City Council - Regular Meeting

Welcome to the webinar you have entered as an organizer and may now speak to any other organizers or panelists on the line when you are ready to begin the presentation press the start broadcast button. On the go to webinar control panel to allow all attendees to hear you this system will notify you once you begin your broadcast. The broadcast is now starting. All attendees are in listen-only mode.

Oh, there we go.

It works when you turn on your mic.

Seven o'clock, I would like to call the 16th City Council meeting to order. We will start with roll call, please.

Patterson. Here. Sabo. Here. Lane. Here. Bradley. Here. McCracken. Here. All are present today.

Thank you. I would now invite you all to please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Our first item tonight is our consent agenda. Tonight on the consent agenda, we have item A, approve the minutes. Council meeting, item B, approve pay ordinance number 1023. Item C, approve temporary use permit for Dean Weller car cruise in. Item D, approve parade permit for the 2026 DHS homecoming parade. Item E, approve donation request from the DeSoto food pantry. Item F, approve task order with PEC for the 2026 street overlay program. Item G, approve Kansas Arts Commission public arts and murals grant. Item H, approve lease agreement with Foley Equipment for street department skid steer pending approval of agreement. City Attorney. Item I, approved purchase agreement with Spectrum Paint for street striping equipment pending approval of contract by City Attorney. And item J, approved proposal from Vance Brothers Inc. for the 2026 Street Preservation Program. Is there any item anyone would wish to remove from the consent agenda for further consideration? Item H, please. Okay. Hearing any others, can I have a motion with the revised?

Make a motion that we approve the consent agenda with the removal of item H for further consideration. All right.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Roll call, please.

Lane? Yes. Sabo? Yes. McCracken? Yes. Bradley? Yes. Patterson? Yes. Mayor Walker on items 1C and D? Yes. Motion carries. Okay.

All right, item 1H, approve lease agreement with Foley Equipment for Street Department Skid Steer pending approval by the city attorney.

I just had a question on that. I noticed that it's a lease with a purchase option, correct, at the end of the three years if we make that balloon payment? I just wanted to ask, you know, historically, I mean, it's always going to be more expensive, but it includes all the maintenance and everything else, correct? It's pretty similar to a normal vehicle lease, except it's for something else.

Yeah, it's pretty analogous to a regular vehicle lease, correct.

And I just wonder, is it more economical to lease it with the maintenance included for that three years or to buy it at the end of it? And I don't know if we've done a cost comparison.

Really, and we've never, I don't think we've ever exercised the pain. But really what this does for us is it mitigates risk. So when you ask, is it more expensive or less expensive, maybe, don't know, over time, probably maybe a little bit more. But it does mitigate the disaster if the transmission goes out or something. We've had that in the past.

So really this is kind of a risk management sort of tool for us. That's all. I just want to make sure that we had considered those things. Sure. If it does turn out that it has zero problems somehow mechanically with all the heavy using, it's that we do have the option to purchase it at perhaps a lower cost than a renewed. Or maybe we choose to lease it. I don't know.

Yeah, that's an option to us.

Okay, that's all. Thank you.

All right. Can I have a motion then to approve that item?

I make a motion to approve item 1H. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Any discussion of the motion? Roll call, please.

McCracken?

Yes.

Bradley? Yes. Patterson? Yes. Sabo? Yes. Lane?

Yes.

Motion carries.

All right. Item two is call to public. Members of the public are welcome to use this time to comment about any matter relating to city business. agenda the comments that are discussed under call to public may or may not be acted on by the council during this meeting there is a four minute time limit if you wish to speak please stand and be recognized state your name and address when you get to the podium anyone wish to address the council under call to public good evening

And we'll get the small stuff out of the way first because you've got quite a data center crowd here tonight. So I want to talk about 83rd Street. And I've witnessed some dangerous situations on 83rd Street.

And if I may, I have two sets of...

You all can see some dangerous situations occurring there with traffic on 83rd and with bicyclists. It's a 45 mile an hour winding, hilly, and narrow major collector street in the city. There used to be signs posted on 83rd Street that indicated non-motorized vehicles are prohibited. Those have disappeared. They're not there any longer. And I've got many more photos of instances like you're seeing there as traffic's been increasing, more construction traffic, much more serious loading on 83rd Street. And we still have bicycles that are causing an issue. And I'm all for bicycling, but there's... I think proper places to do that, much more safe places available. And it's been pretty alarming, some of the instances I've seen, and I've witnessed many of them, and I'm not sure if there's been any accidents or things happen there. If there hasn't been any accidents, I'd be surprised. So I think it'd be prudent judgment to re-implement the local regs to prohibit non-motorized traffic on 83rd Street, particularly in those areas that are narrow and hilly and winding and dangerous. All right. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment. Anyone else under call to public?

I'm Sarah Vandecreek from 8175 Ravenswood Lane, and today I want to talk about laws. In the city administrator's memorandum response to Councilmember Bradley, he states in one of his points about NDAs the following concern. the proposed ordinance mandates that all city emails be saved forever accumulating decades of routine emails creates an exponentially growing data storage bill for taxpayers more importantly if the city faces a large public records request or lawsuit staff and legal teams would have to manually review terabytes of decades old irrelevant messages driving legal discovery costs through the roof So let me tell you the rest of the story. Recently, one of my counterparts put in a CORA request, and we were told that the city deletes emails from former city council members once they leave office. We are not allowed information from these council members for this given reason. I am here today to tell you that not only is this poor business practice, but it is also breaking the law. The city attorney has quoted KSA 12-120 that states that what records can be destroyed for his justification that these public records are no longer available. This law states things such as claims, purchase orders for five years, warrants and warrant checks for five years, duplicate receipts for three years. duplicate utility bills, there's a whole list of things, and I will share with you guys what those are. However, what he did not go on to read is the next Kansas law, KSA 12-121, which states, Nothing in KSA 112-120 shall be deemed to apply to records, documents, or papers not specifically mentioned, nor to authorize the destruction of records, documents, or papers which in their nature should be preserved permanently, nor to prohibit destruction of records, documents, or papers obviously of only temporary value after a reasonable time. Okay. Furthermore, Kansas State, KSA 45-403 states that government records are public property, destruction prohibited, except as permitted by retention and disposal schedules, which was stated in 12-120. There's a whole list of the regulations that it talks about, but they can't be destroyed, they can't be mutilated, they can't be transferred, they can't be removed, they can't be damaged or otherwise disposed of. They have to be kept. That is the law. So we have a huge problem. If the city has truly been destroying the public records of former city officials, then they have been breaking the law. It is completely unacceptable and illegal. This must be immediately corrected. Do not hide behind it being cost prohibitive. If we can find money to put on a twice monthly concert as a goodwill offering to the citizens, then we can find the funds to do what is legally responsible of the city. I hope those missing emails are found. If not, the citizens have grounds to escalate this problem to authorities who can fix it. I will be happy to discuss this with any of you. Just get in contact with me. My information is always available. Thank you.

Anyone else under call to public?

Hello. Good evening, Mayor Walker and council members. I'm Chad, and I am an Arbor Ridge resident. Can we get your full name and address? Yes. Chad Osterman, 31726 West 83rd Court. Thank you. You're welcome. As I mentioned last time, the proposed data centers create an intense amount of infrasonic sound, the sound that you can't really hear, but you can absolutely feel in your body. Our area sits on dense bedrock, and bedrock carries that kind of low, heavy vibration much easier and farther than soft soil does. It travels through the ground and into homes and school foundations with barely any loss along the way. So our high school sits only two miles away from this site. That is plenty close enough, especially with bedrock. Residents near facilities like this have reported sleep loss, headaches, vertigo, anxiety, and irritability. And this is not just anecdotal. These sound levels have actually been measured near operating data centers. And just because nobody's measured it here yet doesn't mean it's not a risk. It means we haven't checked. I was also told that this is a less invasive project than something like a distribution center because of truck traffic. But that's not really a fair comparison because trucks run during the day on a human schedule. And that noise fades out normally over distance. This data center runs 24 hours a day, every day, forever. And that kind of low sound does not fade the same way. It's not louder or quieter. It's just a completely different problem. Now, let's talk about the money. The $300 million figure assumes that all four buildings actually get built, including phases that are not even approved yet. That's one point of failure on the front end. And on top of that, each building only pays reduced pilot payments for a ten-year tax abatement period before the real revenue even starts. So a large chunk of that 25-year projection depends on years and buildings that we haven't even reached yet. And even after that, technology inside a facility like this goes out of date really fast, and nobody's talking about this. It has to be constantly updated to keep up with demand. So, eventually, the building itself gets too old to keep retrofitting with newer equipment in about 10, 15 years. So, there's a second point of failure on the back end, too. Once it can no longer be upgraded to stay competitive, it shuts down. And so does all of this proposed tax revenue. This isn't a one-time risk. It can fail before it's ever even fully built. now the city's own faq states that our tax rates won't rise because of this project and that is a great thing to hear but i would ask the council to put that in writing as a binding commitment and not just a web page faq because a web page can be updated but a contractual obligation cannot And what happens to this site if the building becomes economically obsolete before it's even fully paid off? We could be left with a giant, empty, industrial building and none of the promised revenue to show for it. So what I'm asking for is three things. Real noise limits that catch this kind of low sound and imposing limits there. Independent third-party monitoring of sound levels before and after. And third, a full public disclosure of the actual tax agreement terms. Please, let's not find out the hard way. Choose DeSoto. Thank you.

Anyone else under call to public?

Marie Caldwell, 8412 Corliss Road. Good evening, everyone. Yesterday, I stood in protest at the Capitol related to the Data Center Large Load and Comprehensive Utility Planning Summit, which was attended by our city administrator, Mr. Brungard. The event was hosted by organizations including Pulsinelli, Evergy, and Google, so that should tell you enough. Several members of the public had purchased tickets to attend, but were later informed that they would not be permitted to participate and were refunded. This raises important questions about transparency and public involvement in discussions that directly affect local communities. While there, I spoke with members of the media and residents from other cities facing similar data center issues. one common theme emerged many communities had successfully implemented moratoriums additional regulations or protective measures to address concerns associated with hyperscale data center development in contrast de soto appears to be moving forward without many of these safeguards i also heard de soto referred to as ground zero for these developments A characterization like that should give us pause on how other cities now view us as the catalyst for the hyperscale data center takeover in Kansas. I want to thank Mr. Reeve for reviewing and providing comments on the proposed ordinances and policy recommendations in an expedient manner. However, I have to be honest, I'm beyond frustrated. Many of you sleep at night. I don't sleep at night over this. I'm texting people at 3 in the morning. So many of our requests, including moratoriums, ordinance revisions, and the addition of environmental protections designed to address issues, have already been completed in other cities. And yet, here we are. We're way behind everyone else. I respectfully urge the council to direct the planning commission to quickly begin reviewing and implementing these potential changes agreed upon sooner rather than later. I do appreciate the noise study and you getting after that. I also want to thank Councilman Bradley for bringing these ordinances before the council as I don't think they would have happened. Too often it feels as though the city accepts the assurances provided by Evergy and developers without applying the same level of scrutiny that residents are requesting. So privatizing is gaining, right? And community resources should not be directed towards community benefit. So I am also concerned about what appears to be the lack of transparency surrounding development decisions. When residents repeatedly observe planning commission and city officials recusing themselves from discussions, while this is legal, then their companies are seen working for developers out there and naturally raises questions. Residents trust their elected and appointed officials to act in the community's best interest and to conduct business openly. Maintaining that trust requires transparency and accountability, which brings me to the next issue. One of my greatest developments and honestly my anger comes from the memorandum attached by Mr. Brungardt to the end of Mr. Reedy's ordinance and environmental specialist recommendations. This has the strongest staff opposition in the document and requires me to respond because it favors the developers rather than the residents and it comes from our city administrator who does not live here. Historically, Historically, NDAs were intended to protect propriety information. Increasingly, however, they are being used in ways that prevent residents from knowing what types of projects are being considered in their community. I disagree with the suggestion that increased disclosure would cause problems for the city officials. In fact, the opposite is true. First, a simple Excel tracking system could be maintained to document those active NDAs without revealing proprietary information or taking much staff time. Second, it would give time for reasonable public input instead of having shocked and angered reactive residents. Without a doubt, the existence of NDAs does create a perception that decisions are being made behind closed doors, which erodes public trust after one is discovered. Somebody want to finish for me? Can I go? Residents are not necessarily being asked for confidential business information or propriety information. I can tell you we are astute at sleuthing out a lot of that information. Rather, we are asking for basic transparency regarding the types of developments under consideration. For example, residents should know whether the city is engaged in discussions regarding a data center, manufacturing facility, power plant, automotive plant, or similar project. When residents learn about these developments through business journals or media reports, rather than hearing from their local government, it doesn't foster transparency or trust. It creates frustration, uncertainty, and eventually, as Councilman Bradley would put, mob rule. That's just a joke. Therefore, I am once again requesting that the city consider implementing a moratorium while appropriate regulations, environmental protections, and transparency measures are evaluated and developed. Finally, I respectfully request the answers to the following questions. Has the city or any city funded entity entered into an additional non-disclosure agreement that we are not aware of? Has the development agreement with digital reality been signed and where are we on the nuclear power plant? Thank you for your time and consideration I hope the council will give serious consideration to the concerns being raised by the residents Abby Baker 8400 Edgerton Road

I'm actually going to look at all of you and implore you to make the same communication even with your eyes or your facial recognition that you did to Robert Lacey. Because what's interesting is that he passed around a picture and you all nodded because you understood. You all felt it. That picture meant something to you. What I'm going to implore you to do is feel that same thing for me, even though you don't see it. I need you to hear it. I need you to feel it. I live on Edgerton Road. I'm not far from where the first Beale manufacturing or data center plant is going to be made, right? I also have a neurodivergent child. I lost my husband five and a half years ago, so I am an only parent, not a single parent. And I do it with a lot of grace and dignity, but I ask for the help of a lot of people regarding our school districts, regarding big brothers, big sisters, and everything else that I can ask for, for me and my son. What I'm struggling with is that we're still okay and we're not putting a pause on things, not knowing any of the environmental impacts or what's going to happen to my child, let alone all the other children that Chad, I believe his name is, said and all of the effects that happen. Now, I want you to take a step back. You all nodded your heads and agreed because you saw a bicyclist and a street. You saw it. What you don't see is all the other things that are getting ready to go on just because you don't see it. Please find it in your heart to understand that there's a lot of things going on that none of us want to be here. Again, I've said it before. I don't want to be here. I don't want to keep talking. I don't want to have to keep asking you guys for help. I need you guys to think like other parents, like other people in this community that we try. And we're just trying to make an impact. And we're trying to make sure that it doesn't impact us more negatively than what the hands have already been dealt, right? So anyway, my ask of you is to, when you think of me, think of Robert Lacy's picture. And when you all nodded your head because you knew exactly what he was talking about because it was a bicyclist in a car, I need you to think about that when we're talking about noise effects, environmental effects, water effects, and everything else that happens to me, my son, and my community. Thank you.

Anyone else under call to public?

Good evening. Name's Tyler Faird, 33342 West 87th Circle. All right. So I simply, I have a story to tell you and a call to action at the end of it. In 2018, I began running along the Gary Holler Trail. It's a trail that runs from Olathe all the way to the Kansas River. It doesn't touch DeSoto, but as you probably know, Gary Holler was a lifetime DeSoto resident. It was on this trail that I personally found a renewed sense of life and purpose. Over the course of a few years, I ran thousands of miles. About year two, I'm running along the trail one day and I stop at a bench that I've ran past for, Sorry, well over a year. On that bench was a memorial of a friend of mine that had died. He went to the Middle East and he was a Marine. He didn't come back in great shape and he died. So it was there that I really felt, sorry, one second. I really found a sense of purpose. I found myself closer to God And anyways, again, it was on the Gary Holiday Trail. But it was at this trail that I began to pray. I began to ask God to use me, allow me to see the things that he wants me to see, to hear the things he wants me to hear, to feel the things he wants me to feel, to say the things he wants me to say, and the courage to act on it. And I did that. I did that for six years. I do it today. I went through a lot after starting to say that prayer at that location. I uncovered a lot of corruption in this country that was at the heart of the CEOs and the builders of AI companies and blockchain companies. That led to intimidations. It led to... I drive by my house in Shawnee, which shut down the schools. It led to an assassination attempt in 2023 at the Kansas City Marathon, right at mile three, at 3333 Broadway Avenue outside the parish of Our Lady of Professional Help. I don't say these things as badges. I say them as a testament to what I believe that God's trying to do. During that same time, I worked alongside the co-founder of Ethereum, which was over a trillion dollar asset at one point. I continued to fight for the truth until he sued me in an attempt to silence me. Again, this is not a badge, but a testament. So, getting on with it. Since I moved to DeSoto, I began to no longer use the Gary Haller Trail so much, but began to run along Lexington Lake Park and Sunflower Park. As you know, the Beale Data Center is directly sandwiched between both of those parks. This week, I came across a bench right at the southwest corner of Lexington Lake Trail, and that bench reads this. Gary L. Haller. A life dedicated to the preservation and beauty of nature. Under Gary's terms, he led the Johnson County Parks as director from 1,800 to over 6,000 acres during his tenure. And I don't believe that I say that prayer and I come across that bench as a coincidence. I believe that I was led to that bench. I didn't wake up on Monday thinking I'd come here to talk to you, but I'm here. And I believe I was led here. Why, I don't know, but maybe you guys know. That's for you to reflect on. That's really all I have. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment.

Dolly Holloway, 8530 Hilltop Road. I spoke back in May. I gave you all some scientific information regarding some of the concerns that we have surrounding data centers, and I just want to stand up here and say it is an open offer to each of you to reach out to any of my colleagues, and I will provide you with a 65-page scientific report compiled by Media Justice on the dangers of data centers and their economic impacts on communities. That's all. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Lindsay Billinger, 9141 Coronado Circle. I was just going to read a bit of the CORA requests that we got with the Beal. um agreement and so this is what we got it looks like this with a lot of blacked out lines but talking about water usage and everything we don't even have anything nailed down and then when we request this we still don't get answers so i'm just going to read this and you guys can take it for what it's worth but Water use estimates. Developer estimates that the amount of water service that it will require at the initial build out of the projects will approximately be blank. Developer estimates that the date of the initial service level will be blank. Similarly, the amount of water service the developer will require after the full build out of the project will be approximately blank. Water wastewater use developer estimates that the amount of wastewater service that it will require at the initial build out of the project will be approximately blank, similar to the requirement for water provided above. Developer estimates that the date for the initial service level will be blank. The amount of the water service wastewater service has the developer will require for the full build out of the project will be blank. Thanks for the transparency.

Anyone else under call to public?

Hi, everyone. I'm Jennifer Sharp, 8220 Hill Circle, Mayor and Council. I'm standing here tonight. I don't want to be here again, but we're exhausted and to be quite honest, really disappointed. Sorry, I get emotional. Our community has been forced to spend hundreds of dollars and pour through over 3,500 pages of open records just to get the truth. We are doing your job and we are out of time. This is a life altering situation, not just for us, for all of us, all of us, all of you. Yet we face constant delays, deflections and bureaucratic excuses. The damage is happening now. We need to know right now who you actually represent. Would you buy a home? I do have a couple questions. Would you buy a home if the seller was dishonest? Can we agree that Beale has been not forthright and truthful information? It is proven on record they have lawsuits for being dishonest. Would you still buy the home if they had a list a mile long of concerns or issues or what ifs? Any of you? You're not gonna buy a home. with a list of what ifs that could go wrong, you would move on. And I know that I'm speaking on behalf of probably 100% close to this town. Why did you do that? Why did you let dishonest sellers come in here and overrun you and force you to sign NDAs on our behalf? Why did you give us dishonest sellers with no research, no data, nothing scientifically proven to not cause any health issues? I've put my information out there, multiple sources of health risks. So I guess I just have one question, surprisingly. Which one of you will stand with us tonight and initiate a moratorium that we can put on the next city council meeting agenda and vote on it? Which one of you will raise your hand? Listen, I'm just a mom. I moved here with three kids and nobody else. And I raised those girls and I bought my first and only home here. I've been here for 20 years. Which one of you will stand with us? Will any of you right now raise your hand and initiate, formally initiate a moratorium? Joe, will you? Will you initiate a moratorium for us so we don't have to spend countless hours and money and time away from our kids going through 3,600 pages? Will you? Zach Bradley, will you stand with us and initiate a moratorium that we can throw on the agenda for next week or next city council meeting? Rhonda, Ms. Rhonda Patterson, will you stand with us please? Ms. Lindsay, Ms. Lindsay McCracken, will you please stand with us? Please. Mr. Danny Lane, I have you on video, sir, saying that you would vote yes on our moratorium. Will you initiate that right now for us so we don't have to go through and gather thousands of signatures and walk all over this town? I've got kids and grandkids and full time, we got jobs. None of you will, none of you will do this for us, none of you.

My name is Jennifer Delgado. I live at 33844 West 88th Street. You know, in triage, they figure out who you can save and who you can't. Being here feels like talking to people that won't listen. It almost feels like the situation can't be saved. So instead of trying to repeat sources, I have a few questions. I know you won't immediately answer them, but I just am bothered by these things. I was here two weeks ago, and city administrator, you had a lot to say, a whole lot to say. And most of it was on the side of these development companies, of Beale and all of them. And some of it was, frankly, sort of talking down to or denigrating us folks here in DeSoto. Looking at these pamphlets, I can't help but wonder, I mean, Who was paid to do this? Who gets paid to not address city concerns in a way that actually uses sources? One of the ways that you were talking down to the people who were present in the room, I guess that you also wanted other people to hear, is that we're talking out of fear. And you're like, well, we're the authority. We know what's best for you. And you all are just ignorant. You don't know enough. I have heard multiple people bring scientific sources to you. I have mailed members of the council scientific sources. I have read bits. Those bits don't get accurately recorded, no offense, but you don't include actual specifics. So I've got them here still. I was never asked by any committee member for those. I've heard other people bring actual scientific sources to you, and you don't change your minds. So is it you don't believe in science, or you were lying that y'all are the ones who are experts? These experts bring sources, and I can't find scientific sources in these things. Nor is there any. counter that you have presented to those things. Another thing that I'm bothered by is that you have on your website, data centers in DeSoto will not be allowed to drill their own water supply wells or use water sources that are not managed and controlled by the city of DeSoto. That says data centers in DeSoto are not allowed to drill their own water supply wells. But in the item 4A-data center project-4-21-25.doc, it says, Water wells and rainwater. The city will not object if the developer elects to install, construct, and maintain infrastructure and equipment related to establishment of redundant and or backup water supply and sewer resources, subject to the developer's compliance with the applicable rules and any other applicable state and federal laws or regulations. I could see how someone would go, well, they're going to have to ask us for permission to build the wells. Yes, but that is different than what it claims on the website, which is that they're not allowed to put water wells. Because two weeks ago, you all changed your mind on the agreement. You had the opportunity to tell them no. I watched you sit there as you waited for a second. You all got a little nervous about waiting for that second vote. At least that's what it felt like. instead what you did is you asked them do you intend to build wells oh no they said publicly stated and you're like is it being recorded yes it's being recorded so i have a question which is that are those public comments that they make as legally binding as the votes that you take that's an actual question if they just go oh we don't intend but they can change the agreements and you all go oh sure change the agreements you go right along with them How much faith can one really have in that? They can publicly state anything. Does that mean that they actually have to hold to it? I don't know. That's an expert opinion for y'all, right? You'll have to be able to answer it. I, again, don't have a lot of faith that y'all are going to change your minds. And I think that's something that we're starting to see from other people. What do you want your legacy to be? I mean, honestly, I heard you talk a lot about the money. And one of the questions I had hearing that, because a lot of the money comes through electricity, is what if they install solar cells and they reduce the amount of use that they have so you don't get as much franchise fee? What if they don't use as much electricity? Or what if, as brought up tonight, they don't follow through all the way? Even if all that happens, and you get your millions of dollars, you get it all, what's it worth to you? Because communities aren't just taxes, and they aren't just subtle threats that you could install some sort of worse infrastructure kind of thing, because that was part of it. They're people. Thanks for your time.

Anyone else under call to public?

My name is Zuri Gonzalez. I'm 9680 Lexington Avenue. I'm not here to convince you. There's a lot of facts, data that has been shared already. I just want to let you know this town elected all you guys to be seated where you're at right now. I've never been part of all this involving any type of public notice, but I feel that Our town deserves better. I feel that we gave our vote. We trusted you guys. Mayor, I've sat with you a couple times on other topics and all that. I gave my vote for you. I believe in this town. I believe in all you guys. All of us believe in all you guys. And you guys are sitting right there because of the vote of everybody in our town. That could change. I mean, and we've seen it in other towns across Missouri and all that where they've made completely change and just gotten rid of everyone in there. I'm not saying that that would happen here, but there is a possibility. I mean, town's not happy. Everybody's not happy. They're not content. They're not pleasant and all that. I'm just asking you, think about who put you in the seat right there where you're at. It's the town. It's the people. So something to consider. Thank you.

Anyone else under call to public?

Mayor, can I address one item that was raised by the gal? I'm sorry, I'm forgetting your name. Yes. So I addressed you coming in, and I wish you would have talked to me about this issue. Just to let you know, the statute that you cited from the podium, if you look at the next statute, it's KSA 45-402, it defines what government records are not to be destroyed. and you'll see in there there's nothing stated about emails i would encourage you to talk to the kansas attorney general they are in charge of the kansas open records act you can also call the league of municipalities and respectfully i would just ask that you know if you're going to get to the podium to say that i lied or stated something that's not the law that you give me You know, we can talk, not just come up to the podium and let everybody in the room believe that, wow, our city attorney doesn't know what he's talking about.

No, I didn't say you lied. I said you stopped with this one, which fit your purpose, and you didn't go to the however.

Well, again, it's KSA 45-402 where you can take a look. Thank you. I appreciate it.

All right. We will move on in our agenda. Item three is old business. Consider qualifications and selection for noise. I'm sorry. Selection criteria for noise consultant.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. This item requests authorization to release an RFQ or request for qualifications for industrial noise and acoustic standards. As Council is aware, questions have been raised about whether the city's existing noise ordinance adequately addresses modern industrial noise sources, particularly those associated with industrial facilities. Rather than kind of immediately changing our ordinances, Council directed staff to seek an independent consortium to review our ordinances on this matter. This RFQ outlines kind of the process and the steps to do this. Our anticipated cost is between $25,000 and $50,000. And then just to make sure we're being transparent, we're going to list our RFQ on our website and put it on a plan review site like Drexel, like we do on all of our other RFQs. So with that, I will stand for any questions. All right.

Questions for Brandon regarding the noise consultant RFQ?

Could you just, I know it's in there, but could you just quickly go over the dates on that? Yeah.

Let me pull it up real fast. Give me one second. Yeah, so we would get this out in early August. That August 3rd, if I'm not mistaken, is that first Monday in August. Come back with, the consultants would have to come back with their statements of qualifications by the 23rd. And then we would go to council with a contract that first meeting in August. with the plan to wrap it up by April of 2027. Thank you.

Could you take a moment to explain the timeline?

Yeah, so we want to make sure we give our consultants enough time to get the requests into the city and then it will take us some time to put together a committee and have the committee review the responses. If you look If you look further back in there, we're setting a limit at 20 pages. So if we get 10 of these responses, that's quite a bit of time of reading for our committee to put that together. We will then go in and we will score them blindly. So whoever's on the committee, which I'm hoping to have some council members on, they'll score them, we'll rank them, and then if we need to, we'll have interviews with the finalists. Let's say we have ten that come in. We'll interview the top three. Getting that, getting that.

Please, actually, we do, please, this is our meeting. It's time for us to discuss.

Yeah, this timeline kind of allows us to work around schedules. It is hard to get people in the room certain times, but if council would like us to accelerate this, there's certainly some flexibility with that, but this is kind of our worst case scenario.

It's a typical RFQ schedule that we would, similar to what we've used for planning consultants for comprehensive plan update or any of the other professional services that we acquire through this, through an RFQ process.

Yeah, this falls kind of in line with the community center. It takes a little bit of time to put that together.

So depending on the timing of this, does this push back other potential things that are happening if a noise ordinance is part of what we're looking at for those developments? If this gets pushed back, then do those things get pushed back?

No, I can address that. The noise, our noise regulations are part of the city code, which is police power health. So those regulations we can impose at any time. Okay. And the businesses would have to comply with those.

And then I do appreciate you. I know there were some of those might be here, but appreciate you taking the recommendations.

Yeah.

from them because I think there were some good ones in there.

Yeah, we did. I reached out to all the all the firms that I received. I think the mayor had sent me a list. I've heard back from two of them. They were totally still hoping to reach out to them. I'll follow up with them next week, see if I can't get a hold of them. But my plan is to send out the RFQs to those firms.

Brandon, I don't think anybody's going to argue that time is of the essence here. Where in this schedule can we expedite?

I think getting it to council, we could maybe expedite it. The big thing is the RFQs and then getting it back, getting that group together to sit down for the interview process. But I could see where we get this to the council, a meeting early. So maybe we come back to you last meeting in September.

I think perhaps a selection from the responses, if we can not have a... interview process, I mean, it looks like that would save a couple weeks as well. Yeah, definitely, yeah. If we're comfortable identifying someone that would be able to deliver the work without having them come in and evaluate several firms, that's, I'm just looking at the schedule, that interview process takes a couple weeks.

Yeah. We can certainly expedite that.

Patrick, could I clarify, just kind of piggybacking on what Rhonda already asked? Your answer was that if something comes up as a result of the RFQ at any time in the building process or wherever it may impact, that that can be implemented and they would have to make the changes.

correct yes the city code is so it just says an example you know we have requirements in the city code for you know health nuisances so the noise is considered something that you know we can ticket people it's not related to zoning it's not a zoning reg it's not part of the zoning so it's something that could be enforced at any time.

Okay. So it may not delay on the front end, but it could potentially, if something came up later, if they had to change something.

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I think just being candid about it, I think they would like to know ahead of time, you know, what the requirements are, but it sounds like that's probably not possible. Thank you. Yep.

I think opportunity would also be there to work with whoever selected to advise them that we have time. The essence and an accelerated schedule would be appreciated, and perhaps that production schedule could be reduced by several weeks, if not a month, to bring something back.

Yeah, the...

Potentially looking at 8 to 12 weeks back?

Yeah, so the consultant will... Part of the proposal is the consultant will put together a schedule. As we kind of get closer to going back to council, we can tell the selected consultant, we would like to expedite this and shorten that timeline.

And then have a revised timeline?

Yeah, on the study portion of it. So if you look at it, you know, when we do the kickoff in early November, we could say, you know, we'd like to see this come back a lot faster. As we're kind of negotiating with that so there's definitely some there's definitely some room to shorten this timeline up And I when we get to that process with the selected consultant.

I'll relay those concerns So do you think it's worth noting in this project timeline that maybe some notice that we would like this this is a Yeah, I don't know how to, a typical project timeline, but we would like to see the consultant present an accelerated schedule to deliver the project sooner than what we've indicated in this normal project timeline.

Yeah, I can certainly, I'll make that addition to the.

Okay.

Do we need to be specific with a date to make a motion?

I think we just want to get the, the idea of the publication of the RFQ was to come out in August 2nd, is that?

August 3rd would be the, yeah.

I guess the motion would be to publish this by August 3rd with the addition of emphasis on an accelerated schedule.

All right. I'll make a move to authorize staff to release the RFQ and publish on August 3rd for industrial noise and acoustical standards consulting services and expedite the process with the consultant.

Okay.

Second.

All right. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion of the motion?

Roll call, please. Bradley? Yes. Patterson?

Yes.

McCracken?

Yes.

Sabo?

Yes. Lane?

Yes.

Motion carries. Motion carries. Okay.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

Item 4A, consider Ordinance Number 2693, rezoning 33255 Lexington Avenue from R1 to C2.

All right. Thank you, Mayor and Council. You do have a rezoning request. It's actually a very small piece of property. It's a quarter-acre tract that is actually adjacent to the JT's building. The building was recently purchased maybe in the last six, eight months, and the owner would like to expand, make an expansion on the east side of the building. As you can see in the page of the staff report there is a portion between the two buildings a pardon me between the JT's variant building and then the newly constructed building that has the Lutheran Church and the primary care facility, the urgent care facility, they're actually zoned R1. And so it's kind of an odd piece. Actually, it's there because the trailer park is actually all in the residential one category. The applicant put together an application to rezone this piece that you can see in yellow, which allows them to potentially expand the building. They have gone to the Planning Commission and do have an approved site plan, but of course they can't do anything until the property is rezoned accordingly. So nothing's happening on that front, but they did have a site plan to the Planning Commission at the last meeting.

And so, basically, I'm going to run through the staff report.

It's a pretty straightforward request. We can see the gun shop is actually also kind of a strange deal. It's a legal non-conforming use. I did ask the applicant if they wanted to just rezone that whole piece along Lexington, and they just wanted to stick with their plan and do with their building expansion on the JTs and then... We've had some discussions on some of the R1 areas, but nothing has come to any kind of fruition, so this is their first step. They actually bought the JT's building, the trailer park, some of these tracks around here, and they also own the gun shop as well. So it's all under one ownership. So going through the... zoning compatibility factors character of the neighborhood across the street is residential commercial to the east and west and then south is the trailer park compatibility the proposed zoning request is a really small tract and basically we've looked at lexington as a commercial district and it's consistent with many of the arch or the uses that we have along that lexington avenue roadway suitability of which the property is restricted under its existing zoning. It hasn't been restricted. However, in our land use plan and comprehensive plan, we do show the Lexington Avenue corridor being a commercial district. And so it is consistent with our short and long range plans. Like the time, the property's remained as vacant ground. Actually, it does have a parking lot on it now, so it hasn't been vacant. It is used as part of the parking for the JT's building and then some of the tenants that are in that structure as well. extent in which there's a need in the community for this. We certainly, it's a small project. I mean, there's no great need for it, but nonetheless, it is something that the applicant wants to do and it's their property and they're going through the proper processes for rezoning this tract of ground. As far as availability of required utilities, water, sewer, electric, gas are all there. There's a sidewalk in front of the Area itself so we won't be requiring any sidewalks. We know additional curb cuts on the Lexington Avenue So there'll be very minimal changes or access problems to Lexington So with the proposed zoning adversely affect the capacity of the street network I can just kind of covered that a little bit But there will be very little changes to the street network itself and no changes to as I mentioned curb cuts and things like that along Lexington environmental impacts, don't see any concerns changing from R1 to C2. It's a very heavily C2 district already, and this quarter acre change won't make much of a difference, if any, on the area. economic impact. Once again, I kind of covered that. Probably not a lot of impact. We've had a lot of businesses, a lot of growth in the last five, 10 years. And a small quarter acre is not going to do a whole lot. But once again, small lot, big lot, 100 acres, they all have the same process that we need to go through for rezoning request.

We've gone through the site plan.

Don't see detrimental effects to any of the nearby properties. The trailer park will still maintain their two entrances. So fire safety issues will remain, same as they are now. Don't see any reason that there'd be a benefit to denying this rezoning request. And then I had mentioned earlier the consistency with the comprehensive plan and the future land use plan to show this area as a commercial corridor. Staff recommended to the Planning Commission approval Planning Commission has agreed and recommends rezoning this property from r1 to c2 to the City Council So with that I will stand for any questions that you all may have okay questions for staff Brad ice I see a lot of mature trees in this area or do they have plans to remove everything within this tract Actually, in part of the site plan, some of the trees behind the building, I guess, will get removed. They do have, as part of their site plan, they do have additional trees that they'll be planting, and they will be adding a few additional parking spaces as well. So there is actually a net gain of parking, but some of the trees in that lower part of the triangular area will be removed.

And that out of his street drive remains has access to the homes back there.

Correct. And then the one just to the, I guess on the further west, further west of the gun shop and between the church and the urgent care place that remains as well. Thank you.

And why did you say there was the public hearing? Was there any feedback or anything?

Yeah, that didn't mention the minister in your staff report. So no, there wasn't any any concerns on this one.

Any other questions? Ready for a motion. There is an ordinance. Be a motion to approve ordinance 2693 rezoning 33255 Lexington.

Make a motion we re-excuse me, we approve motion, I mean ordinance number 2693 for the rezoning. Okay.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Any discussion of the motion? Roll call, please.

Lane? Yes. Sabo? Yes. Patterson? Yes. Bradley? Yes. McCracken? Yes. Mayor Walker? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you, council.

All right.

Item B, consider ordinance number 2694 regarding the proposed memory care facility project at 8870 Commerce Drive. This will have a public hearing and discussion Patrick, are you going to introduce this? Yes.

Counsel, as set out in the memo I provided in the packet, tonight's action is simply creating the TIF district to enable an approval of a TIF plan at a later date. Dustin Baker is in the audience here. There has been a request for TIF on this project, and that will be determined at a later meeting as to what level of percentage you're comfortable with for this project. So again, tonight, the public hearing and the ordinance is simply grading the district over the property so that a TIF can be later approved.

Okay. Would anyone like to hear from Dustin before I open the public here?

Yes.

Okay.

Sorry, yes.

Dustin, could you just give us a quick reminder and rundown on what your thoughts are on this project?

Yeah, sure. Dustin Baker with Alcove Development. So the property is located on Commerce Drive. It abuts to the residence at Lexington apartment complex to the, so this lot is just to the east of that complex. What I'm proposing is a roughly 35,000 square foot assisted living and memory care facility. It will be around 53 units. About 33 of those units would be assisted living care units, and then 20 would be memory care living units. It would have 24-7 care, 24-7 staff. We built a similar facility in Eudora, just south of Eudora on Church Street. That facility was a 43,000-square-foot, 55-unit assisted living and memory care facility. That's a similar type of structure that we're going to be, that we would be building on this facility, on this lot. One of the main benefits of this project and the reason for the TIF request is we will be proposing, and if this project was approved, we would be building a public street going from Commerce Drive into the residence at Lexington facility. It would be for public use and that would help alleviate traffic from the from the apartment complex. Right now they have two ways of exiting, both 90th Circle and 90th Street, but this would allow residents to actually get on Commerce Drive and then go to Lexington from Commerce Drive. I feel like that is a benefit to the community. It allows LESS TRAFFIC DURING SCHOOL, YOU KNOW, SCHOOL BUS HOURS AND PEOPLE PICKING UP SCHOOL STUDENTS, YOU KNOW, IN THE MORNING AND AFTERNOON. We purchased the lot, had to pay a little bit too much to purchase the lot from the seller, but we did feel like it was a benefit to go ahead and buy it, try to figure out a need in the community, When we bought the lot and we were trying to figure out what to put on the lot to get the road built, we did some assessment and we really felt like an assisted living and memory care facility was a need for the community. Midwest Health out of Topeka would be the operator of the facility. They currently operate Homestead of Eudora. They operate around, they're one of the largest assisted living and memory care facility operators in Kansas. Again, based out of Topeka, but they operate facilities kind of all over this area. All right.

I'd say one other benefit to that road is here is improved public safety access to that apartment complex as well.

That's correct. So we feel like it's a great benefit for the community, both in the service and the road.

Questions from council for Mr. Baker?

I do, but I was going to ask if we could Attorney, do we have other options? A TIF district, when its purpose, which is horizontal construction improvement, when that purpose is completed, does the TIF district stay in existence? Or when the construction is completed, does it self-destruct, so to speak?

Well, the items that could be reimbursed for are statutory. You know, it's purchase of the land. So once those expenses are all submitted, then, you know, unless there's some thought that there'd be a future expense, which I can't imagine what that would be, but once all the expenses are reimbursed, then, yeah, the TIP is essentially over.

So what happens to all of the... property taxes that are paid after that point? Do they sit in the county treasury, or what happens to them?

Well, I mean, maybe Dustin can address this, but usually when you do a TIP, the expenses are going to far exceed what comes into the TIP.

That's correct, yeah.

you would ever have taxes left over. It's usually eaten all up. But that's something that Jeff White is studying as part of his financial analysis as to what would be in that increment. So that's something to come. Jeff will provide that financial report to you soon.

Okay. And are there any other types of district or anything else? I know we have some other types of, not that it applies here, but OHID, CID, all types of things that would do the same thing as a TIF, or is this the only mechanism to do that?

I mean, you could do tax abatement. That's an option. I don't believe you could do an RHID. So, yeah, nothing's really coming to mind.

Thank you.

I'm curious for the...

redevelopment district are there other examples of that here and we used a similar project under for harps to build the harps uh grocery store was the first tiff i think we've done in the community in the same subdivision commerce park so the uh the harps grocery store is uh 20-year tiff on the property tax and I believe it also included the sales tax as well. And that's, well, we're just a little over 10 years into that, but that allowed the development of our harps and it helped them pay for the land and some of the horizontal construction parking lot and access drive and underground utility work, so.

And parts of Carpenter's Drive, when we fixed the dip for the rail, if you're around long enough to remember the dip of the railroad just east, it paid for that project.

Well, it hadn't yet. Yeah, on the back end. That's tagged on at the back end. If HARPS is, if they are successful in covering all their costs by the end of the term of the TIF, we will get reimbursed for raising the profile over the railroad at Commerce Drive.

Well, I do agree that senior housing is important here. I don't think we do have enough of that. But also making sure that's affordable senior housing, I think, is key. And then also, again, coincidentally, well, I should say all public services are probably in here, the increase in service calls, potentially. So just making sure that those agencies are involved conversations and communications with reviews that are happening, you know, like what's, you know, the average calls that are gonna be happening, say like in Eudora or here at Hillside, because then that means they're, their time is going to be increased and ongoing, where then they may not be receiving any funds to Lager.

Yeah, that's a good point. I do have a little bit of data on the service calls in Eudora specifically. It's right down the road. They're averaging 1.5 calls per month.

And during the public hearing, I know that Northwest Consulate Fire was going to offer some comments during that time, but relative to that.

All right. So this is new for me as well, but what are the pros or cons for a redevelopment district? Blake?

Well, the TIF over an abatement allows a longer period of time. So the amount could be 100% in a 10-year on a constitutional abatement versus 100% on a 20, 25-year with a TIF. So the key advantage for the TIF is that it allows it to extend longer, which would allow the developer to recoup more of those upfront costs, I think that's on this one is probably what's key is why it was presented as a TIF versus an abatement request.

As I put in the memo, I think people would say that a TIF for the city is somewhat of a no-brainer because You know, the developer, it's all their money. They're putting it into it. And the valuation of that property is going to increase. And the city, because we have the taxing authority, the city will get a portion of that increased tax off that property. So the city will benefit. But essentially, you know, all the expense, all the risk is on the developer, not the city. Um, the only exception to that would be if you thought that property was going to develop regardless of the tip. Like if there was someone waiting in the wings that, you know, was saying, look, I'll, I'll do the same project dust and zoom, but I don't need any incentives. That would be a situation where, why would you do the tip? But obviously. That's not the case. I don't know how long that property's been vacant. It's been quite a while.

Ever since they put in Commerce Drive, so what, 25 years ago?

The great public, I mean, the reason that I see that we as a city have an interest in having this project go forward is that secondary access to Commerce Drive. I think we've heard from... I know I had conversation with Chief Maxton that additional access concerns about perhaps a train that might be bringing cars to Rarig Pacific might have that primary access. and having that secondary point of ingress would provide them a greater level of comfort that they could respond to any call at that location in a timely manner. So there is a great community benefit and that's why a normal project that was just gonna bring the assisted living may not rise to this level of incentive, but I think there's a greater public benefit than just the addition of the assisted living and memory care facility in our community.

Last question would be. Availability for us to tour the door facility to get a better understanding before a lot moves further down the road.

Do you want to go tonight?

I don't know.

No, I mean, yes, we we we definitely we definitely.

Right.

But yes, I'm more than more than willing to set up a time and for any of you, or if we want to set a, I don't know, with the meeting criteria, if we can all go together, but I could set up two or three at a time, more than willing to. It's a great facility, so I'm more than happy to. In fact, I think Mr. Darrell Zimmerman is there right now. He is there now, yes.

Any other questions from council before we go to the public hearing part?

Dustin. So you mentioned 55 units. Memory care and assisted living, all single beds, each unit?

We will have... Typically, we're still planning the facility. But like in Eudora, we have two two-bedroom units. So a couple could come in and be housed together. But typically, you'll have one-bedroom units. In the memory care, they will be one-bedroom units.

OK, so I'd like to make the recommendation that we include Northwest Consolidated in all communications about this project moving forward, just because according to the Eudora Fire Department, they made 55 calls to Homestead last year in 2025, which is more than one a week. Our own fire department here made approximately 101 calls to Hillside Village. which roughly two a week, right? If my math is any good. So obviously with all the other increased growth in town, and as we know, anytime MedVac or an ambulance responds to one of these facilities, your fire department has to go for personnel and personal care reasons. I think it's very important to involve Northwest Consolidated in every aspect of this development.

Yeah, I would agree. Yeah, more than happy to. Well, on the development side of the equation, they definitely will be involved heavily. So will the state fire marshal.

All right, thanks, Dustin.

All right, if there are no other questions or comments from council, I would like to now officially open the public hearing.

Sorry, one second. Before you, could we have the fire district, I know you said they were going to speak during the public hearing. Can we have them speak before so that they can inform the discussion perhaps before people come up to speak? I don't know.

I'm just asking. I don't know. Chief, would you come up and offer some comments, please?

I would actually request that we defer to one of my board members that's in attendance.

Then I can answer any questions. Were you prepared to offer your comment during the public hearing, or did you have other presentation material? No, just during the public hearing.

And I think it might cover some of your questions.

That's what I was asking for the presentation. Thank you. Sorry.

All right. I'm going to now officially open the public hearing, and, Michelle, I will give you the podium.

So then do I give my address? Please do. Rochelle Zade, 30253 West 127th Street. And kind of how the chief mentioned, I am a member of the Board of Trustees for the Northwest Consolidated Fire District. And so my point, which, Joe, you said a lot of the things I was going to say. So thank you. Thank you. No, but I am here to talk about the potential incentives that are being discussed for the assisted living and memory care facility because the Northwest Fire District is supports reasonable responsible economic development a hundred percent. So our concern is not whether this project moves forward, our concern is more of whether or not its impact that it will have on our emergency services is 100% accounted for when we talk about tax incentives and such. Because, and I know you have probably better numbers, but every time an EMS response happens There is a huge cost with that. There's personnel, there's the firefighters, there's med act support, there's the apparatus. I mean, before I was on the board, I had no idea the cost of these lovely shiny red fire trucks. It's the fuel, it's the medical supplies. So there are a lot of costs associated with every single call they make. Joe, you mentioned about the details of the Eudora. They did in 2025 had 55 generated fire EMS response calls. Okay, so that those kind of facilities do typically demand more time, more effort from our fire fighters. And since that is the case, that's why we are wanting to make sure, and I think, I don't know, Rhonda, did you mention that the fire district should be involved in these conversations? And typically from the beginning, because I don't think unless you're involved with this fire district that you would have the big picture. A lot of you already said everything that I said. Now I will point out that our district has already, already seen a rise, increase in the emergency call volume. And there's more incidents that are happening at the same time. So with this kind of facility that will require more of their time, it's critical that we have more firefighters, more apparatus, so that we're better prepared when emergencies happen at the same time. I did not write down the numbers for those that are happening at the same time. I can speak on that.

As Ms. Zade said, simultaneous calls. So we are prepared. Our call volume isn't the highest. We're able to keep up. And for folks that don't know, we cover the city and the unincorporated area out of three stations, 70 square miles is what we do cover. Our call volume is over seven, it's a little over 1,200 calls per year. So it's not necessarily the call volume, it's the time spent on calls and the simultaneous call volume that we're experiencing simultaneous calls in the district where there's more than one call occurring at sometimes at over 20%, 20% to 25% of the time. Hillside Village, that was mentioned, a little bit larger facility with bed count. We're running 6% to 9% of our annual call volume at that facility alone. A lot of people don't know, why does the big red fire truck go to these facilities? Because we have the hands, we have the training, we have EMTs and paramedics. We supplement MedAct, the transporting service.

Okay.

Thank you. You're welcome. Anything else, Ed?

All right. I don't, and I can take any questions as well.

After the public, I've got, I'm going to open it up to anyone else that would like to offer comment during the public hearing part, and then if we have questions for you, follow-up questions for you guys from council, we'll ask you to come back. Anyone else offer comment on Ordinance 2694?

Marie Caldwell, 8412 Corliss Road. I have toured the Adora, and we actually have a deposit for a waiting list for my mother-in-law, should we need it. It's a very nice facility. I think that's something we do need here. However, it is very expensive, and at the time that we put our deposit in, they did not take Medicare, which I think is a huge... thing to find out if they they said they were trying, but we haven't heard as to whether they have or not. So I think that's something that we should add to that mix because that would definitely make it even more expensive if they didn't take Medicare. Thank you.

Anyone else wish to offer comment?

Zuri Gonzalez, 9680 Lexington Avenue. I agree with her. I think it is important to have a certain amount of beds or rooms available for those individuals that have Medicare usage and all that set aside for them. Our community does need that. There's a lot of individuals that are on a low income budget. And it would make a big difference for them. It is well needed here in town. So I do believe that that is a big thing to consider when taking it into account when making these decisions. Thank you. Thank you.

Any other comments?

Hi again. Jennifer Sharp, 8220 Hill Circle. I might be wrong, but I just need to clarify. When Dustin Baker came up to the Planning Commission, someone said the fire route, the fire road that was going to go behind the building, exact quote. So there's not a road behind there, right? Dustin responded with, no. the whoever answered said, eh, it'll be all right. Just wanted to get clarification on that.

Any other commenters on the public hearing

All right, I'm going to officially.

Now that we're getting the courage to speak, you guys are going to get sick of us.

But please, would you mind stating your name again for this? Yes.

Lindsay Billinger, 9141 Coronado Circle. I am trying to figure out how do you pass this without knowing what the TIF dynamic will look like? Like how it's like building a house without having like the plans, I guess. Like I'm just trying to.

So this is the very first step. So this allows us to start talking about the TIF and figure out what the components of it might be. So it doesn't set any of the parameters. It just would create the district and start a clock with those that have veto power, those being the school district and the county. So we say we want to start this TIF district and then notify those folks and then they could say, No, we don't want you to do that.

Okay. Okay. Great. And so then like talking about TIFs, looking at like HARPs, like you were talking about fixing that kind of belly in the road. They have like a TIF agreement until like 2036. And so there's nothing in their agreement that says when they have to fix that part of the road.

We already fixed that part of the road. Believe it or not, it was much worse, the Commerce Drive road. Oh, okay. It dropped another three feet, two and a half feet from where it is now before we...

Okay. Okay. Thanks.

You bet. All right. Any other commenters? I'm gonna close the public hearing and put it back to the council. Thoughts, discussion? I GUESS I'LL START AGAIN THAT I SEE OBVIOUSLY I SEE A BENEFIT TO THIS FACILITY TYPE OF ADDITIONAL CAPACITY FOR THIS TYPE OF FACILITY IN THE COMMUNITY. I DEFINITELY THERE'S A NEED FOR THAT. I ALSO SEE THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL ACCESS TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX FOR traffic circulation and for emergency services access to that apartment complex so i think it's appropriate that we would create the district and continue the discussions so confirming tonight is creating the tiff redevelopment district it's not whether a tip is justified or at what level that tiff could be It's not whether it's, yeah, what level. I don't know. If we create the district, I would say we're intuitively saying that we would think it, yeah.

And you're approving the project plan, which is the memory care facility. So you're essentially saying that you're approving that, but not the percentages.

75% for 20-year or whatever. Those specifics have yet to be approved. resolved it. Really, it just it starts that clock and lets our other taxing entities review the proposal and offer their input. Any other any comments from council requests and additional questions for fire or

I just have a quick question. The clock is 30 days, correct, with USD 232 in the county, but that would be...

It's when we publish the ordinance? No, it's from the conclusion of the public hearing tonight. Okay. So it would run, yeah.

And at that point, they have the ability to veto the district or just be involved in the conversation about the level?

They can veto the district. They can say, no, we don't agree with that. Either one of those entities, and I think either one of them could do that, and it would end, basically, in the discussions about it.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Do we need a motion?

We need a motion to approve, if you're so inclined to approve ordinance number... 2 6 9 4 2 6 9 4.

I'll make a motion to approve ordinance number 2 6 9 4.

I'll second that.

All right. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion of the motion? Roll call please.

Lane. Yes. Sabo. Yes. Patterson. Yes. Bradley. Yes. McCracken. Yes. Motion carries. All right.

Item C, discussed shared fire prevention officer with Northwest Consolidated Fire District.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. As many of you may know, the city of DeSoto has adopted fire and building codes that require facilities to be built to a certain standard. Part of that involves fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, the fire code enforcement, review of site plans for compliance with those codes and such. In doing all of that, my department works very closely with Northwest Consolidated Fire District and their personnel to ensure that they are in the loop, involved in those decisions, those conversations. When it comes down to actually building a building and they want to do fire sprinkler and fire alarm testing, because we do not have first responder radios We coordinate with Northwest Consolidated Fire District. We conduct all of that testing in conjunction with them to ensure that those systems actually call out with meaningful information in a timely manner so Northwest Consolidated Fire District and other community partners can respond to those alarms accordingly. With the commercial and industrial development over the past three to four years, the amount of fire and life safety inspections has increased tenfold. Within the last year alone, myself and Deputy Chief Baxter have spent over 120 hours doing fire alarm testing at the Panasonic facility alone. That equates to over 80 individual trips for both of us out there in conjunction to conduct that fire alarm testing. As we've continued to grow and workload has continued to increase, we've been in discussions about how do we claw back some of that time? How do we maximize our efficiency, try to serve the community with the same level of protection or better while still having that time to respond to the growing number of inquiries? We have developed a A proposal for a shared fire prevention officer. This would be a Northwest Consolidated Fire District employee that would be a contract basis with the city for a 50-50 cost split is our initial presentation. This position would spend 50% of their time conducting annual life safety inspections for businesses fire department activities fire prevention activities and things of such and the other 50 would be spent doing fire plan review fire inspections fire alarm testing fire sprinkler testing site plan review in conjunction with my department for construction projects within DeSoto. This would eliminate the need for two people to conduct fire alarm testing. This would be one single person that would wear both the City of DeSoto and the Northwest Consolidated Fire District hat. They would have the authority of my department to go and enforce those codes as as adopted while also having the ability to conduct those tests with the first responders radio system, eliminating the need for two people to conduct that work. In working with Northwest Consolidated Fire District, they hired an employee about a year ago that fits the description and qualifications for this position. He's more than qualified for this work, and he has a true passion for fire prevention and education, which is incredibly hard to find. SO WE FELT LIKE NOW WAS A PROPER TIME TO BRING THIS TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION TO GET YOUR GUYS' FEEDBACK BEFORE WE NEGOTIATE AN MOU OR CONTRACTOR, HOWEVER THAT AGREEMENT LOOKS BETWEEN THE CITY OF DESOTO AND NORTHWEST CONSOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICT. OUR PERMIT FEES FOR THIS YEAR HAVE ALREADY SURPASSED OUR ANNUAL PROJECTIONS AND SO WITH THOSE INCREASED PERMIT FEES IS HOW WE WOULD PROPOSE TO COVER OUR 50% OF THIS POSITION. I HAVE PUT IN A BUDGET ENHANCEMENT FORM FOR NEXT YEAR FOR THE FULL YEAR OF THIS POSITION THAT YOU'LL SEE IN ONE OF THE LATER AGENDA ITEMS ON THE BUDGET DISCUSSION. We estimate that cost to be around $50,000 for the full year. We would like to start negotiating this contract now and potentially execute this agreement and bring this person on this fall. That would put this year's cost in roughly the $15,000 range. That exact dollar figure would be included in that agreement that would be brought back to council at a later date. At this time, we're asking for council feedback, questions, comments, and then kind of a consensus to begin negotiating that agreement with Northwest Consolidated Fire District to bring back to council for further consideration at a later date.

with that i'll stand for any questions and i know that mike and todd are both here and willing to answer any questions as well questions from council cameron i didn't see anything in the proposal would would this position also be qualified to uh give fire safety um presentations and and training to our schools

Is that, I mean, that's generally something that the fire prevention officer in larger municipalities has the ability to do. Currently, we do not have a program to my knowledge that we work with the schools and part of that's just due to workload. Personally, I envision this person having time to do some of that public-facing fire safety training, such as meeting with the schools, doing some of those presentations potentially. Yes.

Any other? Okay. I'll let the fire chief weigh in more on that as well.

Good evening, Council Deputy Chief Baxter. To answer your question, Councilman Sabo. Yes, this this person is more kind of review it as a as a critical risk reduction specialist. So he would he would have the capability to go in. He would educate. He could educate at schools, advance pre planning for the fire district. That's one of the big hazards that we're facing today is as the community landscape grows, the buildings are getting bigger, complexity, more hazards, there's more targets in there. And our staff is not, we don't have the capability to run calls plus do the pre-plan plus do fire alarm inspections. We are dedicated to this position. We have pulled this position in already. He's officially starting with us in that capacity full-time July 28th because there is a need in our office to have this individual in there as a front-facing person to reduce these hazards for us.

Thank you. Go ahead, Jim.

I would just add I think the benefits justify the expense of such a position.

I would say that I've had conversations with the fire district and thoughts that we might consider as we go through our budget discussions fully funding this position because Much of what we're asking this person to do are a lot of city functions, the building department functions and kind of a bigger picture so as not to strain resources of the fire district that perhaps through our billing permit fees, we could fully fund this position going forward as well. But I just ask you to keep that in mind as we talk about the budget enhancement requests going forward that I would hope maybe we can come up with some way to fully fund the position, still have it be this shared position that it's actually a fire district employee that is providing this service. So it has the gravitas and that background and that works in that world, but that we're able to support that position here at the city. Any thoughts over here?

No, I would just echo the importance of the position and also I was happy to hear you say that potentially with the building permit fees, maybe we could fund the full position.

instigator of the need. Yes. So to speak.

So I think that would be incredible.

All right. All right. Hearing no opposition, I'll work with Patrick and Patrick can begin to work with Northwest Consolidated on drawing up that agreement. We'll bring it back to a future council meeting for further consideration.

Thank you.

Thank you, guys.

All right. Item D received report from the DeSoto Chamber of Commerce and Economic Development Council. Good evening.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you. Tim Halverson with the DeSoto Chamber of Commerce and Economic Development Council. Appreciate the opportunity to be with you here this evening. We're happy to be with you and share an update on economic development activity with the DeSoto Chamber and EDC. I'd like to start out by recognizing where we sit here in mid-July. Just on Tuesday of this week, we passed the one-year anniversary of the opening of Panasonic Energy's facility. It's an incredible local and regional win. They continue to grow, having recently surpassed 1,800 employees. The infrastructure improvements we realized with this project are a tremendous economic development success story, from the upgrades to our water and wastewater treatment facilities, to the new water tower, new fire station, road improvements, and enhanced revenues to the city. That wasn't the only thing that happened, though, in 2025. We had Geiger ReadyMix announce and break ground on their $36 million batch plant that will be opening within the next two months. We also had the announcement of the Beale infrastructure project that recently broke ground on phase one of their data center project, which continues to progress. Lastly, my sentimental favorite, is the Merck Animal Health Project. At the time it was announced last May, the state of Kansas dubbed it the second largest project in the state's history, which was true. But I thought it didn't give Merck its due. After all, it was the largest retention project in the state's history. Why was it my favorite? Because Merck and Intervet had been in DeSoto for over 25 years and have a long established shared history. Winning this project validated that relationship. What did we get with that project? Nearly $900 million in new capital investment. We retained roughly 220 jobs that could have gone somewhere else. and we will be adding another 200 jobs. I didn't appreciate the magnitude of the project until a Merck representative spoke from this podium last fall and said it was their largest animal health investment as a company, and it was the largest animal health expansion project in the world. This is a huge win that this and previous councils deserve recognition for nurturing a pro-business climate. So that was a look back at how the community finished 2025. I'd like to pivot a little bit and talk about how we traditionally look at projects in economic development and how projects come about, if there really is a set pattern, which I think we all know there really is not. Where do we get our projects from? Kansas City Area Development Council, KCADC, many of you probably know of them. They're a regional economic development group representing, I believe it's 18 counties on both the Kansas and Missouri side of the state lines. They focus on attraction projects new to the market primarily. They do do a little bit, in the animal health space as well. In fact, they worked on that Merck project with us. But their focus is on the attraction side of things, bringing businesses, bringing consultants, bringing companies to the region. And then Kansas and Missouri can arm wrestle as to whichever side of the state line it's most appropriate for the project to land. Then there's the Kansas Department of Commerce and their business development team. They obviously are strictly focused on the Kansas side of the metropolitan area. They have a business development team with representatives that represents certain regions of the country, the East Coast, Midwest, West Coast, as well as an international division. and others. They've been a great source of leads and projects over the years. The Secretary of Commerce actually is the Lieutenant Governor who is a former local economic developer, so it's always been nice to have someone that understands how it works. So those are really the two primary areas, but we occasionally do get projects directly from site selectors. Usually it's through KCADC or the Department of Commerce, but we do get them from site selectors as well. So it's important to build those relationships so they know what you have. Firms that specialize in it, such as accounting firms, large law firms that have national presence are often big in those areas. Occasionally, and it's not as common, a company direct one. More kind of on a smaller scale, we did have a restaurant a while back contact us directly about looking at DeSoto for a possible expansion. And so, you know, we worked with them, got them the numbers to see if it might fit in their plans. Sometimes we work with developers on these projects. That's probably more for the retail commercial side of things. Dustin Baker, whom you heard from earlier, brought Family Eye Care Clinic to the community about a year and a half ago. And we worked with him on bringing them to satisfy that need to add to the quality of life to the community. And then internally, occasionally, we are able to develop projects on our own as well. Those probably tend to focus more on the retention and expansion side of things because of the relationship that we built with the company, but those do come up from time to time. So now that we have a lead, how do we evaluate it, whether or not we would submit that we may be interested? Well, traditionally, we've measured possible projects we might submit based on capital investment. How will that help our tax base, especially since commercial pays at a rate of 25% of assessed valuation, while residential pays at 11.5%. Those wins, when appropriate, are great for the city budget. Job creation is another major area. Now that is one that is a little bit nuanced and I would say is kind of changing a little bit over time. In a tight market when employers are clamoring for talent and certainly an issue that we have to be sensitive to here where we sit right now with Panasonic ramping up and other employers trying to hold on to their people. This particular item is not weighted maybe as heavily as it had been traditionally in economic development. Next item you see listed there is the industry that they're in. We lean heavily towards pursuing projects that are in advanced manufacturing, pharmaceutical, occasionally the warehouse or logistics project. We try to stay away from those heavy industrial projects as much as possible. Those that have noxious odors associated with them or things of that nature. And then finally, infrastructure demands or constraints. Do we have the water? Do we have the power? Is a building, are they looking for existing space? Is it the appropriate land? These things have all become increasingly important. If there aren't any clear deal breakers there, we try to move forward and submit our interest, which usually involves the often very fast turnaround of three to five days on an RFI, which is usually a ridiculously long spreadsheet. A short one will be about maybe 150 cells long, a longer one maybe 500, which may Maybe this doesn't sound like a lot, but we're usually trying to coordinate a few people to supply a piece of it to input into it. And so, you know, there's the water and wastewater piece and some of the tax information that we would get from the city or some information from the county occasionally, coordinating with Atmos Energy and Evergy to supply the information as well. So I've referred to it as a site selection process, but that term is really a bit of a misnomer, especially early in the process. Companies are putting a lot in the top of that funnel, but the goal for them is to get it down to a manageable number to dig in and learn more as quickly as possible. So early on, it was really more accurately termed a site elimination process. And only as things progress does it truly become a site selection process. Only then can they consider investing effort in making a potential site visit. So after we've submitted, what are some of the top things being considered on behalf of the consultant or the company, whether we make that first cut? Kind of touched on them on the other side already, but power availability and reliability. Do we have power available in a timely manner? In some cases, they're interested in, do we have renewable as a possibility? This has become a bigger issue because of lead time, especially in securing transformers. Workforce availability and skills, labor pool size, concerns, wages, training, etc. Projects have probably questioned us a little bit more in this area than maybe other communities. And the reason being is that maybe the real or perceived impact that Panasonic was having on us. And our employers have been just absolutely phenomenal to work with and have been willing to meet with others through the process. Next, supply chain access and logistics. Road network, rail, that actually doesn't apply to us. We're not pursuing any rail projects. Next one, infrastructure, water, wastewater, environmental. This is one that usually requires a little more conversation for us and that being because the primary land that we're showing them is out there at Astro Enterprise Park that used to be a former munitions site and there was various cleanup that was required of that. Speed to market, what lead times or constraints are there? Megaprojects, we can attest, they really push us for responsiveness. And then is it the right real estate? The site size, the cost, the topography, the land control, is the zoning appropriate, and so on. So year to date, these are the projects we've seen. There have been 25 of them. In green are projects we've submitted on, which are 12, including one that we submitted on earlier today. In white are projects on which we passed. That school bus yellow color that you're seeing there are ones that I kind of took some liberty with that maybe are significant projects either in terms of jobs, the acreage that they would be taking down, the capital investment, you name it. I would also note that we've had five different companies in for site visits so far this year as well. Here's a list of the type of industries which we've seen so far this year. It looks a little different than last year in terms of the industry mix, which was heavier in advanced manufacturing last year. Then finally, here's a few observations on projects. Generally, they're taking longer. We've actually seen more projects this year, 25, versus 19 year to date at this time last year. But on the whole, they're smaller projects. This isn't unique to us. In talking with my peers and others, that's where we're at right now. I think we are all looking for some more certainty before committing to larger investments. I'd like to touch on a few other things as well that we've been working on. We've participated in Team Kansas, which is a business recruitment program the state coordinates, where there are programs, activities, and events with site selection consultants to build relationships. We've participated in the SelectUSA Investment Summit in DC in May, and worked the state's booth and met with companies looking to bring investment and projects to the United States. That was a learning experience for sure. And while I visited with some interesting companies, the best value I found at that event was actually more happenstance in that I was able to steal about 20 minutes of time with a Deloitte consultant on a large project we had opened the week of Thanksgiving and have since had multiple site visits with. Additionally, I attended the Site Selectors Guild in Atlanta this spring and had five one-on-one meetings with consultants, three of whom I've had follow-up with since the event. One of those consultants was actually a principal with a firm that was a megaproject we worked on for the better part of the year in 2025. That project, while we didn't get it, we were ultimately one of three finalists out of 302 communities last year. So it was good to get some face time with him as well. So that is the two external trips we've had so far this year with two more planned for later this fall. Our peer organizations, KCADC and Kansas Department of Commerce approached recruiting a little bit differently this year than maybe they have in past years. And that's because of the unique opportunity of Kansas City hosting several World Cup matches. They focus more on bringing consultants and opportunities into our market. That being said, KCADC brought us a nationally known consultant, the head of industrial development for Newmark. whom we hosted last month out at the fire station and showed him Astor Enterprise Park. He's very excited about what he saw and followed up that same day with his team in Chicago. So that's a relationship we'll only continue to nurture. Okay shifting gears a bit, I wanted to share with you that we take very seriously our relationship with the city and are working to grow the chamber in EDC and to that end we're in the early stages of a strategic planning process that we've enlisted the support of K-State Extension to help us through that. It should help us in navigating what we can and should be doing now and what we can grow into as we develop more bandwidth as a staff and as an organization.

Next, we want everyone to be aware that we have a data center landing page on the Chamber's website.

If you go to desotoks.org and click on the economic development tab, the drop down menu will take you to data center resources. We've included the links to both the Beale and Digital Realty projects, as well as the City's Great Resource page, a link to the KC Tech Council's Fast Facts About Data Centers, and a link to the State of Kansas' Mythbusters document regarding data centers so folks can get a 360 view on the issues. Finally, because of the timing of this report, I'd like to promote the Vote JOCO website we participate in. www.votejoco.com. This is a partnership amongst all the chambers of commerce within Johnson County. It's nonpartisan. It has all the important dates for the 2026 election cycle. You can click on candidate profiles for all those who've completed them for all the statewide and local and county races. And you can even pull up a sample ballot if you're registered and see what your ballot will look like as well. It can even help you find polling places. In fact, I believe early voting starts this weekend, so go get your sticker. That's all I have, and I would be happy to try to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you, Tim. Any questions? Thank you. Oh, go ahead, Ron. Sure.

And I know I've been told this before, and I apologize, I can't remember, but isn't there a committee that involves, like, EDC and then Citi, or I can't remember, I think maybe a council member used to be on, as far as that discusses kind of the strategic plans of what companies are of high interest as much as high value that we're looking to bring in? Like, of course, I've already said it several times, but... the senior living, an affordable senior living, whether that's a memory care facility or a subdivision of some sort that's strictly for that, you know, because it's sad. I know, you know, dear friends of even, you know, my mom are having to leave the community because they're not able to stay where they grew up and where they want to stay. And so... And that's just one of my top things. And it's probably because it's more close to home and it pops into my mind more. But I think those types of facilities and so forth, like if we had to prioritize and justify the types of organizations or industry. that we might like to see? And I'm rambling, so I should answer. Right, right, right.

No, no. Yeah, yeah. No, we have the Economic Development Advisory Council. That's what it's called. That is made up of chamber members and economic development investors as well as representation from the city on that. And those are among the issues that we talk about in addition to digging in maybe just a little bit deeper on projects than we were able to do here this evening. And those topics do come up. We will receive the occasional presentation on other projects that are going on throughout the community to learn more and to offer suggestions as to how they might be a better project that would be brought forth. But certainly open to continuing to that dialogue and what we need. I mean, I'm right there with you. We definitely, on the senior living facilities, we need that. I'm pretty sure a hardware store would be at or near the top of the list as well. And we are always open to opportunities and suggestions and welcome that dialogue.

And then how often do you meet?

We meet on a monthly basis. Okay.

Any other questions? Thank you, Your Honor. All right. Thank you, Tim.

Okay, great. Thank you.

All right. Item E, budget discussion.

Yes. Mayor and Council, for the past several months, we've had a budget discussion toward the end of our meeting agenda. It usually clears the room, but we still have plenty of energy left up here to discuss the important topics We've been through what I've determined baseline budget discussions through all the funds in the last couple months, and baseline is essentially preserving the same level of service, in the most general terms, same level of service that we had this year, extending that into next year at the same levels. We heard a very detailed description of one request. Tonight's discussion will be centered around some of these requests for budget enhancements. That's a term that Brandon coined when he kind of took on this part of the budget process several years ago. Essentially, it's a better term than wish list, because wish list implies it's frivolous, and some of these certainly are not frivolous reports. So the budget enhancements are kind of what we want to step through a little bit this evening. Cameron was here earlier with one such enhancement request for the shared services position with the fire district. It's a really good example of the types of things that our department heads will present, not just that they want a new shiny thing, but that they have identified an additional level of service that's needed and they've identified a reasonable cost expectation with that, and so we're able to take that input from the department heads. We also ask them to prioritize, just on a number basis, one through however many funding requests they might have, what their departmental priority is for that. Then we're able to take those, aggregate those, summarize those for you, which I've done a staff report, and then do a little exercise that we'll step through here in a moment about the impacts of enacting those requests on a quarterly basis. what the impact will be next year to the budget uh but then as importantly what the impact will be five years from now uh to if if we continue these levels of service so and you'll see as we go through the fire services budget is request is one of those that would be an ongoing service need and so we'll have to budget that each year many of these are not ongoing many of these are just You know, we need a new attachment for a piece of equipment or we'd like to do an enhancement to a building. Those are one-time requests. And, you know, within the projections, obviously, the ongoing commitments are larger ticket items that are more impactful to the five-year budget than others. So what we also encourage our department heads to do is to think about, you know, these requests in terms of the budget allocations they've already got and whether or not some of these that we sometimes get are small enough that we could incorporate those into the regular annual budgets, even though they might need approval by the governing body. Maybe they're more than $10,000. governing body but it would be kind of a regular expenditure so those types of things aren't aren't included here so we'll step through those briefly I don't I don't want to belabor them we received a number of them more than a couple dozen I believe so we'll just step through those as we go the first thing I did want to provide though is an updated baseline budget spreadsheet, I'm sorry, five year projection. So this chart on the second page of the staff report shows that. Essentially what I wanted to do the last time you saw this was reflective of 2006 year end projections based on our expenditures through May. We now have one more month of history there that we can project a little bit more accurately. Most notably in this projection, a couple of things. We did get close to a million dollar building permit from Merck. that, as Cameron mentioned earlier, that increased the revenue picture quite a bit for 2026. So on this line, what you'll see is actuals in 23, 24, 25, and then 26 actually has two bars on them. One's just a blue bar, and then the yellow bar is my projection for the end of 2026. So the blue bar is budget, you know, if everything went exactly to budget, including expenses and revenues. And the yellow bar is what we now project. So that's reflective of that large building permit item that Cameron was talking about. So that's that. The other change I've made since the last time you saw the baseline budget is how we handle excise tax. So excise tax is a tax that developers pay on the act of platting property in the city. And it is pledged to general roadway enhancements throughout the city, not necessarily related to the particular development that's platted, but throughout the city. And platting activity has increased quite a bit in the last year. So we've had some pretty significant excise tax revenues come into the city. Historically, we've put all of that excise tax revenue in the capital improvements plan and pledged those revenues toward future road improvements or major reconstruction of road. Also, we could pledge toward just a maintenance project. This year, I'm suggesting that starting next year, we take a portion of those and actually put those in the general fund because we do have a $1.0 million line item in the general fund budget that goes specifically to road improvements. And we've had this for the past couple of years. Before, it's increased substantially as we start to get some of these sales tax. It's increased from several hundred thousand dollars several years ago to now a million dollars. And so I think it's very appropriate to take some of these excise tax revenues and include those in the general fund. So those are essentially the two things that changed. The other stuff, you know, getting more accurate on the expense side because now we have six months of data rather than five months of data, didn't have a big impact really on the expense side. So, that's the new baseline budget there. So, when we talk about now back to the enhancement request, I have included as a As an exhibit to the staff board, exhibit B shows all the enhancement requests that we've got. We actually had 21 requests totaling about $1.75 million for 2027. Again, some of these are ongoing requests for additional personnel or additional services that would be ongoing. Most of these are kind of one-time requests. Gosh, we really need a skid steer. you know, to do something to the building or that. So I've listed those, the summary table there starting on page three of the staff report. Lists all these, there's a title, there's a department, the amount of funding request, summary description. And then the last two columns, FTE is the full-time equivalent. This is like how many personnel that the request would entail. And then a departmental priority. So as you look at the top of this table, we start with the administration budget. There's the top priority in the administration budget is an engineering study to look at 95th and Lexington flooding, historic flooding issues we've had there. This would be an engineering study that would allow us to pursue county funding for a solution there. Very similar to what we're doing on 89th Street. We did that study, 89th, just east. of Kill Creek Road, there's a one-lane bridge there, causes flooding. We did an engineering study. It came up with a solution. We submitted that to the county, and now we're getting funding for that improvement. as well. It's also worked into the development agreement with the Arbor Ridge developers. So that's priority one. Another priority, second priority, would be asset management software. Again, in the administration department, largely this is to an ongoing asset management program for the new water plant, the new sewer plant, pump stations that we've just commissioned here in the last several years. Eventually, this will also include all of our linear assets, water distribution, and sanitary sewer collection. The third thing is a law enforcement feasibility study. In the table here, I have $100,000. That's a typo. Brandon mentioned the actual cost is $50,000. This would be a study to review law enforcement services citywide to look at long-term potential solutions there. Those are the top three priorities in the admin. You can see the other requests in the admin. department. In communications department, there's only one request in events grant and community sponsorship. This would take a portion of what is now the donations line item and put it in a program that I think is more easily to administer and more flexible within the community. So that's top priority for them. Building inspection only had one request. We heard that from Cameron this morning, $50,000 annually. This would be an ongoing allocation the mayor this is this is where the mayor sound like there's some port to consider fully funding this um so you might double that request um in the parks department their top priority is an additional parks maintenance worker they've requested this i think this is the third year in a row and i've shown it in the five-year projections i've shown it as being included in those projections for the past three years so that's shown as their top priority I don't want to belabor these too much, and not to say that the rest of these requests aren't important, but I did want to kind of get to the punchline here. As we look in the streets department, top priority there, I'm sorry. is a UTV vehicle to replace the one that we have. We have a 2011 John Deere. Also in the streets is a request for some medium barriers to handle larger events uptown primarily. There are many in the water department, the first one being an enhancement to the distribution building to add some building enhancement, actually increase some enclosed space at that location. A skid stair there is their second priority. And you can see on down the list. So total $1.7 million. Total FTEs, three. So what I've done then, as you can see, most of these are in the general fund. So the the admin, the communications, the building, the street general fund, the water department is obviously in the water fund. So what I've done is I've taken the five year projections for the general fund And I've showed you three scenarios. The first scenario is that we would approve the Priority 1 enhancement for each department that we just kind of stepped through. The second scenario is Priority 1 and 2. And the third is Priority 1, 2, and 3. And so what I kind of like always to do, and I think it serves us well, this practice of essentially budgeting this on the five-year projections and not necessarily what happens next year. You know, as we take great care to try and predict what the cost of services will be, what the tax picture will look like. I know we talked about in May what the revenue picture is going to look like, that's quite quickly evolving revenue picture. But we do remain very conservative with that, as I think I've explained. So what we do is we plot the year-end fund balance. So those are the bars. And then the lines are the percentage of year-end fund balance as a percentage of the annual expenses. And we do this because we have a fiscal policy that says that we should keep year-end fund balances at at least 30% of our annual expenses. And that was at the recommendation of our financial advisor. It's a pretty common recommendation. It's a standard, you know, generally, you could go 20 to 30 is pretty typical. So I plot the actual year-end percentage, which in this case is that blue line up top. And then I plot what would be the 30%. And you compare that in each year to essentially where the bar lies. If you look at just allocating the priority one request, you can see that the actual projection is still quite a bit higher than that recommended 30%, even, you know, all the way out at the end of 30, 31, remembering that. We've had windfall revenues in the general fund the last several years from economic development activities, and our trajectory is to use those year-ending fund balances to put downward pressure on taxation rates, which we've done in terms of downward mill rates, property tax implications. such that the fund balance decreases over time, not all next year, but decreases over time so that by the end of the projection period, we're close to the 30% level. That's been our practice for the last six or eight years at least. So that's the intent. So you can see scenario one, with just priority one, we're still quite a bit above the 30% threshold. If you look at scenario two, where Priorities 1 and 2 are included. You get a little closer. And then priority 3, I'm sorry, scenario 3 with priorities 1, 2, and 3 were just about there. You can see that these lines are almost matching up. So that is kind of the overall 50,000-foot level of the impact of those. That's on the general fund. I've done the same thing for the water fund. And as we talked about, it's a different scenario here for the water fund because these year-end fund balances are increasing because we expect that the annual revenues from Panasonic and other... will continue to increase over time as additional production lines come on at Panasonic, as the apartments fill up, as economic activity increases. And we have the benefit of not having massive debt service to pay off in the water fund or the sewer fund because Panasonic just got done paying $100 million dollars. to completely renovate those two assets. So what we see here is really an increasing revenue structure. The aim is, this orange line is that 30% policy level. We're not there today. We're under that today. And we talked about this at the last meeting. The goal is to get there as quickly as we can. So you can see that these year-end fund balances for these out years do meet that line here. And in this case, I'm sorry, I might have to, make this a little bit bigger. Those two lines kind of intersect in, I still can't read, in 2029.

That those lines intersect.

The year-end fund balance intersects that. If you look at priorities one and two, you can see that it still intersects in 29, but maybe it waits until 2030. And project one, two, and three, you can see that it's just a little further delayed. So that's kind of the story on the water fund. Again, we have a scenario there where we're not recommending any rate structure change at all. because we have started to see those increases in revenues for that fund. So that's kind of the picture. I'm happy to have any discussion on the specific enhancement requests that you have any questions about, any of those that you'd like to have answered. I might not have all the answers, but we'll try to discuss those. But in general, I think you can see that the budget picture is that the general fund could handle priority one, two, and three. At the out years, I think you're getting less and less conservative as we head that. As you look at some of those, we're getting to the point where it's less conservative than we've been before. I don't know that's a good thing or that's a necessarily bad thing, but the balance we're striking is balancing become too conservative and levying more tax than you need to fund the services that we offer are appropriate for the community. The last thing here on the budget discussion, we talked a little bit about the revenue neutral rate. With the increase in assessed valuation still that continues to climb as the Panasonic facility continues its build out to full build out, our revenue neutral rate is artificially low because that's in a TIP incentive. We collect that tax, but essentially we can't spend that tax. It's going back to the uh into the tiff process so as a result our revenue neutral rate is going to continue to be very difficult for us to meet the the formal rate as outlined by state law which the county is calculated at 10.8 mils at the last council meeting i showed you an analysis of our own internal revenue neutral rate, which would essentially, for an average homeowner in DeSoto, make their property tax same in 27 as it was for 2026. And we did the same thing last year as well. We identified what that number would be from a Miller's perspective on the average homeowner on the average residential property and held that line. So last year, that was 12.94 mills, and that's the mills that we're collecting for 2026. This year, that number is 12.17. So I would suggest that our target, as we talk through our budget discussions, would be 12.17 mills because that will hold the line on the residential property tax. And that, by the way, is the mill rate that I'm showing in all these projections that we just did. on the general fund that's the mill rate that was plugged in there the county needs notice that we're going to increase or exceed the revenue neutral rate but by I think the middle of next week by the 20th by Monday by Monday beginning of next week so what I'm asking really the only action that that I need aside from feedback is the council's approval of the revenue neutral rate notice of intent which I would suggest we set at twelve point nine four mills essentially a flat mill so that we notify that that's as high as we can go. We can't exceed that. We could always go under that. But so our target would still be 12.17. But we would be legally allowed to exceed that to 12.94 if something came up, like a fire services agreement that we might need to adjust the mill weight slightly upward for that. some other aspect that we're not thinking of right now. So the recommendation would be to approve this revenue neutral rate intent, which indicates a maximum mill rate. So Mayor, with that, I'll turn it back over to you. Questions from council.

I have a question. I understand why our mill rate is set the way it is, based on state law and the way the TIF artificially inflates it, sort of, or adjusts it. Have we had any discussions with any state representatives or anyone to see if there's a way to get an amendment to that introduced in the state legislature so that we can accurately account for the way the mill rate is instead of having to artificially adjust it like this?

It's a good point. I don't think we have. I know the school district has. You know, do you have any particular on that? I know that the school district deal with the same, but it's through their funding formula. And that is that impact to them.

So for revenue neutral rate, they may go away. I mean, who knows what they'll do next year? This whole revenue neutral calculation may be moot based on however they decide to, if they decide to do anything with property tax next year, so. I haven't had this specific conversation with Representative Turk, but, I mean, we've kind of had some conversations, but I don't, and I really didn't get a sense from him as to where anything might be next year either, but, yeah.

I had a couple of questions. When we went through the enhancement summary, how did they, was it the departments that prioritized their lists?

Yeah.

Okay. And so you said, you mentioned one, two, and three, but what about four and five or six and seven?

Yeah. So, well, for the purpose of this exercise, I haven't included anything above three. So this scenario here says one, two, and three, but not four, five, six, seven.

I just, I wondered specifically about the environmental health and compliance officer that would serve as the city's, um, internal technical expert on environmental health, industrial hygiene, and project compliance associated with large scale development, because was that the position we discussed?

Yes.

A couple of, um, I just noticed it was a priority for, um, and I think I would probably read ask someone to reconsider?

Yeah, well, a couple things on that. I think from a budgetary standpoint, the intent, and Zach, correct me if I'm wrong, the intent is that there would be a fee charge to the industrial the industrial corporate partners here in town, new or existing, we don't have that. But the fee would offset the new FTE.

At least partially. At least some of it would offset the cost.

Okay, so budgetarily maybe it wouldn't be impactful, some from a perspective of the mill rate, but it's a good point. I think we should, certainly we could show that included in here with at least a partial offset on the revenue side. such that you might not even notice a difference here on this last chart, right? Okay.

And similar, I mean, if it could be like our partnership agreement with the fire district where maybe that's something they have to agree to.

Yeah.

Because that would be an annual cost, probably with an increasing cost each year.

Yeah, and yeah, and for clarity, that is what we do. So if it's one cost next year, we'll have it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

To my colleague council member McCracken's point, I was wondering if, so right now that particular position is covered under admin, but I don't want to have that override something that the admin department prioritizes. Is there a way to perhaps break out those priorities into council directed priorities and then admin separately, because I don't want us to, obviously we have some ultimate authority and discretion in how we address these things, but I don't want us to take away from needs that you may have identified, like the council room AV upgrades or something that you know, maybe something that we need, the DeSoto tree canopy grant program, but I don't think those should compete with the things that the council has directed separately. So if we could break that perhaps as a department as council directed.

Okay. Yeah, absolutely.

That way we can prioritize things that we've prioritized separately from what you've prioritized just to make it a little clearer and fairer.

Let's do that. Let's do that. Yeah. Yep. So are there anything? Did we miss anything that you can think of that you have? Because the tree canopy was one thing. Of course, this position, the environmental compliance officer's position. Can you think of anything that we didn't get in this on the list? Or is there all there?

From my perspective, the law enforcement feasibility study is one that I had asked brandon about a while back yeah and so we talked about the environmental health officer previously as well if those could break out because one is three and one is four and perhaps that would change the way you prioritize your administrative department funding i think that would be more fair to you guys in the admin department You know, the rest of the departments get to say what they want. You're kind of stuck with this.

Oh, I got you. Okay.

Does that change anything when you also, sorry, 930, account for the parks and maintenance worker as we expand our parks and build the new soccer fields and build the new baseball, et cetera?

So the parks and maintenance worker is down below.

It's parks and rec. It's their top job.

It's their top one, so it's included.

Yeah, that was included in that, yeah.

I just didn't know. That would be the only other salaried thing on the enhancement summary list.

Part of the very last one there on the list, the valve exerciser program, that big thing has it. Okay. Yeah.

I'm sorry, does that say one FTE at $214,000?

Well, so if you look back in the description, the $214,000, we have to buy a truck and equipment to go on that truck and then a person to be inside that truck. So year one is $214,000. After year one, it goes down to $75,000 or $80,000.

Yeah, it's just a little shock when you see one.

Yeah, okay, yeah. I understand now. Thank you, though. Okay. Is that truck brand in it?

Yeah, it's actually a lease, if I remember correctly. So with those lease trucks, you're basically leasing the whole thing. The first year is a bubble payment because we pay for 60% of basically the chassis on there. So if it's a service body, we pay for 60% of that. There's a good chunk that would fall off. in year two of that.

It's in here in the back under the budget request valve exerciser. The truck is like $24,000.

Yeah, it's essentially a Chevy Silverado 2500. So the first year would be about $25,000, and then it drops down to about $18,000, $20,000, depending on where they're at with the prices.

Are those open-end track lease? What kind of lease program are we under?

Yeah, so we're under enterprise lease. They're up to five years. It kind of depends on the market, so sometimes we'll get out of them. We do an analysis every year to look to see what makes sense. But generally speaking, especially the heavier duty, the 2500s and the 3500s, we keep those for the full lease because of the service body on there. It kind of makes sense to continue that lease all the way to the end of the term. And then at the end of it, we could potentially keep the vehicle. It depends on mileage and that kind of thing.

Okay. Any other thoughts?

I have one other really hopefully quick question. The elevator update is specifically

This building.

This building? Okay. And after that, they would be able to, any service provider can work on it. So it's kind of opening up. It's a more expensive upfront cost so that maintenance could be less in the future?

Yeah. We haven't really done that analysis, how much. It's just every time it breaks, it's going to fall. And, of course, redoing it, it's not cheap. But, yeah, that would be a benefit that would be easier, quicker to fix.

Okay. Thank you. Yep.

Yeah, Mayor, I would, if you're okay, have a motion to... Yeah, we need to move, make a motion to publish, approve the notice, approve publication of the notice of intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate.

Make a motion that we approve the notice of revenue neutral rate intent as included in Exhibit C. Second.

All right, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Roll call, please.

Patterson? Yes. Bradley? Yes. McCracken? Yes. Sabo? Yes. Lane? Yes. Motion carries.

And I would say if you have any other thoughts that we have overlooked on this budget enhancement summary, send a note to Brandon or Mike. All right. No executive session, so we'll move on to advisory reports. City Administrator.

Just one reminder. I sent an email out earlier this week about a council retreat date on a Saturday. Rhonda noticed that the first link was messed up. It was the wrong type of survey. So look for the second link that I sent out. And I know, I don't know, I didn't check the Saturday. It worked. I did it. Okay. I did it after you sent the. You haven't replied to that and didn't do that. And we'll get that scheduled up. Thank you.

Okay.

City Attorney. I just wanted to briefly update the council on the discussions we've been having with the Northwest Consolidated Fire District. Brandon has been meeting on the sort of operational side of this project. And then I've been working with county legal staff attorney for the district and we put our heads together with a it's just one option for us to move forward would be to have a petition signed by 10% of the land area of DeSoto any owner of land that as 10 or more land area in the city could sign the petition or we could have individual uh residents sign sign the petition but essentially it would be asking uh the county to detach from the fire district all of the area inside the corporate boundaries of the city And then this Northwest Consolidated Fire District would stay intact, but the city fire department would contract with the district to serve areas outside of the city. And the plan would be for essentially all the employees of the district to become city employees. So the nut of the operation would stay the same, but the city would again have its own fire department. To go this route, we would ultimately need to have a legislative change to change the governance framework of the district because currently the city appoints members to that board, as does the county. So if it was the city's department, everyone agrees it wouldn't be appropriate for the city to have officers on the board governing the district. You know, one of the big items that we'll need to work on is dealing with the property, you know, the assets, fire stations, fire trucks. So that's something that the operations side, they're going to start trying to figure that part of it out. But I think, Brandon, we're looking at this would be effective January 1, 2028, if all goes well. And my understanding is the county nor the district have formally approved this, so this is just one framework of how we could once again have a city fire department. I know the chief is still here. I don't know if he wanted to add anything, but I know it's something you've been working on quite a bit.

Thank you, Todd Maxton, fire chief. I know it's late. I won't keep it long. This was initiated by the fire district. bringing all the agencies together, knowing what's best for the community, not just now, not just next year, but for the future. It's approximately 82% of the assessed valuation now is in the city of DeSoto. It was not that way when we had the unification in 2010. It was about, I think, 50-50. So, yes, there's a lot of work ahead, and I appreciate all the work that's happened so far. And then we're starting to brief our governing body, so it's still fresh. And there's a lot of work to do in a short amount of time.

Thank you. That's all for me. All right. I guess I'll just follow just a quick the intent of this is not to steer away from a combined district. The intent was that as we as a city would would see increased revenues that Our taxing structure and structure would allow us to fund a fire department much easier than a fire district that only has ad valorem property tax as its funding mechanism. So their ability to see, they're greatly impacted by any incentive discussions we have, as we have heard tonight, and then the benefits that they see from increased assessed valuation are deferred. So having them be a city department would provide that tax relief to everybody in the district relative to the taxes for paying for fire service without any, as I see it and as it was explained, no, without any Reduction or change in service, essentially, it's the same department. It's just a city department providing the service to the same area with the same personnel and the same assets. Hopefully at a lower cost for everybody.

Has there been discussion yet? I know it's still initial, but how that would work because I think Two of the stations are within city limits and one of them is not.

One's in the county. Right. And I don't think we've gotten that far down as to how that might.

Well, more importantly to me, if the city owns the fire department, then obviously we wouldn't abandon serving the unincorporated areas. Would it be how would that work? I don't know. We're still working on it. But would it be. the fire district remains on its own but outside the city and then it contracts with the city to provide it? Just in general, thoughts on how that would work?

Patrick, I think, might be better on the legal side of that to answer that one.

Yeah, so the district as an entity would sort of just be a shell. but it would have, it would have a contract with the city fire department that city fire department will provide fire service throughout the rest of the district. So all the areas outside of the city, the city would be serving those as well.

Thank you. Thank you.

Uh, all right. City planner, any report for the government? All right. City engineer. All right. Brandon, anything from your corner?

Nope, nothing tonight.

All right. Council comments. Joe, I'll start down at your end tonight. Okay.

Nothing much tonight, Mayor, other than make sure to invite everybody out on Sunday at 2 o'clock to Riverfest for our last watch party. All right. And make sure to place your bets on Couchy, Argentina in overtime.

Zach? Yeah, I don't want to keep us too long with this. IN THE PACKET YOU'LL SEE THE MEMO FROM CITY ATTORNEY RIVI WITH THE ATTACHMENTS OR EXAMPLES, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I ENTERED, SO I SENT AN E-MAIL TO THE COUNCIL, CITY CLERK, CITY ATTORNEY, MAYOR, AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR A LITTLE WHILE AGO WITH MY REPLY OR RESPONSE MEMORANDUM, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I GET THAT ENTERED AS in the minutes as an attachment for review, is my reply to that. And it's kind of long. It's like seven pages. I'm not reading all that.

OK. We could be here until forever.

But I just wanted to point out a couple of things in there. I'm not going into every detail. There's quite a bit of And to be clear, I'm not contradicting the legal opinions at all. But just to clarify some of the intent in there is the purpose of my response memo. And that's all. Thank you. Thank you. Well, I guess I would like to officially introduce that as a item.

Okay.

For your comment, right.

So your email will be part of your comment at the end of the meeting. Correct. Thank you, sir. Got it. All right. Thank you.

So can I just ask, so we had previously talked about the August 6th date and then the second, whenever the second meeting in August is, um, And we had talked about bringing ordinances back. Are we at that point yet? Or do you want to discuss your memo at the next council meeting? I want to make sure I'm delivering what's expected of me. That's why I went ahead and put the memo in the packet, just to sort of give my thoughts. A lot of it's more really not a legal decision, more city council. So I just wonder, are you expecting ordinances to be prepared and presented at the August 6th meeting?

Not necessarily. So my recommendation is that the council, one, directs the staff and city attorney to prepare revised versions. of the NDA, Environmental Review, Dark Sky Urban Forestry, and Well Drilling Audiences that address the technical concerns which you raised without weakening the core policy objectives. And second, initiate the appropriate testament process through the planning commission for zoning related elements, the dark sky urban forestry and the SUP classification for wells and schedule workshops to review the final language. And third, clarify the council's intent that future contracting records and utility policy decisions will be evaluated against these principles of transparency, public health, environmental stewardship and utilities ability. So in answer to your question, that was a very long answer to it. But I think that, and I think Mr. Sabo is going to have something to say, I think that it's not necessary that we have the ordinance to pass, but that the incorporating your technical review, if we could see what that entails at the next meeting. Is that clear? I want to make sure.

So for example, on the environmental position, like what would you be expecting from, I know one of your, and I want to be clear, I want to be supportive of whatever the council wants to do. So I'm not trying to bat down your suggestions at all. But I just wonder with all of the items that you would like to move forward, it does seem a little bit premature to come back with, you know, go through the trouble of ordinances or even, you know, get the planning commission started when, you know, maybe the entire council is not supportive of that. So do we want to, I mean, if you want actual ordinances or, you know, memos to the planning commission, you know, I'll get those done. Sure. or do you want more discussion?

The two things, I think we voted on it last time and the council approved it. So I think the support is there, but we can revote to tally support. But I think that moving forward, obviously there's a process where it needs to go to the planning commission. They need to discuss it, advise us on any changes they want, then we need to receive those. They need to hold their public hearing because of the zoning stuff. So there's a process to go through, and I think we should follow through with that process, just that whatever we send them should have your technical review to make sure that they're not going down a path that they... It's just an idea, right? So that everything's copacetic, everything's good on that. for those two. And I think those are the two biggest ones that, because coming up, they have their meeting in two, a week, two weeks, pretty close. Whenever it is. So I think those would be the priority. And then the other stuff, we can talk about it the next, whenever the next meeting is. But if we need to tally the support, we can do that as another

motion to clarify yeah and i was always saying that from you know the memo i think did shed some more light on some things and you know just focusing for example on the environmental person um i think there's that's a fair question of you know is that something the city wants to do hire another you know, full time person. What I pointed out in my memo is that we really can't be enforcing federal environmental laws. That's just not correct. Something the city can really do. So where does that leave us just on on that? That position.

Well, we don't enforce the environmental laws. I think monitoring compliance with them is something we can do, correct? We don't enforce them, but we can monitor and report our findings as needed to Johnson County or whoever the authority having jurisdiction is.

Sure. I'm not disputing that at all. Okay.

And the other thing that goes with that is, yes, some of those seem to be done through consultants, certainly. However, when you use consultants, you lose the institutional knowledge that's developed over time with a full-time person. And the time and expense of reacquiring that institutional knowledge for each person consultants hired even for repetitive tasking could be a different consultant is I think undoubtedly far more costly than retaining the knowledge in-house. I hope that answers your question.

So maybe on this position, maybe flesh out a little more like what I feel like would be within legal parameters for that position to do.

And the classification issue of exempt or not, that's really an HR drafting question. I don't think it's a reason to abandon the position. As long as whatever you conclude, whether the duties is written or non-exempt or whatever, I don't think that matters to how it's classified. I don't think it's relevant to as long as we get the duties performed, I think is relevant.

other cities, and I apologize, I didn't even, other cities that might have something that's very similar that could be looked at and massaged and assist with the progression of that.

I wasn't able to find any metro area that, municipalities that had it. The budget enhancement, that dollar figure came from a job posting I found. Going off the top of my head, I believe it was Black and Veatch, but it was one of the engineering firms where I got that. I found two or three and kind of gave an average of the starting wage there.

Okay.

And again, I think that's a detail that when it comes time to hire the position, we can work out the correct salary to be competitive clearly you don't want someone who's a recent graduate to take on a position of that responsibility and required knowledge and experience right that's all happening any other questions all right rhonda i think i had some and i didn't write them down and

All right, we'll go on and then if it comes to you, we can come back. Lindsay, anything for the group tonight?

No, I didn't know if Rhonda was going to go. I was just going to thank everyone again for taking the time to be here and thank the city for the continued mowing and maintenance and everything that's making the visibility on certain streets much easier and safer for everyone, I think. And just thank you to the residents as well as the city staff and everyone who prepared for tonight, both comments and documents and otherwise, because I appreciate your time and everyone up here's time serving DeSoto. So thank you.

Danny, anything tonight? Just one thing. I appreciate it, Zach, on what you said tonight on the deal, because I figured that, as you know, the procedural steps of giving to the Planning Commission, first it goes to staff, to the city planner, and then that also leaves public input at the Planning Commission level, and then it lets the planning commission do their diligence and we kind of skipped over that project and we jumped with a council resolution which is a misuse of council's authority even though it is proper and can be done but skipping over the policy procedures was skipped, and I'm glad that you saw that and corrected that, and that way city staff and the public plus the planning commission gets to do their diligence on these and bring to light maybe more input. I know you spent a lot of time, and we appreciate that, but I appreciate that you came to that tonight, and I do approve. That's all I have, Mayor.

All right. I've got one thing if you're unless you're ready.

I'll go. Okay. But I also want to thank everyone for coming out. I think sometimes it is hard when everyone's speaking to us and we're not able to respond at certain times. But even though there might not be anything specific posted or written or emailed that we are listening and there are things that we're looking into or that myself looking at more research on. But I want everyone to know I do feel that there is some listening definitely going on. But I know it was very late, especially for those of you that stayed through until the end.

All right. I have one thing. You know, we've talked about participation in the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee. And we got our volunteers or our members kind of lined up, but I never got volunteers from the governing body. We need to counsel people to participate in that process. So. I think it's like four meetings. How many meetings was that, Brad? Oh, there might be a few more. All right, see, I'm trying to gloss it over.

Are they on weekends?

No, they're...

I'll volunteer.

Anyone else want to step up?

Do you have a cup of short straws? Yeah.

Uh, we can start with one and then, uh, I just want, since we had our first invite go out, I wanted to get that into the calendar, but, um, uh, no pressure. I'm not going to look at anybody and point it, but it would have to be the same.

I was going to ask if it's something where we could do that.

We just can't have more than two at any one of them. Okay.

Because I wouldn't be able to make an ongoing. commitment during the I would think maybe continuity it might work out better if it was some some of that but that's just me thinking but if we could take turns sure maybe like a relay sort of a handoff then I think we could manage that probably all right what what are the meetings generally scheduled for and some of the community center meetings are like Tuesdays at 9 a.m or something like that we've been well the first one's Wednesday to August 4th at five o'clock so

Try to keep them early afternoon or late afternoon for dinner and try to get to home maybe an hour and a half, 6.30. So probably 5 is when we're looking at the start time. And they'll be every month or so. Maybe sometimes they might go a month and a half. I would imagine it's going to be a half a dozen meetings.

There you go.

Maybe those could be 5.30? Sure.

I nominate the retired council member.

Yes, I'm retired, so I can fill in for you guys that are still diligent working.

Supporting his retirement.

So I'm retired, so I can do that. All right. I'll take the pressure off of somebody.

I'd be happy to tag team with Danny. I'm kind of retiring from my corporate job in August 21st.

All right. But Lindsay is.

There you go. All right. Well, thank you. All right. I think we got. OK, I filled out the list. I did my job and I think that was all I had tonight. So I'm ready.

I move we adjourn.

All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed.