Good evening, Wichita, and good evening to all of you.

Welcome to City Hall, and thank you for joining us for the fourth evening meeting of the year.

I will call this meeting to order.

With us this evening is Pastor Ryan Emmons of Friendship Baptist Church to provide our invocation.

Following that invocation, we will have the Pledge of Allegiance.

Can we please stand for both?

Approve the minutes of the regular meetings of October twenty first, twenty twenty-five, and October twenty-eighth, twenty twenty-five.

Council members, are there any changes or corrections to those minutes?

I see none.

I move to approve the minutes for the regular meeting of October 21st, 2025 and October 28, 2025.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, can you please open the roll?

Aye.

Motion passes seven zero.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Awards and proclamations.

Today's proclamations are 75th anniversary of Old Cowtown Museum, National Family Caregivers Month, National Injury Prevention Day.

May I please ask Councilmember Hoheisel to come forward along with the Old Town Museum Board of Directors and any supporters.

The proclamation reads, the City of Wichita, Kansas founded in 1870, whereas Old Cowtown Museum has served as a premier living history site since its founding in 1950, preserving and interpreting the rich heritage of Wichita, Sedwick County, and the American frontier of the 1870s.

Whereas for 75 years, Old Cowtown Museum has provided generations of visitors with immersive educational and educational entertaining experiences.

These experiences connect people to the struggles, triumphs, and daily lives of those who built the early community of Wichita.

Whereas Old Cowtown Museum has preserved historic structures, collections, and artifacts, offering a unique opportunity to step back in time and experience firsthand the culture and history of the American West.

Whereas the year 2025 marks the 75th anniversary of Old Cowtown Museum, a milestone that deserves celebration and recognition by the community and all those who have visited, volunteered, and worked to make the museum a success.

Now therefore be it resolved that the Wichita City Council does hereby proclaim the 75th anniversary of Old Cowtown Museum.

Thank you, Mayor Wu.

I just want to thank everybody in the community who has supported this museum for the past seventy-five years.

It shows that generations of individuals and residents have supported this museum, and we look forward to the next seventy-five years at the museum thanks to our supporters, our elected officials, and the private donors who make this public-private partnership possible.

Thank you.

According to the AARP Public Policy Institute, family caregivers in Kansas provide 320,000 hours of care every year, adding up to 4.5 million dollars in unpaid labor annually.

Whereas family caregivers face tremendous challenges, financial, emotional, and physical.

They do it all from bathing and meal preparation to managing medications, arranging transportation, and performing complex medical or nursing tasks.

Whereas too often, family caregivers sacrifice their own financial stability, stop saving, take on debt, use personal savings, or delay paying bills to care for their loved ones.

These caregivers deserve not only our gratitude, but also common sense solutions that save the money, time, and stress.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Wichita City Council does hereby proclaim November 2025 as National Family Caregivers Month.

Good evening, everyone.

To Mayor Wu and members of the City Council, we would like to thank you very much for this opportunity to recognize National Caregivers Month, as you stated.

There are so many caregivers within Kansas, and the number continues to grow.

So we're very pleased to be able to recognize them, provide our financial support, and advocate for financial support for them going forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

May I please ask Ascension via Christie and any of its supporters to come forward at this time.

The proclamation reads, the City of Wichita, Kansas, founded in 1870, whereas injuries are the leading cause of death and disability to Kansans.

Whereas the state of Kansas is committed to creating and maintaining a safe environment that contributes to the health, safety, and well-being of all people.

Whereas hospitals, state agencies, and community organizations across Kansas are dedicated to protecting our communities from preventable injuries and commend the heroes in health care and all others who work tirelessly in these efforts.

Whereas the City of Wichita encourages all citizens to raise awareness and promote efforts to reduce injuries and improve safety for all Kansans.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Wichita City Council does hereby proclaim November 18th, 2025 as National Injury Prevention Day.

Good evening.

Thank you, Mayor Wu and City Council members.

My name is Victoria Chandler, and I serve as the injury prevention coordinator at Ascension via Christi.

Our hospital over at St.

Francis is the Level 1 trauma center where I am able to serve our community and our trauma team.

We want to talk about the importance about injury prevention.

The campaign this year on November 18th is called Shine the Light.

Our hospital will be shining green lights in the evening to raise awareness for injury prevention throughout our communities.

Thank you.

Thank you.

He just hosted a big event at Exploration Place, which was free to any woman to learn about financial literacy.

And so I'm very appreciative of Treasurer Johnson.

So would you like to say a few words?

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

We went great to get to be with you all.

Uh so one word is thanks to the City of Wichita for hosting us.

One of the things that we appreciated is the ability to get a message out with our leaders and our media partners here in the City of Wichita.

We've worked on the Women in Money event.

This is our second year, and the goal is just to provide information that can be trusted for uh women, specifically with the unique issues they have with money.

Um in particular talking about the importance of planning, the importance of taking action and the importance regardless of whether it's at the household level or the state level or perhaps the city level uh working with the numbers as they are rather than as we wish they were, so that we uh can make good plans and have that opportunity to do the most together and whatever it is that we're working uh to use our financial assets for.

But it really was good.

The the special thing about Wichita this year, we actually closed registration a month ago because the word got out, which is our goal.

So thank you for that partnership.

Mayor, thank you for coming to kick everything off for wearing your green for women and money today.

Appreciate that.

Uh, but appreciate the chance to be here and share that message.

So thank you.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next item?

Public agenda.

The public agenda allows for up to five speakers to have five minutes each to address the council.

No action will be taken relative to items on the public agenda other than referral to the city manager for information as necessary.

Speakers will please state their name and address for the record.

A time clock will display the speaker's remaining time to speak.

Order and rules of decorum will be observed.

The first speaker is Kenley Ziering from the Sedjuck County Register of Deeds regarding property fraud alert.

Good evening, Mayor Wu and members of the City Council.

Uh, my name is Kenley Zering.

I live at 6429 South Jade.

I serve as the Chief Deputy for the Sedju County Register of Deeds.

On behalf of the registered deeds, Tanya Buckingham, I want to thank you for letting me take a few minutes and share a quick overview of what our office does and to highlight two free services that we offer to help keep residents and notaries informed about anything involving their names or property.

So uh a lot of people don't know what the Register of Deeds office does.

We're responsible for recording and maintaining all real estate documents within Sedgwick County.

This includes deeds, mortgages, liens, and releases, and it helps prove who owns the property rights.

It's to make sure every record is accurate, permanent, and easy to access.

And it will give you a message any time a document is recorded in your name.

While it doesn't prevent fraud from happening, it alerts you and it gives you a chance to review that document and allow you to take action quickly if some something doesn't look right.

It's really easy to sign up.

All you have to do is go to property fraudalert.com, select Sedgwick County, Kansas, and then register your name and your contact method.

It only takes a minute and it'll give you that peace of mind knowing that you'll be notified if something is filed in your name.

We also just recently launched a brand new program called Notary Fraud Alert.

It went live just a few minutes uh a few weeks ago, and it works a lot like the property fraud, but it's specifically designed for the notaries.

So whenever a document is recorded using their notary name or seal, and they sign up for this alert, they will also receive an email, a text, or a phone alert right away.

Again, it doesn't prevent misuse, but it gives them real-time alerts to let them know if a document that they notarized is legitimate.

And they just need to go to our website, Sedge County.org backslash deeds, and go to the notaryfraudalert.com.

We're really trying to get the word out about these two free programs, and we would love your help in sharing this information with the community.

Our call is simple to protect property rights, increase awareness, and help residents and notaries stay one step ahead.

Thank you again for the opportunity to speak today, and thank you for helping us spread the word about these valuable services.

Thank you, Kenley.

Thank you.

Councilmember Glascock.

Hey Kennley, thank you so much for speaking today.

Uh specifically having briefly served on the other side of the street, well, I guess maybe two streets now.

Um having toured the registered deeds office and seeing the incredible work you do.

First off, thank you for that.

Can you briefly talk about how you also file DD 214s for individuals as well and what you do for veterans?

Because I think that's an incredibly important service that the registered deeds office offers.

It really is.

And actually, we're doing an event um for the Veterans Day Parade at the exploration place where we will be recording those DD214s for free.

Um, while you're there, you can get your veteran ID, and that's um able to be used anywhere locally, and then also it will allow you to vote if you needed a form of ID.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Kenley.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next individual?

David Martinez.

Issues with second light being moved to the neighborhood.

David Martinez.

I don't see him present.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next individual?

William Glander, affordable housing and the price range.

Good evening, council members.

My name is William Glander.

I live at 235 North Elizabeth.

I'm here tonight to speak about what's happening to many of us in district six.

We are being priced out of our own neighborhood.

Developers are coming in and proposing new studio apartments for around a thousand a month because a market analyst claims the media income in our area is 80,000.

I don't even make that.

But that number doesn't reflect the real people who live here.

Many of us are homeowners who have been here for decades.

Others are renters, re single parents or people working hard every day.

And we live paycheck to paycheck.

Most of us come close to 80 a year, but not all of us.

We want our community to look good.

We want investment, but responsibility investments, the kind that strengthen strengthens our neighborhoods without pushing us out.

Because when these high price developments come in, everything around them goes up to property taxes rises for long time homeowners, landlords, raise rent too much, the new market rates.

The suddenly families we have been here for generations can't afford to stay.

That's not progress.

That's displacement.

This is what people mean when they say economic price out.

When lines are drawn, not on a map, but throughout affordability and devise the community by income instead of uniting us, uniting us as neighbors.

We need a city plan that balances growth with fairness.

Before approving these high-end projects, I'm asking the council to consider how will this impact current residents' cost of living?

What protection can be put in place to keep taxes and rent stable?

Can we require developers to include affordable of workforce housing so people who already live here can stay here?

We deserve the chance to benefit from the progress happening around us, not to be pushed out because of it.

Thank you for your time.

But another thing I also want to add in there, many of us want to be homeowners.

We want I want to stay as a homeowner.

I want to die in my house.

So when I see all these apartments popping up and the price is pricing me out, it's making it hard on me.

So as a city employee of what little I do make or what I will make when I retire when the prices go up, I won't be able to afford to live.

And then I got many people in my neighborhood that only make 30 to 20,000 a year because they're on low subsidy income.

So with the people that in the the meeting I went to a while back, they said that the annual income is 80,000 in Delano.

And I'm up here to let you know.

I don't even come close to that.

So thank you.

Any questions?

Thank you, William.

Y'all have a good day.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

And thanks.

Thank you, William.

You um you're speaking about things that a lot of us are facing right now, increased property values, increased rents, increased um cost of home homeownership.

Um we do have some things in the work we're talking about.

Uh part of the issue is that um when we give subsidies or we give some sort of tax breaks to people for affordable housing, a lot of times it comes in the form of multifamily units.

Um, I wish that we could compel people to want to build single family homes more.

Um, and that that's something we're looking at.

We're also working with our state partners to identify some funding sources and some things we can do to make home builds and home ownership more affordable.

So it is, it's a difficult topic right now, but it's something I think that we're all focused on up here.

Yeah, not knowing all your guys' responsibility, but uh I just need to make it aware of what's happening behind the scenes.

Yes, sir, I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you again, William.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next individual the next individual called right before the meeting to advise they weren't coming?

So the next one after that is Sybil Strum.

How can you unlawfully take a house without permission?

My name is Sybil Strum.

I recite a 32 sick narquanic.

The central is a bully.

Get their uniforms on and they go bully people they don't like.

And nobody's doing nothing to her.

And I was not on the premises when the central came in and broke in my house and took pictures, and I made a police report because I told my Dave Owner, the Central County Commissioner, that I should report it.

They're bullies, they come on your property, they don't tell you who they are, but they take pictures.

Uh stolen by them.

And I am not happy.

I have been a teacher's aid, I helped the youth that were actually an alcoholic and drug infected environments, and I took them in.

Some of the police would give me them.

I would say things like, what do you want?

I want you to take care of these kids.

And I'm devastated.

It's been emotional, it's been mental, and I don't like it.

You bully people.

And how come some of these people in my neighborhood are getting by?

It's because of favoritism.

That's what's going on.

And you guys need to investigate it.

And when I asked who the city the central was, they were not telling.

I asked again.

I have not yet got anywhere with them.

So I went to the police.

And I wrote, I was damaged for suspicious.

They broke in my house.

They took pictures without my consent.

And I didn't even know him.

My neighbor who's deceased called me up.

He says, there's a guy in your house, my old house.

It was a 1910.

And what happened?

They started yelling at each other.

You know, they were the unkind of yellow.

He asked who he was.

He didn't want to answer.

And now I'm paying a $30,000 house.

Nobody gave me that house.

And when I went to Wild Rock, I had a break in.

And went on to Mount Carmel apartments, which she standed.

That was, you know, they paid for the moving.

It was a bad place to live.

Do you think our citizens should put up with dice?

I don't think so.

I don't and then my name, my daughter calls me up, and she says a central came and bullied her.

This is not good.

This is not the way to go.

And I am devastated.

It has hurt me emotionally, mentally, physically.

And I'm done with it.

And I do have a police report of the central coming in.

And then the legal aid wouldn't help me get my property.

And every key came in my property and putting arms and tires.

Thank you, Miss Well.

City Manager Leighton, can you just please address some of uh these accusations and how long ago these were not getting the delegated ration?

Mayor, I I apologize.

I don't remember exactly the time frame.

November the 20th.

20 the 20th.

Miss Sybil, can you please sit down?

2019.

Miss Miss Sybil, can you please sit down?

City Manager Leighton.

Yes.

It's a long history, Mayor, and one that I can't repeat for memory.

Um there were concerns that were expressed regarding the condition of Ms.

Strum's um living conditions, her home.

Um we attempted to um provide repairs necessary for her to stay in the home.

Uh that turned out to be cost prohibitive, so then we provided assistance for her to go into another location, and um we also put her up during an interim period while we were trying to uh achieve uh permanent housing for her, which she is now in.

Um obviously there are multiple sides to this story and perceptions, but um we've we have a I think a pretty long documentation of everything we've done to try to help Ms.

Strum stay in uh uh safe permanent housing.

Thank you, City Manager.

This means that there are two spots available for anyone who would like to address the council.

I see none.

I'm bringing it back to the bench.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next item?

Consent agenda items one through 26 council members, are there any items to be pulled?

I see none.

I move to approve consent agenda items.

Second motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, can you please open the roll?

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Board of Bids and Contracts dated November 3rd, 2025.

Good evening, Mayor, member of City Council, Jason Brognan for the Department of Finance, Board of his convene on Monday, November 3rd for the following recommendations.

Oops.

Recommended Apex Excavating for 220,000.

511.

For purchasing, we have renovation of administration office for the Kansas Aviation Museum.

For Van Asdale Construction LLC for 103,300.

For Sam Bunker Renovation McDonald Golf Course.

Fleet width services LLC for 303,200.

Meters replacement parts and iTron ERTS.

Recommended meter for two different vendors for three different groups.

Aggregate total for 796, $630.55.

We have rock salt for snow and ice control change order.

I'm in the contract for Hutchison Salt Company for $261,300.

For the airport, we have street side snow and ice removal for Eisenhower National Airport.

Recommending SLM Inc.

doing business at suburban landscape management for $105,000.

This is how to become a vendor with the city of Wichita, how to register.

These are some our purchasing calendars, some events we have coming up that we're going to participate in or host with our small business partners.

These are the open opportunities we have right now for the public.

And I recommend you approve these recommendations, and I can stand for any questions.

Thank you, Jason.

Any questions for staff?

I see none.

I move to approve the board of bids and contracts dated November 3rd, 2025.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Public hearing and request by Lang Jin Y LLC for approval of a letter of intent to issue industrial revenue bonds.

Sorry about that.

Troy Anderson, Assistant City Manager.

Want to let uh City Council know that the applicant has requested that this item be withdrawn.

No action needs to be taken by city council.

Receive and file.

Do we need a vote for receive and file?

We don't.

Very good.

Thank you, Troy.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Quarterly financial reports for the period ended September 30th, 2025.

Good morning, Mayor, members of City Council, Mark Manning with the Department of Finance.

Uh today I want to present to you the third quarter report for 2025.

So just a reminder third quarter report includes unaudited financial activity in this case through September 30th of 2025.

We'll use this data, and what we'll do is we'll compare it to what we expected to happen in this case uh the 2025 revised budget.

And then we'll also look forward on uh maybe make some assumptions on what might happen in 2026 compared to what we previously provided guidance on.

And uh we'll also use this data to identify any areas we might want to focus our attention on in the future.

So high level general fund revenues are performing pretty well.

A lot of this, by the way, is going to be pretty redundant because a lot of the themes I'm gonna talk to you about are very similar to the themes that we've talked about in the last several quarterly uh reports.

Our revenues are performing pretty well overall.

Interest earnings is particularly strong this year.

I'll go into a little bit more detail on that in a minute.

Property tax and sales tax are also performing a little bit better than what we expected.

So all those are really good things.

Uh on the expenditure side, our expenditures are also rising a little bit more than what we expected.

Uh nearly all of that is due to salaries and wage pressure.

Uh that's because of wage rate increases, but primarily due to our uh filling of positions, and we'll talk about that a little bit more in a minute.

But recall our strategy is to try to fill positions we could maintain service levels, particularly in public safety.

Uh, and this year we've been pretty successful in that, uh, but that does increase upward pressure on our expenditures.

Uh but overall, we would expect revenues and expenditures while maybe a little bit higher than what we had budgeted.

Uh, we still are maintaining our guidance that we expect this year to be a balanced budget.

So let's talk about four things that are really driving everything I talked about, and again, three of these are redundant.

Interest earnings.

Uh, we know that interest earnings are gonna go down at some point in just a matter of when and how fast.

Well, the Fed started cutting in September, uh, so that's what we've been waiting for.

But fortunately, in 2025, our model was based on uh a little bit more aggressive reductions, which means that we are probably going to overcollect fairly significantly in 2025.

Uh, but uh, what we expected in the future is probably going to happen, which is that we would expect uh interest earnings to decline in the future.

Franchise fees, we talked many times about how that's largely dependent on weather.

That really benefited us in Q1, particularly on natural gas.

Q3 will probably be a little soft again because that's primarily electricity in the summertime.

And our weather was a little bit milder than normal.

So we may have a little bit of weakness in franchise fees.

We'll keep an eye on that.

Salaries and benefits, I mentioned savings from unfilled positions are less than budgeted, which means we're more successful in filling our vacant positions.

That puts upward pressure on our salaries and benefits wage base.

Finally, the fourth bullet there is something we haven't talked about much.

As you probably know, we pay fees to the Sedgwick County jail for inmates that they uh house or defendants that they house for us.

Those costs are increasing fairly significantly.

A lot of that's based on enforcement strategies and enforcement activities, but we are seeing some upward pressure there.

So let me dive down just a brief minute on positions.

We budget in the adopted budget 100% of the cost for every authorized position.

But we know that's never going to happen.

So then we have a deduction, which we call shrinkage, of a percentage, which is our estimate of what we actually will spend.

Typically that's two or three percent.

So in other words, we're gonna budget roughly 97% of the cost to fill every single city position.

And we want to be as accurate as possible.

Now recall we had fairly significant surpluses in 22, 23, and 24.

A lot of that was driven because we estimated our savings too low, and we had challenges filling positions, so we uh we had excess savings, which led to some fairly significant surpluses.

Uh that scenario is probably gonna be reversed this year.

We intentionally increased our shrinkage adjustment in 2025 based on our past history, and then we had better luck filling positions this year.

So that's going to create a little upward pressure on our budget this year, uh particularly in salaries and benefits expenditures.

Again, we want to be as accurate as possible.

We want to fill positions, that's strategically good.

Uh, but uh if we if we fill more than what we expected financially, it it impacts us a little bit.

Uh let me talk a little bit about the challenges we have uh in providing accurate guidance in the fourth quarter.

Fourth quarter is our most challenging quarter because a lot of things happen at the very end of the year.

For example, we're gonna get sales tax and motor vehicle taxes, which is about 10 million dollars.

We'll get those usually the day after Christmas, obviously four days left in the in the fiscal year.

Uh September or December is a challenging month for salaries, particularly in public safety.

There's a lot of holiday pay, there's some clothing allowances that we pay only in December.

There's a lot of year-end payroll accrual, so a lot of things happen in December, which makes it particularly very challenging for us to project.

Purchasing activity curtails in December.

Uh you know, our departments manage that, and uh they know what the expectations are, but it's sometimes a challenge for us to accurately forecast what actually will occur in December.

And finally, we make a lot of closing entries, uh, usually at the very end of December, and sometimes actually even into January before we close the month.

And uh, so until those closing entries occur, it's really a challenge for us to provide exact guidance.

So, in in summary, this year I would tell you revenues could be as high as three million dollars over.

Again, most of that's gonna be on interest earnings.

Jail fees could be a million and a half dollars more than what we expected, so that's definitely a tailwind.

Uh salaries and wages again, you know, could be a little higher than what we expected.

They certainly probably won't be maturely lower than what we expected.

Uh now point out some strategies that will uh we have the availability to employ year end.

You may recall the budget includes about 2.2 million in transfers out of the general fund to cash fund capital projects if we need to.

That's a uh option that we can adjust those if we needed to in order to balance and comply with our reserve policy.

Uh we'll also, by the way, present uh closing at closing adjustments and uh other adjustments on December 16th, so that'll give us another opportunity if we need to to present any uh additional options to you.

But overall, we do expect to be balanced.

So I told you we would flip and kind of take our experience this year and maybe look a little bit into next year, uh, maybe give you a preview of what we might present in February or March of next year.

Uh again, very preliminarily.

Uh, but I noted interest earnings are higher this year.

Even though we expect them to decline, I think that they will probably decline less than what we have budgeted next year, which is a good thing.

So that probably will be a little bit of a tailwind on our revenue side in 2026.

Uh I mentioned we budgeted shrinkage high in 2025, and we turned out we're probably not gonna be correct in that.

We actually budgeted it lower in 206 and 7.

In other words, we expected to be more successful filling positions in 26 and 7.

It just turns out that success has occurred a little bit earlier than we than we thought in 2025.

So we should be uh have uh a tailwind there on the expenditure side, not as much pressure.

Now on the negative side, uh we still have some contracts uh that are open for 2026, depending on where those contracts come in relative to what we have budgeted.

Uh that definitely could be a headwind in the 2026.

And finally, I mentioned jail fees, and if those stay at the elevated level, that also could be a tailwind or a headwind, I'm sorry, in 2026.

Uh let's touch on some other funds, and we have 36 other funds.

I typically only touch on the ones that uh are operating outside the norm.

Uh I just mentioned a couple here.

Uh transient gas tax growth in 25 is a little bit below expectations.

Uh it's a 10 million dollar base, and we might undercollect by a couple hundred thousand dollars, so nothing to be concerned about.

And we were pretty aggressive on our growth assumptions, but we probably will under collect a little bit on transient gas tax.

Uh I usually don't talk about TIFFs, but I thought I'd point out a couple.

The West Bank and Center City TIFFs, the increments are actually performing very well in those two TIFFs, uh higher than what we expected, and that's a really good thing.

And by the way, I know we talked about TIFFs occasionally uh this quarterly, as every quarterly does, has a pretty exhaustive uh review of our TIFS, and that in this quarterly happens to be on page 21 through 34.

Uh finally, I should note uh water revenues, uh, as you would probably expect based on the conservation efforts this summer.

Our water revenues are down about two million dollars, recurring revenues or down about two million dollars uh through uh Q uh three.

Again, that's uh probably something we should have expected.

Uh but the good news is operating revenues are also relatively flat compared to next year, but uh definitely the water utility uh will merit some uh uh some continue uh monitoring.

Let's talk about our city debt.

We always show this slide.

Uh we've mentioned how it typically is going to change, and that is that our growth is primarily going to be again on the water and sewer revenue uh debt and loans slide.

Uh our total uh bonds and loans is about a hundred about one point five billion dollars.

Again, the vast majority of that is in our enterprise funds, primarily our utilities.

Uh I will mention general obligation debt, which is the portion mostly paid with property tax, is about five percent of our total or about 75 million dollars.

Uh let me wrap up by talking about ARPA.

Uh as you may know, we're required to submit a report to Treasury on ARPA each quarter.

Uh we have submitted that report, and uh by the way, it is also available online uh through the third quarter.

Uh we we spent we spent about 4.2 million in the third quarter, and we spent about 60 million dollars roughly.

Uh recall we started with about 72 million dollars.

Uh we have, I believe, about eight projects that have unexpended balances.

Uh now those are obligated, uh, but we need to spend them.

We have until December uh 31st of 2026 to expend those.

Uh that's a handful of capital improvement projects with relatively small amounts.

Uh the MAC still has a fairly sizable amount uh unexpended uh and affordable housing does as well, and then uh violence interrupters and uh uh healthy corner store are the others that have uh balances remaining.

I'd also note that this uh report obviously was uh done in September 30th.

Uh that's five weeks ago.

I can tell you that we spent another 2.6 million dollars uh since we produced this report, so we're actually up to about 62.7 million dollars in total ARPA expenditures.

Uh again, the quarterly report and the ARPA report are both available online.

And uh with that, I'll move to my conclusions.

Uh wage expenditures are increasing, putting pressure on us, pressure we didn't have last year.

Uh, but we still expect a balanced budget this year and probably with a a small surplus.

Uh we'll present some technical and closing adjustments to you, most likely on December 16th, and uh we'll provide a little bit better guidance then, most likely.

And finally, as I noted, the quarterly report and the ARPA report are available online.

I think that's my last slide.

Uh so the recommended action is receive and file the quarterly report, and I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mark.

Questions for staff, beginning with Vice Mayor Johnston.

Thank you, Mayor.

Mark, thank you very much.

Always good good news.

So appreciate that.

I have some questions on the ARPA funds, a couple of the projects there.

Okay.

Uh one is on page 22 of violence interrupters.

There seems to be which I do like that program.

Um excuse me, missing data on the number of contacts of high-risk individuals.

There's no data for June, July, August, or September.

Is there a reason there's no data?

I'm going to defer to assistance manager Martin.

Okay.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council.

Thank you for the question, Vice Mayor.

As to the reason why the data hasn't been reported to the city, I don't know.

I do have a third quarter report from the program evaluator that's handling the value, excuse me, violence interrupters program.

And that includes the data you mentioned.

I'm anticipating a fourth quarter report that I should receive within the next 30 days.

My hope was for violence interrupters, which is currently going through a subrecipient monitoring.

So we have our external auditor conducting an audit uh to make sure that we're complying with the code of federal regulations.

I'm expecting a fourth quarter report from the program evaluator, which will cover the first year of the program being a service.

Want to combine those documents along with the site certification that the violence interrupters program is gone underwent within the last 30 days.

Plan to package those materials, provide you updated data by the end of the year.

Okay.

Thanks.

We have a follow-up to that.

Um there is a note on page 16 that does share that there will not be a quarter four number because other performance measures include updates through Q2 of 2025 and are reported annually going forward.

So that data will not be available.

However, I would like to see that data moving forward.

I think that it's important if we've already started a track record of monthly engagements on number of contacts, conflicts resolved, and prevented retaliations.

We should continue having that data monthly uh so that we can track.

And I really believe that being data informed requires us to actually have full data.

So I would not like to see annual data, but rather monthly.

Glad to provide that information to you, um Mayor Wu.

The reports we currently receive are quarterly.

Uh I'll talk to the program evaluator and CEI about getting monthly reports.

Um, another important thing to note the program evolution evaluator operates on a different cadence or schedule than we do as far as quarter.

It's not our financial quarter.

Um the programs or excuse me, the sites were initiated in September of 2024.

That started, that's day one in terms of program evaluation.

So the quarters don't necessarily line up, heard you in terms of the data you'd like to receive.

I'll work with the program evaluator as well as community engagement institute to provide that data.

Thank you.

Good thing.

Uh we got another question, if that may be.

Um page uh 4041.

Uh who takes this one?

The Healthy Corner Store Initiative.

Is that Dante too?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

I'll stick around this time.

Okay, thank you.

Um some questions on on that.

Um it seems like the majority of the money was spent at Mr.

C's Water Mountain King's product stands.

Yeah.

$65,000.

Is are we just buying the food for the stands and they're selling them or not at all.

And thank you for the question and glad to provide clarification, uh, Mr.

Vice Mayor.

Um Community Engagement Institute is our sub-recipient per the grant.

As per the model, community engagement institute contacted neighborhood corner stores to see who would be partners in the initiative.

Uh, Mr.

MC's market stepped up to the plate and is serving as a distributor for the other uh locations that are participating in the program.

Uh, based on the last report I received, we are up to 13 programs.

So the number may seem inflated for Mr.

MCs because they are the distributor.

Um, and along with that, Mr.

MCs was one of the early adopters in terms of converting its door, uh installing equipment so that uh healthy foods and produce can be uh provided.

Yeah, I read bought some equipment for them to do that.

And there was 33,000 for Mr.

MC's market.

Yeah.

So but there was another, there's a wholesale for 8300.

Yeah.

Um there's 65,000 for product stands.

Right.

And so I don't drill down and provide you more specific data.

The best answer I can give you tonight is that as our distributor, they're going to have the bulk of the invoices of the receipts, and then they'll distribute the healthy uh produce out to other partners in the store.

Um I I do expect that to change slightly going forward in that we started with five stores, excuse me.

The program started with five stores.

We're now up to 13.

We're also having conversations with regional distributors, and so the model may change, so to speak.

Greatly appreciate the work that Mr.

MCs has done up until this point.

The model is evolving.

Um I'll get you a drill down in terms of the numbers you're looking at and more specific data.

Okay.

I I am questioning one of those five places.

Okay.

Uh it is called Healthy Corner Store Initiative.

Yeah.

And one of the places is a 21 smoke shop.

Okay.

Why why are we putting healthy food in a 21 smoke shop?

Um, not familiar with the business.

Um, I could follow up with the community engagement institute to get more details about that business in particular.

And most importantly, what guidelines have we put in place in terms of the program and if that particular business meets the requirements of the program okay.

Who who has oversight of this?

As far as day-to-day oversight, a uh community service rep within the city manager's office works closely with community engagement institute in terms of sub-recipient oversight who we hold accountable to administering the program.

That's going to be the Scott Dr.

Scott Woodick at the community engagement institute of Wichita State University.

That's who I'll follow up with.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

I would like a follow-up.

Okay.

Gladly.

If you don't mind.

Sure.

I have one more question.

Probably not you, though.

Okay.

Um I noticed on the Westlink Library.

There was uh 48 about 48,000 remaining in that in that budget.

Yes, sir.

I know I have residents call me wanting to have a sunshade over the play area because it gets really hot in the summertime.

Would those funds be available for that?

Uh I don't think there's a path forward on that, uh, council member.

We can only spend ARPA money on things that were committed to prior to December 31st of 2024.

And as far as I know, we have no purchase order or commitment for a canopy at the Westlake Library as of that date, which would render it uh ineligible for ARPA.

Okay.

At some point I'd like to see one of those.

Okay.

Because I did go out there on a hot afternoon.

You couldn't play out there.

So thank you.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh Mark, I ask this every time.

What are the projections as far as the interest rates?

I I try to figure out how I can answer that simply.

We have generally speaking, we have modeled a uh projection in which we expect them to reach a terminal rate of about three percent, which happens to be what the Federal Reserves dot plot, if you're familiar with that, would show by about 2027.

Uh I think the challenge is our model assumed that they would drop through 26 and 27 a little bit more aggressively than what they're actually doing, and that's why we even though we expect eternal sortings to decline, we may actually overcollect, particularly in 26 and possibly in 2027.

But ultimately our model is based on them reverting back to a normalized rate of about three percent uh sometime in 2027.

And they've had two cuts this year of uh a quarter.

What's it oh yeah, yeah, they did a quarter in September and a quarter in October, and the you know the word on the street is they'll probably do a quarter in December, although we'll we'll we'll see.

There they have a lot of pressure on them.

And that'll bring it to three and a half percent then if they do another quarter.

Yeah, either three and a half or three seventy-five.

I can't remember whether they started at four and a half or four and a quarter.

Okay, yeah.

Yeah, yeah, I'd I'd be interested to see.

Just always just kind of curious about that.

And I'll tell you not to go too much in detail, but I will tell you one more thing.

You know, our portfolio has a duration, a duration is the length of time in which on average we've invested our funds, and we're restricted by policy uh in that.

Uh but generally speaking, our duration is a little over a year right now.

So what that means is our interest rate risk is relatively small within a year.

That's why I'm pretty confident that we're gonna overcollect next year because I know what our portfolio is earning.

So I think our risk is pretty insignificant 26, but if they continue to cut, we'll probably have greater risk in 27.

Okay, appreciate it.

Yes, sir.

Mark, one question regarding um item number or slide number 26 about jail fees.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh I believe it was 1.5 million.

Can you address?

You said that there has been greater enforcement.

Can you expand on that?

Uh yes, ma'am.

Uh in talking to the uh prosecutor's office and the police department.

Uh we primarily pay jail fees on uh defendants held on municipal charges, not on state charges but on municipal charges, or the ones that are serving time on municipal charges.

Uh a couple areas in which we've increased activity, is my understanding is the property tax or the I'm sorry, the property crimes uh reduction task force uh has been very aggressive in uh looking at uh uh petite theft and things of that nature, and they've been pretty successful in that.

Well, I think a lot of those are municipal charges, uh which means that we incur jail fees, uh, but again, that's part of their strategic initiative, which has been successful in producing outcomes uh aligned to our strategic plan.

The other area I think is in domestic violence.

Uh I certainly am not an expert in that area, but I understand we've been a little bit more aggressive in that area, uh, which again is typically municipal charge, which is increasing our jail fees.

Thank you for that.

I see no further questions for staff.

We'll open it up for public comment.

I see no one from the public.

With that, I will bring it back to the bench and move that the city council receive and file the quarterly financial reports for the period ending September 30th, 2025.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Funding for 2026 facilities maintenance.

Evening, Mayor, Council members, Chris Sewell, Public Works and Utilities.

This item we're asking to initiate our maintenance funding for this year.

There's roughly 15 different line items being initiated.

They're covering over 350 buildings.

That's a smaller subset of our grand total of roughly 575 buildings if we include airport and the utilities.

The replacement value of the ones that we have covered in these maintenance funds is roughly 1.6 billion dollars.

So we have quite a sizable portfolio.

The maintenance funds, we prioritize the investments that come out of those, usually our decision support tool.

It's uh uses a genetic algorithm to optimize risk within our portfolio so that it addresses critical items first, critical to us, meaning if something fails, you're gonna feel it in the building.

HVAC, electrical, fire, life safety, that sort of thing.

Here are the geo bond items.

Uh the TGT will come later.

We'll cover a couple of these real quick.

Um the automated building controls, that's an interesting one.

That's usually the HVAC controls within a building.

The past expenditures, there have been some um board of bid items that have come to you recently where this funding is being used.

We're updating the controls at the fire training facility and also at the Witch Star Art Museum.

So that work's going to continue as well.

The botanica improvements, that's a more specific item.

We'll cover that here in a second, but it's more the programmatic needs of that uh facility that'll address more aesthetic components.

City facility improvements is another interesting one.

It combines park and rec libraries and neighborhood city halls all into one fund.

Uh whereas park facility maintenance that's on the second line also directly affects parks.

And those are directly prioritized by the DST software as to what work gets done in those.

City home maintenance, we'll have an example of that one here in a moment.

1.2 million.

Almost all of that's going to be chewed up in one project.

And then facility security improvements, that's primarily security cameras, outdoor lighting at exterior entrances and so forth, and police facility maintenance as well.

You can uh probably imagine not much of that's going to be going to Patrol East as it is brand new.

There's nothing planned there.

Or Patrol West, who's going to be brand new here shortly.

All of that's going to patrol north, south, the uh bomb squad building that's out on West Pawnee, and the animal shelter.

The botanica improvements line, as I mentioned, the DST prioritizes things in a on a risk base.

And to that end, some things just don't rise up to the level to get funding because they're so far down the list.

Um, one of those is the pergolus structures that Illuminations uses at Botanica as well as the pond boardwalk.

So that's roughly $700,000 that'll be replaced as part of next year's funding.

Uh Evergreen Rec Center, this is a DST item, obviously.

Fire sprinkler replacement that needs to uh fire sprinklers typically have about a 40-year useful lifespan, so that one's come up.

And as I mentioned, the city hall maintenance fund uh 900,000 is being budgeted for this one air handler fan unit replacement.

Now there's six air handlers in this building, and each fan is roughly 125 horsepower, so you might imagine they're a little uh a little expensive to replace.

Um they are also original to the building, so commend our maintenance staff for having fans that have lasted for almost 50 years.

Here's the TGT funds.

There's only two century two and the cow town improvements.

Uh happy 75th birthday to them.

Uh we'll see their uh improvements here in a second.

Uh about three years ago, we had a 10-year plan with ASM as to what to do with the Century 2 maintenance funds.

And as part of that deal, five million of the initial funding went to replace the Century 2 blue roof.

And from then on, only 250,000 of the remaining C2 funds would be directed by facilities, us.

The remainder directed by ASM, who is actually doing a very good job of prioritizing the same types of things that we would be doing.

The cowtown improvements uh mentioned the law office needs a new roof, uh refurbish the interior slightly.

The two restroom buildings out on the property also require uh quite a bit of interior remodel.

And then as I said before, sometimes the non-critical things just don't rise to the level of the DST recommending them.

So the painting and repairing of siding is more of a prioritization from the cultural uh folks that want that done at their property.

And it was a specific line item that was approved in uh last year's CIP.

So with that, I recommend we approve the projects, adopt the bonding resolutions, authorize necessary signatures, stand for questions.

Thank you, Chris.

Questions for staff?

I have one.

Um I wanted to know.

I see that if you can go back to the slide where all the different items are being there.

We go allocated with funds.

Fire and police stations, more specifically, fire stations.

I've had the opportunity to go to various fire stations this year to talk with firefighters about what they're experiencing, and I wanted to know how you prioritize, for instance, uh making sure that the windows or roof are fully sealed so that when they are sleeping, there's no water coming in from snow.

Right.

As uh roof leaks are reported, we're sent out and have a contract to repair them.

But the roof replacement overall, that gets prioritized by the DST.

Um, if I remember correctly, one of them is due for next year.

I can't remember exactly which fire station it was.

But uh much of last year's funding is actually going to be going to fire station one.

Uh, we're going to replace the entire HVAC system in that building.

I know that's been a point of contention recently, and it's been slightly delayed in the fact that we have learned from the uh design work that's ongoing for the new fire stations down at uh nearby the airport facility, the southwest fire station.

Some of the work that's going into that, producing a new template for a fire station.

We want to carry over into all the other fire stations as well, like adding extra decontamination areas, better control of the airflow in there, so uh a little better control of the contaminants that come back into those facilities.

But uh to directly answer your question, yeah.

Uh the fire facilities maintenance, that's a directly DST funded line item.

So it's almost always going to be on the roof replacements and electrical improvements, but uh the day-to-day maintenance that that's just as it's reported and repaired.

I just I guess want to make a comment and make sure that before winter really hits us here in Wichita that I want to make sure that our fire stations all don't have leaks so that our individuals who are sleeping in those quarters are firefighters are not being faced with again precipitation from the outside.

So that could be something that can be addressed.

Just make sure, double check um what is it, 21 fire stations that we have.

As Chris said, they work on they have work orders that are uh based on concerns expressed by the department.

Thank you.

I see no further questions for staff.

Thank you very much.

We will open it up for public comment.

I see none.

I'll bring it back to the bench.

With that, um, I simply want to say thank you for continuing to maintain uh facilities that we have already invested in.

Uh it is very important that we make sure that roofs are not uh leaking or they get replaced.

Um these are all important items that we need to consider as we move forward.

And so thank you again to staff who continue to look at all of the 500 plus buildings in the city of Wichita.

Um, and I know that it is a lot for you guys to review each year, but again, um I hope that when people see uh something that's wrong in one of the buildings that they reported to their superiors so that then it can be addressed as soon as possible.

With that, I move that the city council approve the projects, adopt the bonding resolutions, and authorize the necessary signatures.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 70.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Funding for 2026 sidewalk maintenance program.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council members, Paul Councilman, Public Works and Utilities for the record.

The public works department, public works and utilities department oversees an annual program for sidewalk repairs, has provided by charter ordinance number 88.

Staff continually receives requests to repair uneven or broken sidewalk sections that may be considered a trip hazard or safety concern with the cost of repairs, generally being reimbursed by the vetting property owner.

Sections of sidewalk with multiple cracks or cracks wide enough to allow grass to grow shall be replaced.

Sections of sidewalk that are raised or have sunken one inch or more, creating a trip hazard shall be leveled or replaced.

And sections of sidewalks with excessive cross slope more than a quarter inch per 12 inches or sloped away from the street shall be replaced.

The city is responsible for sidewalk adjacent to city facilities, such as fire stations, police stations, parks, and libraries.

And the city is also responsible for intersections as noted in the picture on the left, where the property lines are extended to the back of curb.

Anywhere there's wheelchair ramps or sidewalk within that area are the responsibility of the city.

And state statute requires that upon verification of needed sidewalk repairs, property owners will be notified and provided a minimum of 30 days for the opportunity to have those repairs made by a licensed contractor.

The city has an annual on-call contractor to make repairs not completed by the property owner.

And the intent is to have the city contractor to complete the repairs as soon as possible after the initial 30 days.

Offset by direct payment from or special assessment to the adjacent property owners.

Staff requests authorization of the full amount of the 2026 budget to continue the repairs.

It is recommended that the city council approve the budget, adopt the resolution and authorize necessary signatures, and I'll stand for questions.

Thank you, Paul.

Questions for staff.

I just want to uh ask you one question regarding sidewalks one more time.

Uh we get asked often whose responsibility is it?

A sidewalk.

Uh, can you go back to maybe the photo?

Um more right here.

Um, can you address the adjacent property uh reference that you've been making?

If it is adjacent to a city property, parks, fire stations, that's the city's responsibility.

However, in the previous photo, if it's in front of a homeowner's house or in this situation, um, there is uh a median behind uh a house.

Can you address whose responsibility would be on the right hand side?

So in the it typically in the front yard of the residential uh house or property owner, that is the the um responsibility of that property owner.

Um occasionally along the arterial streets as shown on the picture on the right.

Um, that is um you know to the hoa.

If there is sidewalk in front of the house, you know, this you know, if there was sidewalk, this is kind of back in houses back up to this is um webb road, for example.

Um the city would bore that cost, provide their sidewalk in the front of the house.

Thank you, Paul.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, just one question real quick quick.

Uh, people who are financially strapped.

Do we have any sort of funding that can help them out?

Um I said again, I'm sorry, I missed the first part.

For people who are financially strapped, are there any poverty level programs that could help with it?

Not that I'm aware of off the top of my head, no.

Okay, that might be the fund.

Sorry, here the most unpopular program that we run here.

There is uh mayor and city council uh Gary Jansen.

There is a program in place, same with our special assessments that we especially like to use to do on dirt streets for low income.

It's a it's the same program, a similar program.

We provide that information.

We provide a reference and link to that.

Uh it's based on income level, but there is a program in place, at least for application.

I couldn't tell you what the numbers are the threshold.

I could get you that.

Okay, yeah, I'd be curious.

All right, thank you, Gary.

I see no further questions for staff.

We will open it up for public comment.

I see none.

I'll bring it back to the bench.

I move that the city council approve the budget, adopt the resolution, and authorize the necessary signatures.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Phase two agreement and funding for four mile creek digester expansion.

Mayor and Council members Gary Jansen, Public Works and Utilities.

Before I start this item, if you wouldn't mind, I want to take a quick second.

I saw that Chris left, and I wish he wouldn't have.

I wanted to make a quick comment.

Facilities management is a challenging deal.

We've got a lot of assets as you've seen.

It's complex.

Chris has done a tremendous job developing our decision support tool and really helping us develop a path forward.

Chris has moved into a new position in public works and utilities going to do a great job for us.

But I just wanted to publicly thank him for what he had done.

He's done a really good job with that over the years, and he's put us in a good place moving forward.

I was hoping he was still going to be here, but thank you for letting me say that.

So the item before you is a request for approval of the progressive design build agreement amendment.

This would be for phase two and additional funding for the Four Mile Creek Digester Expansion Project.

So to provide some background, uh, what you see this kind of blue area is the sue what we call the sewer shed, the basin that uh drains into our four mile creek sewer treatment plant where that square is near Harry and 159 Street East.

The city actually took over this facility and the system that feeds it from the Sedget County in 2001.

Uh we made an expansion in 2004 and last expanded the facility in 2019, which I'll talk about in just a moment.

Uh that expansion uh effectively doubled the capacity.

There's a lot of growth in this area, especially up around Key 96 and Greenwoods, all of it that drains to this through this basin to this facility.

There's a lot happening, there's a lot more coming.

It's important that we have the capacity in this facility to provide sewer treatment and services to the area.

Uh looking to the future and some of the things that we're doing with this project will set us up for the next expansion.

Uh probably sometime in the next 10 to 20 years, but it'll put us in a good place to be there.

So looking at the uh site itself, the green areas highlight new facilities that were constructed or expanded with the 2019 project.

The orange is the aeration basin uh basins, which is the focus of this project.

This facility, uh similar to our other wastewater treatment facilities, uses a process called aerobic digestion to break down solids in the wastewater treatment process.

Um again, with all the growth in the basin, uh, with us taking on more flow to the plant, we need the ability to break down those solids.

It's it's a critical part of the treatment process.

The initial modifications, this digester expansion along with the initial modifications completed in 2019.

Uh, the byproduct of this process is sludge, it's solids that come out of this.

Uh, we have to transport those to our main what I would call our main wastewater treatment plant, plant two at the south end of town where we deal with those.

We do land farming with those.

Um, and it's worked well, but that's part of the the um permit process, so we have to deal with those solids.

The reduction of solid storage, uh, which this will help with, along with the odor control improvements for making it B and R will reduce the amount of odor generated during the treatment process.

So you've heard us talk a lot about what's happening with the B and R project.

Uh one of the primary focuses odor control.

We take solids from this facility, biosolids to plant two.

That adds to the odor control or the odor issues down there.

This project will help minimize the solids.

It's gonna help us minimize the odor issues at plant two.

Hopefully, that all made sense.

The uh odor control improvements at plant two.

We've talked about before, projected to be completed in the third quarter of 2026.

We're pushing to get this project done as soon as we can so the timing is right so that we don't add to that issue once B and R is done.

These uh the CIP, the funding in the CIP, which I'll show you in just a moment, was was uh basically a placeholder.

It was estimated prior to initiation of any of the design.

Uh phase one, which was previously approved by the city council.

Uh completed an in-depth analysis of existing equipment and future needs.

Again, this is a progressive design build, project delivery.

What that does is allows us to have the owner as uh staff, the designer and the contractor work together uh to save as much cost as possible, work through a lot of options, look at the most effective and efficient way to design and build the project at the same time.

We are shooting for completion of construction in the first quarter of 2027.

We're gonna do what we can to expedite that, hopefully, so that we're closer to the schedule for BR.

Looking at the financials, the phase one contract with the council previously approved was $345,000.

The phase two amendment, which you were considering this evening, is just under $11.7 million for a total revised contract and guaranteed maximum price of just over $12 million.

The budget to support that.

The existing budget is $7 million.

It was included in the CIP.

We need additional $5 million plus $300,000 for staff time and cost for a total budget of just over $12.3 million.

There's several places that the additional funding is coming from, including the Foremile Creek Settlement Agreement that was approved in April of this year for $1.75 million.

We also have contingency fund within the CIP for just over $3.6 million to make up the difference.

That contingency fund is in place for unplanned costs associated with the overall wastewater collection and treatment system.

We've done the same thing on the water side.

We've talked about that.

It serves as well to be able to supplement needed budgets for these types of projects, and it helped it's all included within the current rates.

Thank you, Gary.

Questions read out beginning with Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just one real quick question.

The contingency for wastewater is different than any contingency for stormwater, correct?

Correct.

Two separate funds.

Okay.

Just want to make sure.

I see no further questions for staff.

We'll open it up for public comment.

I see none.

I'm bringing up back to the bench.

With that, I move that the city council approve the phase two amendment and the revised.

Oh, sorry.

I know this is in council member Tuttle's district.

Would she like to move this item?

Sure.

Thank you.

Thank you, Gary, for the presentation, and thank you for all your work on this.

I'm really appreciate it.

I I mention all the time we're investing almost a billion dollars worth of infrastructure with our water and sewer treatment plans.

So thank you so much for just continuing to be forward thinking.

And with that, I would move that the city council approve phase two, approved the phase two amendment and the revised budget, adopt the amending resolution, and authorize the necessary signatures.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 70.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Creation of chapter 3.23 of the code of the city of Wichita regarding lodging establishment license.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council.

This is Jan Jarman for the law department.

I'm presenting on behalf of the Wichita Police Department tonight.

So this is not new for you.

But today I'm here to present to you the uh ordinance on uh lodging establishments.

The background of this is that the state of Kansas does currently license hotels and motels.

Um the city of Wichita does not at this time.

The city does receive a number of complaints, um often, about uh trash found at hotels and motels, illegal dumping, mattresses, furniture, um, things in the parking lot, premise condition.

Uh in addition, we have uh violence, drugs, and other crimes, and we've been contacted by community members about those issues as well.

Without licensing authority, the city has limited ability to address the problems at lodging establishments.

Um we currently would call the state, ask the state to come in, and we are really on their schedule, and they have to deal with the entire state, so it takes a while to get it addressed.

The proposed ordinance uh was presented at the September workshop, and I'll tell you that no establishments have reached out after the workshop with any kind of feedback.

Um, the proposed ordinance is similar to other regional ordinances.

Um, the Kansas City area has a robust local hotel motel licensing uh ordinance, and that served as our model in this in this case.

So the proposal we have for you is that we establish uh an lodging establishment license, and that we charge $200 a year for that fee.

You might remember that I shared with you at workshop that that was kind of a median that's similar to what other people charged.

It was at the highest, it's not the lowest.

Um the order is a little lower than some because some do break their fees down by the number of rooms, but that is difficult.

So I just we chose a lower number so we didn't have to deal with that issue.

We would propose that the ordinance be effective on January 1st, 2026, and that we give businesses who are already licensed three months to get into compliance at the end of March.

So all we're asking at that point is between January and the end of March that they submit an application, and that then the ball would be in our court.

The initial qualifications are very simple.

You would have to have a valid license from the state of Kansas, which means you had an inspection.

You have to have a $1 million insurance policy.

We have to know where to find you if there's an issue, so your contact information, and you have to acknowledge that you have read the ordinance, you understand it, and you understand you could be inspected and such.

The application, a license will be granted if everything is met.

There's no disqualifying factors other than if they don't meet all of the things I just told you about.

So we really put very few disqualifying factors.

You all know that in some licenses, we'll say if you have a criminal history, you can't have this, and we really didn't put this in here because if someone has a criminal history from 15 years ago, I'm not sure it's really relevant to whether they could own a hotel or a motel or be licensed.

So we didn't put any of that in.

The applications will be accepted online, that is our goal, and they're already working on that, hoping if this goes through, they'll be ready to move forward on it.

Um decisions will be made within 30 days of the application.

So the conditions of the license are there will be no hourly rates allowed at hotels or motels.

Um there will be some standards of cleanliness.

These are really uh positive because we don't have an ordinance in Wichita.

Some of our ordinances in Wichita do cover premise conditions, but we don't have any ordinance that cover these issues, which is you have to have clean bedding and towels, you have to have clean ice makers without the the gunk in them.

Uh, you have to have uh no uh mattresses that are clean, free of bed bugs, furniture has to be clean and safe.

Uh and you have to have a regular pest control uh and a control of bed bugs as well, which is we know that's an issue.

Um, so it does add some conditions that are not currently in uh Wichita code.

And it also provides the right to inspect if we get complaints on those issues or if we see them uh out in the open.

So, in terms of the correction of violations, if violations are found during inspection, a notice will be issued with a date for correction.

Establishments will be given time to correct violations with reinspections.

Just want to make it clear to this council that the intent is not to revoke everybody's license if they get any kind of violation.

We do give people time to resolve their problems.

Suspensions and revocations are really only an option in cases of significant health or safety issues, or habitual failure to correct a premise violation, or failures to address chronic nuisance violations.

So there will be more for chronic issues or for something that is very dangerous.

A license could be immediately suspended if issues were found that constitute an immediate danger to the health or safety of a person, like uh conditions of property or significant and unique threats of danger from criminal activity.

Again, it's not a situation where if you have a crime, one crime, that that's somehow going to get you suspended.

But if there's a unique danger, uh, like a threat to the people who live there, um then the chief of police could come in and say that they need to shut this down if there is a specific threat to the people.

But it wouldn't be an immediate shutdown would not be for any kind of just criminal activity.

This suspension could be specific to a section or an area.

You wouldn't necessarily have to close down the entire facility if it's like a health and safety violation, if there's like if a deck is dangerous, that you would just keep people off the second floor.

That would be an example.

A suspension may be issued with five days' warning.

So there's two kinds of suspensions.

One is immediate, it has to be for something very significant.

Um, a suspension can be issued with five days' warning if there's a serious risk of harm or danger, but it's not significant enough to require an immediate closure.

So that's a second level.

Any suspension or revocation may be appealed, and most of them will be stayed pending the appeal.

So if you give a five-day notice suspension, then they can appeal it and it will be stayed and they can continue their business until the city council hears the appeal.

An immediate suspension, the kind where the chief goes out and says, or fire chief or MABCD, if someone says this is so dangerous, we can't have people here right now, that would not be stayed.

Um, the appeal will be through a three-person panel with the city council.

Um we found that those smaller panels allow more flexibility with your schedule, and it allows us to set really prompt hearing dates, and that's why we have been moving toward these three-person panels.

The benefits of a lodging establishment license are many.

It will protect citizens by allowing city departments to quickly respond to condition complaints.

It will protect your neighborhoods with attention to the chronic nuisance complaints and and the property complaints.

And it's also fair to the establishments.

Their fees are reasonable.

They'll have notices of violation and opportunity to correct, and there will be a robust appeal process where most of the time it would be stayed during that appeal process.

So based on that, we recommend that the city council approve the proposed ordinance and place it on first reading, authorize necessary signatures.

I do stand open for questions.

Thank you, Jan.

Mayor, Mayor, if I can just add, I do want to thank Visit Wichita for engaging with us and uh involving some of their members in our re in the review of the ordinance.

Um in fact, what we brought to you in workshop and what we're bringing tonight is reflective of changes that were recommended by the industry.

Thank you, City Manager.

Questions for staff, beginning with council member Glasgow.

Thank you, Mayor.

First off, thank you for the presentation.

I also want to thank my colleague, uh, Councilman Hoheisel for leading this originally when he proposed this.

I don't know if I was fully bought in and uh he convinced me.

And so I think this was good governance, and I think this is a good proposal before.

So thank you, Mike, for leading that.

Two quick questions.

If we go back to slides 71 and 72.

Or just go 72 is fine.

Thanks.

Perfect.

Um, so regarding, or maybe go one more, one more slide.

Uh, regarding the suspension to a specific section area of the entire building.

Can we just talk about maybe last year there was a hotel that the state closed along West Kellogg?

Will this give us a better ability to have oversight where we're not pushing, let's say, hundreds of people on the street if a hotel is condemned.

This allows us to go section by section to make sure we may maybe don't inundate the shelters or our resources in the community.

Will this be a tool that will allow us to do that better than just having the state come in?

I think what happened with the state was a success because it unfortunately we didn't get enough notice.

So it's gonna help us with notice because we'll control it.

Um, but it's a good model for how we would like to do things, which is we brought in a lot of people to help uh the people who are living at that hotel.

So, yes, it'll be good because we'll be in control of the timetable, um, but we will continue to be very careful with the people who live there.

And the goal is never to shut down and we need these hotels and motels.

They're needed.

And the goal is not to shut them down, but to make sure that they're safe.

And I do agree.

Well, I think last year it was a success, seeing how the housing department, the police department, law, everybody came together, communications and were able to get people housing.

Um so I do think that was but it didn't have to be that difficult.

You're right.

It it was because the state controlled it, it it we didn't have enough control over the timing on it.

Yeah, thank you.

Um and then quick question, this would be maybe a question for Bob regarding licensing.

It talked about how there's an application process.

I know you and I have talked about digital license uh licensing for um different things that we require.

Is this something that we would look at, or is this maybe not in the initial licensing uh that we digitized?

Uh I'm sorry, uh Mayor.

Councilmember, that is something we are looking at uh specifically doing a digital um uh registration.

If we get this, if it's approved tonight, we're gonna start work on that.

Appreciate the streamline.

Well, I think it's a great ordinance, so thank you for the work on it.

Thank you.

Councilmember Total.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jan, for the presentation and all your work in this um city managers on my notes.

I was gonna thank visit Wichita, and then also ensure the community that we've had engagement with the industry.

Um we heard that loud and clear a few weeks ago at a very long council meeting that the industry likes to have their input and we need to have their input.

So thank you for anyone who did provide that.

Then council member Glasscock wouldn't stole my notes because I wanted to say thank you to Councilmember Hullheisel for all your work on this.

I know this is really important to you, so thank you for getting us to this point.

Um I did have just a few questions if that's okay, Jan.

Um what if somebody so there's a 200 a year fee, which I think is just right, you know, it's not too much, not too little.

And I was looking through the license required and fees, and it says that if somebody doesn't pay their, let's say the total in, they we don't pay our 200 dollars, we get fined five dollars a day.

Is there a point where something else happens?

Because I could go for a hundred days and not pay my fee because I just don't believe in it, or I haven't and my next question is gonna be I know that there are 106 um lodging establishments licensed by the state, so I assume we have that list and we'll send them out notification.

But is that how they'll be notified so they know they have to have a license?

And then what will we do if they don't pay their license?

And then my third part of that, and then I'll stop talking and you can talk.

How will we monitor it every because not everybody?

It's not everybody January 1, it's whenever they apply.

So I just want to make sure we have the mechanism to keep up with the licenses.

We learn from the party bus ordinance at entertainment transportation that we created this ordinance and then as a heck of a time getting people to apply.

They have now all applied.

Yes.

On this one, the fee you're talking about, the five dollars a day is really meant for um to get people moving on that initial application.

The ones who are currently licensed, if they fail to license, we'll give them a five dollar.

We don't want to keep them.

It used to be if you were convicted of something, then you wouldn't be able to get your license.

So now it's five dollars a day.

Um it's really meant to apply for the to the initial.

I just want to make sure that you know there's always the the bad actors, if you will.

And so what you know is somebody gonna be monitoring this list and go, oh, we only have 104 that have applied, we've got two.

Who does somebody call out to them?

Is it that legal's responsibility?

Because we're only gonna get about 21,000 a year.

So I just am thinking about like cost recovery, and and I know we're gonna try and streamline the process, but still a human has to monitor the process, right?

So if somebody doesn't apply, it does does legal call who calls them to say you haven't applied, do the right thing.

We do have all of their emails, so that's the great news.

And they will all get, and I would assume I haven't talked to licensing about this.

I'm sure licensing's squirming, but we've been really close with licensing on this.

But probably we will send out instead of mailing, we'll probably send out emails.

Okay, and then when we don't get responses, uh they're going to get visits probably by the police department because they'll be operating without a license.

That was what I was trying to get to.

And then again, somebody within licensing will monitor it to know that you know next year at March 31st, Tetalink has to, yeah, okay.

I'm sure that we can run a report on that, and that's how we'll figure it out.

Okay, thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

You did say one thing that I wanted to mention because it was kind of based on something I watched in a meeting with that mayor mentioned one time, and that is why are we doing business with people who are allowing them in my case to have licenses when they're in arrears on everything?

Um, and in this ordinance, we actually said if you're in arrears on monies owed, we're not going to grant you a license.

Um, if you're on a payment plan, that's okay.

So then that triggered a question for me.

And if it was in here and I missed it, I'm very sorry.

And I'm gonna be supportive of this.

I just want to make sure that you know we implement it well, right?

And so that it does what it's supposed to do.

So what if you know I'm in the rears or I have whatever, and I you don't relicense me.

Then you're shut down.

Okay.

Just want to make sure.

If you get caught operating without a license, then you'll be prosecuted.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Jan.

I did have one question regarding inspection.

So it is not a requirement to get the inspection prior to getting the um license.

Can you talk about the initiation of the inspection?

Yes.

Um, to get a you have to have a state of Kansas license to be a lodging establishment, and they do inspections, so we are going to use their inspection.

Uh, we do not have enough people to do full inspections.

Um, so we're going to that's that'll be the plan.

And then if there are problems, we will do our own inspections after they're licensed.

Thank you, Jan.

And again, thank you, Councilmember Hoheisel.

Uh, this was something that I also initially was not in favor.

I just thought another license and another barrier and burden on individuals.

However, I see that there is a problem um, especially with hourly um motels, and I know that this addresses that specifically.

Um, so again, I want to make sure that this was not a burden to the good actors in our community.

And so uh city manager did address that visit Wichita and its hotel partners, the stakeholders that are being affected, have been uh contacted, and there were no major issues.

So thank you.

Thank you.

With that, we will open it up for public comments.

Hello, everyone, my name is Christopher Swanson.

Um I live at 1200 South uh Market Street, uh, which is basically uh right off uh Broadway down south.

I live in the SOC neighborhood.

Um want to thank you all for your time and your work.

I also want to sing the praises of um council member Hoheisel as well for putting this forward.

Um I I've uh worked in the neighborhood for about eight years now, lived there uh for about three, and I love my neighborhood, it's a quirky place.

Um, but we have a lot, uh we're known for these these hourly motels and a lot of these uh hotels and motels on South Broadway.

And just living there working there for years, uh, we've just encountered a whole host of different issues and problems in the midst of that.

Um I work with a group of neighbors that we put out a neighborhood newsletter um and we try and highlight the good things in the neighborhood because we know a lot of the news is the bad stuff, and uh I love delivering the newsletters to these these hotels and motels, but I'm also uh a bit nervous sometimes when uh I see some of the conditions of the rooms and the folks um hanging out around there, and I'm just nervous about what that means.

And I know as you all have touched on, it's a complex issue.

It's not as simple as just shutting these places down, like for many of these folks, um, they're very close to homelessness.

Um and this is kind of the last step.

So I don't think that's necessarily the answer, but I do think there is something to holding businesses to a higher uh higher standard around some of these things.

Um yeah, and I think that's that's a good thing.

I'm in the process of starting a coffee shop that will be on South Broadway.

Um, and I'm just trying to be a part of good businesses that are doing doing cool stuff on South Broadway.

So um that's that's part of it for me as well.

But um, I know there's some concerns around city staffing and and the time and the money that will go into some of the licensing and the inspections.

Um, and I understand that.

I also think um I hope we can look long term and think about the impacts.

I mean, the amount of times I go down South Broadway at night and just see ambulances and police and all the staff that's out at um these hotels and motels.

So I hope that I think in the long run, even though there's some some cost and some time up front, I think this will hopefully save some of our other service folks and folks who are trying to address those problems down the road.

Um, and I I I mean, frankly, I don't know any neighbors that aren't a huge fan of this.

Um, so I hope you all will consider listening to the residents um in the neighborhood as well.

Um we're excited about this, um, and I think it'll be fun to continue to work in partnership with our hotels and motels, hold them to to some standards like this.

And um, yeah, we thank you for listening to our residents, and I think that's all I have to share for now.

So thank you, Christopher, Councilmember Glascom.

Christopher, huge coffee fan.

So just quick question.

Do you have an expected opening date?

Or I don't want to run your surprise if you haven't announced that.

No, I appreciate that.

Yeah, no, thank you for the shout-out.

Uh yeah, um the hope is to open probably around next September or so.

Um we're in the midst of doing a lot of construction at the corner of the Lincoln and Broadways.

The cop shop will be on the southwest corner of Lincoln and Broadway.

Um so we're doing a lot of construction there.

Um, and hopefully that will all be done about May, and then we'll move in and kind of get into the design phase.

But yeah, we're moving as quick as we can, and um, it'll be called SOC Coffee Company, because that's the name of the neighborhood.

So we're trying to kind of shout that out as well.

Um, short for the South Central neighborhood.

And uh yeah, so yeah, thanks for that shout-out.

I'm excited.

Well, when it opens, make sure to let us know.

We need coffee up here, especially late night meetings.

So thank you.

I appreciate that.

Yeah, well, love the Southside and love my neighborhood, so hopefully it's a good thing.

Yeah.

Thank you, Christopher.

Thank you.

We'll continue with public comments.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council.

My name is Timothy McCorready.

I live at 1002 South Broadway.

I live in the middle of this section.

We have six hotels within a mile either direction of our house.

Um, we are directly affected by these hotels on a regular basis, including today.

Uh, there was uh a shooting across the street with people that ran to those hotels.

So I believe this passing this will directly affect our neighborhood and help hold people say to a higher standard.

I think we're trying to hold them to just a minimum standard.

And and that will be helpful across the thing.

And I really appreciate the council and the mayor working towards getting this passed so that we can get these improvements and at least help these people have a decent place to live where they feel safe, even if it's is a hotel.

So thank you.

Thank you.

We'll continue with public comment.

I see none.

I see none.

I'll bring it back to the bench.

Councilmember Johnson.

Thanks, Mayor.

Just wanted to say appreciate the presentation, Jan, and the work you're doing, and also join everyone else in thanking Councilmember Hohaisel for his leadership and work on this.

I remember when you first brought it up and the issues that we have been hearing about, um, especially on Broadway.

So thank you for doing the necessary work to address this, and I'll be supportive.

Councilmember Ballard.

Thank you, Mayor.

I also just wanted to thank uh Councilmember Hoheisel for his leadership on this.

We deal with a lot of the similar situations on North Broadway with hotels and motels.

So appreciate you taking the lead on this, and I will definitely be supportive.

And with that, Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um and I appreciate all my friends on the South Broadway corridor as well.

Um, this doesn't just affect our neighborhood, but our neighborhood is definitely one of the ones that is the most affected.

And again, it's it's not to try and punish people or uh take away anything that's holding people to a higher standards because a lot of what happens in these places does spill out into the neighborhood.

So with that, I am glad to recommend that the city council or to move that the city council adopt the ordinance and authorize the necessary signatures.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

CON 2025-116 conditional use to permit car wash within 200 feet of residential zoning, generally located on the east side of North Rock Road and within 300 feet north of East 37th Street North.

Hello, good evening.

Scott Wadel from the planning department here to present this one.

As you heard for this case, the applicant is requesting a conditional use in order to permit a car wash at the site.

This case is being heard tonight because the district advisory board and the planning commission recommendations are different, and also because protests were received within the notification area.

In terms of the subject site, subject site is generally located to the north and east of the intersection of 37th and rock, as you can see here.

Subject site is approximately just a little bit over one acre in size.

It consists of one ownership parcel.

It is undeveloped and is zoned LI Limited Industrial.

In terms of the request, the applicant has indicated they would like to utilize the property for a car wash.

A draft site plan was included as part of the application materials submitted by the applicant.

It shows that the access would be from the south of the property using a shared private drive.

Let me see if I can find it here.

It's uh tilted to the side, so to the south is to the left on this graphic.

Um it shows that uh the access would be from the south of the property using a shared private drive off Rock Road.

In that location, Rock Road is a uh three-lane roadway with a median dividing the north and south traffic, so it's actually just one lane headed northbound.

A site plan shows an exit from the subject site to the north onto Thorne Drive.

It also shows that there would be two queue lanes internal to the site.

The vacuums are shown on the east side of the property, and the wash tunnel is on the west side of the property.

So going back to the property.

So property to the north across Thorn Drive is owned GO General Office and is developed with a drainage bond.

Property to the east is zoned LI and currently developed or in the process of being developed for hotel use.

Property to the south is zoned LI and developed as a service station slash convenience store.

Property to the west across North Rock Road is zoned LC, limited commercial, and developed with a commercial building.

Property to the northwest across North Rock Road is zoned SF5, and here's the zoning, and developed with single family dwellings, as you can see.

In terms of the staff report, the staff report provides additional information on setbacks, noise, screening, and landscaping, and also public services in the area.

In terms of review, on September 25th, the planning commission held the public hearing for this item and recommended approval of the conditional use.

That vote was 12 to 1.

And that vote was per the uh the recommendation for approval was per staff's recommendation.

One member of the public spoke at that hearing with concerns about increases in traffic and noise levels.

On October 13th, the district advisory board reviewed the request and recommended denial.

That vote was nine to zero.

The board cited golden factors two, three, five, and eight as reasons for denial.

Specifically, the board had the following concerns.

The proposed access to the site causing traffic concerns.

They were concerned about the narrowness and number of lanes on Rock Road and the impacts that the queue of traffic might have.

Second reason was that the increased traffic and noise creating a hardship for nearby residential properties.

And then third, they also mentioned that the general opposition to the community exhibited at the DAB meeting.

And speaking of that, at the DAB meeting, 14 members of the public spoke in opposition to the request, citing concerns about traffic, noise, trash, and the safety of pedestrians in the area.

So in terms of protest, 52 protest petitions were received against this conditional use.

One of the properties was within the protest calculation area, and I'll show you that in just a moment.

So uh here on this graphic, the purple is the notification area, which is larger than the actual protest area.

The protest area is the green ring.

So you can see that one of the properties uh was in the protest calculation area, and that equaled four percent in the protest area.

So it did not exceed this state threshold of 20%.

And so because of that and the MAPC's recommendation for approval, uh, an approval of the zone of the conditional use can be done with four votes.

Four out of seven.

So the recommended action, again, coming to you from the MAPC is to approve the conditional use, adopt the findings of the MAPC, authorize necessary signatures and instruct the clerk to publish a resolution after approval.

So the recommended action again coming to you from the MAPCs to approve the conditional use, adopt the findings of the MAPC, authorize necessary signatures and instruct the clerk to publish a resolution after approval again requires just four out of seven votes.

Alternatives include the following.

You can return the case to the MAPC for additional consideration that would require just a simple majority.

A note about process, city council policies at the public hearing for planning agenda items occurs at the planning commission meeting.

According to the policy, the city council does not receive public comments on zoning items.

So with that, I'll take you through some of the graphics and images.

So again, here's the site outlined in that blue-green color.

Here's the zoning map showing what was described earlier.

Here's the map from the comprehensive plan showing the areas recommended for both residential and employment mix.

Here's the site plan for the proposed car wash again tilted to the side, north is to the right.

Here's the protest notification map again, four percent.

Here's another uh map showing the protests that we received from further out than the notification area.

Here are photos of the site and the surrounding area.

And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you, Scott.

Questions for staff.

I have a couple.

Um I wanted to know has the applicant actually reached out to the concerned neighbors.

I am not aware of any communications between them.

Wanted to know can you address some of I know that the DAB had certain concerns that you have already noted during the public speaker portions of that uh meeting?

Can you address some of the major ones?

Of the DAB meeting.

Um I was not present there uh for that.

But in term in terms of addressing, do you mean to recount what uh their concerns were and what they stated?

Um well, here's one.

Uh I'm just gonna look through the notes real quick.

Uh dangers to pedestrians in the area.

Um, another one is traffic on rock road and how it's stop and go already, and the adding the uh car wash will cause it to be even worse.

Um, another one is noise uh from the car wash, uh traffic again, um water dripping uh and freezing on the roadways, potentially creating a traffic hazard is another one.

Uh it seems like traffic is one that appears uh quite a bit as we go through the list.

And can you address is there another similar business nearby?

Uh well, in terms of automobile oriented, uh, there is the convenience store that's immediately to the south.

Uh the I I would say a difference there would be that 37th Street has more lanes, appears to be about a four or five lane as opposed to Rock Road, which in this location again is uh down to three lanes and two in some areas.

And it am I correctly thinking that there's also already a car wash on the south west corner of 37th and Rock Ray?

Yeah, it appears that that uh is true.

If you look at the aerial, I think you can see it, it's the second property from the on the southwest corner of the intersection, second to the west.

Thank you, Scott.

Vice Mayor Johnston.

Thank you, Mayor.

Scott, I've noticed that on Rock Road from day one, going through Willowbend, the storm sewers are out about a lane.

Um I don't know if you've ever noticed that or not, but they're out.

It almost looks like they meant to increase Rock Road to four lanes at some point in time by putting those sewers out.

Interesting.

Uh I personally have not observed that uh recently, but um to my knowledge, I am not aware of anything in the CIP in terms of improvements to Rock Road at that location.

Okay, I found it odd when they built it, they put those the storm sewers so far out.

So okay, I see no further questions for staff.

This does not get public comment, and this resides in Councilmember Tuttle's district.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Um, thank you to Scott and to JR in the Metropolitan Area Planning Department.

I appreciate your time in answering all of my questions.

Also, thank you to the legal department for navigating through all of um my questions and concerns.

I do want to state that I have had ex parte communication with the community members.

Um I've tried to keep count, and I think I stopped at 204 emails.

Some of them were in my spam email box that I had to go and find.

Um I've also received multiple phone calls.

So lots of public engagement for me on this one.

I also have had ex parte communication with the applicant's agent.

I have not spoken directly with the applicant.

I did also want to make a note to thank to all the residents for being so respectful.

We had a packed house at our district advisory board, and then all of the emails that we have received and all of the residents have been very kind and and I really do appreciate that.

That means a lot.

So with that and the overwhelming amount of concern that the residents have, and and Scott mentioned it, but I'm gonna state it again for the record.

Um the following findings for my motion will be based on the proposed use combined with the surrounding two and three-lane roadways, will have significant traffic concerns.

Also increased traffic and noise, but then also at the district advisory board light pollution was also mentioned several times because this will be in people's kind of backyards, would create a hardship for nearby residents, and then there has been significant community out uh feedback opposing this application.

So with that, I'm gonna move that the city of Wichita override the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission and deny the requested conditional use as recommended by the district advisory board.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 70.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

PUD 2025-16 zone change requests in the city from limited industrial district to planned unit development to create the Proctor Family Indoor Athletic Facility, generally located on the north side of East 28th Street North and within one block west of North Greenwich Road at 11010 East 28th Street North.

Hello, Scott Weddell again.

So for this one, uh the applicant sub has withdrawn their application that was submitted to the planning department on November 4th.

So with that information, I recommend that you uh receive and file this information or simply move on to the next item.

We'll receive and file and move on to the next item.

Madam Clerk.

Do we need a vote on that?

Really, we take we need to take no action.

I mean, we don't even need to receive the file.

I think we can just move on to the next item.

No action is taken on that item.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next item?

PUD 2025-17 zone change requests in the city from B multifamily residential district and general commercial district to plan unit development to create the 944 South Topeka Planned Unit Development Number 149, generally located one block south.

Correction, one block east of South Broadway Avenue and three blocks south of East Kellogg Avenue at 944 South Topeka.

Hello, Scott Waitle again from the planning department.

So as you heard, the applicant is requesting to rezone the subject site shown here in this aqua green color from B multifamily and G C General Commercial to PUD Plan Unit Development, which is custom zoning.

This item is being heard because the district advisory board and the planning commission's recommendations are different.

And a note on this one is that the district advisory board had a tide vote and did not pass a motion for this item.

And I've got more detail about that.

I'll I'll talk about in just a moment.

In addition, protests have been received within the notification area.

So for those two reasons, this is being heard.

In terms of corrections, I've got a couple of notes that I wanted to make.

Um the staff report was revised earlier this week.

The revisions were to update the map on the first page to indicate the house at the northwest corner of the intersection of Emporion Gilbert is not included in the zone change request.

Uh we had actually received a number of different legal descriptions from the applicant, and so in the process of compiling the report that accidentally got missed.

Second one was that uh we updated the uh required votes for the various actions, and I want to highlight that six votes are required in order to approve any zone change, and that five are required in order to override the MAPC.

And I'll talk about those in just a moment as well.

In terms of the requests, the applicant has indicated that they are requesting this zone change primarily for two reasons.

The first is in order to bring the nonconforming church building into compliance with unified zoning code by creating custom zoning site development requirements.

The second is in order to permit additional zoning flexibility for future development on the property to the east.

In terms of the property, the site is generally located to the south and east of the intersection.

Well, actually, I would say to the north and east of the intersection of Topeka and Gilbert.

It is made up of multiple ownership parcels.

It's approximately 1.18 acres in size.

It is developed with a church, a parking lot, and a playground/slash green space.

The church building is listed on the national and state registers of historic places.

In terms of context, properties to the north are zone B, multifamily and developed with single family dwellings.

Properties to the west across South Topeka Avenue are zone B and developed with single family dwellings and a duplex.

Property to the south across East Gilbert is zone B and developed with a multifamily dwelling.

Property to the south of the southwest corner of this subject site is zone GC and developed with a multi-tenant commercial building.

Property to the southeast of parcel two is zone GC and developed with a single family dwelling.

Property to the east across South and Portia Avenue are zone G C and B and developed with single family dwellings.

So as you can see, there's a variety in a mix of pretty intensive zoning districts in the area, but the majority of the properties are zoned with single-family dwellings.

In terms of the staff report, the staff report provides additional information about the proposed use of shipping containers for housing at the site.

Applicant modifications to the initial zone change request through the process, landscaping and screening.

In terms of review, on August 28th, the planning commission held the public hearing for this item and ultimately deferred the case to their September 25th meeting.

The purpose of the deferral was in order to allow time for the applicant to address concerns that nearby properties expressed regarding the appearance of portable storage containers being used as residential dwellings.

Five members of the public spoke at the August 28th meeting with concerns again about having storage containers as dwelling units, parking on the nearby streets, and also questions about the completeness of the application.

On September 25th, the planning commission considered the item again and recommended approval of the request per the staff recommendation, but with an additional condition of approval.

And that vote was 1201.

So there's one abstention.

The planning commission added in their recommendation that the storage containers shall be required to use shiplap sighting on either wood or composite as illustrated by the exhibits submitted by the applicant, and you will see those as part of the attachments with the staff report.

Two members of the public spoke against the request with similar concerns, again, of having storage containers as dwellings and not enough parking for tenants on the site.

On October 1st, the district advisory board reviewed the case and did not approve a motion to recommend denial of the application.

The vote was a tie vote.

It was five to five, and no substitute motion was taken up.

Two members of the public spoke at that meeting regarding the application.

One was against the request, citing concerns of crime, the design of the storage containers, and additional parking on nearby streets.

One was in favor of the request, citing that having the vacant buildings being occupied and in use was a greater positive than having them empty.

On October 13th, the Wichita Historic Preservation Board heard the case.

The recommendation of the Historic Preservation Board was to approve the request, three to one with one abstention.

And in that deliberation, the board limited the review to the existing church property.

In terms of protest, 20 protest petitions were received against the application, with 13 of the properties within the calculation area.

The protest petitions equaled 34% of the total protest area.

Since this exceeds the state threshold of 20%, the any approval of a zone change will require six of seven votes.

In terms of council action, it is recommended that the city council adopt the findings of the planning commission, approve the planning commission recommended PUD, place the ordinance on the first reading, authorize the necessary signatures and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance after approval in the second reading.

Alternatives include the following.

That would require five of seven votes.

You can override the MAPC, adopt alternative findings, and approve the PUD with modified PUD text, that would require six of seven votes, or as always, you can return the case to the planning commission for additional consideration, which would require a simple majority of four or seven votes.

And again, just a note about the process of the city council policy as if the public hearing for planning items occurs at the planning commission and the city council does not typically receive public comments on zoning items.

So with that, I'll take you through some of the graphics and images.

So of course, here's the outline of the site, which was described here earlier.

Here is the zoning map, and the crosshatch is to indicate that the church is listed as a historic building.

Here's the map from the comprehensive plan showing new residential as recommended in the area.

Here's a site plan that was submitted by the applicant as part of their application.

It shows the storage containers somewhat in the lower right hand corner of this graphic.

Here's the protest map that was submitted.

I also do want to add that as part of the revisions, we included an update to the map, which shows a protest that was previously not included in blue, and it's uh just south of Gilbert and along Broadway.

It's the second parcel down from Gilbert.

But uh the total protest within the protest area is just over 34 percent.

Here are images that were submitted by the applicant.

Uh these were distributed at the planning commission meeting the second meeting that they held.

Again, the layout uh of the structures that was submitted.

One item of discussion that's come up at the planning commission meeting and other meetings, as I understand it, is whether or not there would be uh plumbing in the facilities, and I do want to point out that this graphic shows that there are bathrooms, restrooms located in the shipping containers.

So uh just different images that were submitted as part of this.

There's quite a few, so I'm gonna flip through them.

Uh here are photos of the site.

So this is the existing church uh boarded up.

Some of the windows, my understanding is have been broken out.

Uh this is looking from the parking lot, which is located on the east towards the building on the west.

The church uh building is to the left, and then there's an educational wing that was added on to it further to the north, which is the brick portion that you see with windows.

Looking to the north at some of the houses.

And this is the one that's up against the parking lot across the street, uh, to the east and to the south.

And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you, Scott.

We'll begin with council member Todd.

Thank you.

Um, I'm gonna hold my questions and see how the discussion goes, but I did want to state for the record that I have had ex parte communication with the applicant.

Thank you.

Councilmember Glascock.

Thank you, Scott.

Just one quick question, and I think you mentioned it toward one of the end of the slides.

Each of these units will have a bathroom, plumbing, kitchen.

I will say that the graphic that was submitted by the applicant shows that it will have a restroom in it.

Is there a requirement that could be added that a restroom has to be present or that um facilities have to be present in each individual unit?

It there could be.

You certainly could have that as a condition of the PUD.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

I'll let Councilmember Ballard.

I I did just want to reply real quick, the council member Glasscock and talking with MABCD in order to have occupancy, they would have to have both bathrooms and kitchens in there.

Councilmember Ballard.

I just want to we all know what if on topic parking is, is parking going to be an issue.

I mean, are there enough parking spots for units?

That has been a subject of debate and discussion through the process of this P this PUD and the review.

Um the applicant has indicated that uh the parking spaces, it would be a minimum of 36 parking spaces required in the language that is being recommended to you by the MAPC, and that is the same as what the applicant requested.

Um so if you talk to the applicant, they say that that's enough.

They've indicated uh that's the situation because of the population that will be living here, that some of them can't afford cars, some of them uh will have to just have transportation by other means.

But if you talk to the residents in the area, at least the ones that are some of the ones that have participated in the process to date, you'll see that parking is a reoccurring theme in terms of concerns.

There are concerns about how much parking will be used in the area.

Um they've expressed that uh on street parking uh can be a challenge to find at times, and so they're concerned about uh just uh additional cars taking up additional parking, making it more difficult to find the existing parking resources open.

Vice Mayor John Stanton.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um Scott, if it's a two-story container, does it have to have be sprinkled or not?

I am going to defer to our friends at MABCD and FIRE for uh information on that.

I'm afraid I just don't know the answer on that one.

Okay.

Mayor Council members, good evening, Chris Labor, M ABCD.

So as we've seen these to this point, they would be duplexes.

So as such, if they meet those criteria, they would not require sprinklers.

If they do something to go beyond that, uh we do have uh provisions in our local code that allows three and fourplexes uh to meet separation criteria and avoid sprinklers uh to if they're built as a town home or to a town home type standard, which I don't think these could be.

Uh so bottom line, they would have several options to avoid sprinklers.

Okay, thank you.

And is the applicant here?

Is it time for questions for him or not?

Can't talk.

Okay.

Thank you.

Oh, oh wait, then council member Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, from my discussion with MABCD, the stacking um of one unit on top of the other, and I believe you are in that meeting in Troy as well.

That's what MABCD indicated is a stacking of the units would require a sprinkler system.

Uh Councilmember Tuttle was there as well.

I have had ex parte communication with the um the applicant as well, so just to make sure I put that out there.

Yeah, thank you, Councilmember.

That is correct.

The stacking in that method would trigger that requirement.

I was incorrect.

Councilmember Tuttle.

Thank you.

Um I I want to be careful because uh this is zoning, right?

And the the job of us right now is to determine is this the appropriate use of the land?

But I think the intention from what I've heard in Councilmember Hull Hazel, we had a very robust meeting to discuss this, is that it would be for housing for um kids who are exiting from foster care.

And so if the PUD is set so that it's that, and then it's determined that this doesn't qualify for the housing vouchers like we talked about, it could put the applicant in in a bind.

So, Councilmember Hullheisel, do you do you remember this conversation that we had?

And do you have any additional thoughts or concerns at this point?

Or I and I know our job is just to determine if it's the appropriate use of the land.

I don't want to you know get too far ahead, but I also just want to make sure that you know we're we're setting this project up for success.

I I haven't heard back from housing at this time.

I have a couple questions.

Can you go back to the rendering of the modular home?

Certainly that works.

Thank you.

Um first and foremost, I also have had ex parte communication with the applicant.

Uh, can you share since the applicant cannot speak um during this portion?

Is that correct?

Mayor uh Jennifer Magani Law, the under city policy, City Council policy number nine.

The applicant can speak if count called upon by council to clarify items.

Perfect.

Then I will ask questions, and I think that Vice Mayor Johnston had questions too.

I would like the applicant to come forward as I have several questions regarding this project.

The first one is in regards to the usage of this property.

I know that we're only going to talk about the land itself.

However, uh, this is part of a bigger project regarding youth exiting foster care.

Can you share what this project is?

Um specifically that right now there's a large contingent of youth that are aging out that are immediately unhoused, approximately 30-ish percent in which all um this presents an opportunity will go directly to this.

Um it it aligns with the FYI voucher.

It does have to meet the same criteria as Section 8.

So, like it's got plumbing, it's got all of the standard things that you would require for the um I I think Section 8 standards for residents.

And it I don't know how much detail I can give like a lot, like it's just again.

This is to address a specific group of individuals.

Can you one more time, I guess, just share?

So these are individual units for youth aging out of foster care.

Is that correct?

Yes, ma'am.

There will be approximately 55 units in total.

Um of those 45 units will be for youth that are aging out, 10 are for what's called intentional neighbors, um, people that have committed to living um for subsidized rent in these communities just to be stewards of the actual um youth that have aged out.

Um the anticipation is that they will be using their FYI vouchers here, and this is a community.

The church will not be residential.

The church is going to be a site where we aggregate local resources.

There's 52 organizations that are partnered with us as part of the resources that will now be aggregated and available for uh youth that have aged out of foster care.

Right now, there's not a single place in uh proper witch at all, and we are partnered with I I don't want to throw names out there, but everybody else in in foster care.

So we just want to be that site where um everybody comes together and they the the kids as they transition out of foster care are immediately um here, safe, secure, and as they establish themselves, then they transition to other places.

It's not probably they won't stay there for five or a hundred years, but it is a place that will remain as this for as long as we can possibly be.

One of the concerns was regarding parking.

Um can you address parking with this group of individuals and the usage of transit?

Yeah, two things on that.

The minimum was 36.

Um we submitted uh updated planning documentation.

There is a one-to-one ratio for every unit.

There will be a parking space.

Um additionally, um, to mitigate some of the concerns.

We've got four organizations specifically for transportation that supplement that resource for uh people that are either in foster care or if transition out of foster care, it'll be immediately available to us.

We do uh promote the utilization of both bikes, but and I don't know if I can call out specific organizations, but yeah, we we provide Ubers.

We provide there will be a bus stop here.

Um I mean, we'll everything that we generally do at one of our educational sites will also do here.

My last question is actually the question I asked from a previous zoning case, and that is have you reached out to the concerned neighbors.

Yes.

Um I want to say we've got a list of maybe 72 individuals that live within, let's say a 15-block radius.

Um we've met with families, we've met with every single organization that I'm aware of in the community, and without throwing names out there, like I don't know anybody that right now is not on board other than some neighbors that right now are a little bit confused and we're very concerned about the parking.

And again, we had that re-planned and zoned and submitted, and I haven't been able to share that with anybody, so I believe that will alleviate the only concern that I've heard maybe that's a question for Scott then.

Um are these plans regarding the parking being considered?

I I am aware that those were developed, but I'm not aware that we've received those in the planning department.

Vice Mayor Johnston.

Okay, thank you, Mayor.

Freddie, I've also had a conversation with you, so I appreciate that.

Um if if we look at one of these units, that is total of four shipping containers.

Yes.

Okay, these are the ones that are on the railroad cars, the long ones that are there.

Um this graphic was created with AI or what was it created with?

Architect, AI from the architectural engineer.

I I don't know who generated the graphics.

They also did the inside of the school.

I don't know.

Okay.

I had someone else show me these two on a different project, and they were created by AI.

So has any of these been built around the country?

As seen.

Similar design, yes.

I can tell you that I've saw similar.

I don't know about this exact design.

I don't want to say anything more.

There's some in California, but they're a little a lot different than this.

The one I'm thinking of was used for the similar purpose, and I think it was Arizona, and I think there was another one in New Mexico.

I can I can get new renderings and provide those.

It doesn't look like there's a front door on these.

Is it a sliding door?

There's a sliding door.

Sliding door is the front door.

Yeah, with the with the digital keypad for security.

Okay.

Do you have any cost estimates of what that four unit would cost?

I believe the per unit cost was approximately $62,000.

Okay.

We we evaluated about a hundred and eleven different what we call tiny home or uh or small home or modular home options, and this was the one that was determined to be the best for our project.

Okay, so you the rents in those would be uh we meet the it and I hate using the term Section 8 not to diminish it, but that rate, whatever the standard housing rate is, is exactly what we charge because we take their vouchers and unfortunately the biggest thing about those vouchers, you have six months when you age out to apply, they last for up to five years.

Unfortunately, we've got you know hundreds of people that have missed that opportunity because they didn't have stability when they transitioned out of foster care.

Me being a foster kid, I'm like, if you have a safe place for them to land and you can help them uh I guess navigate what it takes to get the voucher, then again, who takes the vouchers?

There's an you know this is the place.

So it it's so are your plus or minus eight hundred dollars a month per year.

Yeah, yeah, for a single bedroom.

I think our city rates like 850-ish, 850.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

I'll have some comments at the end.

This question's maybe for city manager.

I know that one of the questions was regarding housing and the FYI vouchers.

Um can that be addressed?

So our housing community service director is not here right now, but under the housing choice voucher program, every unit would have to be inspected and comply with HUD code standards as part of uh anybody who's holding a housing choice voucher, whatever that's worth.

Thank you.

Again, um, as I mentioned earlier, I think it's important to know what the use of this is for, and thank you for allowing the applicant to speak.

Um I know that unfortunately public comment is not available for zoning cases.

Um, but I do want to ask maybe this is a Troy question.

I feel like I've seen um a couple of container uh homes.

Um I believe it was in district one in council member Johnson's district just north of Kellogg.

How does that differ from this?

So there's um I'll try to talk at a really high level.

How a structure is built, whether it's built out of containers or whether it's built out of more traditional methods.

Uh generally speaking, you have two code series.

You have the international residential code and you have the international building code.

Under the international residential code, uh, for example, um, you have uh what they call one family, two family, and townhouses.

So if a structure, if an occupancy uh and a construction type meets the definition of a one-family, two-family or townhouse, it can fall under the international residential code.

As we were talking a little while ago, under those definitions, the one family, two-family, and townhouse, you can't stack units.

The minute you stack units, one unit on top of another unit, it no longer meets the definition of a one-family, two-family, or townhouse.

So now immediately you fall under the international building code.

Under the international building code, now you start talking about things like fire rated construction, fire separation between units, fire suppression systems, i.e., fire sprinkler systems, so on and so forth, right?

So that's kind of the juxtaposition until a set of building plans are submitted uh for review by the building department.

Again, without getting into the complexities around how there's an occupancy class, a construction type, and those are usually what defines what the code requirements are.

Um containers can be used as a construction method, right?

It doesn't have to be constructed with traditional, whether that be uh wood frame construction or metal frame construction, that's how they define all the construction types under the international building code.

So you can use containers.

Uh the minute you start using containers, then you start involving engineers and engineers uh having to sign and seal plans.

Um because the minute you start cutting in the containers and modifying containers, you start to compromise kind of the structural integrity of containers.

So a lot of these structures have to be signed and sealed by an engineer.

Again, you can do it, but depending on the occupancy class and the construction type, that's what leads into all of the code requirements, particularly under the building code.

I don't know if that answers your question or not, but thank you.

Councilmember Johnson, thanks, Mayor.

Just to add to that, these have a much more consistent design than the ones in the Hyde neighborhood, which are basic containers that can't they are the color that they were when they were received.

This has nice siding and windows and all of that, so these have a better aesthetic than the ones in district one.

Thank you.

I will now thank you very much to the applicant and thank you to staff.

Um I know that this is a topic that is near and dear to many of our hearts because it's housing and it's housing uh individuals that are in transition and vulnerable.

Um but I know that right now we're only talking about the land use of this specific piece of property.

Um so this does reside in council member Hoheisel's district, and he is the one that speaks on the behalf of that district.

So I know that Vice Mayor Johnson wants to speak to you.

Yep.

Vice Mayor Johnston.

I just want to say I I very much support the housing initiative with the church, what Freddie's trying to do.

Um I have I told him I have deacon's concerns about these.

Uh I've been working on housing here for the last eight months, and I've got another gentleman that brought me very similar designs but single story, and the cost was a lot more than $62,000 for just a single story.

Um at the clinic, the clinic is just a block away from this.

We were looking at a shipping container, a half a shipping container for a dental office, and it was very, very expensive.

And we went out and toured.

They're made in Bel Air, Kansas, and they're shipped all over the world.

And we toured their site, and he showed us how they were how they were building them and what they needed to do and to Troy's point.

Uh you have to do a lot to meet code on those things.

Uh, so you have to put a lot of electricity in the walls, plumbing in the walls and the floor.

Um it's very, very complicated, and it's very, very costly.

Um, just to put a little window in cost a lot.

These big windows, I imagine would cost a whole lot.

So I really have a serious concerns about these units.

Um, I don't think you can do them for $62,000 apiece.

I just really don't.

Um we're working on some manufactured housing and warehouses and stuff, and you know that's a lot simpler than this and doesn't look as nice as this.

Um, and and we're looking at $80,000, $90,000 for a similar type structure.

So I just don't think this is possible.

I know another gentleman I talked to uh generated by AI, and trying to get some cost on it now by talking to uh the people up in Bel Air and and to Lang Group uh looking at it since they do a lot of container work.

So I just have my serious doubts about this.

I like the program for the for the uh foster kids aging out of foster care and the church.

I have serious concerns about this if it's viable.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

I appreciate it.

Um yeah, the meeting with MABCD earlier this week.

Uh it was very informative.

Um, lots of things I didn't know.

Um it also stimulated a few more questions as well.

So I want to make sure that we give the applicant a chance to uh explore this with MABCD, meet with us, answer any questions, get a solid plan together, and see what the thoughts are after that.

So I'm gonna move to defer this item to the December 2nd, 2025 council meeting uh during the deferral period.

I would encourage the applicant to meet with MABCD to discuss the unique code requirements related to the proposed use of shipping containers for residential use, and also meet with council members uh to discuss any of the concerns that they have for this project.

I'll second that.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

PUD 2025-19 zone change requests in the city from manufactured housing district to planned unit development to create the park village PUD number 150 for RV campground and manufactured home uses, generally located on the northeast corner of South Greenwich Road and East Waterman Street.

Hello, Scott Wheatle again from the planning department.

So for this one, the applicant, as you heard, is requesting to rezone the subject site from manufactured housing district to plan unit development.

So another custom zoning district.

This item is being heard today because the district advisory board and the planning commission's recommendations are different.

In terms of the request, the applicant has indicated they are requesting the zone change in order to allow portions of the subject site to be used for RV camping.

In terms of the property, it's located at the south east corner of Douglas and Greenwich.

It's made up of one ownership parcel, which is approximately almost 74 acres in size, and as you can see, developed with a mobile home park.

Properties to the north are generally zoned SF5, single family and developed with single family homes.

Properties to the south are zoned LC Limited Commercial, SF5, and MH manufactured housing.

The LC properties are developed with a restaurant and uh shopping center.

The SF5 properties are developed with single family homes, and the MH properties developed with a manufactured home park.

Property to the east is zoned SF20 and is in unincorporated Sedgwick County.

Property to the west is zoned LI, limited industrial district, and in unincorporated Cedric County and developed with an airplane manufacturing facility.

In terms of the staff report, it provides additional information about site development standards, screening, lighting, parking, signage, setbacks, and density.

In terms of review, on September 25th, the planning commission held the public hearing for this item and recommended approval of the requested zone change subject to conditions.

They also added, and those conditions were per the staff recommendation, but in addition, the MAPC added a clarification on screening provisions, and that vote was seven to five.

The MAPC recommended conditions are described in the staff report.

Five members of the public spoke at that public hearing in opposition to the requested zone change with concerns regarding an increase in traffic, current and future safety in the area, and a current lack of site upkeep.

On October 13th, the district advisory board heard this item and recommended denial of the zone change request, and that vote was unanimous.

It was nine to zero.

In support and prior to the motion, board members expressed concerns that the rezoning would detrimentally affect the stability of nearby properties and the mobile home residents on the subject site.

There are concerns where the transient nature of the RV stays, the lack of a defined area where the RVs would be located.

And in addition, the board members specifically identified golden factors three, five, six, and eight as a basis for denial.

Three members of the public spoke in opposition to the zone change request at that meeting with concerns about crime vacancy vacancy and adding RV vehicles to the nature and the transient nature.

No protest petitions were received against this application.

Therefore, the zone change requests can be approved with a simple majority of four of seven votes.

In terms of council action, the recommendation to you is that the city council adopt the findings of the planning commission, approve the planning commission recommended PUD, place the ordinance on the first reading, authorize the necessary signatures, and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance after approval on the second reading.

And that again would require just a simple majority, four of seven votes.

Alternatives include the following: you can override the planning commission, adopt alternative findings, and deny the PUD request.

That would require five of seven votes because it's an override.

Or as always, you can return this case to the planning commission for additional consideration, which requires just a simple majority or four of seven votes.

So, and again, the quick note about the process of the public hearing is at the planning commission, and the council does not typically receive public comments on zoning items.

So, with that, I'll take you through some of the graphics.

So here's the aerial showing the site.

Here's the zoning map, which we went over just momentarily.

Here's the map from the comprehensive plan.

It shows a combination of residential, new residential, and employment recommended in the area.

Here is the PUD graphic that was submitted as part of the application.

It shows simply the site identified as the PUD in the text with the conditions which is included in the staff report.

Here's the notification and the protest area.

It's a different kind of shape than you normally see because there's unincorporated county on both the east and the west, so it extends a thousand feet into the unincorporated county.

Here are photos of the site and the surrounding area.

The site was developed prior to current standards for screening and landscaping, so you'll notice that the fence is different than what you would see developed today.

And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

Thanks, Scott.

Questions for Scott.

I see none.

This resides in Councilmember Tuttle's district.

Thank you.

Thank you, Scott.

Thank you for meeting with me and again answering all my questions.

I really appreciate it.

I wanted to state for the record that I've had no ex parte communication with the applicant, the agent, or any of the residents.

We had a very robust discussion at the district advisory board meeting.

Some of the major concerns is that the made this proposed zoning would have significant potential to be detrimental impacts of the surrounding neighborhoods, including increasing transient uses and instability and housing tenure by the area residents, and then also an increased demand for public services, especially emergency services.

This is a manufactured home neighborhood, and we would be putting RVs in it for people to live in.

So I think it would significantly change the character of the neighborhood, as did the district advisory board.

So with that, I would move that the Wichita City Council denied the zoning change request.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 70.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

PUD 2025-21 amendment to PUD 55 to modify building capacity, building coverage area, and max gross floor area ratio on parcel one, generally located on the southeast of East Douglas Avenue, within a hundred feet south east of South Hillside Avenue at 3207 East Douglas Avenue.

Scott Waytel again from the planning department.

So uh this is a case that you've seen before.

Uh it's a Crown Uptown.

And uh as you heard, the applicant is requesting to amend the existing custom zoning PUD at the site planning unit development uh regarding the theater and the address 3207 East Douglas.

The item is being heard tonight because the district advisory board and the planning commission's recommendations are different.

And a note on this one, similar to a case from earlier tonight, the DAB had a tied vote and did not pass a motion for this item.

In addition, protests have been received within the notification area.

A couple of notes on corrections and clarifications.

Uh first is that the required amount of votes to approve any zone change for this case is six out of seven, and that is because of the protest.

Uh the staff report correctly identifies this number except in one location where incorrectly stated four votes.

So I just want to clarify it's six out of seven.

And also, second, that the DAB and MAPC recommendations are different because the DAB did not approve a recommendation.

The report provides details about this, but there's a sentence suggested that the MAPC recommendation was the same as the DAB, and that is incorrect.

In terms of the request, the applicant is requesting to modify the plan unit development in order to allow for increased occupancy of the theater from the current 850 persons to which it's currently limited due to the zoning.

And uh, in order to do this, they are recommending they are applying for uh removing that constraint out of the zoning so that it would be instead set by the codes, the building code and the international fire code.

Uh the second thing is that they are requesting to allow the building coverage area to be allowed similar to what is allowed in the central business district zoning.

Uh similar fashion, they want to allow for the maximum gross floor area to be what is allowed in central business district zoning and also to allow for the maximum gross floor area ratio to be the same as central business district.

Uh the applicant has indicated they are requesting this rezoning in order to allow for a more viable business at the property and to allow for more options if the site is to be redeveloped in the future.

In terms of the property itself, the site is generally located as you know, to the south and east of the intersection of Hillside and Douglas.

It's made up of two ownership parcels.

Total in total, they're approximately a little over a half an acre in size.

They're currently zoned, planning unit development and developed with a theater and a parking lot with 17 parking spaces.

The Crown Uptown Theater is not listed on a historic register.

It is listed in the Wichita Historic Preservation Plan appendices, an inventory of Wichita's undesignated historic resources.

In terms of context, properties to the north are Joan G G C General Commercial and are developed with commercial businesses.

Properties to the south are zoned LC and B multifamily and are developed with multifamily dwellings and a duplex.

Property to the east is zone GC and developed with an art gallery.

Property to the west is zone GC and developed with a commercial store.

In terms of the staff report, staff report provides additional information about the building itself, parking, the existing plan unit development zoning, and the case history.

In terms of review, on October 9th, the planning commission held the public hearing for this item and recommended approval.

That vote was 9 to 5.

The planning commission recommendation included PUD text with additional requirements that would one limit how much of the site and what portions of the site could be utilized for parking if it was to be redeveloped for that purpose.

And two would prohibit commercial parking area as a use of as a permitted use on the site.

So it would prohibit the owner from demolishing the building and using the entire site for commercial parking area.

Five members of the public spoke at the Planning Commission public hearing, opposing the request with concerns about traffic, lack of sufficient parking spaces, public safety, and impacts to adjoining properties.

On October 6th, the district advisory board considered the application.

A DAB member made a motion to recommend approval per the staff recommendation.

The motion failed five to five.

No other motion was made, resulting in no recommendation from DAB 1.

The DAB discussion included questions about what would be allowed per the requested rezoning if the site was redeveloped.

What amount of occupants would be allowed by the building and fire codes?

If and when would a fire suppression sprinkler system be required?

How much parking would be required?

What alternative transportation modes are available?

What would the impacts of additional demand on parking be for the neighborhood?

And what does the College Hill neighborhood plan recommend?

Four members of the public spoke at that public meeting with three members against the request, citing concerns about traffic, lack of parking, and public safety.

One member spoke in favor of the request.

In terms of protests, 34 protest petitions were received against the application.

Nineteen of those protests were within the calculation area.

And it added up to 71% of the total protest area, which exceeded the 20% threshold set by the state.

So therefore, any approval of a zone change would require six of seven votes.

For council action, it is recommended that you adopt the findings of the planning commission, approve the planning commission recommended amendment to the PUD text, place the ordinance on first reading, authorize the necessary signatures, and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance after approval on the second reading.

That would require again six of seven votes.

Alternatives include the following.

That would require five of seven votes.

You can also override the planning commission, adopt alternative findings and approve different amendments to the PUD.

That would require six of seven votes, or as always, you can return the case to the planning commission for additional consideration.

Again, would require four or seven votes.

So again, just a quick note about the process and that the public hearing occurs at the planning commission and that the city council typically does not receive public comment on zoning items.

With that, I'll take you through some of the graphics and maps.

Here's the map showing the site.

Here's the zoning, which was discussed earlier.

Here's the map from the comprehensive plan showing recommended for new residential.

Here is the graphic from the PUD that was submitted.

Here's the protest map, again showing over 71%.

Here's a further zoom out of the protests that were received.

Some of them are quite small, so we just circled them in red so you could see where they were located.

Here are photos of the site and the surrounding area.

And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you, Scott.

Questions for staff, beginning with Council Member Glaskop.

Thank you, Mayor Scott.

Quick question.

Regarding the recommended actions, I think what you said was different than our green sheet, and so I just wanted to verify that.

Uh said the recommended action on our green sheet is four or seven votes, but you said that would take because of the petition six to seven votes.

Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

And that is a correction that we uh and an error that we made on the green sheet.

So my apologies.

Uh, because of the protest, because the protest is over the 20% threshold, it requires six out of seven votes.

So to prove M ABC, the six of seven, and then under the alternates override MAPC is five of seven.

That's correct.

Okay.

And then return the case to MAPC is four or seven.

Correct.

Yes, sir.

I just want to make sure I had that right in my event.

Absolutely.

Uh I did have a couple questions.

So the current capacity of this building is 850.

Is that correct?

Uh yes.

I I do want to disclose um there's additional information in terms of the 850 is established by what the zoning would allow.

So the PUD limits it to 850.

And talking with staff from FIRE and MABCD, uh, the their two codes limit it to 860.

And that was uh granted through a variance process that was gone through by a previous owner.

860.

Correct.

There's a 10 person difference.

Obviously, this has come to the council multiple times.

Um I will ask the question yet again that I asked earlier this uh evening.

Has the applicant reached out to the concerned neighbors?

And if so, what has that look like?

I'm not aware of any meetings outside of the discussion at the DAB meeting and at the MAPC.

Councilmember Glascott.

Thank you, Mayor.

Follow up to the mayor's question.

So item 3A says the use of the event center and scratched out shall be limited basically to be allowed by code, that's fire code.

So even if we pass this today, they would still have to meet fire code to increase capacity beyond the 850.

That's a separate conversation at the fire marshal fire department.

That's not something that is in this recommended action, correct?

In essence, that is correct.

Uh the one technicality is that they would be allowed 860.

860, so 10 person difference.

But if they wanted to increase capacity, that's what fire code and the fire department not us now.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Any further questions for staff?

I guess follow up to that, just a quick follow-up.

What happens if they just choose to increase capacity?

Could the fire marshal shut down the menu if they let's say they just increase it to 1200?

Yes, I'll defer to them for enforcement actions, but it would be up to them.

Hello, um, Chris Dugan, fire marshal.

Um, as Scott said, right now the variance committee issued a cap of 860 persons.

So regardless of what goes down this evening with the PUD, 860 is the cap.

Anything beyond 860, we would have to readdress the fire code and he would have to bring it up to code requirement.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Anything further?

Councilmember Todd?

I have a question.

I'm sorry, now I'm getting myself a little confused, so I'm just gonna ask a question, a clarifying question just to make sure I understand.

Okay, and it's for you or Scott.

So right now the capacity is 860.

Is that correct?

The PUD is 850.

850.

Yes.

And if we if this passes, then it's 860.

Correct.

Okay.

So we're if this passes tonight, it's 10 more people, and that's it.

Correct.

If I could, I'll try and add a little bit more definition and color to that.

Please do.

Um so uh in essence, I would think about there are two two levels that are established here.

One is zoning, and then the other one is fire code and building code.

Right now, zoning is set at 850.

That's specifically called out in the PUD.

Uh the fire code and the building code set it at 860, and that was done through a variance process, which I just I highlight that because it means it's unique.

Uh so uh 850 zoning, 860 fire code.

If the zoning goes away, if there's no longer a cap that's established through the zoning on the property, then they would still be at the 860.

But uh there are things that they can do to meet fire code and building code that would allow them to increase the occupancy.

But those the I I'll let fire marshal elaborate on that, but you know, fire suppression systems, what you know, there are physical things that they can do to the building in order to increase that capacity per the fire code.

I I'm sorry to be redundant.

I'm gonna ask this again just to make sure I understand.

And and if I'm wrong, tell me.

Okay.

Tonight, if this passes, then the capacity goes from 850 to 860.

At this point in time without any further changes to address the fire code and building code, that is correct.

If it doesn't pass, then it stays at 850.

Correct.

Okay.

So woven into it, do we have the authority to change fire code this evening and say it's 860?

What if they want to have a thousand people, right?

Or 1,500 people.

Because I think the the intention of the applicant, I don't know.

And I have had ex parte with the communication with the applicant, I'll state that for the record.

But they want to have increased capacity, they want to have more people there.

Um I I will state that safety is my number one concern.

So how do they get more capacity then?

Yes, sir.

And if I'm asking dumb questions, I'm sorry.

I just want to make sure I understand.

Because all of this to get 10 more people doesn't seem like like the end goal from what I understand, but I may be a misinterpreting it.

Well, as far as the fire uh protection portion, the applicant would have to work with both the fire department and the building code official to make sure any increased occupancy would meet both the fire code and the building code.

Um additionally, I know there's parking concerns and other concerns that are not really in my wheelhouse.

Um but but to extend beyond 860, you would have to again get with Mr.

Labram and myself and make sure that everything was kosher with the building codes and whatever fire suppression system was indicated would be applied.

I I don't want to know my comment my colleagues, but I'm gonna ask a follow-up question if that's okay.

So tonight we wouldn't have the authority to say it has to be um I don't know, this or you have to have that.

We tonight are just deciding if the capacity can go from 850 to 860, and then we put our trust in you, fire and MABCD to make sure that anything that any action that's taken further to increase capacity has the necessary safeguards.

Yes, ma'am.

We don't do that tonight.

I'm not gonna speak for you or for counting.

Yeah, I'm sorry, that wasn't very fair.

Yeah, I would tie any increase to capacity.

Um put that back in our court to make sure that the correct code requirements are applied and enforced per the fire code and the building code.

Okay, so tonight we're just talking about 10 bodies.

It seems that seems so.

Thank you.

And thank you to my colleagues for letting me answer so many questions.

Thank you for those clarifiers.

And again, one more time.

Current capacity is 850.

And if this passes as is, it would increase by 10 additional individuals that for the capacity.

And this does reside in council member Johnson's district, so we will defer to him.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um District Advisory Board did not help me with this one.

But um lively conversation, this issue has come before us before I believe the neighborhood has made their intention known, 70% protest.

My concerns uh remain the same, the same as the neighborhood when it comes to the safety of those in attendance as well as the parking.

Um but at the district advisory board, I really began to think about as I usually do what is a form of compromise and see what we can do to help out and work together.

The neighborhood's main concern uh outside of those who know that the building had some safety issues without a fire suppression system.

Was the impact of vehicles uh on the neighborhood?

Those are my concerns as well.

Um looking at that, uh we worked with I worked with our team to come up with something that maybe could address all of that in lieu of denying this application, or at least me moving to deny it.

Um with that would be looking at safety, fire safety, as well as what parking would look like in the neighborhood.

So it's a little wordy, but looking at um in this motion, making sure people are safe and then making sure we address some of the issues of parking in the neighborhood.

So my motion this evening would be to uh adopt the findings of the MAPC, approve the PUD amendment as recommended by the MAPC with modified conditions, place to ordinance on first reading, authorize the necessary signatures, and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance after approval on second reading.

My motion would include the following modifications, though.

A fire suppression system approved by the fire department and MABCD that must be installed prior to building occupancy increasing above 860 persons for parking.

Occupancy of 850 persons shall require a minimum of the 17 parking spaces they have now.

Occupancy above 850 persons shall be permitted, provided that the off-street parking shall be provided at a ratio of one parking spurse per four occupants and shall meet the following conditions.

Parking spaces including on and off street can count toward a maximum of 25 percent of this off-street requirement, provided that the PUD number 55 parcel one property owner submits a survey detailing the quantity location and applicable parking restrictions, and the survey is approved by the planning department.

None of these parking spaces can be more than 0.25 miles away from PUD number 55 parcel one.

Private property spaces can be counted toward this off-street parking requirement so long as they are within half a mile of PUD number 55 parcel one, and the property owner submits the following written documentation from the owner of the participating private parking, private parking providing the parking, and the information is approved by the planning department.

Examples of acceptable written documentation includes parking and or lease agreements, or a survey detailing the quantity, location, and any applicable parking restrictions for publicly available private parking spaces, and the survey is approved by the planning department.

Examples of these types of spaces include spaces where individuals can pay for parking on an hourly or daily basis.

Planning department approval or denial of the parking information and surveys can be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals by either PUD number 55, parcel one owner, or the property owner within 200 feet of PUD number 55.

The property owner would be responsible for notifying the planning department in writing of any additions or reductions in parking related to satisfying the PUD number 55, parcel one off-street parking requirements, and enforcement of the off-street parking requirements would be on a complaint basis.

In support of this motion, I offer the following findings.

Second motion and a second, there's discussion.

Councilmember Glascott.

Councilman Johnson, I appreciate the ability to compromise, but I think that's a very burdensome motion for an applicant if you're how to manage that.

Um I one of my questions would be maybe you can maybe you can answer this.

How would so if the requirements are supposed to be 0.25 away from the venue?

How does the applicant mandate that to patrons?

How do we establish that those are the locations available for patrons?

I know they can provide a map, I guess, on their website saying, hey, these are where we have parking agreements that doesn't prohibit or stop anybody from parking outside of those requirements.

Um or like I'm just confused at how this could actually be implemented in real time.

I appreciate the ability to compromise and normally I support more compromising, but convince me on it.

I'm not convinced, just based on a motion.

It's a lot of words, but basically, much like with WSU, you get directed to a certain place to park.

The big the key in this is the applicant has always said that he has agreements and he's shown some agreements to the community where he went out.

So it's not really a huge burden on him to go do the same thing that he says he's been doing.

And he I think he does have one that is valid, one or two that is valid.

So he would just be responsible for getting some additional agreements.

It also allows some on-street parking.

So neighborhood doesn't want all of that.

So this would allow some parking on street as well as require some private spaces as well.

When you look at the occupancy piece, the uh applicant at the district advisory board said that he would uh respect what the professionals say and the fire marshal has indicated we need a fire suppression system.

This isn't a burden on the applicant because he said he would do what the professional say, and the professionals say they need fire suppression.

If he wants to go above the 860, um, that's something that he'd be doing.

One of the concerns of the public though was not knowing what that number was.

If you go above that and you follow fire and building code, you're somewhere around occupancy of about 1,500, a little north of 1,500.

In order to get there, he'd have to go do the work to show he has a parking that he said he has.

Um so that means he'd be talking to his neighbors as well as putting in a fire suppression system to keep people safe.

Okay.

I have two quick questions as a follow-up to that.

Um, one would be for fire marshal.

Regarding Councilman Johnson's motion had fire suppression required.

When you spoke earlier, it was anything over 860 if they wanted to have something that may be a contributing factor to increase capacity.

Correct.

Is it a recommendation of the fire department now that fire suppression is needed at the space under the current capacity?

Because that's what Councilman Johnson's motion would do because the increased capacity beyond that would be your determination of fire suppression.

Is it the recommendation of the fire department now that fire suppression is currently needed?

So right now the 860 was an agreement.

Um the owner at the time added double the number of fire exits that were needed, and also a voice enunciated alarm panel.

So the fire marshal at the time felt that was a safe measure and met the attendant of the code and allowed the occupant to increase occupancy to 860.

Like I said, that was in 2018.

Going forward, I would be more comfortable if we went back to the letter of the code, more or less, um, work with the occupant, work with MABCD, and anything that extends beyond 860, I would refer back to the fire code and enforce the code itself.

Anything that extends beyond that, but that currently is not a requirement based on deviation.

Currently, based on the fire code over 300.

Over 300 is based on the fire code.

So there were some.

Okay.

And then question for legal.

Sorry, your motion was a lot.

So I have a lot of questions.

Question for legal.

Councilman Johnson's motion took basically the recommended action, but adapted it.

So really it's probably an alternate finding of overriding MAPC.

So this would require instead of six to seven, five of seven votes to pass.

That's what we think.

Okay.

You think you think it's six?

Okay.

I'm sorry, I'm being corrected by playing.

It is not an if I could.

Um my understanding is that because it would be approval of a zone change and amendment to the PUD because the protests over the 20 percent, it still requires the six.

Still requires six to pass this.

It is not an override, actually, it is an adoption.

So thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Councilmember Tunnel.

Thank you.

Um fire marshal, I'm going to ask you to join us again.

I'm sorry.

You're gonna get your steps in today.

Okay.

I'm sorry.

I just want I'm not an expert, right?

So I just want to make sure I understand.

So with councilmember Johnson's motion, he is saying that if this passes with 860 and the applicant asks to put even one more human in the building, it has to have fire suppression.

Correct.

Correct.

Is that normal?

I don't remember us from the bench deciding what fire code should be.

Because I just worry a little.

I safety is the biggest concern for me.

I'm much more concerned about the fire safety than the parking.

The parking, I think can be figured out.

But a better way to put it maybe this anything over what is allowed by the variance committee's approved letter will require us to revisit the fire code and enforce the fire code accordingly.

But the variance committee could say the applicant wants to have I'm just making this up as I'm going, right?

The variance committee could say the applicant now wants to have a thousand people.

We don't think that warrants a uh a uh sprinklers.

Our code says says it does.

The fire code says it does.

And the fire code now repeat again.

What is the threshold for water suppression?

300.

300.

Yes.

Okay.

So adding in to have fire suppression, if it goes anything above eight sixty, is our norm.

Yes.

I can't say norm because the norm is not to have a variance letter for a specific occupancy.

Would not be uncommon.

Would what not be uncommon?

It wouldn't be uncommon to have to have a fire suppression system.

No, it would not be uncommon.

Because normally it's 300.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

I'm just trying to make sure we don't create something where we have slippery slopes where there's fire code being enforced, and sometimes we're infusing into it.

The fire code's been established by the content expert.

So okay.

Thank you for entertaining all my questions.

You're really kind.

Councilmember Glascock.

I'm back again.

Sorry.

Uh, just one last clarifying question for you.

Does the motion from Councilman Johnson require if they're sort of passed in any capacity tonight?

And maybe you don't know this question, maybe this were a question for you, that they establish fire suppression, even if they didn't increase capacity.

That they would have to implement it now, or is this if they increase past one person?

This is if they increase above eight sixty.

Okay.

And right now they offer a variance that would be traditional in any other space that we have.

That 860 number?

No.

860 is unique to this.

Correct.

Yeah, that's sorry.

I may have asked that backwards, but correct.

Okay.

According to the code, its occupancy and class is an A2.

Anything that is an A2 that serves alcohol that is above 300 occupants would require a fire suppression system.

Okay.

Because they have this variance letter.

Okay.

That was issued by the variance committee in 2018.

They were allowed to increase their exits, um, the size of their exits, the voice enunciate alarm panel.

And the committee at that time felt comfortable with that and moved them all the way up to 860.

But that's just for this one occupancy.

Okay.

And this is a speculative question.

I just want to know what the financial burden, fire suppression system.

This is very speculative.

Are we talking tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands?

I would say hundreds.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I had 930 on the estimate of when this was going to end.

So would Councilmember Johnson care to read that motion again?

I'll read it word for word, really slow.

So we have a motion and a second.

Any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Approval to exceed the gift limit established by the ethics ordinance for Mayor Wu to accept travel and expenses to attend the Rodell Fellowship Seminar in Amelia Island, Florida, November 20th through 23rd, 2025.

The fellowship is hosted by the nonprofit, the Rodel Institute for the purpose of education, collaboration, and professional development.

The estimated gift amount for travel hotel meals and material is $3,500.

There's one addition to that statement, and there is no taxpayer dollars being spent on this travel.

Any further uh I move to approve my travel.

I'll second it.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Janine wants to stay.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Approved for mayor were to attend the KU Dole Institute of Politics, high stakes leadership in Lawrence, Kansas on Wednesday, November 12th, 2025.

A city vehicle will be utilized.

All other costs will be paid by the mayor.

I move to approve my travel.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

I see no further agenda items.

I just want to use a point of privilege to again recognize that a student was here in our audience this out this evening, and unfortunately she had to go uh home to do homework.

Uh but the mayor's youth council, youth mayor Elizabeth Timsall was here this evening and wanted to share a few remarks, but um it ran too long, so she had to go home.

But I just wanted to say thank you to our youth who are wanting to lead in our community and appreciate that she attended this council meeting.

We will now move to council member comments.

Are there any comments from council members?

I see none.

I will go ahead and move to adjourn this meeting.

Second.

Oh, wait, sorry, Councilmember Hoheisel wants to speak.

No, no, no, no.

It's an appointment, not a comment.

Actual business.

Okay, Councilmember Hoheisel has an appointment.

I'd like to appoint uh Vanessa Christofferson to the ethics board.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

I move to adjourn this meeting.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Oh.

Motion passes 6 1.

We are now adjourned at 9 08 p.m.

Thank you all very much.