City Council - Regular Meeting

7 o'clock. Let's call this meeting to order. Please join me in the pledge of 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. Yes, I am not Todd Winters, the mayor. Uh, he and our city administrator are in Vegas at ICSC. So, we're going to go through this quick agenda. Um, let's start off with this presentation. Ryan,

I did So before we start this um this is a training that our uh liability insurer Midwest public risk uh has recommended that we provide um for you all the the elected officials of uh the city of Gardner. um not necessarily specifically this video, but um th this is a video that many of you have seen many times. Um you know, anytime we rotate new elected officials in, um I think that they want us to bring everybody up to speed. Um, so this video actually does a pretty good job of touching on um some of the various pitfalls that you as elected officials may find um in and what you're doing on a day-to-day basis for uh the city. Um and then I am going to do a brief presentation about uh the Kansas Open Records Act and the Kansas Open Meetings Act. And specifically um you know there there are many portions particularly of the Kansas Open Records Act that you all probably will never have any involvement with that we and staff deal with on a day-to-day basis. But there are some exceptions um and questions that I regularly get from elected officials um talking about what is what of the documents that um you kind of deal with whether it's your personal cell phones or notes or anything anything like that that um you all may have or keep as part of the performance of your duties. So, we will talk about that and then we will of course talk about the Kansas Open Meetings Act which you do deal with quite a bit. So, um with that we'll go

ahead and uh play this video um and I will touch upon kind of some of the points that the video raises after it's played. Yeah, he's back there. Okay. So, um I know you were waiting with baited breath to see the video, but we're going to uh have to get the the sound back up. Um, so while we're waiting for that, I'm going to go over some of the things that we talked about or that I mentioned um at the beginning about the Canipa Meetings Act, Kansas Open Records Act. Um, that really relate to how it is that you perform your duties as elected officials. Um, this is a general overview of what we're going to talk about. Um, we're going to do again a brief overview of the Can Open Records Act, the Can Open Meetings Act. Um, the plan was to show you the video and then go over uh some of the potential liabilities that you as elected officials may see or interact with. Um, hopefully none of you are ever in a

position where you're named individually in a in a civil lawsuit. Um, but that is that certainly has happened. within the realm of possibility. So, we're going to try to give you some tips as to how it is you can best navigate those potential risks and talk about the various types of claims, whether those are state law claims or federal claims for uh constitutional violations, which is that last bullet, which is section 1983 claims. Okay. So, we're going to talk about um the Kansas Open Records Act first. Um this can I move the box to the bottom because I can't really it's all right. Um so the definition of what is a public record. This is kind of an essential part for um you all in thinking and navigating um what it what records you do keep whether the records that you have as a council member constitute a public record within the meaning of the Kansas Open Records Act. I think a lot of elected officials think that anything they may have on their personal cell phone, any text messages, things like that might be subject to Kora. So, I'm going to try to give you some tips and advice as to how to avoid those those types of pitfalls. Um, but technically, an open record is supposed to be a record that is within the possession of the municipality itself. So records that you have and keep in your own personal files um are not technically within the care and custody of the city and fall outside of the definition of a public record. Um there are further exceptions that uh that that talk about uh what constitutes a public record. Um and specifically subsection 3A talk about uh records that are owned

by a private person or entity uh not related to uh the functions and activities of programs or operations funded by public funds. So there is a world where that that uh some public officials out there I don't think this happens at the city of gardener if your cell phone is if you get a cell phone allowance um then that could make the records open to a core request because that is potentially funded by by um public funds. Uh you all at the city of gardener uh that is not an issue. Um, we'd like to say we did that intentionally, but um, it's just because you all don't get a cell phon stipen. Um, and then specifically, you have an exception under section 3B. You all are defined um, under Kansas law as a member of a legislative body body of uh, a political or taxing subdivision of the state. So, your own personal records that are kept by you, even if it's related to your own job duties and responsibilities, those are a spec specific exception to the uh Kansas Open Records Act. So, that was pretty quick. Uh Kansas Open Meetings Act. Um so, what's what's the purpose of KMA? really the the primary purpose of KMA is to make sure that um the business of the elected officials, in this case you all um that you're not making any decisions outside of the public eye. What does that require? That requires us to publish notice of meetings, to provide notice to individuals who've requested notice of public meetings. But in addition to that, um there is it's

impermissible for you all to take any binding action outside of the presence of a public meeting. Um there could there are certain things that can happen outside of the public eye or the public realm. Um those are some specific exceptions that we'll talk about that allow us to go into executive session. Um, you know, I think it's also important to know that, um, to the extent that city staff may be simply providing information to you where there isn't an opportunity for interactive communication, that does not violate coma because that is an essential element. So, if Amy or Jim or Renee send you an email um and say, "Hey, here's Friday Minute Memo or here's information that is relevant to something that's coming up on an agenda." Please do not reply all otherwise you'll be in violation of coma, which is um you all if you all are on an email where information is being provided to you. Hopefully that admonition admonition is on each and every email that you get. But if not, be mindful that um if you reply all, you are now engaging in interactive communication likely in violation of coma. Um okay, so these are the basic requirements of coma. I've talked about some of these. The goal is to have decision- making happen in the public. What constitutes a meeting? Um, so the meeting is meetings can be what you commonly think of as meetings, which is what we're sitting in here today, but an email where it allows for interactive communication could be defined as a as a meeting within the meaning of the open open

meetings act. Anytime there is a uh majority of the quorum of the body um which is the number of people that's that are required to take action. Um so typically that's going to be three for you all. Anytime three of you are in a position where you're engaging in interactive communication relating to the business of the body. Um, so what does that mean? If you all are at a barbecue and you're talking about um what's going on at at your kids' schools or as long as you're steering the conversation away from anything that's going to come before you, that is not a violation of coma. It's only when you are in that same setting and your conversation slips into, oh, did you see we've got this planning and zoning application coming up next week? God, what do you all think about that? That's where you get into trouble. That's where you have to comply with KOMA um and um make sure that we're noticing all that up. So th this um these are many of the elements that I just talked about. Serial communications, I don't I haven't touched on that just yet. Um serial communications are situations where um someone is coming to each and every member of the body maybe in groups, groups of two, groups of one individually um communicating the same information, gathering responsive information and and really to satisfy interactive communication, you'd have to say, well, so and council member so and so told me

they're going to vote this way as did council member so and so or council member so and so said um has these thoughts about this application such that there is effectively interactive communication although you're all not there together you're doing it serially through a series of uh of meetings um Kuma does not address meeting procedures that's a common misperception. Um agenda, a lot of people think uh agendas are things, you know, there there's a conception out there that you have to publish an agenda at least 24 hours in advance, 48 hours in advance. That is not the case. Um you can adjust the agenda here uh here this evening. You can you could go have an executive session and add an item to the agenda that wasn't previously identified on the on the meeting agenda. The only strictctures on what you do with your agenda are what you have in your governing body rules and procedure. Um uh meeting conduct uh use of cameras, recording devices, those are required to be permitted. you're allowed to put reasonable structures or requirements around it. Um, I had a jurisdiction where recently where a member of the public was trying to put a 360 camera on the podium was capturing attorneys notes and all kinds of things. Um, and so there were restrictions that were put in place. Um there was a complaint made to the AG and the AG said yes that's a permissible restriction. You can you can dictate where the cameras are at so long as the cameras

can capture what is being uh what is happening at the meeting, what is being said at the meeting. So, um, you know, I I think a lot of the restrictions on that are some of them are a little dated because people think of the big news cameras and blocking everybody's vision. The cameras today are much smaller, but generally you can you can restrict where those uh where those cameras are located and recording devices, executive sessions. Um again I mentioned this at the beginning but no binding action may be taken within executive session. There are uh very few topics that can be addressed in executive session. The topics um that are typically uh used let's see I don't have those in there. The topics that most typically occur are um uh attorney client privilege communications. Um the some boundaries around attorney client privilege communications. your attorney has to be there. Um otherwise, well, but believe it or not, there was a AG opinion that got uh complaint that went up on on that basis. Your attorney has to be there. Um and you can't have third parties who aren't representatives of the city present, otherwise the privilege is waved. Um and then you know some other common um exceptions that uh are used um include uh personnel of non-elected personnel. So um if you all wanted to go to executive session to to um talk bad about one of your fellow council members that's not permitted um because they are not non-elected personnel. you'd have to do that out here from the deis for uh for everyone

to see in here. Um and then uh you know land acquisition is another common u common exception. Um but when we go to I mentioned this before, you can't have any votes when you're in executive session. You can develop consensus. Um you know, preferably if we're developing consensus, no one's raising their hand. I'm going to vote this way or that way. Um, that that's not the type of consensus that's being talked about. Um, so I think that's it's not responding.

There we go. Um so going to executive session um some of the rules have changed around this uh over the past five years or so. Um you know generally speaking I think most people are familiar you have to state the time that you're going into executive session. You have to state the time that you're going to come out of executive session. you can only address a single topic while you're in executive session. Um, and you have to state the uh justification from the statute, whether that's attorney client privilege, whether that's personnel matters of non-elected personnel. Um, and then you also have to provide a general description about what the subject of the meeting is. So, um, if you said, um, you know, attorney client privilege communication, that in of itself isn't enough. You have to go a little bit further and say relating to a potential development, real estate development within the city, something like that. Um, so that's that's a rule that came in within the last five years or so. Okay, video.

If not, I'll just burn through this. We can do it in June. That's true. June. We can skip this part. We can let attorney finish and we can watch the video next month.

Yeah, that's fine. Let's do that. Give them two weeks.

That's where you were, right?

Yeah. Okay. So, um there are two general bases for potential liability. Um they're state law claims, tor claims. Uh what tor claims mean are, you know, things like liable, defamation, things that aren't statutory claims, um but claims you're going to see down in district court over here in John's County. Then the federal types of claims um that elected officials um I I see sometimes get sued over are constitutional type claims. So claims that um something that the elected official has done or what you have done collectively as a body um for example may have deprived someone of their first amendment rights whether that's first amendment right of free speech or um freedom of expression of religion uh 14th amendment rights um to due process you might get uh some employment claims If for some reason, and as you'll watch the video, the video will tell you don't get involved in employment. Um, but um if you are um involved in an employment claim, it it's possible you could get sued over a due process violation. All employees um have due process rights. Um the public if you hold public employment, you hold a property interest in your in your public employment and uh various Supreme Court case law says you have to be afforded what is constitutional due process when um that is being deprived from you whether that's from termination or suspension things like that. So the first thing I'm going to talk about are torque claims.

um the Kansas Torque Claims Act. Um before the Kansas Torque Claims Act was passed, there was kind of this archaic um governmental immunity case law out there. The TOR Claims Act came in and made liability the rule rather than the exception. That being said, there are a number of immunities um that uh that municipalities as well as any individual who's being sued in their personal capacity can latch on to and take advantage of um to give them immunity from liability for torque claims. Um so whether it's public employees uh elected officials um you have to be taking action within the course and scope of your employment. Um if you are doing that or the course and scope of your elected official position. If you do do that, there is an obligation on behalf of the municipality if a judgment was ever taken against you that the city the city or hopefully Midwest Public Risk um would step in and be required to indemnify you. The only exception for that is for punitive damages. um punitive damages. Um the municipality or the city is permitted to indemnify you but not required to. And the reason is that claims for punitive damages require um kind of an elevated state of mind such as you are acting maliciously or wantingly. Um I'll tell you that in the state of Kansas the legislature has adopted a number of um procedural mechanisms and makes it

very difficult um to get awards of punitive damages. So u but it is out there. Um so some of the exceptions that I wanted to go over um legislative functions. So when you sit up here as legislators um and you're taking legislative action um you've got immunity for that conduct when you're acting acting collectively. So when you're adopting resolutions and or ordinances things like that there there is immunity for that uh type of conduct. Um personal immunity. So there is personal immunity um that's provided to a member of the governing body um who was acting within the scope of their office and acting without actual fraud or malice for any damages. So what I was just mentioning before um if you as an elected official and the reason this is in here is because they want to encourage people to be sitting in the seats that you're sitting in. Um, if there was not a broad immunity for you as elected officials, it'd be you'd be pretty hardressed if everybody was getting sued and taking personal judgments against them. Be pretty hardressed to find people to sit in those seats. So, the legislature did uh grant some personal immunity for elected officials as long as you aren't acting with that heightened state of mind which I mentioned which is typical for um for punitive damage claims of actual fraud or malice. Um the next bullet I've talked about yeah so that this personal immunity from liability I think it's important to note that this just applies to state law claims. Um, so the body of federal

claims that we're going to talk about here in a second, this immunity under the TOR Claims Act doesn't give you a get out of jail free card on that. We've talked about punitive damages. There's a cap on damages under the Kansas Torque Claims Act of $500,000 for a single occurrence. It's been at that number since I started practicing law. So, they're not exactly inclined to keep up with inflation and make suing municipalities um a very profitable entity. Um I'll tell you that may seem like a lot of money in terms of other caps out there that may exist in other states. This is very low. Section 1983 claims, these are the types of constitutional claims that I mentioned. Um there is a there is an immunity defense under section 1883. Um and basically what this qual what qualified immunity provides is that if you as elected officials or these employees and the performance of their regular job duties if they are acting in good faith um and they have a reasonable basis for their actions so long as their actions or your actions aren't in violation of what is called clearly established law, then you enjoy qualified immunity. You get the you get the case thrown out. So, what's I don't know if I have a slide on this. No. What is clearly established law? clearly established law is if there is a Supreme Court case that's factually similar enough to what it is that the employee or an elected official is alleged um to have done wrong that says yeah if you do this you're violating the constitution you're violating whether

it's first amendment rights 14th amendment rights something like that um in addition to the Supreme Court cases the 10th circuit court of appeals governs what uh what we do in the state of Kansas if there's a 10th circuit case that says that's close enough factually to what happened that says if you engage in this conduct you would be violating someone's constitutional rights that's going to be considered clearly established um punitive damages in section 1983. So the reason people name individual actors in section 1983 claims is immune governing bodies or pardon me municipalities rather are immune from punitive damages under section 1983. The only way you can get to punitive damages under the federal law, which is this is section 1983, basically is a vehicle which allows people to sue for money based upon a violation of their constitutional rights. And the only way to get to a punitive damages claim because because municipalities have been found to be immune by the Supreme Court for these types of damages uh for from punitive damages is to sue the individual actor. Um, so I really see this is where I really see where individuals are being sued on the um on the torque claims. It's possible they can be sued. However, because there's no indemnity requirement under those under those state law claims, this seems to be more of a fertile area where individuals are named. Um the qualified immunity

rules would equally apply to a claim for punitive damages. Um but um those are the types of claims that you all uh need to be thinking about. Um I think that the video actually does do a pretty good job of contextualizing all this of the types of claims that you might see. It talks about planning and zoning cases that might appear before you, whether you're acting in a quasi judicial capacity or a legislative capacity. Um, even though the video is probably 25 years old, it re I think it does do a pretty darn good job of giving the examples to you of the types of matters that you're likely to see. and um and gives pretty accurate um pretty accurate legal guidance and advice on that. So, I guess we'll watch that next month. But with that, are there any questions?

Okay. Thank you.

No public hearing tonight. On to public comments. Members of the public are welcome to use this time to make comments about city matters or items on the agenda that are not part of a public hearing. If you wish to come forward, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. There's a five-minute time clock on your left. That being said, come forward. State your name and address for the record. And the podium is open. Good evening everyone, Carter City Council members. Uh thanks for uh having us here tonight. Um my name is Carrie Bar. I actually am former state representative for House District 5. I'm here to speak though tonight on behalf of the Kansas Maha Council. And so wanted to talk with you about the data center that you guys had um others coming in to talk about and the June 1st agenda for a moratorum. Uh it just so happens that this site that was being looked at I think it was 1083rd and Claire happened to be in house district 5. So this was personal to me in my former district that I represented. But again, I said I'm here tonight on behalf of the Kansas Maha Council uh to speak on those data centers and how they're uniquely burdensome land use that impose disproportionate infrastructure, health, environmental, and community costs relative to their local benefit. And because of that, they should be restricted to areas specifically designed to absorb those impacts. But you might be asking, why are data centers targeting Kansas? There's probably more reasons that I'm going to list, but there are some key reasons. It's because we have weak res weak regulations and very low standards in the state of Kansas right now. They're cutting corners that will directly negatively

impact our community. Second, Kansas has passed, this happened when I was a legislator, actually, a 20-year sales and use tax exemption in 2025. I was against it. I voted against it. yet it passed and there were no protections. So you're seeing an influx of data centers coming into our state as a result of that. So I'm really sorry for each and every one of you who are having to deal with this issue now because I think it has created a target on our backs here in the state. So what can you do to protect the city, the people and the employees of these data centers, the animals, the agriculture in your area is to put a moratorum and in the legislature we used We could call it a date certain. So you could pick a date and time that something could be in place. And for me, I would recommend that you do a date certain of when the state of Kansas performs an independent third-party study of the effects of safety and health of data centers that will provide the necessary measurements and requirements needed for Gardner to have protections needed to approve this type of project and to avoid being liable as some of the things we've talked about when you've known and should have known because there is a plethora of data and information out there on this on the effects of these I've actually started to write a bill that would provide some of these protections and put some things in place. And so some of that does include that we do a study on this to see because I think there needs to be more done. But in I don't know if you guys have seen Tammy Clark and these and Kristen Megan Kelly. They're these industrial hygienists. Their job is out there to specific look at projects like this to look at the safety. They look they're they work for OSHA. They work for companies, employers to make sure their safety, not only for the employees who might have exposure to carcinogenic materials to things that would filter through the air that could impact their

lungs and their breathing, things that could affect water and um the runoff of water that could affect a community, the sounds and things like that. They look at the community around there to make sure that there aren't these impacts. They speak extensively on this topic of data centers. And so I highly recommend if you haven't watched it, but I am going to go through a few things. So I only have a minute 20 left. There's not enough time because there's so much information out there on this. But there really needs to be a multi multi-disiplinary approach and review of all the requirements. I'm just going to hit on highlights. I'm not going to be able to go detail because of the limited time. But we do need to have this study done so we can prove approve and have safe regulations because the state is so weak on this. Energy is a huge issue around the entire community. Actually, I'm aware of other states that businesses have been impacted. So, if I was a business and gardener, I would want this to not be in place because it could impact my financial earnings as as well. Transmission lines are known hazards. Kansas is looking at 345 kilovolt lines and they're actually um looking at ones that are even higher in that and there's emissions and effs and things of that nature. You might find out that Kansas actually passed a statute, a law last year or 2024, it's KSA66-1293 where they are passing 90% of the deferred cost of energy onto the rateayers. So by doing so with more energy lines coming in, they're going to pass the costs on. It will affect your community and I'm assuming people already have issues with that. Continuous acoustic monitoring needs to be required. Engineering controls to be put in place. tonal energy which is something that's highly hazardous needs to be looked at. There are human health issues that are studied already in this area. Livestock horses, agriculture are affected as well as auditory as well. So thank you so much.

Um Carrie Schmidt, 30125 uh West 187th Street. uh Gardner. So, even though he isn't here tonight, I first want to say thank you to Mayor Todd Wyinners for letting everyone at the last meeting be heard and not put a time restraint on public comment. I also want to thank him for putting a vote on a moratorum regarding data centers on the June 1st uh city council agenda. This isn't to stop progress, but to protect our community and surrounding communities while you address the serious gaps in our local rules before it's too late. A moratorum is vital to return control to the taxpayers, ensuring our local resources are protected from predatory development before irreversible damage is done. Fast-tracked zoning approvals are being granted without independent environmental or engineering reviews, leaving our community blind to the true toll these facilities place on our health, livestock, and environment. What makes this especially urgent for gardener is the vagueness in our own zoning codes and land development regulations. Our current ordinances do not specifically define, classify, or regulate data centers at all. These data center operations are simply shoehorned into broad outdated categories like general, industrial, or commercial districts. These codes were written long before anyone imagined facilities with such extreme power draws, water consumption, constant noise, traffic, and industrial scale operations. This vagueness leaves far too much open to interpretation. There are no clear enforcable guard rails on setbacks from homes, noise mitigation standards tailored to 247 cooling systems, limits on energy and water use, traffic impact requirements, or compatibility protections for nearby resident or

residential and rural areas. Without specific definitions and updated zoning rules, projects can move forward under unclear standards never designed for them, putting our community at risk. Many cities in the country have already passed moratoriums to study energy, water, noise, health, economics, and especially regulatory shortcomings before approving more projects. An 18 to 24month pause here in Gardener gives you time for thorough impact studies, the creation of clear definitions for data centers, uh, strong and specific zoning updates with real guardrails and protections for residents. Council members, our gardener community and even the surrounding communities deserve better than rushed decisions under vague, ill-fitting rules. Please in June 1, vote yes on a moratorum. uh 18 to 24 month uh on data centers protect our power, our water, our health and our future. Thank you. I'm kind of short a little bit. I'm Stacy Rogers. um candidate for governor of Kansas and I first want to also thank you for I wasn't at the last meeting but um for giving people the time to um express their concerns to the council. Um I do I am calling for a statewide moratorum. Um, I'm challenging our legislators and our cities and counties to put something in place so that we do have the time to um to explore the guard rails that need to be put in place in regards to these projects. Um, I I've been involved in many of these projects

across the state and I've seen the same repetition of not clear information being given to the cities and counties. So I don't even blame them but there is enough information out there right now to be researched and studied that we you can make a good solid decision for your community and that does require that moratorum of time and so I just encourage you to do that um on June 1st and to really listen to your um residents and maybe do a work session with them, invite them in and really talk to them about their concerns and and work together as a community to make the right decisions. And that's all I have to say. Thank you guys so much.

Good evening. My name is Dr. Nicole Bowen and I live at 22625 West 191st Street, Spring Hill. First, thank you. Um, I know the last several weeks have probably not been easy for this council and I know that several of you have responded to my requests for face-to-face conversation. I appreciate that and I hope that we can prioritize that ahead of June 1st. I recognize that public service is difficult work especially with the conversations around the proposed data center at this location um and larger resoning efforts. There is real tension between revenue, economic growth, infrastructure needs, housing, and protecting the long-term character and development of the community. I know that these decisions are not simple, and the larger gardener becomes, the more difficult they will continue to be. So, I did want to begin by thanking each of you. I appreciate that this council listened carefully to residents over the last several weeks regarding the proposed data center development at 191st Sinclair. I also want to apologize for not being at the last council meeting. Work had me away, but I watched the live stream and I was proud of my community. You heard from my father that evening who is here. Um, and our family story was shared both here and on several news outlets. I have the privilege of being the third generation to live on our family land. And because of that, this conversation has felt deeply personal to me. At the same time, I've tried to approach it very thoroughly and rationally, not emotion forward. And while an immediate proposal may no longer be in front of us, tonight's and upcoming agendas are a reminder that these conversations around industrial growth and incentives are ongoing in Gardener. I know many people in the community you've heard tonight are now calling for moratorium on future data center development. And I think it is important to acknowledge that those calls are not coming from just one group of people. They're coming from local residents, regional advocates, elected

officials, and even individuals currently running for office in Johnson, Miami, and across the state. Whether the city ultimately supports a moratorum or not, I do think that this process has revealed a larger question in front of gardener. Are we willing to remain grounded in the planning principles and development standards the city has already adopted? And if conversations around projects like data centers continue in the future, they should include independent third-party assessments around environmental impact, infrastructure demand, and compatibility with surrounding residential and community spaces before incentives or reasonzoning applications are considered. I also believe residents deserve transparency around the use of economic incentives moving forward. The proposed incentives tied to the project at 191st Sinclair became a major part of this conversation and I think the community deserves a clear understanding of how those decisions will be approached in the future. In my opinion, one of the strongest points raised during the process came directly from Gardner's own I35 175th Street sub area plan. That plan specifically talked about compatibility, transitions of use, and protecting residential areas from more intense industrial development. That language exists for a reason. And to me, that is the core issue with this particular site. There are arguments others will make and I have previously made about agriculture, utilities, traffic, or water usage of data centers in general. But what makes this proposed location such a for poor fit for industrial resoning is the intersection of rural residential living and agricultural land community infrastructure already surrounding it. This is not isolated agricultural land or industrial ground disconnected from neighborhoods. It is part of the living community. There are homes directly adjacent to this land where families have built lives for decades. There are

schools nearby serving thousands of students. I also think it is important to acknowledge that while this particular piece of land may feel outside of Gardener to some, the impacts of these decisions do not stop at city boundaries. Families in surrounding rural areas, Spring Hill, and unincorporated Johnson County are affected by what happens in that corridor. As Gardener moves forward, I would encourage this council to continue to take a measured approach. I would specifically, excuse me, ask for a commitment to uphold the city's existing planning framework and to approach future industrial resoning requests in areas like this with extreme caution when compatibility standards are not met. I would also encourage Gardner to take a leadership role regionally. These conversations are growing across Johnson and Miami counties, and I would love to see Gardner work collaboratively with other cities and the Johnson County Commission to begin discussing regional standards and long-term planning around impacts of this scale, projects of this scale and impact. I want to end with the promise. I am not anti-growth. I know it is coming regardless, but growth without thoughtful planning creates problems communities spend decades trying to undo. Thank you for your time and attention tonight. Good evening. I'm David Harris. I live at uh 23365 West 191st Street, Spring Hill, and part of a multi-generational group there. My folks live next door at 23275 and my in-laws live next door to them at 23185. They are in their 80s and they wanted to live here forever. And so while my predecessors indicated that the previous uh previous issues off the table that

was in our backyard, I was 999 ft from the entrance to that property. would have made my property virtually unlivable. I'm not going to repeat all the great things that were said before me. You've heard it all. But when this type of use comes face to face with agricultural or residential use and we have no time to respond, that's that's insane. I would hope that the outcome of all this, the impact studies compatibility would come down to a clear view of where data centers and in fact all industrial uses will go in gardener. We should know in advance where those are similar use, similar impact to environment, to the community. And I would think that that that connection with residents here and this committee would go a long way. It would give peace to those folks that chose Gardner or Spring Hill as their home of residence. Thank you. Seeing no one else come forward, let's move on to the consent agenda. Is there any item the council member would like to remove?

Items three, four. Three, four, and six. Do I hear a motion to approve one, two, and five? So moved. Second. Motion Deon second Johnson to approve uh items one, two, and five. All in favor? I One opposed passes. Uh, council member McNair, would you like to discuss number three?

Yes. Uh, I wanted to ask David, give us the details of what this involves and also while you're at it, why we would put our renewable energy credit directly from FEMA. Well, I made a mistake when we brought this to the council back in March. The way I understood it was uh KMEA was asking to sell our WAPA Rex, which as a council you have never done that before, though. It's a new item. Is the availability to do uh sell your Whopper Rex. In the past, you've always sold your Marshall wind rex and you've been doing that in the past. Well, when KMA issued this new form, I thought the request from KMEA was to sell the Whopper Rex, but their intent was for us to check both boxes, the Marshall Wind Rex and the Whopper Rex and put everything on one form. We are you had previous in the past been selling your Marshall wind racks but the only one that we changed in March was the actual sale of the whopper. Just for benefit, what is

Western Area Power Authority? That's the hydro dams up in South Dakota basically. Right. Why why we have why is here in front of us sign off on that be currently right now? Yes, sir. Well, I don't know why it's it's not currently filled out. What we're asking for is to allow the city administrator to check the WA hydro sale racks and check the Marshall wind racks for sale. Could you do us a favor? Yes. Bring back next weekly. I can do that. That's what

I don't think that's necessary. I mean, we can we can discuss this and then if we move forward with it, you know, we're we're telling the city administrator check these boxes and he has that authority. I'm good to that. So I I don't think we need to come back is what I'm saying. Okay. No, the motion covers that. So and it allows us to check whatever the council directs. Okay. So the motion directs I I would just uncomfortable sending out a blank document. No, absolutely. The motion included in the consent agenda item covers the direction of which boxes are to be checked and signed up. I I guess I didn't see that specific. Any other comments, concerns on number three?

I'll entertain a motion on number three. So, are are we saying we're just going to check just the WA? No. WA and Marshall.

Second. Motion Deon, second McNair. All in favor? I. No opposed. Uh, item number four, McNair. Council member,

thank you. U had a couple questions for Kelly. Why are we doing what is this? Why are we doing this better project 329,000? So KOT provides a certain level of aesthetic improvements to bridges. Basically what that means is they'll put up galvanized chain link fence, galvanized poles, no improvements to concrete. So basically bareformed concrete. Um it's kind of a generally industrial look. So uh this is basically to provide the same aesthetic look that the new gardener road bridge will have. I think the intention would be that all of the bridges through the gardener corridor would have the same visual representation uh and not basically just look like a bare concrete.

So 324,000 329,000 excuse me. Uh is there any chance it could go over that amount? Is that is there responsible for

it's it's possible it could go over if it did we would have to bring it back to you. How do you feel about more aesthetically experienc? So, for me, time and time again, I get a lot of questions and outside of sitdown restaurants, it's why don't we have a welcome sign in Gardener? And it's because KOT doesn't allow it, right? We have that small one right there outside of their property. Why can't we improve that? This is a welcome sign to our town. Well, we have that on 175th and Gardener Road. Both projects will have that. This is just one clean.

Yeah. Yeah. And I think it was just consistency. What I would like to throw out there is Matt, will you please explain the special highway fund and how it is funded?

Yeah. Special highway fund. So the city uses fund accounting and we have different funds for different purposes. special highway fund um consists primarily of gas tax which we get p it comes from the federal government it gets passed down through and then we also have a special county sales tax that goes in there so this kind of has its own funding sources different the general fund and then we use those to fund our projects and this is one of the projects that will fit within it reason I brought that up is because of that funding mechanism you're limited and whether or not you like this or not you're limited on what we can do with certain funds, right? We we can't take those and throw them in the general fund and reduce property taxes, right? But we can use those to do something like this and not use property tax money.

So, it's kind of like transient guest tax. There's certain times that you're like, well, I wouldn't maybe do X project for $4 million, but we've got this these multiple hotels generating this revenue and we can't do anything else with it statutoily. Might as well do this project that does something good for the city. So that's why I think this one is acceptable because we don't have a whole lot of other uses for that. Um I mean we could use it for roads potentially. Uh but you know to Casey's point we hear it over and over and I don't know what else you can use it for other than just straight construction. I I just wanted to make sure that we understood that this could possibly work.

Yes. But it'll have to come back here and if we say no we're at that point that's that's that. Okay. Yes. I'd like to point out it doesn't include a contingency on there. So, anything over that amount would have to come back to council. Okay. So, I'm good with that. Just to illustrate one quick point, uh the aesthetic package, I believe on the Gardener Oak Bridge was over 600K. So, this is quite a bit less than that as well. Thank you. Any other questions, comments on that item? Number five. It is four. Sorry. Four. Four. Um, entertain a motion. So move. Second.

Motion Deon and second McNeer that we approve item number four. All in favor? I. Passes. Uh, final item number six. Council me council member McNair. I don't have a problem with that's who we who were selected. Go ahead.

Who were selected for the state? What I what I'm curious about is why we would go from a one-year contract to a fiveyear contract for efficiency. From what I understand, that's what we've done in the past is this has been a five-year contract for the tree trimming.

I can jump in here. So yes, it's been anywhere from three to five years and this is usually um a good thing to do because there's only a few people few companies that even get involved with this because you have to have special training and you're around live high voltage. Um ASP has been a partner of ours for years in the sense that they give us the opportunity to do a five-year contract without huge price increases. So we essentially lock in five years of just up for efficiency. That was the reason. That's why. Good. All right. Any other questions, comments? Okay. I'll entertain a motion.

So moved. Second. Motion Deon second. We all in favor? I.

No opposed. Motion passes again. No planning and zoning consent agenda. No committee recommendations. No old business. New business. Item number one. I assume finance director. The developer has requested the use of IRBs, industrial revenue bonds, to finance a portion of the costs associated with the proposed commercial development, which includes approximately eight warehouses consisting of distribution, light manufacturing, and office use. Following a public hearing that was held on January 21st, 2025, city council adopted master resolution of intent number 2158 determining the intent of the city to issue up to 365 million in IRBs for the overall project. The purpose of tonight's resolution is to declare the intent of the city to issue 34 million in IRBs for the first phase of the project and approve the payment in le of tax schedule mutually agreed by the city and the developer. This step is required by the master resolution of intent. The IRBs will be paid solely out of rentals, revenues, and receipts derived from the lease of the project to the developer from the city. The bond shall not be a general obligation of the city nor constitute any pledge of full faith and credit of the city and shall not be payable in any manner of tax by taxation. The bonds have been requested by the developer for sales tax exemption on construction materials, equipment, and furnishings. And the proposed project would receive a declining scale property tax abatement that averages 72% over the 10-year period. It is staff's recommendation that you adopt the proposed resolution.

Any public comment, questions, comments, council? Okay, I will entertain a motion. So moved. Motion Deon second. McNeer. All in favor? I council member. Oh, sorry. You need a roll call. My fault. I Council member De. Council member. Yes. Council member Johnson. Yes. Council member. Yes. I'm sorry. It's literally my first five minutes on the job.

I know. Last one. It will only be 15 minutes. Well, you got a point there. Okay. Council updates. Start with you, Mr. Hunter. All right. Go ahead. I got a couple.

I thought you did. The basketball court at Winwood has um surpassed its cure days. Excuse me, 28 days to cure. Um benches got installed. Surfacing um starts this week as well as the goals getting mounted, weather permitting. Um so that that project's come along really well. Playground's a little bit behind due to mother nature. They did start setting up the structure, but it was in the wrong orientation. So, they had to had to go back and and start um from scratch with that. But that should probably put us back maybe a week or two. Um so, I'm just waiting kind of for an update this week and see what the weather looks like. Okay. So, that's it.

Thank you, Mr. Nikki. Nothing tonight. Kell, anything else? Nothing tonight, Chief? Nothing, sir. Nothing. Um just a heads up. Um, we've been working through the budget process and we're targeting the next council committee for a presentation on the budget highlights. Okay, turn. Nothing further. Amy, nothing. All right, Mr. McNair or Councilman McNair,

you know, just want to make a comment that u regarding data centers, it's something we need to be thinking about council meeting regarding moratorum. One of the things that that personally I I I don't like data centers. That's just my personal feeling. However, I I think the gentleman that uh spoke at the last meeting that didn't really support or deny the the gentleman that uh kind of said what data centers are. What they are is they are a necessary uh evil if you will. And the result of social media, online food orders, online retail, uh, cell phone, video, uh, all these things, all these magical applications that we enjoy in this country, it takes data centers to do them. If we don't want data centers anywhere, if we're saying we're all against data centers, then maybe we should be considering giving up those parts of our lifestyle. I can assure you at 70 years of age, I can remember a lot more years than not living without those conveniences and it was just fine. So, if we're if we're going to be a nation that is opposed to data centers, then we need to be considering that. And what it really kind of boiled down to for me is uh you know, a term that we hear all over the country, nimbies. Yeah, I want data centers. I want all the applications, but I don't want that in my backyard. And if we as we go forward to consider this thing, we need to be considering will all of our neighbors of anybody that's possibly touched gardener boundaries now or in the future

be capable of building data centers on our boundaries. We need to consider that as we move forward in moratoriums because if we dearm ourselves if somebody builds one like flips the the one that we just talked about here a couple weeks ago, if that was to flip over the other side to Hedge Road uh and become tha for example, tha would have no responsibility to protect us from effluent, sound or anything else. So as we go down the road uh deciding whether we want to have a moratorum on this, we need to be considering those items and and not just the political expediency of a yes or no vote. So I would encourage us all to to to really think about that as we go forward in the next two weeks. Thank you,

Councilman. We

uh I'll put a pin in that one. We can wait and talk about that in a couple weeks. Uh I think the the thing that's coming to mind for me and maybe people will hear my voice. Um be careful out there as school gets out. I saw a couple of kids riding through um the parking lot at work today. Um luckily one had a helmet on, but horse are on their ebikes and their electric scooters and they're zipping around pretty good. And it was 5:00 and there was a lot of traffic. Um I just feel like we're going to see a lot more of those kids out there. We see them a lot more out on out on the greenway where they're not supposed to be. Uh but just be keep an eye out there as you drive around as as school gets out. That's all I got to say. Other than that,

thank you, Councilwoman. My turn.

Okay. Well, I just first want to say congratulations to everyone who graduated this past weekend or who is coming up with graduation, high school, college. Um it seems like it's everybody and everywhere. Um so congratulations for all the hard work you've done and for this accomplishment. Um we are all as a as a city council I feel confident in saying we're all proud of you and um we wish you the best. Um I also want to say thank you again to the people who came tonight to speak during public comment. Um and the people who came last time. I'm anticipating there will probably be people next time also. Um it's really good to see people getting involved in um in what we do here and in making their voices heard. So, thank you for coming and sharing your thoughts with us.

Councilwoman, well, Vice President Council, uh so Saturday was Armed Forces Day. That's the day that we set aside to thank those that are currently serving in our military. So, thank you to all those that are currently serving as well as it was also GHS graduation. So, congratulations to all the 2026 grads. That's all we got.

Okay. Um, I have a question. It got brought up by someone in the community. We have one piece of property in the town. It's for you, Mr. Nopek. Um, zoned recreational north of the fairgrounds. They want to put a a fireworks stand there, but evidently that's not in the code because it's the only place that has that zoning and we don't we didn't address it essentially. So, do we have any reason we couldn't put an amendment on that or some sort of stop gap to allow someone to put a firework stand there? that. So, as far as the code is concerned, where the zoning is specifically spelled out for fireworks stands is in the uniform offense code is not in the LDC. So, just so you understand, it's two different things. If we were talking about the LDC, you'd have to go through the planning commission and have to have a public hearing and do those things because it is a specific section of the uniform offense code under the fireworks stands element where it has specifically identified the zoning districts that are where fireworks stands are allowed. You could go ahead and consider adding those districts or a district to it. Um that would just be done through an ordinance amendment essentially. Um, so that is something that is in your purview. I don't have to worry about going to planning commission. Um, I don't know how the list was originally generated for the districts in which fire fireworks stands were allowed under that. I do know it's specifically oriented towards the commercial zoning districts. Um, what we have to remember about the fairgrounds is it's fairly embedded into a residential district, which is a little bit different. it is the only parcel that has the rec designation. You're correct about that. Um so if you were to choose that, that would be the one parcel that would be affected by that that element. But

again, the context would be something we'd want to look at specifically as large as that rec zone is because it covers the entire fairgrounds including I believe it includes area north of Madison that they use for overflow parking and stuff. we'd want to really look at that residential context as well if we were to do that. But that that is in your purview. If you wish to do that, we would work with the city administrator's office um to probably put that together.

So if council has an appetite for it, is that something that we could spell out not just that zoning but partic that particular location or we could say north of Madison? spell out the location kind of like you do with a flat because what I don't want to do is add another zoning and then one day we decide to add another wreck. I don't know why we would but

and that is possible. I mean the the wreck district is kind of an interesting district. It's kind of like our activity center district. It's it's rarely used. It's specifically there. I think it was honed towards things like a multiuse county fairgrounds kind of element. Um, I would say I probably need to look oop, sorry, probably need to look closer at just the definitions and intent of that district, but that could come to you in a calf as well so that you could consider that. Um, I I'm going to look at Ryan for a second on this one just because from a zoning perspective, I can see where we could call it individual districts. I think if we were trying to get into some of the micromanagement of the parcel of land and try to get it to a a subparcel of that district in the fairgrounds that might be a little difficult legally, but I'm not sure. And I don't know if you know the answer right off, but that would be something we probably want to look at from that perspective because then you're you're almost giving a preferred use to a specific location only because you really honed it down to

Well, you you are, but since it's the only one that exists. No, but I'm even thinking if you were to say in that rec um you could put it along center or gardener road, but you by the pool, but you wouldn't necessarily allow it somewhere else on that rec property. So, if you were getting into that micro kind of level, that's where I think I would have some concerns potentially, although it is specifically geared towards fireworks stands. So, okay. Again, in that uniform offense code, you may have a little more flexibility than if we were dealing with the LDC.

Fair. So, let me put it to council. Does anybody do we have consensus to look into this and have staff investigate it and and the attorney? Um, or would we everybody be okay with a firework stand potentially like north of Madison um north of the the demolition range? Were you talking about like where they do the overflow parking for? That's that's where I was specifically asked, but you know, we've got these pieces here sandwiched right in between like that's the backyard of some and the sideyard of some others.

But I I feel like it's I mean, you're I think the only other Well, let me put it that problem you might have is with parking, but people park there all the time. Um, we have allowed for use of that area for multiple different purposes, including a food truck. Granted, it's a little bit further south. I don't know. I guess I my opinion we should look at it. Is that city-owned property? No. Well, not not the fairgrounds itself. Correct. Okay. Yes, it's county. Yeah,

I'm totally looking into it. Okay, Amy, will you please look into that? We will. Thank you. Um, that's all I have for tonight. Um, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. Motion Deon second wean that we adjourn. All in favor? I meeting is closed.