed in a way that wouldn't end up too deep if we had to make significant uh vertical curve changes to that road.

Uh ultimately that that project never came to fruition.

Our contract with Bartlett and West included not only the design for that phase, but also an overall route analysis and preliminary planning for the entire uh all phases of that large project.

And ultimately, after significant review of that, we determined that the best most cost feasible project for us for the city was actually to go back and looking at a crosstown main, so through the heart of town.

So we shifted the focus of that effort to a new route analysis for that project.

We looked at how we could potentially benefit uh the Northwest zone because uh one of the primary reasons for extending water to that part of town was just we we have experienced issues in the past with the high amount of demand that we get in this area during the summer, uh peak summer demands, obviously there's a lot of irrigation going on out there.

One of our largest customers is out there with the golf course.

Uh so during during the summer months we struggled getting water to that part of town.

So that's the reason we were looking at a new transmission main to get water to that side of town.

So we were looking at potential other projects we could do in that northwest zone to improve the system.

So that was in 2020.

Um as I mentioned, a little bit more background history.

That that modeling recommended the route go through town.

It would be more beneficial and cost effective.

There are many benefits to that.

Um being one of the one of the reasons that we opted not to go to a more rural route is when you have a transmission main, it's ideal to have demands on that main at various intervals along the main.

That northwest transmission main route really was a direct route from the water plant to the Colbert Hills area, and there wouldn't be a lot of usage along that path.

So pulling that pulling that main back down in the middle of the town provided several other benefits, and we can get into those, but another one would be uh that it provides us the ability to get more water to the Sunset Zoo Tower, uh which then can allow us to get more water to the Stag Hill zone and to the Eureka Valley zone if we ever have an increase in demands out there due to industrial growth.

So those are some of the drivers between about why we went back to this crosstown route.

So a little bit more on the on the project needs.

Uh the existing 24-inch cross-town transmission main.

Uh it goes roughly through uh the Manhattan Country Club and then down Kimball Avenue, all the way out to Hudson Trail, and then north to the CICO tank that is on Londonderry Drive.

That project was built in 1971.

Uh it's it's uh well within its useful life expectancy.

There's been multiple times where we've actually shut that line down, rerouted it for NBA, for uh Kimball Corridor projects.

It's some of the best main we have.

It's in still in great condition.

But we do have we do have adequate adequate capacity in that main.

However, we we do not really have any redundancy for that main.

It is the primary way that we get water to that part of town, so we don't have any redundancy.

Additionally, modeling shows that during the peak demands, the velocities and that velocities in that system are too high.

When velocities get too high, they can cause issues like water hammer, um, they can degrade the main.

Can you tell us what that is?

Water hammer, sure.

Water hammer is uh it's a we call them transient surges.

So uh when water is moving fast and something happens where it stops, it essentially creates we call it a water hammer in the system.

It's supersonic waves that have the ability to blow the mains apart.

Um we used to have some issues with that at uh RCPD's facility where we were we were having odd transient surges and we were having issues with it blowing apart their uh fire service mains.

So it's a problem, it causes a lot of issues in a system.

Um higher velocities reduce the life of the mains, they cause higher wear on valves, etc.

So that's why we looked at you know the need to have this redundant route.

One of the primary reasons, and so it will provide a significant amount of redundancy for our system in order to reach up other parts of town.

Obviously, water plants on the east side of town, a lot of our highest demands are on the west side of town.

So that is a little bit of background on the needs.

Uh this is a large project, so because of that, we had to break it down into multiple phases.

We're looking at up to 10 phases.

Um, due to size, complexity, and cost.

Uh mentioned there, we've got about 10 phases we're looking at.

We tried to break them in about 2500 to 5,000 feet sections.

Uh each one about 1.5 million to 2.5 million dollars in costs.

Uh overall, we're looking at a potentially uh 20 to 25 million dollar project on the high end.

Um so it's gonna be quite a cost costly project.

Uh we mentioned phase one.

Well, back up here.

One of the things we did is we looked at completing each of these phases with other infrastructure projects so we can get a little bit more bang for our buck.

Anderson Avenue, that project includes a significant portion of the future transmission main along Oakdale Avenue or Oakdale Drive from basically goes from college down Anderson and then Oakdale Drive down to the down to the cemetery.

This was all through an in-house design, and the 24-inch transmission main portion of that project is about a one million dollar project.

Uh provided a map that shows a breakdown, an approximate breakdown of the phasing.

Uh, as I mentioned, phase one is here with the Anderson Avenue project, phase two is up here on Hudson.

Uh, a good example of collaborating with other infrastructure projects.

I know when you were talking with Director Johnson about street maintenance, Hudson Avenue got brought up and mentioned that this is actually one of those sites where we're come up, we're collaborating our effort to get two projects done with once.

So we're designing this project in-house, at least the street side and the stormwater side.

Uh, we have only we've only looked at soliciting consulting services from Bartlett and West for the water line design.

So Bartlant West was the next in line on our water engineering on call program.

Uh but just in general, looking at future phases.

Uh, one of the biggest challenges we're gonna have is trying to get through the university, and another challenging phase we'll get will be getting from North Manhattan back to the water plant.

But um college avenue, uh, that's this green section here.

That would be the next phase.

It is also going to be in line with a major street project.

That is another road that Brian has identified as a critical need to do to do concrete maintenance or replacement.

Um then we're actually trying to work with K-State right now.

They're they're working on a project for the uh veterinary diagnostic lab funded through the state that they are in the planning stages for that we might be able to collaborate with them to get them to fund a small portion of their water line, and then we would pay to oversize it.

So trying to find projects where we can collaborate and find some efficiencies.

I know Brian uh Director Johnson has mentioned a lot about a lot of potential large storm sewer projects on the east side of this uh east downtown watershed.

I don't know a lot about it.

Did I say that right?

All right, um, but looking at many routes through this part of town for stormwater improvements, more than likely when he comes up with a project or gets funding for a project, that's when we'll look at uh more detailed route analysis for it.

So again, so this is a breakdown of a very very um heavily involved project, many years.

Uh it's going to be very complex.

So that'll be a good opportunity to introduce it to you.

Back to why we're really here, phase two Hudson Avenue.

This is about 2600 feet of 24-inch water line.

As I mentioned, it extends from Kimball Avenue to Claflin Road.

Um Bartlett and West fees are estimated at uh 63.

Well, we'll double check that.

I know it was about 60,000.

64.

Yeah, 64,000.

Uh we anticipate the construction costs will be between one and 1.3 million dollars.

Uh we should be able to wrap up design and get this project bid before the end of the year, but construction will likely be in 2027.

So that's all I have.

Have any questions?

I'd be glad to answer for.

Well, I see you like to go down College Avenue.

We just spent a pot full of money on paving up through the athletic end of the world.

Yes.

Or we got right away so we don't have to tear up our street that we just paid for.

So that work was primarily north of Dickens.

North of Dickens.

This would be primarily south of Dickens.

So between Dickens and Anderson Avenue, essentially, or call college heights, roughly.

So we have the water line north of Dickens to Kimball.

Yes, that that was done with we did a portion of that with the Kimball Corridor.

I think there was a large 10-inch replacement, if I remember right, or 12.

So we we did that when we replaced the street there.

Commissioners, any other questions for Randy?

Randy, may I oh go ahead.

Oh, just uh so all of this would come out of the water fund or yeah.

Uh right now it would, I mean everything's in the forecast as each one of these phases would likely be a 10-year geobond type project.

Um if the state of SRF funds ever change where we could utilize low interest loans through the state, these would be ideal type projects.

Um hopefully we can collaborate with K-State a little bit and and utilize you know our policy to where if they have to build an eight-inch main, we can come in and pay just for the oversizing.

So we've started preliminary conversations with them about that.

Um yep, all water fund.

So you you're kind of I mean, I know you're saying that the the trans main transmission line, like that's a pretty good shape, but you're a little bit worried about it.

Is there any way we can you know get the golf course to use less water, or is you know, I mean, it's uh um what we do with the golf course is we try to work with them to regulate when they pull water off of us that to mitigate their impacts to the system.

So over the years we've we've implemented some infrastructure at their meter to where we actually control that from the water plant.

Uh they call us and say we need water, we can set the rate, open that up.

I mean, they they irrigate by drawing off of our system and it goes directly into one of their ponds.

Um I mean there they are one of our largest customers.

Um unfortunately, I mean, they need it.

So uh I wouldn't I wouldn't say we've worked with them to try to reduce their consumption, but we have tried to make it where it had a less impact on us.

So dealing with more opportune times for them to fill their their pond.

Um they used to have the ability to turn their system on full blast and almost drain our water tower.

So we we had to work with them very closely to mitigate that.

Um we we had we did a lot of work in trying to figure out why we had issues keeping water in that system.

Ultimately, we found a few locations where we were pumping water into it, but it was going right back into a lower pressured zone.

Once we found that, we were able to make some improvements.

It substantially helped our ability to meet the demands of that zone in the middle of the summer in the hottest, hottest demand times.

So a little less concerned about that nowadays.

Randy, we've spoken during the last several months talking about many of these projects about the age of our infrastructure.

So if I remember you said this was that line was installed in 1971.

Yes.

So we're looking at 55 years.

What would be the estimated lifespan of pipes?

Uh, if you talk to a ductile iron salesman, 100 years.

Uh we have some cast iron mains that have been in the ground for 120 years that are exceed exceptionally well, mostly because they have very consistent pressure.

But we also have ductile iron mains that we've installed in the Brookfield area where maybe it was a quality issue, but could be a corrosion issue with the ground that lasts less than 20.

So it's really hit and miss.

Also, getting a main replacement.

Any other comments, Commissioners or questions?

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Um there any comments from the public on this agenda item.

Seeing none, we will close public comment.

Uh do we have a motion?

I would move that we approve a professional services agreement and amount not to exceed 63,984 with Martlett and West Inc.

for the crosstown water transmission main phase two project.

Second Jared, will you call the role, please?

Mayor Adam Chack.

Yes.

Commissioner McCollow.

Yes.

Commissioner Fox.

Yes.

Commissioner Morrison.

Yes.

Commissioner Monlin.

Yes.

Motion passes five to zero.

Thank you all.

We will now move into our final item on tonight's agenda to consider approving a construction manager at risk agreement with BHS Construction Inc.

in the amount of 22,500, and an agreement for professional engineering services with Olsen Inc.

in the amount of 442,979 for the design and pre-construction services and project authorization resolution number 040726-C for the Morrow Street Improvement Project AG2601.

Thank you, Mayor.

Commissioners, um, this evening I want to take the opportunity to uh cover a couple different topics.

One, the agreements that uh were highlighted in the overview by the mayor.

The other, uh looking at Morrow Street and the feedback that we believe we received in January and February, and obviously why the item is on the agenda this evening.

The contracts itself, uh BHS has been working for the city on infrastructure in Aggieville, primarily along Laramie, uh, currently 12th Street from Morrow to Fremont.

Um we will also in a large part we we selected BHS and brought forward the recommendation to hire BHS to manage this in relationship to the private project of the hotel, the Hampton being built at 12th and Laramie.

All back up to the beginning of some of our efforts in Aggieville, and we selected um McCown Gordon to build the parking garage at North Manhattan and Laramie.

We went ahead and brought McCown on to build North Manhattan to build Laramie and to build 14th Street.

There is an advantage, and we learned this uh decades ago.

When you are under construction vertically with such a significant project, having one general contractor oversee the public infrastructure adjacent to it makes a lot of sense.

It's very difficult, and we've had some challenges in other areas of our community where a general contractor has a large construction site for a vertical, and we are trying to do public infrastructure next to them with a different general contractor.

They're on different schedules, they're being paid by different people, and they don't necessarily have to listen to each other.

Um we we learned some hard lessons through time, but the Hilton and Third Street, we were able to coordinate and collaborate there.

It's one of the success stories, uh, but we have other stories and other examples where it just doesn't work very well.

So I will admit we've hired McCown for a section of infrastructure downtown, uh, really close by and near the parking garage, and now we've hired BHS to administer the general contractor role in and near that hotel.

I will offer to you and I think a lot of the businesses in Aggeville and the Aggieville Business Association and our community has had a really good uh rapport and a really good uh communication line between BHS and the projects themselves.

This is the last phase of major reconstruction than Aggieville.

I believe it to be one of the more important ones.

There are 40 businesses that face more and getting this right, communicating effectively, coordinating multiple subs, getting materials here on time, so we're not waiting and creating delays is as high as of importance that we have we've had in a project for quite some time.

It is why we're recommending them.

It's why we're bringing them back.

They have proven themselves, and we would like to continue to move forward with them.

You as a governing body have the ability to enter into this type of agreement, this construction manager at risk.

This process really forces a marriage between Olson, who we selected in a competitive process at the beginning to really evaluate all our Aggieville infrastructure, and here we are, 2026, Morrow, some nine, ten years later, about to wrap this thing up.

They have submitted basically design estimates, Olsen has, and BHS has submitted a pre-construction amount of 22,500.

We are all with this tonight with this action.

This team will be moving towards a guaranteed maximum price.

It is obviously to construct the two blocks of Moro Street.

I'll bring up a presentation from what we provided you all January 30th.

The maximized parking scenario on concept A.

We received a lot of positive feedback to move in that direction.

We showed some amenities at mid-block and option B, and we also had some more significant enhanced mid-block improvements.

We came back in February again, had the same conversation, trying to get that feedback.

Right now, we are planning to come back with 35% design with more detail about that 1910 water line underneath Morrow with all the connections that we need to make with those 40 businesses, and with more detail.

We have crossed Morrow at 12th Street.

We probably more than likely will start there, but there needs to be needs to be some public input and feedback and commission input and feedback, which direction, how quickly do we get 12th Street back open in order for vehicles and pedestrians to access the businesses and the district.

Our preference is to come back at 35%, get further direction and definition of these improvements.

That's what we have anticipated.

That's what's part of the scope and the fee.

So this evening, we can certainly take more feedback if there is some for Morrow, but we do plan to come back and gain some more after 35% design has been reached by Olson with input and feedback from BHS.

Questions, Jason, I would think at 35%, you would be committed to parking on one side or the other side of the street.

I think they'll be able to show you at that point in time options if you desire them.

Both we could have angled on north and on the south in those concepts and gain direction that evening.

Mark Bishamp's here with Olsen, he can expand on that if you'd like him to, but he can he'll have a better feel for what he'll be ready to do at 35% based on your feedback that night.

Personally, I in the beginning I was more favorable to parking on the north side just because it was in the sun more often and might be better for parking.

But some people brought up on if it's on the south side, there's more parking.

And I think we can provide you a little bit more feedback there too.

There is a certain distance from the intersection that we'll have to keep not parked.

Uh it I don't know if Brian would say it matches up identical to the entrance and the exit for the parking lot, but those are the types of details we can provide at 35% too.

Um Jason, I recently learned that there's a large holding tank for the water system under the road in Aggieville.

Is that true?

Is that the case?

Well, that's news to me, Mayor.

Uh anyway.

Maybe.

Yes, I've heard that as well.

Um anything about that?

Where did the information come from?

Someone who previously worked in your division.

It would not surprise me if there's something there that we don't know about.

I have never heard of a whole just so folks in the audience.

Yeah, uh uh Randy's not familiar with it, but he's not uh discounting or ruling it out either.

Uh there's there could be something that we're not aware of.

If you m might look into it just so we can be aware if that's something.

I I understand when you were working on um 12th street that a tunnel was discovered that perhaps was not previously known.

Or it was known, but okay.

There was speculation and it ended up uh accurately being there.

Um we have had more ripped up quite a bit in spots to uh to fix the water lines.

Um but yeah, I think there's there's just that general nature of any time you're getting into a roadway system uh that hasn't been um fully uh excavated for a water line uh in over a hundred years that you may find something you're you didn't expect.

Are the trail rails pretty close to the surface?

There I mean there are pictures.

Uh we have some in our possession within the city, and I know the historic uh resource the the the museum has pictures of the rail actually on the roadway.

I don't know how how deep it will be, but we'll find out.

All right, take good pictures.

I think could we have Olson come up for a second?

You bet.

Martin?

Sorry, I didn't.

I said Olson, I didn't say Mark, so I'm sorry, I didn't, I didn't hear so.

Um with the 30 percent comp 35 percent completion, do you I mean do you want us do you want to know which side of the street like angled parking is gonna be on yes it would help because with the uh we we're gonna have inverted crown, which means they're not gonna be there's not gonna be any curb and gutter.

So anticipate just like what you have on 12th street right now in front of Kitz and Annie Mays to where that street all drains to the center.

If you Jason, if let's see, can we in the right?

So uh as as you can see the center of the street, if it's parked to the north is more to the south.

If you go clear parking on the south side, it moves more to the north.

Uh the more I'm thinking about it, there we may be able to be able to flip, or I guess we you know, I don't know, maybe put if if you decide to change your mind, we may be able to use the the parking as the line as to where the water goes, the back of the parking.

Not ideal uh to put that in a sump.

But we were going to base on what we were hearing was put the parking on the north side.

But if that's not the consensus, then uh that that was gonna be the basis of our design.

My slight preference was the south side, but I maybe we can talk it over maybe when you're when you're looking at normal parking, your normal parking is you turn into the right versus turning into the left.

Which would be the south.

Yeah.

Would it help with if we could make a decision sometime expedite your work in the rest of the project?

Uh yeah, that's really the only thing that really dictates a preference.

So well, if we leave it wishy-washy, flip a coin, look at one, two, or three alternatives.

Do you go faster with three alternatives or slower?

In designing three alternatives.

Well, we're probably not gonna design three alternatives.

We're gonna design one and then we'll come back and then we'll and then we'll we'll correct it.

So but it I would I would love to have a I would love to have a consensus uh from you guys tonight if you can.

And I'd one other probably irrelevant question is with no curbs, what are going to be the car barriers from running over pedestrians and storefronts?

That'd be exactly what's in front of uh varsity donut.

There'll be there'll be parking blocks set there.

And then there's also if you notice on every one of them, there's a ballard.

So in case somebody loses control, they go over, they'll be able to stop.

So if you want my input, I mean I've as I said I thought Commissioner Fox, you do have some folks here from Aggieville if you want to hear um input from the public before we um before you make any of the I would like to hear that, yes.

Okay.

Anything else before I Mark Mark I Mark, I just say um I would you are the experts, and so I'd really like to hear from you at the end.

The optimum north-south, you know, I I mean we're not parking experts, but I'm sure there's one that perhaps has a better reason to exist.

So when you come, I actually I don't think there's a I I could design either one and both of them will work.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, uh it's just preference.

I thought at the earlier meeting, one of the things we heard was had to do with which side got more sun and so was less likely to stay ice covered.

Can you refresh my memory?

You have parking on the on the north side, yes, more likely to have more sun because it's further away from the buildings.

If parking is on the south side, it's gonna be more in a shade.

So a little bit more treacherous for people who would be exiting their cars.

I uh as much as what I feel that the city does down there as far as removing snow and everything, it gets cleaned up pretty fast.

Just a reminder, we do when we do snow removal, we do take um dump trucks and scoops and we actually remove the snow from Aggieville.

Thank you.

Uh Dennis or Ashley or Brent, uh, would any of you like to make a comment?

Sorry, but Linda, not Britt.

Yeah, uh good evening, uh Dennis Cook with Aggieville.

Um everything we've heard you know originally was it was kind of leaning towards the north side, but uh what we haven't done is put that out and and get the business's consensus on that yet.

So I didn't know that we were supposed to have that ready before tonight, so uh, but we could do that awfully quick.

I think that might be helpful.

I mean, I I agree with Karen.

I'm not a parking expert or logistician.

Um I think having some of that input from the business owners who have already recognized that they're going to be losing some of the parking along that uh street is significant.

I would like to hear their voices if we could.

Yeah, I uh I I would end I've got an idea of what they would do, but uh I would like to hear it from them.

And we have not you know, yeah, they've for the most part they have seen kind of you know the options, but you know, but there is there were south side and north side options, and so but we know we've never actually stuck that in front of everybody and asked for you to you know put a vote in or whatever, so we could do that pretty quick.

I was gonna say, since we're in the design phase of this thing, I think that's something we need as soon as possible now.

Meet back here in an hour.

No we can do that really quick.

Danielle, is that information that can be put into our mail folders, or is that something that would require a presentation?

Uh feedback from the Aggieville business owners on the where they would like the parking.

We can absolutely drop that in a mail folder for you all.

Okay.

So we don't have to wait for another formal meeting in order to receive that.

So my question was several months ago, you're all gonna take a survey in Aggieville, and apparently that did not occur.

And number two, wasn't the city going to try to contact them to see if we can motivate them to make a decision?

And did we do contact?

The survey is active.

Uh we've been out there for uh I believe a week and a half, two weeks.

Uh we should have those results, hopefully here by the end of the week.

And this is about trash.

Uh we could go back out, or we can rely on Dennis to to poll his folks and give us some perspective on north or south side of the street for angle parking.

Seems to me that would be the half hat fields and the coys, the north half will want the south half, or the south half will want the north half and will still have a stalemate.

You probably will.

At that point, Commissioner, we can flip the coin.

Ashley Furman, 2000 Hunting Avenue.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners.

In February, after the meeting where Olson shared these conceptual renderings of Morrow Street, I sent a more detailed email to all of you on this topic.

So tonight I'll keep this focused on uh a few key points I hope stay front and center as you move through the design process.

I'm an eight-year resident of Manhattan, and I feel strongly about this topic because in many ways my story is exactly the type of story this community is trying to create more of.

I have no ties to Kansas, but in 2018, I chose to move here over places like Lawrence and Kansas City, two cities I was seriously considering, because of what I saw was happening here.

Downtown's redevelopment stood out, and even more than that, the Aggieville Community Vision Plan had just been published.

It signaled that this was a community with momentum, one that was willing to take bold community-informed steps to shape its future.

And that really mattered to me.

Not just because it aligned with the kinds of experiences I was looking for, but because it made me feel like I could contribute to where Manhattan was headed.

And that's exactly the kind of signal that continues to matter to the professionals and families are trying to attract and retain.

Specifically, what excited me in the Aggieville Community Vision Plan was a call to develop quote a vibrant historic pedestrian-oriented urban district.

And based on nearly 43 responses to the community wide survey, 81% of respondents said that they would be in favor of more pedestrian amenities, such as wider sidewalks, outdoor seating, and street trees, even if it reduced the number of on street parking spaces.

And business owners agreed.

As long as lost parking spaces were replaced somewhere else, which has been addressed by the parking garage.

When I was recently reviewing this data, I was encouraged by how much of the Aggieville vision has already come to life.

We've added new development, we've increased density with hotels and apartments.

We've created spaces where people can gather and spend time and subsequently more money at local businesses.

Now what's in front of you is the heart of Aggieville.

It's Morrow Street.

And it can either become a destination or a drive-through.

But if we want this district to be a magnet for townies, for tourists, for long-term investment, experience matters.

But you only have one shot at developing an experience that pulls people in, generates energy and excitement, and gives them a reason to stay.

So please do not ignore the overwhelming support for pedestrian amenities as you continue this process.

And perhaps instead of focusing on north side, south side, parking, parking, everything about parking.

What if we reframed it to consider how can we incorporate more of these pedestrian amenities that the community wants?

Thank you.

Thank you, Ashley.

Is there anyone else who would like to approach the podium?

We will close public comment.

Commissioners, do you have any additional comments or questions?

I do think we've gotten a little held up on this, and we just need to make a decision.

A couple Sundays ago, I was at a reception at Union Hall, and downtown was very, very, very busy.

People were walking, that kind of thing.

And we often hear there's no parking downtown.

Well, I parked in the behind the courthouse.

I walked to half a block.

It was not a big deal.

And there was lots and lots of parking.

So I think we need to um to get the pedestrian thing right and to just decide on a north or south.

To me, I just don't see the difference.

Well, uh I have a question for staff, if that's permitted now.

I guess whether Jason or Danielle would be the proper ones.

I don't have a particular discussion or concern about going forward with the design.

If we know what a design is, I think we need to make a decision now.

As you said earlier, has been on the drawing board for eight years, and the snail would have gotten down to the end of the street by now.

Number one.

Number two is my problem is what you have presented for us to do tonight is not only approve the design stuff, but also hiring the project manager.

And I don't find this agreement with the project manager acceptable on four or five different issues.

I mean, I'm I'm wanting this to move quickly, but uh certain issues I see I I pointed out the other day is insurance liability requirements.

I mean, one minor screw up down there in a million dollar liability isn't going to do anything.

I think I don't know when this was drafted, how it was done, whether it is a common one we have used as a cookie cutter for other kind of projects and tweak it to whatever we're doing.

But I think the insurance issues are way out of whack for liability for the city and our citizens.

Um I think we need to have an ability to discuss and cuss about some of the provisions in here.

Um I understand we're on board with Olson, and that's fine.

I think they've got good concepts and they've done what we've wanted them to do in the past, so no need of changing horses.

I'm not even arguing about BHS at this point.

I'm arguing about the documents that we are saying we're going to live by.

I don't think protect the city or the public, and maybe not even the contractor.

Um, because if we had a major loss and there was some liability issue, a million dollars you're going to cover, and they may not have their own independent liability to protect us, and our people are going to be lost.

Our insurance requirements in that document reflect every document and every construction contract we have.

We go we approach our insurer with those provisions every year.

They provide us the minimums by which they will accept in terms of a relationship with the third party.

I understand, but that is an insurance company telling us which is reasonable, and that's not inappropriate.

What I'm saying is this may not be reasonable for the project we're doing.

And I understand that.

I just want to point out to you, it's in every contract we have, so it's it's fundamental across the board in your mind.

It's not just this agreement, I'm assuming.

I am sure there are projects that you are doing that have minimal risk that those are adequate.

I don't see where you got 40 businesses, and I don't know what the fire down there at the bookstore cost everybody, but you know, if there was one or two more buildings, there are a million isn't going to touch nothing if it's even related to this incident.

And so, I mean, I understand that's cookie-cutter insurance language, and I'm just saying we should not follow that program as a routine deal for our project.

And so if we got a 20 million dollar project, this may not be reasonable.

If we got a four million dollar one, and it's all concrete out in the middle of the field, this is okay.

I I mean Yeah, I think if there's a consensus to raise that, VHS will simply go realize that larger insurance premium, and it'll be more expensive, but if that's the will of the governing body to modify that, we can absolutely modify it.

Well, I don't I don't know all the business owners and building owners down there, but I'd sure be unhappy if they showed all up and said we lost four million dollars.

Why in the hell did you do that?

We also don't have a lot of experience of losing that kind of revenue on a project.

Well, our fire chief back there, he's praying that you don't lose anything.

Well, I'm I'm praying right with him.

But there's other sections in here I do not think are appropriate for us to be as he's even a general policy.

And I appreciate that, Commissioner.

And next week we have a work session to go through all our processes to select and go through our construction, not only selection, but our contracts, if you'd like to dive into those.

Tonight, you know, we're trying to advance more just like we have Aggieville for the last seven to eight years.

If we want a whole scale look at our contracts and modify things to get the governing body more comfortable, you know, we owe you that conversation and that alternative to uh to select.

Yes, tonight are we are we tabling this and all contracts moving forward until we resolve that?

I guess that's my bigger question of the governing body.

Well, I can't speak for the governing body.

I can speak for me that in this project, I don't think it's appropriate.

Again, if it's a million-dollar project of all concrete and steel and out in the middle of the field, 80% of this night that I've had concerns about are not relevant.

If you're going to be doing a project like this downtown, I'm not sure million dollar liability, any one of those buildings is going to be satisfactory.

And so I'm not wanting to slow it down.

I'm willing to say in concept, let's do it, but I don't think we have a contract that we can authorize the staff to sign yet, in my opinion.

And I'm only one of five.

So you have to look at the other four, what they want to do.

Otherwise, I'm ready to go ahead and say parking on one side, leave it to the best engineering requirements for the water lines and the connection and get her done.

The other thing it doesn't have in here, and I understand part of this we gotta have faith.

Somewhere in here it says we have to have good faith, everybody that works good faith.

Nothing talks about any kind of concept for timeline.

And so that's why I think we need to decide what we want to do on a street development so they know what to design and they know what they're gonna be able to bid, and I also want to have it so we know how long in the hell they're gonna tell us it takes.

I'm not willing to accept seven months.

I mean, even if you do block by block, I'm not willing to think that's fair or reasonable.

So, and there's no concept of urgency other than they've heard me say it here, and hopefully staff is telling them time is important.

BHS is offered to provide you those alternatives.

My response to them was let's get to 35 percent so they understand more about the project.

Olson's more familiar with the project.

You want four months, six months, nine months, twelve months timelines, they'll provide you estimates on what that'll cost.

They're willing to do that.

And then we can get direction from the governing body on how they'd like to proceed with budget and timeline.

That contract's not gonna have that language.

It'll be in the GMP.

We need to give an op, we need an opportunity to talk with them, and they'll know more with 35% design, which is really what we're trying to get started tonight.

So personally, for this two block section, I do think uh agree with Jim, we need some kind of time limit faster than what they've done all the previous sections.

Uh you know, in previous sections you'd see days go by that no work was being done.

Uh you know, we can't have that on on these two blocks.

These are the most important in the whole area.

So uh, you know, we we need it done faster than all the others.

So uh back to my point on on the parking, at least in my opinion, uh, to give Mark direction.

Uh, you know, I had as I said, I originally thought the north side would be better just because of the sun and that whole situation.

But and thinking about it, thinking about Andrew's comments, you know, uh parking to the right probably does make more sense.

From a line of sight backing out, you can see better if you're parked to the right.

Uh probably a chance for a few more spaces to the right.

Uh so I, you know, I I've been thinking more, might be better to go to the right.

So, you know, as as for the the the ladies' comments about the the walking area and maybe not even having parking uh, you know.

Uh I in my opinion, parking down there helps businesses during the slow times.

You know, when the students are all here, when parties are going on weekends, games at places humming, you could have no parking, and everybody'd be fine.

Um, but during the slow times when all the students have left, when it's just us city folks down there, especially some of us older retired folks, uh we want to be able to drive down the street and and park if there's a chance.

At least we know we have a chance to park on the street.

So I in my opinion, we cannot eliminate parking in Haggyville on Morrow Street.

So those are just my thoughts on that.

So could you find it acceptable if we would approve one side or the other and enter into at least the original agreement with BHS just to do the preliminary with no contract, and then later say, here's the contract that we find acceptable.

Is that approved by you or be appropriate?

Because I don't I'm willing to take that step, but not with this contract.

I I uh Commissioner Morse.

Oh, sorry, Mayor Adam Chak.

I don't think it's legitimate to ask them to do work without agreeing to pay them.

22,500.

Will you I'm saying we agree to pay them the 225 to work with them to get somewhere.

Without a contract?

Well, without the contract to do the other five million dollars or whatever it's gonna cost to do the rest of the project.

My recommendation, Mayor and Commissioners at this time would be for us to continue this item to our next uh city commission meeting.

Give us an opportunity to uh check with our peers what those other liability insurance requirements have been for projects that are of similar size and nature um as this Morrow Street project, uh see if we are in line like our insurance company would suggest, or to see if we are out of line, like Commissioner Morrison would suggest.

And then also uh this will give us uh an opportunity to discuss um the this timeline concern um that you all have.

Uh as far as whether we're doing parking on the north or south side, I'm hearing more of a consensus to um let um the engineers run some numbers and uh get direction of uh what is um in the best interest of safety, but also uh whatever maximizes parking.

Is that seeing some head nods?

Okay.

So uh the motion I would uh require on the floor would be to continue this to the um May or April 21st meeting, and we will bring it back to you all for reconsideration.

It will likely be on consent if we're able to um come up with some numbers.

And putting it as a special part for next week's meeting would not be time enough, most likely.

Uh I would prefer just to go ahead and put it on a regular uh commission meeting.

Legislative meeting.

That gives us we have to have those documents um figured out by Wednesday, Thursday.

We basically will be putting your packet out by Thursday, so no, that doesn't really give us enough time to work with the um BHS and Olson.

Um I think it's a good idea to urge this being expedited as quickly as possible, but I also think we need to know what it's gonna cost us to do it faster if we have to, you know.

Um so, yeah, getting those prices because uh just getting it done to get it done that fast if it's gonna be twice as much.

That's that's sort of silly.

What if I'm only asking for normal expected construction time and then to advance it from seven months to four months, which may be reasonable time.

We ought to be giving the message that in the project reasonable time is X months.

Yeah.

You know, I can't do that.

We ought to be telling them additional information we can get from our peers on similar projects and see if we can't get uh the similar timelines that they're seeing.

I also see that our engineer uh Mark Baychamp has um approached the podium, so he may have something he would like to share with you all.

I I also I don't think it's fair on our part.

I certainly don't want to be yanked around by any of our colleagues, but um we are not engineers, we are not operating the equipment, we are not dealing with uh safety issues, we are not dealing with problems that arise from the weather.

I think it is uh setting us up for failure or for shoddy work or rushed work if we impose a timeline on a project like this.

I I disagree with that very much.

I think that our colleagues can tell us what they think they can produce.

Um, and we will make our decision based on that.

The whole purpose of getting it to 35 percent at that point is so BHS understands what's gonna be built and how to build it.

Right now we're at the point where we don't know how we're gonna build it, because I don't know how every building is served with water.

I that is all the investigation that we have to do up front.

All this does tonight is it gets us moving.

And we need BHS on board because we use them as sounding board.

We'll have every we'll have meetings every two weeks about what we're finding, what we're discovering, all through this 35 percent.

So they're up front and understanding what it's gonna take to get this thing built.

We can't bring to you at 30 uh uh uh uh right away in two weeks.

We can't bring to you what it how we're gonna build it and what's gonna cost, because frankly, we don't know yet.

So the whole purpose of tonight is to get us moving to get us at 35 percent so BHS can have an understanding of how we're gonna build it, where we're gonna start, how we're gonna phase it in order to optimize the timing.

So that's I just want to be because I was I think there was some misconception here a little bit about uh what was going to be provided uh here.

So well, I would just point out that just because you put a time requirement on a project doesn't mean you're gonna get shoddy work.

Uh many projects are done with time requirements because they need to be done within a certain period of time.

Uh beyond that there are costs to the owner.

So uh those those kind of agreements are are made a lot and they don't result in shoddy work.

So uh in this particular case, we we need to have that time requirement.

And it's pretty important.

My apologies to BHS.

I did not mean to imply that shoddy work would be the result of a requirement.

So Danielle, do you want a motion to table this until the 21st?

I appreciate um I would I would um like a motion to approve um both the CMAR agreement and the professional engineering services agreement, but if the commission is not comfortable moving forward and would like to get more answers on the liability insurance, um then I would um like for you all to continue it.

And there is more issue than just a liability insurance, I think we need to discuss in the agreement.

Uh Commissioner Morrison, will you please outline those um for us right now so that we know what we'll be working on for the next two weeks?

I'm not gonna do it now, but I can do it by tomorrow because I've written them down.

I can give you my markup on my contract that I have here, the issues I have highlighted if that helps you.

I'm happy to give you what I have.

Oh yes, that's fine.

Thank you.

Uh can I think BHS wants to come up and do you want to say something?

Patrick to you.

Hello, uh Patrick Shatter, BHS.

Um this agreement for us to get started.

Um we don't we won't have any liability at the very start of this, but but the contract that you're reading shows us how we're gonna do business once this project moves forward.

There would be time after this.

I would consider that as if we need to uh put a different liability insurance amount in that clause and make a change, we can do that at a later date.

Um that would be fine with us.

Our liability insurance is much higher than what's listed in there anyways.

I think we have a 15 million dollar umbrella liability policy, so we're covered.

It's there's there's no issues with insurance on our end, but um that would get us moving forward.

I will make a motion that we approve the CMAR agreement and professional engineering services agreement as presented, and that we approve resolution 040726C.

Is there a second?

I'll second it.

Commissioner McCollow.

Yes, Commissioner Fox.

Yes, Commissioner Morrison, no.

Commissioner Von Leno.

Yes.

Mayor Adam Czech.

Yes.

Motion passes four to one.

Uh that concludes our business for this evening.

Is there a motion to adjourn?

All in favor, please say aye.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Thank you, Clark.