City Commission - Regular Meeting

Go. We'll now call to order the March 9th, 2026 City of Abene, Kansas City Commission meeting. Shayla, may we please have a roll call. Mayor Rin here. Commissioner Taylor here. Mr. Khoff, present. Mr. Lidle, yes. Mr. Meisenberg, yes. Roll call is complete. Okay, if we could please stand for the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Right. And our first item is approval of today's agenda.

I make a motion to approve the agenda as written. I'll second. Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none roll call vote. Vice Mayor Taylor. Yes. Commissioner Khoff. I. Commissioner Lidle. Yes. Commissioner Meisenberg? Yes.

Myself? Yes. Motion carries. Our next item is approval of the consent agenda which consists of the meeting minutes for the February 23rd regular meeting, meeting minutes for the February 25th special meeting, meeting minutes for March 2nd special meeting, preparation ordinance A-309-26-26, and AP payment register. I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda as written. I'll second. Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, we'll move a roll call vote. Commissioner Koloff, I. Commissioner Lidle,

yes. Commissioner Meisenberg, yes. Vice Mayor Taylor, yes.

Myself, yes. Motion carries. Our next item is under heading six, public comments communications. First up is a public forum. If there's anyone that would like to address an item not on our current agenda, they may do so at this time. Please state your name, address, and there's a three-minute time time limit. Bruce Johnson, 524 East Ridge Road. Um, thought I'd have a little fun. This is the city of Abene, and the bottom is the southeast drainage water. Everything goes out the city. And here are a whole bunch of inlets where everything comes in and drains into all of that. Uh what I was thinking is that this is probably way oversimplified. But but it makes a point that if we get just enough water coming into the system that that the big pipe outside can handle it, there's no reason for anything else to back up unless it's broken or plugged or something else is coming or there's more volume coming than what those little inlet areas can handle. So, that's an issue. Um, if the big pipe is plugged or it's maxed out, then it should be coming up in a whole bunch of places, not just the ones I think that that are showing up that we have on our list. And since it's just a in sense a sense just it's a it's a elevation thing. You know, whichever is the high lowest is going to backflow first and then the second one up until you filled them all up. The uh exception to that would be uh 8th and Walnut. That's a thou south southwest corner of the football field. Well, I think the football field is draining into that system in that corner and it's like trying to drain a giant swimming pool in through a little tube. So, it is what it is. You can't really change it. So, I'm just saying let that one go. It doesn't doesn't need to do anything. That one drains, I think, straight west into Mud

Creek. The the one that's at second in Walnut, which is out in front of public works office, that one may be different because it's it just looks low. But at any rate, it would seem like there's several places that should be coming up alongside that one. And maybe they do. I I don't know the answer to that. um a whole bunch of the rest of them except for second and uh and Buckeye of which is Mr. Warriors here which is interesting. Uh that one's a whole different animal I would say. But everything else I would want to know, you know, is there something that's blocking those lines? Is there something that's broken? Is there some reason for them specifically to be backflowing? Is there something downflow that's just blocking to where that particular one flows back? And um I thought I mean I'm a farmer dentist guy. I would take a game camera and put it down where the big pipe dumps out. At least I'd know when the water when that pipe was full. And if these area other areas are coming backing up before that pipe is full then you got a different problem. the big pipe, I don't care how big you make it, is not going to fix it. The one at second, northwest second, uh, we I mean, we all know we've beat that one to death. It's just it's full of rock or 2/3 full of rock or whatever it is. But my main comment there is, does that have to drain underneath the railroad tracks? Could we run a separate line and stay on the north side and just eliminate the railroad track issue totally and run it uh who knows right down Buckeye to the middle of Seventh Street and and hook in there? I don't know what the cost would be, but I think it's something that is worth looking into. Thank you.

To that uh point, I guess city manager Quindai, would you be willing to put a an item on a future study session to see what it would look like to scope look at the technology, whatever options we have for actually looking at those sewer lines, determining if that's something that the uh just I would just say put it on as a study session. Whatever you think direction we need to go, whether it's looking at outside companies to bid it or the city to buy it, Sorry. Uh Brad and his team are looking at uh what equipment it would take uh to have that on site rather than having to hire somebody to come in and then comparing that to what it would cost to look at all of the uh sewer and storm water. Uh hiring somebody or purchasing our own equipment. Generally, when you buy like a vacutor truck, you would add that on uh as a cost. This wasn't done with this one, so it'd be a standalone, but they're working on that what it would take for us to go in and look at every storm uh drain and also our sewer lines.

Do you have a timeline for that? No, probably the next month or so. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. I guess it would help if I turn my mic on. You please state your name and address. And there's a threeminut time limit. I apologize. I didn't.

Yes. My name's Hank Royer. My residence address is 309 North Vine and I also own the west side of the 200 block of North Buckeye. And kind of tying in with what Bruce was talking about, I I'd kind of like an update of what we're doing about the water that going out from the UP. Um I can tell you that we've never had this problem before the rocks were it came filled up with rocks. I mean, it's a problem that's been created. And it ties in with the other thing I was coming in representing the other owners all the way up to Fifth Street to reaffirm to you all that there's nothing wrong with the storm drains north of the tracks up to Fifth Street. And in our opinion, there's no need to spend $700,000 to tear all the sidewalks up, dig all those pipes out, look at them, and then have to go put new pipes in and new sidewalks in. And those owners are also concerned about the time duration because if you get somebody that's efficient like the ones who did the south side of the tracks, those businesses could be out of business for a month or two easy. That's their only entrance on a lot of those businesses is off of Buckeye. You tear up those sidewalks and for a month or two in front of them, they're out of business. And that's your main retail downtown and they're all concerned. They number one don't want you to fool around with the storm sewers and number two you're going to them if you do. Uh I've got some other comments on it but I saw since I did bring up your agenda you're talking about this in reassigning some monies that you over bonded later and also I see Brad's on there later with something about the clip project on Buckeye. So maybe I play by your rules. I'll stick around and talk at that time. But we owners really don't want to see anything done with those storm sewers north of the tracks. We don't have any problem getting the water away if you'll

just clear the tracks so it can go on down. Thank you. Thank you. Erin, do you I guess do you would you like to provide an update on that with

I'd be happy to. Sure. Uh happy to report on that. So as as we've reported at a few a couple two or three meetings in the last um three to four months. City staff and I have tried to work cooperatively with Union Pacific, both their staff and their legal representative. Uh city staff first contacted Union Pacific uh personnel in early to mid September of last year and uh public works uh met on site. Uh Mr. Anderson met with the uh Union Pacific representatives on site on September 25th of last year, I believe, and then there were some intermittent communications uh with those Union Pacific representatives following that on-site inspection, but nothing was ever done. Uh we escalated it by sending a a letter to their legal department on uh October 31st requesting a remediation plan. uh that resulted in a response from someone in their legal department that we had intermittent communications with. Uh more recently, their legal department advised that Union Pacific personnel would be working exclusively with city personnel to resolve the matter and they did not perceive a need for uh legal uh involvement at that point. uh they did direct our attention to a 1960s agreement that uh suggested that the city could have a share of the cost responsibility for whatever has to be done but I think it's too premature to reach that conclusion. Um ultimately the the corrective work needs to be performed uh if there is corrective work to be performed and then the cost can be allocated appropriately. Um but despite those intermittent communications late last year, um to my knowledge, there have been no more communications and we have unfortunately concluded that our next available remedy is to file a complaint

with the Federal Railroad Administration. Uh federal regulations require uh railroads to maintain drainage structures underneath their tracks so that they remain free of obstruction. And based on staff's investigation, which I believe is corroborated by what Union Pacific personnel saw when they were here, uh we do not believe it is free from obstruction in accordance with federal regulations. Uh we have over the past uh week or two finalized a complaint. Uh it is not yet submitted, but it will be submitted within the next 24 hours through the Federal Railroad Administration's online portal with supporting information. We are asking them to investigate the site and determine uh whether they believe that the site meets the federal drainage regulations. As far as what they do next, uh we haven't been through this process before, but we are hopeful that they will escalate it rather quickly. Um but based on Union Pacific's lack of any substantive action to address it, uh that's the only choice we've been left with. And unfortunately, this is not a case where the city can simply enter and self-perform the work. It is an active railroad line uh on a right ofway owned by Union Pacific. So, there are significant uh safety and other issues associated with that, but it will be submitted and I'd be happy to update the commission with that final submission once we make it and keep you a prize.

What is the nature of that complaint? I mean, how is that being submitted? it it uh is in the form of a letter that references the federal regulation that's uh I think you may have uh brought it to our attention at one point but it it's a very simple regulation that says that railroads shall keep drainage structures free from obstruction and we're saying that Union Pacific is not complying with that. Here's our evidence in the form of pictures as well as pictures of the ponding that has resulted from several storms that have been well documented. And uh also reciting the uh previous efforts that we've made at length to obtain voluntary cooperation.

We believe there might be a safety concern as well, right? Not just from flooding, but potentially from the construction of the whatever they constructed at that time that it was. Is it maybe sagging or something in that area? Am I thinking of

We have referenced the various direct and indirect potential consequences of the obstruction ranging from potential flooding of privately owned properties to ponding on the right of way as well as our belief that this could have resulted from a structural failure uh within the roaded itself that results in the rock entering from above. Uh so we've with you know we don't know for sure but we have covered all of that to make them aware of potential uh public safety issues. Yeah. If you just please send us maybe send us an email when you do submit that and if you hear any correspondence back.

Sure. Do you have anyone else that would like to address the commission? I guess when you take the podium, please state your name, address, and there's a three-minute time limit.

Wendy Moltson, um the director of the Abalene Public Library. I live here. No, I'm 11:08 North Campbell. Um I am passing out our 2025 annual report that I usually bring to you guys every year. Uh just a couple highlights that um circulation was up in 2025 along with the computer use of computers and our Wi-Fi. Um almost 700 people came in for free tech assistance and we circulated 76 hotspots. Um programming is up. The participants increased. We added active and self-directed programming last year to increase those numbers. And even though costs for books and media, utilities, and maintenance have increased, our return on taxpayer investment remains um at over 2:1. And you may have heard some of our good news already this year with our grants from the Carnegie Foundation and the Pizza Hut Slice of Literacy Foundation. And I am confident there will be more exciting news to share in the near future, but I can't at this moment. Um, and don't forget to look on the back and you can see what the most checked out items were in 2025. And I'm going to put a few extras at the back in case anyone wants to grab one on their way out.

Thank you. Thank you.

Well, I'm going to say I'm saving the best for last here. Name, address, three minute time limit. Julie Roller Weeks. Um, Abene Convention Visitors Bureau director. Um, I do live at 805 Spruceway Street if you're curious. Um, for the eighth year in a row, Aene is a finalist in USA Today's best historic small town contest. I would encourage everyone to vote early and vote often from every device that they do have. Um, this is a big honor for our community in Kansas to be competing with um, just amazing communities across the state. It's something we should all be really proud of. So, thank you for your past support and please vote. Thanks.

Thank you. Do we have anyone else that would like to address the commission on an item not on our current agenda? Okay, seeing none, we will move to item 6B, proclamation for Omitama, Japan, celebrating 20 years. Whereas the city of Abling, Kansas, and the city of Omama, Japan, have shared a meaningful international relationship for the past 20 years, grounded in mutual respect, cultural exchange, and friendship. And whereas this partnership has fostered greater understanding between our communities, strengthened ties across borders, and provided opportunities for cultural, educational, and civic collaboration. And whereas the city of Omama has been a valued partner to the city of Abene, and this relationship reflects our shared commitment to cooperation, goodwill, and global connection. And whereas the 20-year milestone represents not only a celebration of the past, but also an opportunity to reaffirm our dedication to continued partnership, communication, and mutual support in the years ahead. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the governing body of the city of Abene, Kansas, does hereby congratulate the city of Omitama, Japan, on 20 years of partnership and friendship, and proudly affirms the city of Abalene's continued commitment to maintaining and strengthening this valued relationship. Be it further proclaimed that the city of Abalene extend it extends its sincere appreciation to the people and leadership of Omitama for their friendship and collaboration and looks forward to many more years of shared understanding and cooperation. In witness whereof, I have her unto set my hand and caused the seal of the city of Abalene to be affixed this 9th day of March, 2026. If you want

real hot Give me All right. Next up under heading seven presentations is 7A 2025 financial review and outlook finance director Bond. I think we're going to have it up on the screen there. Um, okay. Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. Today, I'll be providing an overview of the city's financial position as we look back at 2025 using unawudited year-end figures. This review is intended to give a highle snapshot of where we ended the year, identify key trends, and highlight areas that will shape upcoming budget and policy decisions. While these numbers are preliminary and subject to change as part of the audit process, they provide a reliable picture of the city's overall financial health and help inform decisions as we plan for the year ahead. Got to make sure I know how to use this.

All right. To start things off, I'd like to take you to take a look at how property tax dollars are distributed. This chart shows seven entities that levy property taxes within the city of Abene. Of every dollar paid in property taxes, about 10.4 cents, the green pie, is received by the city. Those funds are then distributed throughout the community to support essential public services such as police and fire parks, swimming pool, city admin, streets, and the senior center. And if you guys have any questions as I go, that's totally fine. All right. This chart shows all the revenue sources that help support city operations. And I know it's kind of difficult to see. Um, typically property tax, sales tax, and utilities make up for more than 3/4 of our total revenue with the remaining 1/4 made up of various sources. Forformational purposes, miscellaneous is a combination of reimbursements and refunds, sale of excess equipment and property, non-governmental grants, gifts and donation, lease income, insurance claims, and interest. License and fees include things like court fines, permits, and re recreation fees. So, we're going to talk about the utility funds here. And the next four slides, the green is going to represent um revenue. The red is going to be um expenses. So, sorry, I lost my This is over the last 5 years. Um the green bars represent revenue which is primarily funded through water service charges. As you can see, revenues have remained relatively flat during that time with no rate increases and no adjustments for rising operating costs. The G or the red bars show our general operating expenses which in the last two years have exceeded revenues. In 2025, we made a significant effort to reduce expenses

and eliminate anything that wasn't necessary for daily operations. While that helped control spending, it also meant delaying maintenance and system improvements. Because of this gap between revenue and expenses, the city has steadily relied on reserves to maintain operations. Those reserves are no longer available to sustain the utility, which is why the recent water rate increase was necessary. might be dead batteries. Oh, there we go. Okay, so this is the sewer utility fund. It has and how it's been trending over the past 5 years. The green bars represent sewer revenue as well. Red is expenses. Similar to the water fund, sewer revenues have remained relatively fa flat while operating expenses have grown at a much faster pace. As you can see, expenses have exceeded revenues each year since 2022. This trend reflects rising operational costs, maintenance needs, and overall system demands. Similar to the water utility, this gap has required the city to rely on reserves to maintain operations, which is why adjustments to sewer rates may be necessary to keep the system financially sustainable. The recycling fund, for the most part, revenue and expenses have remained relatively close to one another. This noticeable spike in expenses in 2023 was largely due to several capital improvements to the building. Uh spray foam installation was done that year. Um repairs to the walls um and uh some interior repairs as well. Since then, the fund has returned to a more balanced position which with revenues and expenses staying relatively in line.

And the last one here is the storm drainage. Revenues have remained relatively steady year to year while expenses have varied depending on drainage, maintenance, and project needs. uh the larger in 2021 reflects a significant drainage pro project, the Faith Avenue um that was completed that year. In the years since, expenses have been lower and more routine, generally focused on maintenance and smaller improvements to the system. Okay, this chart is expenses across all funds. So, all of our funds are included in this. This chart shows the city's 2025 expenses. As shown, personnel costs account for approximately 45% of total expenditures. That does include benefits as well. The remaining 55% is made up of contractual services such as legal, utilities and engineering, commodities like equipment repairs, general maintenance and fuel, capital expenditures, uh including equipment and infrastructure projects, and debt service. And speaking of debt service, this shows the debt service payments that were made in 2025. We made a total of $246,438 in interest payments and $825,000 towards our principal balance. We did make the final payment for the Dawson Cottage Edition in 2025. Next, we'll be we will review cash balances. Here's a historical look at the city's total cash balances across all funds. As you can see, the city's reserves grew steadily and peaked in 2023 at just over 9.2 million. Since then, the balance has gradually declined as funds have been used to support operations and capital projects. By 2025, the balance has decreased to approximately 3.6 million. While reserves were built up over several years, recent spending and project commitments have reduced those

balances, highlighting the importance of maintaining a sustainable financial plan moving forward. To note, this does not include the $10.3 million in temporary notes issued for the industrial park, cclip, and recreation improvement projects. These funds are restricted and may only be used for those specific projects unless formally reallocated. Yes. Oh, sorry. Sorry, I apologize. No, it's okay. I just the uh peak would be on 2021 at 9.2 million and you can see that the uh

cash balance continues to drop starting in 2022 and notably that's when the uh revenue neutral rate became effective and that's when the city started using its reserves uh to maintain revenue neutrality. Sorry, B.

Thank you. All right, these are unodudited year-end balances for just some of our top uh funds. This one of the key takeaways is the noticeable decline in ending balances in the general fund, water fund, water equipment reserve, sewer fund, sewer equipment reserve, and the tourism and convention fund. Over the past 3 to 5 years, the city has increasingly relied on reserves to absorb rising operational costs. As those reserves have been used to cover those gaps, the balances have steadily declined, which is reflected in the trend you see here. The decrease in the tourism and convention fund is largely tied to lower transient guest tax collections throughout 2025. As you may know, the city's fund balance policy establishes a minimum minimum reserve levels for each fund. Specifically, the general fund is required to maintain a reserve between 15% and 25% of anticipated current year revenues. The bond and interest fund must maintain a minimum fund balance equal to 10% of anticipated general obligation bond principal and interest payments. All other budgeted funds are expected to maintain reserves to address both planned capital improvements and unforeseen capital needs. This slide shows compares the general fund balance to the city's reserve policy. I've also included bud budgeted numbers for 2026. As shown, actual reserves have declined significantly and are now below the minimum 15% threshold. This is important because reserves serve as the city's financial safety net. When reserves fall below policy levels, the city has less flexibility to maintain unexpected revenue shortfalls, emergencies, or unplanned costs, and it can increase financial risk over time. Rebuilding the general fund reserves to meet policy targets is critical to

restoring long-term financial stability and maintaining the confidence of residents and other stakeholders. What's next? Varnney and Associates will be here on April 2nd to begin audit fieldwork and internal budget preparations will start in late March and continue through May. I've also in I have the 2027 budget calendar that I'll distribute to you as soon as I'm finished here, which provides a general overview of when and how we plan to begin our budget discussions with the commission. Please note that at the April 13th commission meeting, we will be requesting your feedback regarding highle budget goals for 2027. Thank you. And if you have any questions, I will try to answer them for you. If there's no questions for Kelsey, I just want to point out that the drop in transient gas tax revenues is not indicative of uh less hotel rooms. It's indicative of less remittances being sent in. We're not seeing a decline in people staying in Abene. There is an issue with uh hotels remitting the proper amount which is being corrected.

What date did you say you were going to get that to us initially? April something. It's on our schedule. So April 13th is when we're going to request your goals. Um and then I think the first time that we come before you all um would be June 8th. Okay. And that's with a completed audit. Um, I spoke with the auditors today and they anticipate they'll be here April 2nd for fieldwork and they anticipate to have us a completed audit within 60 days. So by June second, I would assume I have something

I think Mr. Quinda has put some of this stuff uh into effect. Um, but do we have kind of a comprehensive list of all of the city's assets and depreciation schedules and that sort of thing? I know some of that's in our CIP also. U but I would looking more at equipment. Do we have kind of a comprehensive list of all of our city assets? We do. Okay. Is that something you can share with us before um that April 13th meeting? Sure. Any further questions for Kelsey? Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. And our next item under heading 8, unfinished business is 8A, resolution number 030926-1, a resolution adopting an amended and restated community improvement district policy for the city of Abene, Kansas. Uh, deputy city manager, community development director Zuk. Good afternoon. Today we have before you resolution zero or excuse me 030926 amending adopting an amended and restated CD policy. Um, the last time we reviewed this was back in April of 24. Um, so we're coming back to you guys now um after some city commission um discussed some potential updates and clarifications that we've met the past two or three study sessions regarding those. You guys have given us your feedback. Aaron has drafted those all into the policy. Um if you guys have any questions on this, you can sure ask us. Um this will repeal the current policy um with the passing of this resolution.

Any questions for Carrie on this item? Also, I did speak to Natalie at DKDC and she was appreciative of the changes. This will help streamline the process moving forward.

Thank you. No further questions. I'd entertain a motion. I will make a motion to approve resolution number 030926-1, a resolution adopting a amended and restated community improvement district policy for the city of Abene, Kansas. I'll second. Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion?

If seeing none, we'll roll call vote. Commissioner Lidle. Yes. Commissioner Meisenberg. Yes. Vice Mayor Taylor. Yes. Commissioner Kolhoff. I. Myself. Yes. Motion carries. Next item is 8B. Discussion and possible action regarding all regarding the reallocation of series 2025 general obligation temporary note proceeds to address deferred capital projects. Interim city manager Quinde.

Yeah, this is something that uh the commission has talked about numerous times at regular meetings or in work study sessions. U. Last time we talked about it, staff was asked to come up with a list of priority projects um that we could present to the commission. But this is uh three allocations really not a question about we have we bonded too much money or we have extra money. It's really a question about project priorities, what you find as important or needs to be done now, not about having extra funds available from the general obligation temporary notes. Um, we've identified five priority projects currently deferred. Two street projects that are uh currently in the capital improvement plan for 2029. Bridge resurfacing uh currently in 2026 if uh allocation is done. Otherwise, we'd have to push that back to at least 2028. Uh community center HVAC replacement scheduled for 2026. and the airport hanger project which is scheduled for 2027 is a new item. As the um commission's aware, we've gone through several iterations on the the design, whether it's six hanger or uh eight hanger, what kind of funding we get from the um FAA and also KOT. We had to back up and regroup because some of our grant applications were applied for not stating that we were applying for federal money. So, um, the K dot grant that we had for the air construction, K dot graciously said, "We'll rewrite that grant and you can use that for your, uh, engineering," which was great. It saved us a ton of money, but we had to reapply for the KOT, uh, grant for funding of the hangar construction. We won't know that till the end of March, I believe, at the soonest. So, what you have in there is uh as one of the projects is

$575,000 for the city share of uh constructing those eight hangers that were destroyed in a storm in 2019 uh that still haven't been rebuilt. That is a worst case scenario uh based on the estimates provided. And assuming we do not get that KO grant, it would be around $291,000 if we get the KO. Uh and again that's assuming that you authorize uh eight haters as opposed to six be less at six. Um one of the questions that was raised is well they were torn down by a storm in 2019. They got some insurance proceeds. Why do we have to come up with this amount of money since 2021? I believe they were not uh zero mills were levied for the airport. So they were getting no revenue uh to operate on. So what they were doing like you heard Kelsey say with most of our funds is they were operating just on reserves. They weren't getting revenue to cover their expenses. So they were using their savings account. So that's the reason that we would would put that on there. Even with the 2027 construction date and assuming that it's the $261,000, the airport does not have the funds uh in the airport improvement fund cover that cost and neither does the city and the capital improvement plan cover them. So we would actually have to forego the grants that we received to rebuild that regroup and that would take another couple years and they've been without those hangers since 2019. you've heard the airport board talk about before and Kelsey who's the liaison that uh without those hangers the traffic there is less the revenue is is less and we have to maintain so many uh registered aircraft at our airport to be eligible for federal otherwise we're

we're not that's the reason that's u that's in there so if the projects that we've identified as high priority or not move forward with the existing no proceeds needs, then they'll remain on the CIP where they're at and likely deferred until the city can absorb them financially, which I would estimate based on what you saw with uh what Kelsey provided and the uncertainty that the legislaturator is providing with how they're addressing property taxes, I would say that would be five to seven years out. You would have to defer some of these things. Um, so the question to the commission tonight is, are there any project are these projects and priorities something that you would like to see advanced sooner or should they remain on the current CIP schedule and be delayed anywhere from two to five even longer uh years? If those are priority projects that you'd like to uh see, then the commission can direct staff to move forward with some, all, or none of the projects using the uh temporary allocation notes. You'll notice in your packet that uh we're estimating $3.4 million borrowed more than we needed. I mean, I can detail that out again if you'd like, but uh if that's something that you think are high priority and you agree with staff to move them along, then what we would do is put those on a uh resolution. There's two of them inside your packet that would show you exactly what they are. You just have to fill in the blanks. U you could vote on those at the March 23rd meeting and then that would be it. uh we'd have to send them to uh various entities, but there's no public hearing required because you've already gone through that process. Now, just because if the commission says yes, we want one, we want two, or we want all uh of these projects reallocated, does not

mean that you're committing to actually doing those projects. All you're doing is simply telling uh the note holders and the uh federal government that we borrowed this much money for these projects. Now, we're reallocating a portion to these projects. Um, but to proceed on any of those, whether it be the airport, the HVAC, or any of that, still require us to go through the process and for the commission to say yes, uh, we have to do it. For example, if you were to approve all of them, say move forward, we want to do them. Doesn't mean you're doing them all in 26 like the airport would be in 2027. Uh the only ones that I would suggest would be uh this year would be the HVAC and that's an item that Brennan will bring up later. I know when we talked previously um that resurfacing of the bridges was was definitely high up on the list. Um, you just had mentioned that in 2026 the HVAC piece of it is that would likely be done this year. Is that just due to bidding timelines and

Yes. Uh, Brendan went out and uh solicited bids for them. We looked at replacing just two of them or all of them. Uh we looked we decided because of some of the cost associated with the replacement having to hire a crane every time you get up there and you move a unit which is a large portion of that cost and the cost right now are much less than we thought. We thought there it'd be close to $220,000. Some of those bids in there are close to that but the local contractor I believe is 126,000. Um there's pros and cons and the mayor asked two questions that I was going to be prepared for. But so with the uh air conditioning units, you know, one of the questions that was posed today is or not posed, but the statements was, you know, I could possibly support replacing two, but not all nine. Two of them are down, by the way. One of them's been down for a few years, the other one's been down for a year. Uh so some of the advantages of doing all of those uh air conditioning units is well I guess back up. They're all original to when that was built. So they're at the 20-y year mark which generally they say 15 to 20 years for an HVAC unit or commercial. Uh they say 20 to 25 for residential. First house I bought my my air conditioner was put in in 1957 and I didn't replace it until 2006. But I saved a ton of money once I put it in for energy. So those are just guidelines. But some advantages for doing all of them now is or only replacing two units is you have lower costs today. Uh but the disadvantages are future failures are likely soon. Um because all nine units were installed at the same time. Those compressors generally start failing in succession. Uh the city doesn't have the funds set aside for those future replacements. Uh emergency replacements can be more expensive. Now, whether that's an

emergency would be up to you. Uh you know, if it's 100 degrees outside or 110, do we just shut down the community center? Do we spend extra money to get them done? Uh but you wouldn't have it. Uh risk losing cooling in parts of the building uh and more disruptions to programs and events out there. For example, it could affect classes, rentals, and community activities. If you do all nine units now, uh it avoids future financial pressure. you would not need to find the unexpected funds later when the uh units additional units fail. Uh it reduces the risk of multiple failures over the next few years. Lower total installation costs. You're not bringing back kind of like mobilization when you do a street project. That's a large portion of your cost. You're not bringing back that crane for two time two units this time and then having to bring back a crane for one or two units next time. That you're doing it all at once. And then uh more energy efficient equipment. Our uh city's electric bill is around 50 to 65 thou 55 to $65,000 a month. You know, that could help cut that down uh and less risk of disruption to community programs. So those are the reasons that we're suggesting if it's a priority for the commission uh that we do all nine as opposed to two. And then the mayor also brought up uh the bridge inspection that was uh completed by Paul uh engineering in September of 2025. It's a annual inspection that we have to have done. It's routine and they rate the uh bridges from 0 to nine based on their conditions with nine being excellent uh seven to eight being good condition, five to six fair and then four below in poor condition. And the three bridges that we have in the city, two were rated as five and one as a six. So it uh indicates that the bridge decks

are in fair condition. They're structurally sound, but the surfaces are uh worn. So they recommended the uh long-term maintenance of uh resurfacing. There's different types of resurfacing uh applications, but the most common is a polymer concrete uh resurfacing that they do. And what that'll do is it seals the deck, uh, protects the reinforcing steel inside the bridge, repairs minus surface deterioration, and also restores a smooth driving surface. Um, the bridge will remain safe and structurally sound. And they estimate that that's polymer surfacing can extend the life of the bridge from 15 to 25 years as opposed to letting it go further and then you're at a point and I don't know when that is but you could be at a point where you have the engineer comes in and says you have to replace it. You can't uh just maintain it. That's just some background on the bridges. So the question that we have for the uh the commission this evening is u of those projects that staff has identified as priority that are currently deferred were deferred as part of the uh budget issues and and pushing them back. Are those a priority for the uh commission to do sooner uh rather than deferring them several years? And if so, which ones? And we can bring that back to the commission. We

I've kind of since we spoke earlier this afternoon, I've had a little time to dig in here. I've got a couple of notes. Um I'm just going to kind of go through these as you've got them on the list here with the the uh bridges. There's a couple of programs. Um there's the Kansas local bridge improvement program and there's an offsystem bridge program. Correct. uh which uses federal funds for bridges not on the federal aid system. So just a couple of potential avenues to look for uh I guess other funding for that. Um it also mentioned the cost share. I don't know if there's a separate cost share program specifically for bridges but just another avenue to I'm not aware of that one. The other two that you spoke of I'm aware of. Okay. Uh but not the third one.

Okay. Um then going on to the community center HVAC. Um I am of the mind that we just fix what's broken and if it's not broke don't fix it. I think there's a lot of um dramatic improvements that'll be coming in HVAC technology. And so, well, everything you said was absolutely true, right? We're going to absolutely save energy with the two new that we have there, but it's uh Kelly, I'm um not sure which units are broken. I'm sure there's some that are more vital than others, but if we've been able to operate for as long as we have without two units, it's probably not going to be life or death for anybody if one unit goes down and we have to order one. That would be just kind of my read on that situation. Um there's I guess with nine units we can probably make do with however we've been doing it I guess for the past however many years. Um so again I would I would like to see kind of the just the broken ones fixed there on the airport hangers. I think I've discussed this publicly before but my feeling is that whatever they want to do is fine with me as long as they're willing to pay for it. So, however they want to cash flow that portion of the bond, whether it's six or eight and we get we're paying 290 or 575, that cost needs to be borne uh by those hangers. And then uh from the on the street projects, um I those aren't a priority for me. I I have driven on both of those fairly frequently. Um really the still the number one priority for me from a street perspective is Buckeye. I know that that's probably on our road map for Ccl. Um, but that's really where my priorities are from a a street standpoint.

My opinion on the air conditioning systems at the rec center is we've been without those two for one year and two years. Correct. One. So that just means that the other seven have been working overtime. So they don't have as much life left in them as what they would have had they've been working what they're supposed to. So I say we do them all night now like you said save the money on the crane and I think it just makes more sense get it done now.

And not to interrupt but if you look at the financial picture that Kelsey uh showed and the staff uh with the commission's permission is doing an amazing job cutting expenses. Um but if you do two now and say in a year or two one or two break again you will not have the funds to uh pay for it because it just won't be there unless we increase revenue and I don't know if I'll be here in uh well I don't know how long I'll be here but during last budget season that was a difficult task to do because you know I feel just like everybody else I don't want to pay more for anything else but we've relied on our reser serve for so long. Uh I don't want to tell my daughter, you don't have the savings anymore. You got to put that back cuz I want you to move out in my house then. So, but yes, I would agree.

Well, and I feel like the money's there now that we can use and get it done and uh that building does a lot. I mean, there's a lot of public stuff going on in that building and I think we'd really lose out if we were to close it down because we don't have air conditioning or heating. Thank you. I mean, I guess to that point, the money is still there, right? We don't have to pay the temporary bonds. The earliest we can pay them back is 2027. We don't have to go to permanent until 2029. So, there's really no urgency to spend that money. I mean, the the if we don't spend it on HVAC today, we can pay off and avoid interest. But, I don't I don't think that not spending the money today means it's not going to be there tomorrow.

Does it mean that it's going to get used on something else? Well, I think I mean the way I understand this process, right, is if we say we can't use it for anything then unless we go through this process of saying, "Hey, we're going to use that for it." So, I I hear what you're saying. Maybe I don't know. But I think if if we do, it's because that was more important. I think if you've got cash, you've got options. Once you spend it on HVAC units, you've got HVAC units.

I feel like the HV pack units are of high importance right now. We're estimating that uh as I mentioned the city of the right word overborrowed or will have $3.4 million that it's left over from these project costs and after talking with our engineers on the industrial park it's likely going to be a little bit higher so you'll still have those there. This reallocation process that we're asking you to do is one are these priorities if two tell us which ones so we can put them in the resolution. You adopt that resolution and we make the notifications. Uh it doesn't mean you have to spend it. Just means it's been reallocated. We still have to come back and say, "Okay, we're ready to do the uh polymer overlay and here are the bids." And you if you say $300,000 for the polymer overlay and it's reallocated over here and then for some reason we get a grant that covers that. Even though it's reallocated, doesn't mean you have to spend it. It's just technical process of saying we borrow this money for these projects. We're going to have some left over. We want to reallocate it for these. Doesn't mean you have to. We'll still look for grants and ways to reduce those costs. It just means that it's there. Do it. Does that make sense?

That was going to be my next question for you. What's that? Just making sure that uh you know, even if we did reallocate funds, I'd still be pursuing grant options and Yes. and uh if there are any cost share options. Um but like you said, at the end of the day, you if we vote to reallocate this and don't use a penny of it, there's no and it's kind of like when you adopt a budget, if you reallocate X amount for this project, say $300,000 for the bridges, we can't spend 301. That's all you can spend. No. So, even though we reallocate the money now, we're still going to have to individually vote on all these projects as they come up and

Yes. What's the timeline on uh the reallocation process? uh if if the commission will tell us today these are our priorities, we get a consensus, I fill in the uh resolutions which are in your packet, I send them to Aaron and Dominic uh Beck from Gilmore and Bell, make sure that I didn't get anything wrong, bring them back to you on March 23rd. you adopt the resolutions, then we uh send notification. The federal tax clearance certificate we send to the feds uh and then we send one to Gilmore Bell who notifies the note.

And just for clarification, there is no um commitment to spend this money on these projects if we approve it this reallocation process today. Correct. Yes. We'll have to bring those back to you. One of those will be brought back to you. uh which I don't want to muddy the waters now next but uh yes the road projects uh will have to come back with bids we have to follow all of our procurement policy uh procedures thank you yes is there a consensus from the commission to do none one some or all of those as far as just reallocating for those

mayor might speak Yeah, just please take the uh podium and state your name. My project. I'm not going to address all that stuff. Just state your name and address again.

Hank Royer, 309 North Vine. I'd communicated with all of you about the uh Buckeye project and uh when I was communicating with you, it was half a million to resurface it. The state was going to pay for it. And from the reports that we had initially here, it was a $1.1 million project. And that's what I've been sending you. That's your engineer. Um, today I see the commission agenda and on the front page it says that the K dot program it will be approximately 1.5 million is what it says. So it's gone up $400,000 since your engineers report before. And then I go back to the actual reallocation. It says your initial allocation is 1.9 million for it. So we started at 1 one. The front page says that you're only allocate going to go to 15, but now it says is at one nine.

Yeah, it's always been one nine. The 1.1 is reducing the $800,000 from KOD as their match.

Okay. Well then, and that's good. That's good. I didn't understand that. But the other thing is I would still say on behalf of all the owners in that area, we would like to see you reserve the right to reduce it yet further back to the $500,000 range for the resurfacing, which we all agree needs to be done. It should have been done a year or two ago, but consider strongly that we don't need those s storm sewers from Fifth Street to Second Street replaced at 700,000 or if it's 1.9 at $1.4 million cost. It's it's it's don't fix something that's not broke. And and that extra money, you can reallocate it later. As I understand it, you're just doing this based on today's numbers. But if you choose not to go forward with that, you'll have another million dollars here you can reallocate to resurface some of our streets like Cedar Street from 5th to 14th and some others that need some serious attention. So we owners would suggest that you can cut this cost back a bunch and have some more money to reallocate at a later time. No, and I think it's uniform of all the owners and they're all really worried about what's going to happen if you do tear up their fronts. I mean, you know, SNK, that's her only entrance to get in and out of there. RHV, that's their main entrance. All those antique stores, they that's their main entrance. they could possibly go in the back, but it would be devastating to their retail business if you tear all that up and takes a month or two months or whatever they're going to take to do it. Thank you.

Thank you.

I was just going to point out that the uh $1.5 million U estimate that is in the reallocation, that's the latest engineer's opinion of probable costs. We think they're they're pretty close of that. And I'm just doing some quick math. Less than $200,000 uh is goes towards the storm uh inlets. The uh Milan overlay is about $7 and uh I think $90,000 of that cost. Keep in mind that uh when the city applied for this grant, I don't know, it applied for two separate grants, two separate projects. uh scopes were approved after several iterations and then u the commission combined those projects into one and then uh signed an amendment with KOT on the grant. So we have one project with $800,000 worth of grants. If you uh now that's KOT awards their grant funds based on the scope of the project and and scoring criteria. But when you apply for these grants, uh you're telling them we're doing this scope surface preservation. This is what we're going to do and we're going to kick in this much money. Well, because we're going to kick in this much money, we get so many points on the scoring. If you change that scope from what it is now to uh just a mill overlay, it'll be problematic for KOT because if you'd have done that originally, you may not have scored as high and some other city would have got awarded. But now that you've said we're going to do this project at uh $1 and a half million dollars um but now we're going to cut it back and be like wait a minute that's not what you originally told us and that's not what the amended is. So they have two courses that they can do. They can require you to do another amendment or they can just revoke the the grants. I'm not sure which one will they'll do, but

it doesn't bode well for future applications when they scored you based on something you agreed to already in the grant agreement and then you would you cut it substantially back where somebody else may have got the grant tonight. So, uh and I did check with the engineer right before uh the meeting. U we're not digging up any storm sewer lines in the middle of the street. There are inlets that will be replaced and when those ones are taken out, what we can see of the pipe, if it's damaged, we'll replace it then. But we're not going to excavate just to replace storm sewer up.

I guess I'm back to the question. Yeah. Do we have any further questions on the reallocation? We need a consensus on which projects

have any thoughts? Guess I have one more question on the bread resurfacing. Um Is that a standard um investigation by an engineering? Is that just a standard inspection or is that something that we initiated because we've had issues with those two bridges? Uh every year they get inspected. Okay. Yes. I believe it's every year or every two years. Yeah. It's by annual and it's mandated. Okay.

And just FYI, the inspection Not last year in 25, but the 23 inspection, those bridges were already marked for recommended polymer overlays at 23. Okay. So, yeah. Then I'm not sure if uh you saw the uh the report, but if you're interested in that minutia, we can send you the report from KOT. I was just going to ask for that.

I can get those to you. Paul Valley Engineering is inspected them. They enter at the agreement, they enter all the data into the off bridge uh mandatory database. Thanks. Appreciate that.

I would be okay reallocating the money for these projects as long as each one of them comes back before us again for a commitment um uh and a vote. Um the bridges have been there for a while. The HVAC is obviously an issue we're going to hear more about from Brendan here on the next um presentation. Airport hanger, there's obviously timeline and grant money um associated with it that um we could potentially lose. Yes.

If we don't um at least have capital prepared for it. Um, so I'd be I'd be comfortable moving forward in the order as written. I would also because I don't see a downside to not I mean if we we're voting on everything anyway when it comes back around. So I don't see a downside. So I would be in favor also. Those all have to follow the procurement policy. They'll come back before you. Yeah. Yeah. I would be in favor of it as well.

Yeah. I I don't see a whole lot of issue in at least reallocating the funds, opening up the option, but we talked about with the grant funding options on the resurfacing, the polymer resurfacing, if we can get any of that or all of that paid for, that's obviously ideal. Um, I mean, I'd be fine. It's all going to come back to us regardless. So, and Mr. Royer's comment about Cedar Street, that was one of the projects. Uh but the sales tax is that's a project that that is put out for bid already. I saw that. Yeah. And so that's a a project for this year be paid for by the sales.

Okay. Then we will uh bring that back for your consideration in two weeks. Thank you. Next option or next item is 8 C. Consider consider approval of a bid from withnow Heating and Air Inc. in the amount of $132,491.61 for the replacement of the air conditioning units including hillguards to protect the units at the Alyn Community Center facilities maintenance director Alvarez.

Good afternoon, Commission. Um so yeah, John gave you some background on the units. Uh they're actually 2004 is when the units were made. They were installed in 2005 2006ish. So they're technically about 22 years old. Uh we currently have two units down. Uh the price to fix those is I believe they both need heat exchangers. They're roughly $8,000 a piece to just do a heat exchanger. Uh that still leaves the compressor, the coil, uh the motor, and the electrical all to be 22 years old. Um yeah, so recommendation is to accept with now heating and air um their bid with the hell addition of the hell guards. Um the units that are up there currently do not have hell guards and the coils are in pretty rough shape. Um and by replacing all nine together, I believe it keeps the cost down because if you have a crane come in for every unit, you're going to have a mobilization charge every time and have a crane rental every time. you have them replace all nine at one time. Obviously, the crane's here for the day or two days and they can just do them, set them and reset them. Um, everybody turn in a bid for Linux units, um, which is what we currently have up there. So, there will be no adapting to the curbs or anything. They'll reuse the existing curbs that have been sealed into the roof with the new roof coating. So, none of that will be damaged in the process either. Um, and by replacing all nine at one time, it eliminates the possibility of having multiple different brands of units up there. And um, so I had seven come, six gave quotes or put in bids um, with now what's the cheapest in the local.

Brendan, I want to thank you for putting this together. Um, I know we've seen each other in the meeting here just a little bit and I know, uh, I hear from a lot of people around the city that you're doing good stuff for Thank you. for us. So, I appreciate that. Um, did you work with any type of engineers or anything like that on this project? I did not. Um, I put a RFB out for a direct replacement with the same capabilities and same features that our units currently have. Also, the units we do have up there, that style of Freon is being phased out. New Freons are being put in because of EPA and all that stuff. Um, so eventually that freon also for those units won't be available anymore for further repairs. Could be a possibility. Are those 32?

Um, I'm not sure what our existing units are. The new ones are I think those are R454B from Yes, I believe that is correct. The existing ones. I do not remember what they told me those were. New ones are Yeah, R4B is a new one. I would just uh kind of the way I'm looking at this, I know we've had some other, let's say, performance issues with that structure

and I'd have some concerns that that was even sized correctly in the first place. Um, and I don't know what we have for local engineers. I think like PKMr or whatever atikica has done some work for me. Um, but when we've replaced some of these things, we found number one that they were sized totally incorrectly. Um, and then looking at some of the even the new technology that's that's been available for 15 years, ERVs and um, heat pumps that there's a tremendous opportunity to save cash. So, I'm just on operations specifically. So like uh my personal experience is that when we put in an HVAC unit, you have to size it based off of the three coldest days of the year. And so 80% of your capacity on that unit is to heat uh -20° air up to 50 degrees or 70 degrees or something like that. Um, but with using an uh an ERV, which some of these units now just come standard with them, um, it it gets rid of, you know, 40% or 50% of your label capacity that's needed for that. So, I again, I kind of want to just make sure we're looking at this whole thing, especially if we're replacing all of them. If we're replacing two of them, I say, you know, maybe we just drop those two replacements up there. How many square feet is that property? I would have Yeah, I if I would have looked at the roof paper, I could be able to tell you. Um I do not know currently off the top of my head. It's on my uh my bid from when I did the roof coding.

Yeah, I just I guess if we're going to do it, I think we need to do it right. And I think that means involving the engineers and and making sure that we do have it sized appropriately and then we're getting the most efficient equipment and again just doing everything right from the word go. So Brendan, right now you're sitting at a repair cost for two units at around 16K to replace the heat exchangers. Yep. Just replace the heat exchanger. Okay. Um had what has been the uh how have they been operating other than this? I mean are you seeing more and more and more service calls?

I would say the service calls have definitely went up. Um, as far as repairs, um, draft assembly, draft fan assemblies are also going bad on the units frequently. Um, I should have brought some of the repair history with me. Um, Kelly might know more. He's at the at the building regularly every day. Um, that they're just getting to where they're tired and they're getting expensive to repair. Um, and like I said, they they just need replaced. um they're expensive to repair every time we have to call somebody out to come look at them. And also with the two down, you are working your other se uh seven units harder. There's three units on the first stage or first level of the roof and then six units on the second level of the roof. The six units above the gym are all the same size. the three on the first level, the one above the restrooms and the one above the offices or um little lobby there is the same size and then the one above the um meeting room or conference room is a different size. So there's three different size units. 601, 2011, and one of the other.

Which ones are down right now? I believe two on the roof. Two on the obviously the roof. Two on the second story above the gym. Middle. Yep. Yep. The two middle units on the gym. Those are both currently down. Um Yeah, they both those both need heat exchangers. I believe one needs a heat exchanger and a graph fan assembly.

And also the uh your packet has a recommendation of approving the bid this evening. That's incorrect. Uh because the commission is considering reallocating those funds plus to give you time to think about that expenditure. We'll bring this back for your consideration of approval on March 23rd. this evening. So, to kind of piggy back on um Commissioner Koloff's point, um is there I guess I don't know with with now or there's somebody that we can get in contact with to make sure that we are replacing them with appropriate sized units.

Uh yeah, I could definitely reach out and see um see what maybe some HVAC companies recommend or possibly see about getting an engineer to let us know if they are sized appropriately. Um, I mean, we could look into that.

I was just looking back, um, since we've talked to West now about this for two or three years probably, we just knew it was coming. Um, I had asked about could we get away with less units and his um, answer was uh, the gym was engineered for 51 tons of cooling capacity. So worst case scenario 100 degree day building at full capacity. The duct work and air distribution was engineered for six systems. If you do increase um from this is for the gym from six to five or even four. Um you would have hot and cold spots. Duck work modifications would need to be done and also electric service to each new unit would need to be reworked. Um, if we installed smaller systems, we run the risk of not keeping the gym acclimated during high occupants, high occupancy and hot days. Retrofitting this layout for less units would not be cost effective. Installing smaller units would cut cost but has the potential of not keep

I just want to make sure that I'm clear. I wasn't suggesting that we go to fewer units, but potentially just more efficient whether by whether through heat pumps or ERS. I was just going to tell you what it was engineered for. Yeah, I think that's good. The 51 tons is a good good start there. Is that something you you could pose it with now is just to kind of get a little further detailed clarification on maybe have them uh I don't know if they're send it to you or Kelly if just email that out to us so we have something to reference prior. And one more thing you might ask them to is um calculate cost savings for the energy efficiency because that's going to be a big a big savings potentially. So if you can throw that in there and help them sell the system in it'd be helpful to their cause. Not a problem.

Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Next item under heading nine, new business is 9A, presentation of sewer utility rate study and financial recommendations. Beth Warren with Kansas Municipal Utilities. Sorry. Um, good evening, mayor and commissioners. My name is Beth Warren. I'm with Kansas Municipal Utilities. Um, I've been working with city staffs the last several months on a sewer rate review um for your guys' utility um and doing kind of preliminary discussions tonight high level of what the overall results of that review are. So within your packets, you should have a copy um of a little three-page summary report um to hit those highle points of the review. Um we looked at and summarized two basic scenarios for the review. Scenario A is just to show and highlight what the potential outcome if nothing's done, if no actions is taken and no rate increase is implemented. Um B shows kind of what rate increase that you're looking at being necessary to fund the utility as expenses were forecasted. Everything number of customers, sales, all of that is built in there. So overall um based on everything we forecasted the estimated outcome was looking at and resulted in about a 46% increase necessary to break even on expenses as they were forecasted. Um those expenses are based off the 2026 budget and then inflated at 3% each year thereafter. um from 2026.

That does also include a 100,000 annual budgeted transfer to the equipment replacement reserve um to fund equipment replacement plan of the utilities equipment needs. That also builds in debt service on the KDH loan. Um estimated that debt service would kick in in 2027. That was about 25,000 of an additional expense. So, nothing major there. And then we also carried forward debt service that you're currently paying on the 2019-B bond issue to the tune of about 520 to 530,000 a year. We carried forward 500,000 of that because that matures in 2028. So 2029, we just left half a million in debt service for future potential infrastructure projects. Um that way you don't have a major drop off in expenses and have to come right back and re-evaluate that if another project comes up at that time. So we've got that initial adjustment the first year of that 46% and then basically just shy of 4% annual increase thereafter just to maintain that break even point that you've achieved with that initial adjustment. First table of that summary kind of hits overall financial stats as far as that kind of revenue over under expenditures. Touch on coverage ratio highlights for that 5-year period and cash balances both in the main operating sewer fund as well as the equipment replacement fund. And then the next two tables highlight the actual charges based on that. So table two summarizes um actual charges basically for your inside city limit users. So right now your monthly minimum

is $15.30. With that full 46% increase that would go to 2238. And then if you do that annual adjustment each year thereafter of 375 you end up at about $26 in 2030 for that monthly minimum. Your usage charge, which is per 100 gallons, right now is 64 cents. With the 46% increase, that would increase to 94 cents and then by the end of that 5year period puts you up at $1009 per 100 gallons. Um, picking out a bill for 5,000 gallons is generally highlighted in a stat a lot of agencies look at when going after funding or considering grant money being doled out. um your bill for 5,000 gallons right now is 47.50. That would go up to just shy of $70. With the full 46% increase and then by the end of the 5-year period, that'd be up around just shy of 80 or just over 80 depending on rounding. Um and then the third table just highlights those same charges for outside city limit users. So, any questions? plan to ask Beth to come back to the March 23rd uh commission study session to get into the details and answer any questions that you have.

You pretty much read my mind there. You said March 23rd. Yes. Correct. Do

we have any further questions right now for Beth? I do want to thank uh publicly thank Beth and Katie Miller who's I don't know Katie's title, but she's in charge of water and wastewater at KMU. Uh the city originally contracted with KMU to do uh water wastewater and uh storm water. Uh we reached out to uh Katie and said we really don't want to do the water anymore because we need a cost of service study. They graciously said that's fine. and we're not going to charge you for the work we've done. And they found grant funds to cover the cost of the work CMU is doing. So this cost the city nothing.

Yeah. This review was funded under EPA's water TA program. So all our work and time into it was at no cost to the city. It's all directly build to EPA essentially. Okay. Thank you very much. That's fine. Well, the study session will be after anyway. So,

our next item is 9B, discussion and possible action regarding repealing the current industrial land policy. Interim city manager Quinde. So currently the uh city has an industrial land policy uh that may run counter to what uh you're planning on doing with the industrial park. Uh the policy which is dated I believe in 20 2020 effectively states that uh the city has invested public resources into land acquisition to accommodate new and expanded and relocating industrial activities. Um it says that it'll consider giving the land free to uh all 20 acres to an industry that comes in to um as a tenant or to to build there. The minimum project requirements according to this policy would be $500,000 of capital investment uh for new full-time equivalent employees and a base wage of $20 for each creative position. um they would make a request to uh Car's office and uh that request reviewed be reviewed by Dickson County Economic Development for a recommendation uh to the commission. Um and if the criteria is not met, say you were to give them somebody 20 acres of free land to build and the criteria is not met, uh then you could revoke the free land agreement and they would have to pay you fair market value of what that is. But since the city is uh planning on investing millions of dollars into the industrial park, putting in sewer, water, and a roadway, although it's two and a half million of that's covered by a Department of Commerce grant, our recommendation would be that uh the commission consider repealing this or

terminating this policy uh and then either one talking about a new policy at a study session or addressing how we want to charge or what we want to charge for those lots or per acre once the work is done and it's a certified site because that'll be something that we'll have to put on or let commerce know what that is. I just didn't want this to slip through the cracks and you spend $3.5 million doing it and somebody says, "Well, you won't give me the land for free after you put that in." So, are there any question? Is there any urgency on this?

Uh other than if you have somebody that asked. Uh Natalie did have a request for information. I'm not sure if it was for the industrial park. Carrie says it was. Um so she asked what we should tell them the price was. We told her fair market value, which is contrary to this just because if you want to give it away free, it's completely up to you. I just want to make you aware of it. As far as the timeliness or how urgent is it, I can't tell you it's based on people that are come in and say we're interested in it.

This has a lot of discretion in it though, right? I mean, there's nothing that there's no shells as far as if you check these boxes, we have to give it to you, right? Correct. Other than you're sending the message that you you'll give the land for free and all 20 acres, not parcled out. Yeah, I think at the time in 2020 it was assumed that it would be we you know we weren't going to put in all the infrastructure that we are going to now.

Um and even during discussions on the uh commerce grant and just this entire project as a whole. Um, it was discussed to use funds from the sale of those lots to help pay down the bonds prior to final sale. And some of those are dated, but I believe I shared with you what some uh other cities were charging for for lots and it may not be in here, but I believe it is. Yeah.

Yeah. And I'm not saying what that it should be. I just want to make you aware that right now your policy says you'll consider giving all 20 acres away free and I'd recommend that uh you I don't know what the right term is refer to Aaron terminate it repeal the policy and then discuss it in a study session what you'd like to do. Yeah. And even just looking at that Wamigo example. I mean they're they don't have direct interstate access. I don't think those sites were shovel ready either. So especially if they're certified by commerce, uh that should be very very attractive to to developers.

Yeah. And the timing 2007 2003 may have bless you. And since this is the first time we brought it to you, we're not asking for you to make a decision this evening. Uh unless you object, we'll put it back on the March 23rd agenda under unfinished business for your consideration. This is a incredibly sloppy policy. I just was going to tell you that there's something under section six, but there's two section sixes in this policy. Yeah. The first section six, in the first section six, I think that's the only area or the only section that references anything about it being free. Um I I think other than that, the policy

just says that there's a potential for a benefit, which I think that still would be the case, right? I mean, we're willing to kind of work with anybody depending on what they're willing to bring forward. I think so, but like you said, one, it's very sloppy. So, that's a first impression that somebody may get from us. And you could read that first section six, not the second one, fifth one, that uh call it 6A. Yeah, 6A that you would revoke the free land agreement. So, to me, that would assume that it's free.

Yeah, that's the only place that I saw. However, um, and again, I don't I haven't had a chance really to dig into it, but other than that one sentence, I think we probably mostly agree with everything that's in there. Yeah. I think it I mean the I guess the end policy could be fairly vague. Yeah. And you don't have to revoke it. I guess you just revise it to what you want. Is that something that we talk about at study session and then hammer it out and then come back with a concrete answer? Yep. We don't have a study session this evening, but we can put that on the study session uh on the 23rd. Yeah. And you can give us some direction.

And in the meantime, if we do have somebody knocking on our door and we haven't invested the money, maybe it's something you want to consider. You do have some time. It's just want you to be aware of it. Very good. Thank you. Have any further questions on this item? Kyle, I'm just making you wait a second. Next item is 9C, presentation of property and casualty insurance renewal options and premiums. Kyle Becker with Smart Insurance. 9C number one.

Okay. Well, uh, appreciate you making me wait. It lets me practice my patience because, you know, I'm so good at it, Brandon. Uh, commissioners, thank you for your time. Um, we're excited because we get to come and offer a renewal for this year's term and uh would like to echo what Mr. Quundai said. Staff was uh extremely engaged when it came to uh pricing of the policy and and what it would do to affect that. So, they were very um they're very involved and very in tune to the budget restraints. So, they were they tried to do everything they could to to give some options. So, um thank you to them. Uh last year's renewal, we came in with an annualized cost of just just right around $44,000. Um after all the changes that we've made, and I know there's still one uh Chief's Drunk has to make before um the renewal. So it'll actually actually lower because we have a fire truck on there that's going to be going away. Um but in the grand scheme of things, what we're proposing is we've got two options, option A and option B. Uh if we do nothing with deductibles, uh it's a 5.6% increase from last year. Um majority of that is coming from increase in value of property. So we're going from like 89 million to like 93 million. Um so that is the that is the lion share. Um but Mr. Quendai did say, "Hey, if there's some recommendations that you can give uh to help lower cost, do that as well." Um, some of our larger vehicles, fire trucks, um, dump trucks, things like that. They they're required to carry a $3,000 deductible currently. We average up we average over the last five years less than two claims a year. So, if we would just mirror all of the um deductibles on the on the auto $3,000 and we take a little risk on that saves

us about $10,000 and that lowers our increase to a 2.8% increase. So, when we were when we were doing this, we said, "Hey, let's at least bring that to the commission so they can make a decision if that's something they want to do or not." Um, if we have a a common loss like a hail storm, they double that $3,000 anyway, and that is what the deductible is. So, if we have five vehicles with a $1,000 deductible uh that get hammered by hail, they're going to double the highest deductible even if it's not involved. It's $6,000 deductible. Um, so, so we're gambling just a little bit with some premium, but based on our history, I think it's maybe a gamble worth taking. Uh, I have I can answer any questions that you guys have for us or um, anything else. Uh, did want to get it to you this meeting. So, if you wanted to sit on it for first grade, you could. Um, but and we will still have time to get out all certificates of insurance and and ID cards if if we do that. If not, we'll get everything processed and and out to where all the department heads have what they need with more than plenty enough time.

Can you give me a a breakdown of the um savings of raising the deductible? What are they now? And then you're going to three grand.

Most of So, most of the private passenger vehicles uh carry a carry a $1,000 deductible currently. Um in fact, all of them carry a $1,000 deductible currently, but the heavier heavier trucks, bigger trucks, especially the fire trucks, they carry a $3,000 deductible. There's nothing that carries a five or anything like that. So, um, by increasing our deductible on the private passengers from 1 to three, we're saving ourselves 10 grand. And, uh, did did pull our loss run or loss history. So, in 2026, we had one claim, uh, that did hit multiple vehicles. Um 2025 we had two 2020 uh 4 we had one as well. We did not have an auto claim in 2023 and we had four in uh what would that be? 2022. So um like I said if if we have a year where we have four claims it will end up not being maybe the right decision. But based on the last 5 years history, I think that you know it could make sense.

I don't know if uh this needs to come from you or from Mr. Quinn. Do you have the full policy that we can review? I can get you 175 pages. I thought you probably could. Thank you. So I guess I'm want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly when we're talking about deductibles. So right now the private passenger vehicles are at a thousand, right? Okay. So then if we had a storm like a hail storm come in today, you know, hit let's call it four private passenger vehicles and then two of the larger trucks that are 3,000 deductible, that deductible is already capped out at 6,000, double the highest.

Yep. And it does not matter if one of the uh $3,000 deductibles are involved in that storm. So if that's just that's their common loss deductible structure. So what uh in 20125 you had one claim multiple vehicles. We paid $6,000 deductible but it was $86,000 worth of uh damage that the insurance company covered. And I do not believe a firetruck was damaged. Nope. No firet truck, no no heavy truck, no dump truck, anything like that was damaged. So So a multiple vehicle claim is $6,000. Yep. The max you'll ever have on an auto deductible would be $6,000 for one event.

For one event. So, where where it gets a little sticky and you know, uh is if you have a $4,000 loss, then you go, well, do we just turn it in or not? Um that's that's the only time. Right. Yeah.

One of the things that uh we've been talking about as staff is uh asking you to create what's called a riskmanagement reserve fund. It's authorized by statute and it's a way for cities to put money aside uh for things or covering insurance deductibles or covering damage that we don't want to make claims on. You do that by adopting a resolution. I believe that's what the statute says, but I defer to Aaron. Um, and then you fund that annually to whatever level you want. The the unique thing about this statute and this risk management reserve fund is if you um want to spend a dollar out of it, you have to ask the uh governing body's permission. It's written in the statute that way. I'm not sure. A lot of cities have done that if they've increased their um deductibles. Um but you have to fund it. You can't just create it and then have no money in there. But the example that uh Kyle brought up was if you have a a 3,000 or $4,000 damage, which nowadays is just a a fender or a light assembly,

do you make a claim or do we just pay for that out of the risk management reserve rather than having those claims associated with our account and then possibly inflating our renewal in future years? And I will say, um, staff does a good job with if there's if they're not sure about somebody's driving record hiring, we get that ahead of time. Um, we don't hire a lot of a lot of youthfuls. Um, the ones we do, we're very selective on. Um, and and they do a nice job of, you know, we don't tear up a lot of stuff. Knock on wood. So, um, but in the in the grand scheme of things, staff has really done a nice job when it comes to that. Hey, can we get this person through? Yeah, we can. Or we can put them on a watch list so we can let them drive.

So, it was the first time I heard about that risk management reserve fund. But the first thing that popped into my head was allocating the savings from going to that higher deductible from the lower allocating that annually into that fund.

You definitely can do that. Uh the one caution I mean going $1,000 debuckable or 3,000 u I mean it's a it's a coin toss really. You could put that 10,000 of risk management reserve but just keep in mind that uh the 2026 budget was not built for a $3,000 deductible. So, if the um well, I guess it'd be $6,000, but if the police department, let's say they had three accidents in um 2026 separate, we have we'd be able to cover the $3,000 uh but not nine. So, you'd have to do something like that risk management reserve otherwise it really eat into them. does a great job with Shayla. So, for the 2026 budget, I think the difference between what our renewal is and what we budgeted is uh $2,000. So, do you have any thoughts on the um deductible increase? Sleep on it.

I think it's fine. I'm good with it. Yeah, I'm fine. increasing deduct deductible going with that option. So we're taking option B. Is that the is that something we'll need to formally approve at next meeting or Okay.

Yep. I will forward that uh I'll forward that to you. Um and we will go from there. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. That then you would uh the commission would be willing to entertain the creation of a riskmanagement reserve fund. Something we can look at. Yeah. Okay. We're coupling it with this and Yep. Okay.

Next item under heading 10 department reports is 10A sports complex project update parks and recck director Tim Brookke. you have anything? I never know if there are any prepared or just what's in the packet. So, yeah, I guess I can just say if you guys have any questions for me, I can answer those. Are they in the packet? The online one. were.

So, when they're listed on there, I never know if you guys are presenting something to us or It is in there. Okay. But yeah, unless you guys have questions for me, um I just kind of gave you the update of where we're at right now and what our next few steps are for the process. questions for Kelly. Thank you. Thank you.

So, do the other two have some Okay, open it up. Uh 10B Buckeye project CC clip 1 and two project update public works director Anderson. Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. Brad Anderson, the public works director. Um, I'm just kind of I put mine together, so there was nothing really in a packet, but I'm just kind of giving you an update on this is going to be our busy time ramping up with everything. So, uh, a little bit of an overview of what's going on in the public works world. Um, so my first one I'll give you an update on is the Ccliff project with basically where we're at. Um uh as you know this project was uh combined a year ago into what we reference as CCIP 1 and CC clip 2 with CC clip one being from the UP railroad tracks to uh North Fifth Street and then uh uh Ccl which was the south city limits to um South Fifth Street. Um basically down around the Liberty/Midwest meets. Um, so this uh the agreement was uh approved by commission uh I believe on on the August 25th meeting um of last year. Um but where we're at now um plans have been submitted um to KOT. Um a revision came back. They've once again came back went back to KOT and that's where we sit right now at this point. We're waiting on um final approval. Um and then uh it would be to advertise after that. Um where uh the engineer sitting at right now is that bidding documents um uh to give authority when they can advertise the project shortly after. Um they're still targeting an advertising time frame of the project to begin uh for advertisement in the month of April. Um there's no exact date, but that's uh

kind of the April. And then um summer construction will take place um with the project expected to finish in the fall. Um I'm not sure if I briefly mentioned this, but there were only two easements that were needed um signed and returned back for approval that had to be turned into KOT within the project. And those easements um were on Fourth Street around the Donut Palace area and the US Postal Service. Um they signed an easement for work that would be going on in those specific areas. Um any questions on that specific project?

Uh you said the engineering documents have been submitted to KOT for final approval where we're at state.

That's where we're at right now. Um yeah, the planning for that north project actually started what was a full year ago or more and then uh now that they're combined into one project. Um so I think uh some discussion was already brought up with uh where we were at and what the project was going to consist of and I think Mr. Quinday highlighted on a bunch of them. Um as mentioned um on the north project you can actually physically see some inlet issues on some of those right now. Um, so inlets I think are pretty much in there um in the plan for replacement in the current plan that was approved. Um, if we do not need to do any drainage structures underneath the roadway, we will not be doing the drainage structures. Um, we're not going to tear up the road just to see what's going on and replace them. So, um, that's one part of it there. Um,

and those drainage inlets have settled in, haven't they?

Yes, they have. Uh, another portion that's been brought up is the sidewalks. And I know that was a large discussion with with commission in the past and um a couple of um people from down in that area did make some comments, but it was voted on that it was approved to replace sidewalks, especially in the downtown area as part of the project. Um, I just I do believe that that was part of the um um when Mr. Quendai talked about KOT does a scoring system and whether or not um your uh the city's contribution in dollars and and the project that they want to throw into it is takes into accordance on on the dollar amount that you're awarded. Of course, when that was approved by commission, that's what was submitted for plans. Um, I do know that we are strictly going to be watching um, within the engineering phases of the project of what takes place in the downtown area. I do know it won't be like the south projects where they milled the complete surface off all at once and everything was exposed. Um, I may be preliminarily talking here, but um, I do believe there's plans to um, do either an inside lane at a time or an outside lane at a time and that uh, uh, temporary entrances into the businesses that will be effect when the sidewalk project uh, is taking place. Um, so that uh to uh not disrupt as much as possible um, for the business owners downtown. Um those plans will be set a little bit more in stone once we get everything back um from KOT. Um any last questions on the K dot part?

There was um I think to the north of that on the north part of that project some of those storm water inlets are kind of tied directly where the ADA ramps Yeah. or I guess they're now I don't think they're up to code anymore. Part of the sidewalk improvements, I believe, were to include some radius turns at some of the intersections and include some ADA compliancy in there. Um, so yeah, everything from that fifth street intersection to the south there. I think some of those storm water inlets are actually almost tied into those ramps.

Yes. And that's why there is some rec reconfiguration of building the new radius in place and and alternating. I know the east side of Fourth Street. Well, and the west side, both of those were going to have some um distinct changes to them in order to make the radius and tie them into ADA compliancy. Um that's just part of what was um brought to our attention by KOT when the project was initially walked um because of the ADA requirements that have to do with levelness and everything else that goes into the sidewalk itself.

I have one more question. Um, do you know what kind of um plan is in place? Because I know on what would be the east side, uh, those business owners, they have access to the back of the building on the next street to the west. But the guys on the west side of the street, they don't. They just have minimal alley access. And I know they use them, especially SNK. Yep.

Anybody in the middle of the block specifically is going to have some challenges. in it that has been expressed in our opinion very highly to the engineer and of course once we go to bid contract that's going to be something that is um significantly talked about with the importance of of keeping an access even if it's a temporary access while the sidewalk is being tore out um maybe pour apart get to their entrance area have a temporary and I would from what I've understand they've got some kind of a temporary sidewalk on these construction construction companies, they can move in and set up and and make access allowable so you're not shutting them off entirely. It don't get me wrong, it's going to be a challenge. Um, but I think uh we've expressed our concerns with it very much and it because it is a downtown area.

From past projects, what they'll try to do is like they pour the road half. So if you have an entrance, they'll try to do just half of the concrete so you can use the other. But a lot of times they bring in these portable bridges that you'll see where they'll the person's actually walking over the work. It's not high. They'll come in at night and u dig it out, frame it uh and then put that bridge over it when they get ready to pour. They'll do that generally at night so they don't disrupt the uh the business and then put that bridge over it so it can cure while people are still uh having access.

Thank you. Yeah, with the I'll just throw in with the expected time frame of this um let's just face it on Buckeye and anywhere there's there's never a good time frame for a project to take place, but um I'm not sure if we're going to be uh and this would include the south end of town with all the um people that come into town, but it we're probably going to affect could possibly affect the very beginning of a harvest time. Um not ideal, but um something we're going to have to work through. We're obviously going to interfere with the central Kansas free fair time. We've already made contact with the fair board and uh we have plans to change the parade route for this coming year. Um that's K DOT's recommendation. Um recommended route, just so you know, is going to be beginning the fair parade on uh 7th and Cedar Street and bringing the parade south down Cedar and then turning at Third Street and continuing along the normal route. Um you never know, it might be something that they like. Um, we do have to get permit every every calendar year um to allow from the state of Kansas from KOT to to allow to use Buckeye, just so you know. But those accommodations are already been made. And of course, depending on when they say it's going to get finished in the fall, obviously we can be involved with fall harvest, too. Um, the ideal would be to wrap everything up before um obviously we hit winter. So,

I think a couple three years ago, we had to reroute the parade route as well. Um, well, the parade route got to stay, but we had to reroute the detour because of um uh on 14th Street. Okay. Thought we had to line up in a different location one year.

Yeah, it was a different lineup area and and this will be the first real time that I think Buckeye itself has been affected, which is the parade route. So, um, one a a couple other things while we're talking CC clip real quick that I just wanted to throw out, um, just so you had the information. Um the don't know if we're ready for this but as you know these applications that we turned in for K dot started years ago and just today from from KTO K sent out that the 28 and 29 CIP projects are are are available now. Um you have to get on a list if it's anything you want to be entertaining. Um deadlines are actually due I believe May one. Um, I don't know if any of you remember, but um, two years ago, um, we applied, and once again, it's an application from Fifth Street to A Street with the reworks of the Seventh Street intersection. And if any of you kind of remember that, um, KO came out and walked the area, judged it, scored it, and yeah, we didn't we did not receive that one. Um, I guess personally as I sit here knowing what the condition of Buckeye is in, um, I would like to do everything I can to utilize KOT funds if they're going to allow money to be coming out. But by the time we get to 28 and 29, we're we're on down the road a little bit further and there's um other sections of Buckeye that go all the way up through town to the north end um that are um showing signs of wear now. So, um, just an FYI for you, I've been in contact with the KTO district engineer, this is just a side note, but, um, not knowing what will ever take place on the north end of the town with a a potential large business coming into town, um, we may have to revisit thinking about what it

would take from the north city limits to, uh, the interstate or 21st Street because that section of, uh, Buckeye is is showing its wear already. And as you look into this phase, we can continue spot patching and doing what we can. Um, but I think a complete redo um, if something gets built up there, um, would be ideal. And, and I don't know, you're once again, you're looking at a 28 29 time frame. So, you're three years away yet. So, that's how early you have to be thinking ahead in their game of the financial game of getting money. Is that We've gotten those two projects obviously that you're you referenced earlier. We got 400,000 a piece on that. Is that kind of like a hard cap?

Um, I think it is. Um, and and the dollar amounts can come less if you're if depending on the amount of work that the city's willing to put in for a project for other improvements that qualify. Um, intersections, sidewalks, drainage, curbing, any of the stuff in their world that does an overall um improvement. I believe there was three stages and the stage that we're at with the mill and overlay was 400 grand cap.

I guess that's an important point. I'm wondering that's obviously the most highly trafficked area of our city. I'm wondering if there was additional cost share if we were to put concrete down for that section from 21st up to the interstate. Probably be a good idea to look at. Now, I can tell you that you made the mention of concrete. When we looked at the fifth to eighth street, including the seventh street intersection, we did um look at that gave them the option of potential concrete. Um they do throw in more money towards those improvements. I can't think of the terminology or the improvement that it is called, but more dollar geometric

geo there I guess geometric improvements. Um, and I'll be honest with you. Um, I think that we need to look at improving Buckeye in the in the long term as a concrete street. Um, I just think that um, we're too late in the game already on what we're going to get done now um, for these two projects this summer. We needed to be thinking about that four years ago. But um um I think it's showing that our base underneath the K15 and Buckeye is is uh weathered and and uh taking about all it can handle in its lifespan. And if you're going to do a complete reimprovement anyway, um concrete's the long-term way to go.

Metric improvements grant will pay for that surface uh preparation, making sure it's settled. Just one thing to uh consider is that under the geometric improvement grant uh um they will require that any entrances to businesses that do not meet their spacing requirements, they'll require that they be changed. And you've got some issues down by like McDonald's where they're all super close. That would be part of it and it would they may cover part of it. I mean going with concrete in that area is a great idea. The geometric improvements grant is awesome, but they come in and they say, "Here's the rules and you're going to have to move these uh entrances." So, yeah. So, that Go ahead.

Sorry, you probably can't see. Mr. Royer had a question here. I didn't know when when that was appropriate for him to speak. The bid in April or advertise in April. Then you mentioned the harvest and the fair might impact. Did you have any time frame? Are you going to have any restrictions on these? But that's that's months. We're talking two three months. Is there I know you you don't have a lot of control, but if there going to be any restriction on them and how much time they have to do it. I think it's just length of the project. I don't know if you can say to them if they come in and get started and then fair weeks here that you tell them that they can't do anything that week if that's

No, I I just mean the overall for the merchants. How many months, weeks are we going to be torn up? Well, in one specific area how it'll affect the downtown, like if you're talking downtown merchants, um I'm not sure to be honest with you because I haven't seen the final outline, but when they're saying that it's going to um start in Junish and and end up in fall time. Now, can I say that their specific downtown block will not be usable that whole time? I I don't know. So, I I think they're going to do their best to get in and get that area said and done and move on. Is there any financial incentive is what I'm asking. Is there any can you put a timeline on them and a performance deadline?

During the bidding process, uh you generally have a pre-construction meeting with the interested biders and during that time, you can tell them that the city has a concern in this area and we'd we'd want them to do work say at nighttime so you don't disrupt the business. But rather than saving money as an incentive, that's going to generally cost you more. Um, but you can talk to them in pre-construction meetings and they they bid accordingly. If we want them to do certain work at nighttime in certain areas, you sure can ask them and make that a stipulation. It just impacts

if that's what you meant. Yes, you can do that in some pre pre-construction bid meetings. Um, I don't know if you're going to be able to, um, I think that any contractor is going to look at the engineers and the contractors getting together and figure out what the in their mind the length of the project is based on footage, lane miles, all that good stuff. So, um, if you're if you're going to say, "Hey, is there any way we can you guys can hurry this up and shorten it up 30 days?" I don't know what they're going to be able to do within their time limit authority.

One other question on the scope of the project. We went through a lot of iterations. You were part of it what we were going to do. Do I understand now that you talked about an easement up there at the donut palace? Are you in fact going to take out part of Buckeye and move the side move the curb out to straighten it out?

Uh, no. I think it has to do with reconfiguration of the uh intersection on both sides of the street on the north and the south side of the street. So, you're going to be rebuilding a a new radius, a new curb line to set that inlet in play. And part of that over on the Napa corner is because getting that to fit in there with ADA compliancy right now as it stands is is tight. So, when you're talking the other side of the street, um the only thing that I can think of that was thrown into it is that area the street's just really bad in there on down in front of uh Davis's

there. There was a portion uh right off of where West stop was that where was it was originally planned to be realigned but that was removed. Yes, that that was removed from realignment in there. So I can't remember it was sometime last summer I believe. Yeah, K dot did make some granted us a little bit of leeway in that particular block between fourth and fifth because there were several according to K dot access management policies entrances that were not not aligned correctly and and uh including an actual visible sidewalk and it's part of actual parking lot area. So,

and uh John just gave me this this cost estimate. I'd like to know when this is going out to bid because they've got here, I know your engineer is pretty generous here. He's got a flagger for construction near the UP Railroad. $5,000 a day for that flagger that I'm going to fly for the job. Get in line. That is pretty

at $5,000 a day for the flagger of the track. I ran into the same and it seems like that it sounds like that's cheap because when I got a I'm just telling you last year on my local street project when we redid uh the overlay on Third Street when we were going to get we had to stay x amount of feet away from the railroad tracks near Washington because that price jumped like I'm saying about 10 grand in the bid estimate for them to provide and so uh we therefore we stayed the footage away mandated by the railroad road and we if you'll notice go drive that. We didn't overlay right up to the railroad tracks and it stops about 20 foot short because of that reason.

My estimation in my career I've had to have railroad permits to go under them with utilities. The railroad flaggers it's um a big crew. They have to uh manage train traffic. So it's it's a it's it's a little bit more than just a flag man there. It says flagger for construction. I just wanted to clarify just to throw that out there that that is there I guess and I assume it's during those pre-construction meetings. Um I I think it would make a lot more sense to do that area directly in downtown both for the harvest time later in the year um and to keep downtown as open as possible later. There's not going to be a good time to do downtown.

Right. But is there a way to move? I guess I my preference would be to do that in the first part of the project so that way it's less it's less of an impediment on the um train tracks with harvest and with fair time having access. I agree and I as an outline just saying I know there were conversations about um and I don't know any factuals but do you go in and start in the sidewalk area alone you know sidewalk and outside lane because you got to change your curbing because ADA compliancy is not good that means you got to reset your curb to the right level so it's just there's just things going on where I don't I don't know what phase is what and that's yet to be determined

and a lot of these companies will bid that based on what crews they have available if they if their sidewalk what crews are available first. That's what they're going to hit first. Um they've got their schedule built out, you know, one or two years. So, that's how they'll bid it on who's available when they can. And we'll work that out during uh pre-construction.

I I probably will. We'll probably have some staff um discussions, but if you if you hear us coming back anytime soon for I guess input on 28 29, I mean you you have to think ahead and you have to be thinking of the next project and all you're technically doing is applying. Um if you it goes back to if you you do anything to change anything too major, do you get points not added up for whatever reason it may be? So you should apply and then you're like, well, we don't have enough money and you turn it back down. Don't apply again for a while.

Yeah. The wheat the wheat harvest I think all the grain in the neighboring counties comes down Buckeye now and you tie that in with the Bruce shuttling it out west. You're going to have a heck of a traffic jam just for the semis. If you cut one of those lanes down, you're going to be backed up all the time. But I guess that's part of the part of the project. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. We looked at changing traffic control there on the project itself.

Uh I'm thinking like temporarily changing signaling and that sort of thing while we're doing that project. I'm not sure. I I don't know that anybody's I haven't had any input on that or discussions on that yet. But are you talking detour, John? Are you talking because they they have standard traffic plans that they follow different? Yeah. And for truck traffic, it's possible that we utilize the truck route, which would be 14th Street to Brady and Brady to first. That would bypass it at least truck route detour.

Yeah. And we won't k's going to have control over that. Okay, I'll um move on real quick to um the industrial park. Um staff's been in several recent meetings, just so you know. Um engineering and surveying's been done. So, um what we've done is finalized a sanitary sewer alignment and service area. um decided on a proposed pumping plan. Um refined the ditch alignment and profile which city uh staff um we walked that with the engineers when we were having some problem or trying trying to figure out what was going to take place. Uh they completed a regional detention basin um location and assembled sheets for the full plan. So, what's coming up shortterm, just so you know, um they're going to update the project cost estimate. Um since sanitary decisions have officially been made now, and what that is, just so you know, plans for a lift station and a wet well, and it's going to be a new system that's technically all underground. Our only other lift station here in town is is an above ground um station that's you can visibly see. So, u a little bit more aesthetic in that. Um, we have to actually finalize the lift station. There's two options on the south end of the property. One by the entrance road and one moving to the west near the what is right now the tree line that um kind of next in behind um the Russell Stover's property uh and provide the city with easement exhibit for drainage easement. Long-term, the final plans um hope to be sent in the month of April um with uh a sealed set of plans in place by the beginning of May um with hopeful an advertisement um during the first 10 days of May and

construction starting in the late summer early fall. Um construction completed in the spring of 27. That's all input put in there because of once you get into weather and don't know what you're going to get into. So, um, at this point, nothing has changed from previous cost estimates. We're we're still on schedule um with everything there. Do you have any questions on the the pump plan um for the grounds or anything? Um, when they surveyed it, just to let you know, there was a ridge, a high point through the middle of the property. Um, so if you can envision a high point, the only thing we're doing for this project, um, in regards to future expansion is putting in that lift station in the line. Um, it's better to do it now, um, than to only do it the length of your property right now. And, uh, we won't build past that point, but we're planning for that in the future because of that ridge line in place. If you only put in the one station at x amount of feet, I'm just giving an example of your line placement in placing the ground and then you build north of there in the future, you then have to put in a second lift station further to the north to pump it to the ridge point so it'll pump over that. So, um, that's just kind of a an example of the only expenditure that I feel is well worth the dollar value. Put it in place now. If you build in the future, you don't have to worry about it in the future. You're ready to go.

You said estimated completion date spring of 27. Yeah. Based on weather.

Yeah. If they get started in the fall and they get going, um I'll be honest, it's a little little bit different of vision than I envisioned on the street. Um in my mind, the whole time I had like curbing in place and everything. We'll be obviously because it's industrial concrete road set in place. um basically with an open ditch on the end. Two reasons for that. You're going to change the grade of the ground a lot out there and then there's no sense whoever buys the property for whatever type of business they're going to do. They're going to put whatever type of entrance they're going to want or maybe a location to the north, to the south, two entrances, whatever they want. No sense in putting in curbing um for a street and then have the company come in and cut it and rip it out just to put in whatever they want. So they can build on and put an entrance onto any anything.

Open ditch to the north. Yeah, open ditch and then flowing to the um east. Have um I apologize if I'm not remembering this. Have those uh engineering plans been sent out to all of us? Uh no. Okay. Engineering plans for the project? What's the status on that? Um, yes. Okay. Final plans check set to be sent to the city um first week of April.

I've had a couple questions from the public asking how that's going to be built out and I guess maybe you know is it going to be designed for one user, six users? What what kind of infrastructure are they putting in? Well, all we're putting in um is the roadway and uh the sewer um capabilities and uh we'll have water going up the street from there on. Oh, actually I don't I'm not sure what that is off the top. Okay. I'm just lines concern

what what I guess it doesn't sound like you've got the full engineering plans, but what level of detail do you have on that on water sizes and everything? Just the proposed development as a whole. That's pretty much what I have. I've I've I've got the ground layout. I've got where the detention basin is going to sit. I got the two options of where the um um the lift station Okay. Is that what you want basically? Yeah, just whatever you have would would be useful. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions on that project right now?

Okay. And then just um you might have heard, but I'm bidding documents went out um sent them out today to prospective and contractors on the on Cedar Street. That's going to be paid for by local um in my local street projects. the sales tax money um for for the street projects. We'll see how them come back. That's a plan to get going this summer. I will be getting phase two of my local street projects for microsurfacing done. Still plan on estimated about $440,000 of income a year. I'm playing the safe game and just still only spending uh or budgeting about $400,000. If I'm at 401 or 402, I'm in the safe game in my opinion there. Um, and the last thing that maybe you guys have maybe heard about a little bit was um a slight um uh defect or not defect, but um on Buckeye/K15 right down here at Texas Street. Um we've got a little bit of a I'm not going to say a sinking going on, but something's going on. We have camered the tube in the area. We can't see anything wrong with the tube itself. There are plans to get it done. Um, we just at this point, which we're getting closer, there's no asphalt plants open and operating anywhere. So, we're not going to dig in and tear tear into it until we um have availability of replacing the street back in in a decent time frame. So, I think that's it.

Any further questions for Brad? No further questions. I'd entertain a motion to adjurnn. Before you adjourn, I know you want to get out of here. I just want to give a quick shout out to uh Brad and Kelly Timbrook. We um asked Olsen to work with Mid America on what's it going to take to put a water and sewer line in uh for that I believe and I'm just spitballing. Their estimate was $336,000. Brad and Kelly both said uh no. They reached out to local vendors and uh we'll bid it but we think we can get that done for around $80,000 just doing it with local people. So nice. Kudos to them for saving a ton of money and and Joe. Yeah,

thank you everybody out there. Thank you. No, you're fine. That that was worthy of it. Um I would now consider a motion to adjurnn. I moved. Second. Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, we'll do a roll call vote. Commissioner Meisenberg. Yes. Vice Mayor Taylor? Yes. Commissioner Kolhoff? Hi. Commissioner Lidle? Yes. Myself? Yes. Motion carries. We are adjourned.