City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

All right, good evening, everyone. It is 7 o'clock in Gardner, Kansas. We'll call the meeting to order. Please rise and join me for 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.

Good evening, everyone. Thank you for coming. All right. We are going to start with a public hearing to consider or to receive public input regarding the city's intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate. So do I hear a motion? Move it.

Second.

Motion McNeer, second Johnson. We open a public hearing to receive public input regarding the city's intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate. All in favor? Aye. All opposed, abstain. The public hearing is now open. If you'd like to come forward to the podium here. You have a five minute time limit. If you could state your name and address for the record. Sure.

Good evening, everybody. Bradley Steinmetz, 409 West Bluebird Street here in Gardner. Good evening, Mayor Winters and members of city council. I'm standing here tonight regarding your proposal to adopt the fiscal year 2027 budget and your intent to pass a resolution to exceed the revenue neutral rate. While I understand the complexities of managing a growing city, I am deeply concerned about the compounding structural increases and overall costs that are being passed directly onto the citizens of Gardner, such as myself, during a challenging economic climate. Let's look directly at the itemitis increases detailing in the city's own draft in the budget document. First, page 15 states that the total property tax collections are projected to rise an estimated $6.57 million in 2026 to over $6.83 million in 2027. That is a direct increase of $260,000 extracted from property owners in a single year. We were told that the city's operational mill levy rate is remaining flat at 17.814. But we all know that because Johnson County hiked our property valuations by 5.2% this year, a flat mill rate is a functional tax hike. If this council votes to exceed the revenue neutral rate tonight, you're explicitly choosing to collect that extra $260,000 from our pockets instead of lowering the rate to keep our actual tax bill stable. For the average single family home evaluated at $358,000, that choice directly cost our households extra money every year. Second, the property tax increase does not live in a vacuum. Page 16 shows that the general fund sales and use taxes are projected to spike by another $389,000 in 2027, rising to a total of $9.5 million. Our families are paying significantly more just to shop and consume goods locally. Third, our monthly household budgets are being heavily squeezed by consecutive compounding hikes in the city utility enterprise fees. The budget locks in an immediate 4.7% increase to our water rates and an immediate 4.2% increase in our sewer rates. What concerns me most about these utility hikes are not a one-time occurrence. The budget stakes those increases will continue compounding every single year until the year 2031. When we ask why these revenues are being captured, the budget message makes it very clear where the money is going. It is going to a massive health insurance contribution spike for the city personnel, which is jumping from $2.8 million to $3.2 million in 2027. It is going towards a 3.5% merit pool for the employees and 4% step increase for sworn officers, and is going towards an internal operations overhaul like a $300,000 new phone system. Mayor and city council members, your citizens are facing the exact same inflationary pressures. Our grocery bills are higher, our insurance premiums are higher, and our day-to-day costs are skyrocketing. Yet when our household expenses go up, we have to cut back and find efficiencies or lose our home. We cannot vote to just artificially increase our personal income just to accommodate yours. Meanwhile, as the city takes in record revenues from a growing tax base and new commercial developments like Crossroads and Treadway, the financial burden on the individual resident continues to climb. Page 17 of the budget explicitly notes that the city is choosing to deliberately draw down our accumulated fund balance reserves from 43% to 34%. I urge this governing body to exercise strict fiscal stewardship. I ask you to vote against the resolution to exceed the revenue neutral rate, to adjust the mill levy down to offer true relief for your residents that truly need it in this time, and to reevaluate internal operational expenses before passing structural multi-year rate increases onto the families who live here that love this community. Thank you for your time and your service.

Good evening. My name is Lynn Stewart, 690 South Sumac Street. I've lived here in Gardner for five years. Every year I've seen utilities increase. You, sir, stepped up to my door and told me that you were going to take charge of all of this. You were going to bring it down because of all the wasteful spending. Now, I can tell you this. Since I've been here the five years, everything has gotten expensive. I moved here from Colorado Springs. I paid less in property taxes in Colorado Springs than I pay here. All right? I know how this works. You're all like the military. You all have already made up your minds what you're going to do. But I can tell you what. I finally found something I can do here, and that's go over here to this golf course. It's inexpensive. And you guys have let that place fall apart. You don't spend any money whatsoever on that golf course. And all the other golf courses laugh at us. Laugh at us. Now I can tell you what, if you vote, which you all have already made up your minds, if you all vote for this increase, I can guarantee you this. Being prior military, being an NCO, I will team up with some of the people in this building, and I will force a recall on each and every one of you. You all are elected. And you're not looking out for us. You're looking out for your own egos. And if need be, if you pass this, you know me. You stood at my doorstep and talked to me. You know I do what I say. I will also team up with some of the people that are here this evening. I will get an attorney. and file an injunction in order to stop the increase of the property taxes or hold it up. Thank you.

BILL BAUNINE, 28570 W 159th Terrace. I live in your subdivision, Mayor, and I'm not as eloquent or even as passionate as these guys, but I think it's sad that we have to come, that there's not more citizens, but that we have to come at a time when things are so rough and you guys want to extend. You can't even do what's already too high, and like I said, I almost feel like your minds are all made up because this is what you want to do. But think about the people that you're serving. I've been here about 18 years now. And like Garner, but we're getting to the point we might be pushed out of Garner too. And I just wish you would just hold the line back and just not use these little, these little projects that you have that we just have to absolutely need, and that you'd reevaluate that and take the burden for a year or two off the taxpayers. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Ty Bingaman. I live at 652 North Pear Street here in Gardner. Yeah, I guess I'd like to know what the justification is for rising, because everything I've read up on rising the neutral tax, it says if the property taxes have gone up, which based on the county they have, because they said my property went up $27,000 since last year, which is crap, it's supposed to stay the same or actually go down. So I don't know, you know, does anybody know where you got the information to justify the raise in the neutral tax? My wife says I'm stupid, so I'm just trying to find out the information before I argue with her. You know, I don't know if you can answer that now or not. But I am concerned. You know, I figured it out in just the little percentage tax. It's about an extra hundred bucks out of my pocket. And thanks to Johnson County, which I am going to protest when I pay my taxes, that's going to be about an extra $600 a month. But yet all the other houses around me only went up $1,000 to $4,000. And Mike Kelly, the new, he said, well, you've got a three-car garage. I said, so what? You know, well, we have 23 different, I said, why do you have 23 different calculations for taxes? Taxes are taxes, but whatever, a bunch, you know, not that much. And then, but I'm also, you know, he already mentioned about the water going up 4% for the next four or five years. And I know next week is the meeting for the entertainment district. And I've been reading up on that. And we're talking Star Bonds. And everybody knows from the Star Bond deal with all the pro teams, the people in the Star Bond district are the ones that are putting the bill for it. The taxes go up. Everything we buy, we're going to end up paying more sales tax on. So we're going to end up putting the bill for whatever that is. And the utilities will come in. Because I looked, and there's really no major utilities for something like that up there. And I read an article that said the builder will get with the utilities. Well, sure they will. Who's going to pay for it? Well, they'll raise, somebody will raise whatever. You know, gas. Yeah, I guess you guys control our electric and all that, sewer and water. But, you know, we're just going to get nailed. And I'll talk about that next week. But anyhow, I just, I mean, are you allowed to tell me what the justification is for rising the neutral rate? when supposedly the county says the taxes went up or the property taxes went up. I guess you're not allowed to tell me.

Yeah, we usually do.

Okay.

Okay, well, you know, I mean, if there's some way I could find out, I looked and looked and looked and can't find a justification. I did wonder why everything seems to be done in secret, but yet I did read here the 18th edition of the legal record and the city website. Well, I never heard of the legal record, and I know the city website, but you're leaving it on us to find out information that you're supposed to put out there to us. So, you know, I mean, I get emails from the county whenever there's a big storm, and I signed up for information on the city, but I don't get anything other than, hey, there's a meeting tomorrow or next week. So, you know, I just kind of feel that something like this we need to know about or everybody should know about so they can voice their opinion. But anyhow, oh, and I noticed in my subdivision somebody put up some signs that says no outlet. They put them pointing the wrong way. So if anybody can, and I did put that, I did put a thing for that. It's got no outlet this way, but yet the outlet, that ends that way. Okay, thank you very much.

Anyone else coming forward? I hear a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. Uh, is it McNair? Yeah. Motion, uh, McNair and second. Baldwin. Yeah, sorry. Then we close the public hearing. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? The public hearing is closed. So we have new business consider adopting a resolution of the city of Gardner, Kansas to exceed the revenue neutral rate for the fiscal year 2027.

Mr. Wolf.

Senate Bill 13 established new notification and public hearing requirements for the proposed budget to exceed the revenue neutral property tax rate. Revenue rate is the mill levy required to raise the same amount of property tax as a prior year using current year assessed valuation amounts. Charleston County clerk calculated Gardner's revenue neutral rate to be 16.933. The city's proposed 2027 budget is based on a proposed mill rate of 17.814, which exceeds the revenue neutral rate. In compliance with Senate Bill 13, House Bill 2104, and House Bill 2239, the city published notice of the public hearing to consider exceeding the revenue neutral rate in the August 18th edition of the legal record. The notice was also posted on the city's website on August 25th. We've also sent out notices and links to that on social media. It is staff's recommendation that you adopt the proposed resolution.

All right, council questions, comments.

Assuming that the degree is mostly going to be in the budget that's coming up, but I will answer the one gentleman's question.

The reason R&R goes up every year is quite simply that it's impossible to ever have the same expenses next year.

They don't exist at your house. They don't exist here.

So because of the country's monetary policy, it always costs more next year because of inflation. We're not even talking about some major change to something at the city or your house or insurance major increase, no law change, none of that. Just in general, it's going to cost you more next year than it will this year. So R&R is always a pipe dream. It's a good theory to make us think about things, but you'll never be right at it. What R and R probably should be is R and R plus some sort of value, but the problem is how do you calculate that number? So that's why it goes up. And then as far as the assessment from the county, that's independent of us, obviously. That's half the equation, and then the other half is the mill rate, which we do control. So the first gentleman, I think it was, is correct that if you keep the mill rate the same, we do capture that additional revenue from having the assessment go up. That's correct. The problem is right now, and every year, to be honest, even if you wanted to, to drop to the R&R, you would have to cut in our case, almost a mill, which would be pretty significant. And since you know it's gonna cost you more next year, that hurts you because not only did you have to find a way to cut that this year, but next year, we get a portion of our funding from the county that's based off your mill rate related to the other cities. So even if you cut your mill rate to zero, let's say, then we don't get a piece of all of your county taxes. So you actually never want it to go all the way down. Obviously, we don't want it to exceed a crazy number either. So that's just a little bit of background on R&R. That's it.

I had something I wanted to add. To both of the first two gentlemen that spoke, I hear you loud and clear. Yeah, revenue neutral. really is a tax increase. One of the things that we need to understand as taxpayers in Johnson County, though, is that even if we did reduce the mill levy to zero, it would only decrease your taxes that you actually pay to the county for all the other taxing entities combined, it would reduce your tax bill by 14%. Because out of the total tax bill all we get at the city of Gardner is 14% of the bill. The biggest recipient of that by significantly over 50% is USD 231. So look at your tax bills when you get them. They will tell you where the money's going. I, too, am a senior. I, too, am a Marine Corps veteran. I am a 100% service-connected disabled veteran at that, living on fixed income.

And I'm going to tell you, brother, I hear you loud and clear.

And I will be voting no on this resolution. like last year.

Matt, what's the, I know you've told us before and I just can't remember off the top of my head, what's the dollar value difference between revenue neutral and keeping the mill levy the same?

It's about $261,000.

So that's for the Gardner budget. It's about $261,000 that we would be talking about.

Yeah, I mean, basically our tax levy amount is about $261,000 higher than it was the prior year. And that would be the number you're focusing on here tonight.

So Matt, what you're saying is if we could find $261,000

Cuts, if you will. We wouldn't have to raise mill levy, is that correct? Yes. We'll have that conversation later.

This vote is not on the actual mill levy, correct?

This is just to exceed the mill levy.

No, that was earlier. This one does state a number as well. Correct, Matt?

I believe it does.

I think what you're referring to is the prior resolution set to public hearing in an amount not to exceed.

This resolution also .

Yeah.

So if we dropped, because it's not just the 261, in the increase, dropping the mill levy also reduces county funds, and it also reduces our ability to do capital improvement in geo bonds, correct?

It's taken into account for that calculation for our credit rating. Really, I would say it is you're eating into your fund balance quicker. Unless you make the actual cuts, then it really wouldn't. If you're basically not cutting things out of the budget, you'd be eating into your fund balance. which we already are.

You also have to consider that the state's looking to cap our sales tax as well. So going down with the thought that we could go up in the future may be limited or taken away altogether.

I'm sorry, we can barely hear anything you guys are saying. I apologize. We can't hear what you're discussing.

All right. Is there any more discussion on this part of it? Do I hear a motion on this? Resolution 2204? So moved. Second.

Can I say one other thing real quick?

We're going to go ahead and take a motion on this. So there's a motion, Johnson. Second, Ween. We adopt Resolution 2204, a resolution levying a property tax rate exceeding the revenue neutral rate for the city of Gardner, Kansas.

Yes. Yes. No. No. Yes.

Yes. All right. So resolution 2204 passes.

So then next, we will consider holding a public hearing to receive public input regarding the proposed 2027 budget. So do I hear a motion to open the public hearing?

So moved. Second.

Motion, Johnson. Second, McNair. We open the public hearing. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstain. Open the public hearing if you'd like to discuss the 2027 budget. Yes, sir.

Can we talk? Yes, sir. Sorry. Again, Ty Bingaman, 652 North Pear Street here in Gardner. I'm just glancing at the budget. And again, you probably can't tell me. But $10 million to do about a mile of center to moonlight? That seems a bit steep. I don't know. I know it's been 30 years, but I know they called on a million dollar a mile to pour 10 inches of concrete for a highway. So that was years ago. 3.5 for baseball field, and we're trying to come up with, what, 280,000. And I'm not, you know, for the tax thing, I'm not asking you to do away with it. I'm just asking you not to raise it, because the county's going to get their bite on me. But I've always, you know, again, I'm retired in Rotary at 90%, and I voiced that at the 4th of July thing a couple months ago. But whenever I want something, and I'm a woodworker, I look at it and say, do I need it or do I want it? Just an example. Do we need to put new surface on a baseball field for $3,500,000 or we just want it? Would it be nice to have? That's how I look at things when it comes to my personal budget. And I'm not hurting for a retiree. But I want to keep putting money in the bank to save up for when I may need it. But anyhow, it just seems. And I'm not a politician. And I don't want to have to run for anybody's position. And I won't, because I'm not a good speaker. and all that, but I am going to go to a county meeting and try and get on some of the voluntary boards up there in a couple of weeks. I don't know what that's about, but, you know, I don't have anything else to do other than mow my grass. But, you know, I'm just starting to get frustrated of all the money that's being sucked out of not just me, but everybody, and more to come with the menagerie that may go in. I'm just scared to death. If I would have known that I was going in, I probably wouldn't have moved here two years ago and overpaid for my house. I heard a hotel was going in, and I thought, well, we could use another hotel, a nice one, but more than a hotel.

So I appreciate you at least listening to us tonight. I feel like this was already determined beforehand. Kelly Johnson and Steve McNair, thank you for voting on behalf of the public. I will say I am very disappointed in the other members of this council. I have not only spoken at the Board of Commissioners meeting about them also raising our taxes. See, that's the other thing. And Mr. Baldwin, I don't care what you just said right there about It's always going to go up. It's always going to go up. You guys are supposed to be representing us, right? So if you can't fiscally hand our money, then we need to find somebody else that can. So I will be running for city council in this upcoming election. So someone else has a voice for these people other than people like Mr. Baldwin that just, oh, it's always going to go up. It's always going to go up. I don't find that excusable. At all. You guys are here to represent us. Do I know that inflation's there? Yes. Do I think you guys are probably trying to do your best? Sure. But those kind of excuses don't land with me. Not with a guy that's working three jobs and you're gonna just sit here and say, you know what guys, it is what it is. If you can't afford to live here, move the hell out. That's basically what you're telling us to do. So, and you can smug all you want to, that's completely fine. I'm gonna start fighting for disabled veterans. I'm gonna start fighting for people living in this damn town that can't afford to live here. I grew up here. I've been here since kindergarten. I moved away, I came back, and sorry I'm getting a little passionate about this, but this is enough. How many jobs do I got to work to either entice your ego or your budgets? Literally, if I have to lose my house for my kids while I'm getting a smug look over here because of your budgets, that's a different issue, right? What else in this town has to go to hell for these people to start raising their voices, which I'm going to start doing for everybody. I promise you, your name will be mentioned as a good man. Your name will be also mentioned as a good woman that are fighting for us. The rest of you, I can't tell you where your seats are going to land this next year. On top of just sitting here and telling you I'm promising I'm running, I'm going to make sure everybody else that sits on this council's name is heard, what they voted tonight. And people may be for this. I don't know. But a guy that's struggling to feed his family and making sure that I'm not dying of a heart attack at 43 years old, enough's enough.

Yeah, it's the veteran again. I can tell you right now, I have respect for this gentleman and this young lady, okay? This guy, you got issues. Look how smug you are right now. How can you justify what you just said? Did you go to college? Did you? Yeah, I didn't think you'd answer. Mayor, I'm holding you accountable. I'm a disabled veteran, 100%. The state finally did something for us veterans by giving us tax exemption on sales tax. The city of Gardner, you guys don't give a shit. about its people. You don't. This guy shouldn't even be on the freaking board. His looks at people up here talking, his smirks, says a lot about the city council here. And Mr. Mayor, you should do something about it. You should do something about it. It's ridiculous. It is utterly ridiculous. You don't need to repave the road. The road is fine. That's just a want. There's other things in this town that need to be taken care of other than the main road out here. That's ridiculous. And meanwhile, you got people on fixed incomes, and I know this guy don't care. He don't care. Look at his face, Mr. Mayor. Look at his face. He's got a smirk. He doesn't care. You guys need to do something. You need to wake up and get some common damn sense. That's what you need to do. You got people out here hurting. And I know each and every one of you have seen the signs, the lines over here to get the food by the Walmart. I know you've seen it. That should tell you something right there. But you all don't seem to care. This guy, he hasn't looked at a person yet up here talking. You've got issues with your board. You need to put a fix to it.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- Dr. Sherrilyn Ray, first I want to say, Councilman Baldwin, your smirk look and your laugh when people are talking about losing their homes, people are talking about not being

Let me move it closer.

Your smirk look when people are talking about losing their homes, talking about feeding their families is disgusting. You guys are tasked with your community survival. If you tax every single person in your community out of their homes, what does your budget look like? You're gonna just rent the property back? What if they decide to move to a different state? Kansas is ranked 19th in taxation. We can't say, what about the county? What about the state? What about this? What about that? Because you're responsible for the decision that you make here and now for everybody that you represent. That's what matters. $10 million to pave. I'll give you two mouths. Who did you hire? Is it paved with gold? I mean, that's a legitimate question. Is it gold-plated underneath there? If not, are you guys having bids? Because at the rates that is listed, you guys are going with who you know maybe? I don't know. Who you're friends with maybe? Family members maybe? Don't know. But the people should know. There shouldn't be anything that happens behind closed doors that the people that you represent doesn't know because that transparency creates trust. That trust creates a group of citizens that will have your back and understand exactly what's going on because they see it. But when you have backdoor deals, when you smirk, when people are talking about losing their homes or feeding their family, you lose that trust. And it should be embarrassing It should be embarrassing. And if the smirk is because, man, maybe I shouldn't have said that and I'm embarrassed, own it. Because accountability is true leadership. As mayor, you lead the ruse. It's coming down on your head. What do you want to be remembered as? The mayor that made the majority of your families homeless? The mayor that Is OK with families not being able to feed their children? Or do you want to be known as a mayor that stood up for the people, that was a voice for the voiceless, and a help for those that were helpless? That is your legacy. Every one of you guys have a job to do, and I'm not discrediting that. I run a nonprofit. I know what it's like to make ends meet. But I don't say I'm helping you. Jason, so why don't you, even though you need the support or you need the help or I'm serving you, why don't I give you this much, take this much more from you? That's not realistic. And it doesn't help the people that you're serving. I see the families over and over and over again. When people become in survival mode, then we have an increase in crime. And then we wonder why. But there's nothing that as a mother I wouldn't do to feed my children. And that is what you guys should be looking at. Thank you to the two that voted no and actually stood up for the citizens. For all the rest of you, shame on you.

Okay. Anyone else coming forward? We have a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. Motion McNeer, second Johnson. We close the public hearing. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Abstain. Public hearing is closed. All right. So we have new business number two, consider adopting an ordinance adopting the fiscal year 2027 budget.

One of these college people with no common sense.

On September 8, 2026, the statutorily required budget hearing for the fiscal year 2027 budget was held in compliance with KSA 79-2929. Following is a summary of the fiscal year 2027 budget that is before the governing body for approval. The budget is structurally sound, is represented by adequate reserves in both tax levy funds at the end of year 2027. Projected end of year 2027 general fund balance is 34% of expenditures. Proposed mill levy is 17.814 mills, the same as the prior year. It provides for continued investment in infrastructure to improve quality of life for residents and support community growth. It includes planned water rate increases of 4.7% in 2027. It also includes a proposed wastewater rate of 4.2% in 2027. Both rate increases in utilities are to support infrastructure projects. In water, we have two very large capital projects, Hillsdale Lake intake structure and the transmission, the new water transmission line. And in the wastewater fund, we have the continued expansion of Kill Creek Water Resource Recovery Facility. It is staff's recommendation that you adopt the proposed ordinance.

Thank you, Matt. Council.

Just before we get started, I just had one thing. I wanted to say thank you to all of you that spoke this evening. This is the first time in a long time we've had good, solid, positive community feedback. When you do what you did tonight, regardless of whether it's for or against an item, this gives the council feedback from the city Like the last lady that spoke, it helps increase transparency and trust your government and trust with the people. So I applaud all of you who came tonight and spoke. Thank you.

Do you want to go through some of the... I'll do it. Ms. Johnson, do you have anything in particular on the budget? I... We have to...

I would like to cut but I don't have a specific area right now I'm very interested in hearing where that's possible this is my first time through with the budget and so I'm not as familiar with how everything shakes out over the course of a year I hate to say that, but I am still a learning curve as far as the budget goes. So I am very interested in knowing and hearing from everybody else what you guys have to say. I do want to make sure that we are not taxing any more than we absolutely have to.

Could you speak up, please?

I'm sorry.

I was saying I do want to make sure that we are not taxing any more than we absolutely have to. because I know that feeling.

Sure, sure. Jim, I don't know, could you just briefly run through where it starts, like where we get our budget number, how that whittles down to that?

Sure, so each, when we start the process, each department will come with requests. We have personnel requests, we have equipment requests, And each one does a presentation on what the need is and what we're trying to address. And we take all those things and we put them in to a budget document. And then we start cutting, start cutting to try to get down to the absolute needs. Now there's two things that I think are relevant that I'm going to anticipate is going to come up tonight. So say we're requesting a dump truck for $269,000. That's coming from revenues from permit fees, one-time revenues. It's not a structural budget issue. It's based on a fundamental operational need. But it's not coming from the property taxes that support the employees and things like that. So that's why when we have those revenues, we look at the absolute need. And again, as an example, the dump truck, if we don't get it this year, we lose a year of operational efficiency, and then we pay 15%, 20% more for it next year. So there's really no gain. It's based on the growth of the city and additional needs that we have there. So when I go through the budget, and Matt and I will sit down and literally cut I think 95% of all the requests, whether it's equipment, personnel, all those things, because we just can't afford them. And I look at what's a one-time expense, what we can get by with, like for example last year i was asked to cut things i cut things that we could cut permanently and that was the proposal not things that are going to come up again next year because the next year you have an additional increase so just that's how we go through the process and i i think we there's one additional personnel in this budget and i think there was like 14 or 15 requests So instead of sometimes you try to get out in front of growth with personnel, right now we're just trying to hold the line until it's absolutely necessary for us to do that with planning staff, with engineering, and things like that. Thank you.

And maybe it's worthwhile to address a couple of the points that were made. the baseball fields at Celebration. You might talk about where we're planning to fund that. That's not necessarily coming from.

Right, that comes from the transient guest tax from people that stay at the hotels. It's not coming out of general fund, and transient guest tax can only be used for things that bring additional economic development. So sports tourism, we spend money on the downtown area for beautification and things like that. So it can't just be spent on anything, but it's coming from hotel fees for people that stay at the hotels. And with regard to the road costs, I mean, we bid those. I mean, those aren't made up numbers. We do a closed bid process, and it is incredibly expensive. I know that, and it's getting more expensive. But that's just the cost of our experience doing the roads here. I mean, they're just incredibly expensive.

And those, those, we vote on them. Those are our hand in counseling. We vote on those numbers. So as far as being transparent, those, you see all the bids and the packet documents and we discuss and we vote.

And we always look for grants and we have county participation through their tax program. So we usually on major projects like that, we don't fund the whole thing. We get money from the county. We will look for grants and things like that, but it is incredibly expensive to do roads.

And with that specific area of road, we had a town hall meeting that was very well attended, one of the best attended ones with feedback of people that lived in that area that saw a great need of doing that specific stretch of road, and even upset that we weren't doing more of it. We just can't afford to do more.

Well, and there's even stuff that one of the last town halls that we had was around the railroad tracks at Moonlight, trying to decide what we should do there, and obviously can't afford that right now or maybe ever. It's just prohibitively expensive, and so we just may have to live with that. I don't know if anybody, those are the ones that I caught.

OK, I got three items I want to address. Matt, you said we need to cut about $240,000-ish?

$261,000.

You said $61,000. I've got some items that I want to talk about. Yes, first the $300,000 dump truck.

Kellen, would you like to tell us

the people on the dais, the governing body, the people attending here, and the citizens watching, why you need a $300,000 dump truck this year.

We need an additional dump truck because we haven't expanded the fleet since 2009. I believe the city was...

two-thirds of the size it currently is then.

So basically, we haven't expanded equipment capacity for about 15 plus years. However, the workload has gone up pretty significantly along with the amount of snow miles that we need to plow. This dump truck in particular is larger than our current dump trucks. It is about double the efficiency, so about double the load capacity of our current dump trucks, which means that it's one driver instead of two, so it makes us more efficient. And also, it is more equipped to handle the arterial roadways that we've picked up in the last 10 years. So we've picked up all of 199th Street, Clair Road, that kind of thing.

How many dump trucks do we currently have?

Public Works, I believe, has three smaller dump trucks at this point.

OK. The next item that I wanted to talk about I went out to the city website and took a look at open positions. I've also went back and looked at the Friday memo from the last 60 days. And near as I can tell, we've had running seven or eight open requisitions, have had for some time. Mark and Mark. I think two ladies on the other side. All of us on the diocese have been, on city council, have served in corporate worlds and jobs at one time or another. And when you have several open positions going into a budget cycle. More times than not, those get cut. And those open positions, including one that just opened up just in the last week, we'll get to that one here in a minute, Comes to a total, as near as I can tell, going mid-range of salaries or wages and factoring in 125% of the wages for benefits package. Comes to about $631,000. We're budgeting, wanting to spend $248,000 for new patrol cars. Chief, I don't know how bad our fleet's in, Can we hold off for a little bit on that? I mean, is it one or is it a true need?

So we adopted the VERP program. I'd like the chief to answer, sir. Okay. I'm going to answer. You don't get to dictate that. I'm going to answer that first because I'm the one that started it. So the VERP program was put into place because. Stand down, please. Steve, you don't get to dictate that. And you need to be respectful when you're talking to staff. I am respectful. I started the police patrol replacement program because the vehicles were getting up around 100,000 to 150,000 miles. So the VRB program, if you delay one, it has a cascading effect on the entire fleet. So if you talk about maintenance costs and downtime and things like that, that is the reason that we have the VERP program. And if you delay it even one year, you go from five vehicles needing replaced to ten vehicles being replaced. It's not an efficient or smart way to run a police department.

Well, Jim, here's the thing. I have not had the ability or the opportunity to speak with the chief or anybody else on this staff because you, sir, have personally banned me from any contact whatsoever with any of city staff. You're bullying me tonight as you have in the past.

And I don't appreciate it, sir.

We can address that.

Now, I've got more to finish here, please. Go ahead. So we have $543,000. The citizens aren't getting hurt here, guys. And I'm being shut up because I'm representing the people that elected me. So $643,000 in open positions, some of which we've been without for 60 days or more. When you're without a staff worker for 60 days or more, chances are more than not you don't need to repeal that position. Kellen, you lost an engineer last week. And it's on the job postings this week.

$100,000-ish, $80,000 to $110,000.

It was as much as we send out in engineering that we send out for consulting, like traffic studies, like all kinds of other things. I don't see where we really need to replace that engineer. So that's between the cars and the truck, that's a little over a million dollars. Now we've got a third one that we've got to talk about. We had a staff a couple years ago in the planning department for deputy director to be used for two years for training, two to three years to get her trained up. And our director last year had promised us that he would retire by mid-year this year, no later than. an extra salary there, I don't see where we need to spend that $200,000 next year. So I'm looking at this going, guys, there's a million, million, three that we cut pretty easily. That's not to mention that our general obligation bonds and principal went up $24 million this year. Not to mention that our debt service went up $6 million this year. I think we're spending beyond, I think we're really spending beyond where we need to be. And that's all I have to say.

Thank you. So addressing the staff, which staff?

Which one was I disrespectful to, Tim?

No, go back to, I'm asking about the staff. What staff positions are we?

I can tell you, sir.

We have...

A staff engineer opened for 75 to 110 people. $10,000 a year for public works. We have electrical generation substation manager open for $95,000 to $117,000. We have a procurement specialist for $20 to $26 an hour. We have a plant operator for wastewater for $20 to $26.15 an hour.

I choose in mid-range on all these open positions.

We have a customer service representative and community development customer and public works, $20 to $21. Customer service representative for finance, $20 to $21. Maintenance worker for the streets and other, $21 to $25. Maintenance worker line, $20 to $25. We have seasonal positions that I didn't even count for. A SCADA specialist for our electric department at $30 to $40 an hour. And we have a police officer that's open right now for $30 to $40. Those are the openings. Those are the 11 openings that we have right now.

Got them off the website today. You're saying you don't think those positions need filled?

I said, no, I didn't say that, Todd. What I said was... The ones that have been open for 60 days or more certainly don't need to be funded. And if we're going to fund another city, another public works engineer, then we need to take a hard look at all the stuff we send out for consulting services.

So for an example, like with police officers, it's really hard to fill that type of – can I finish, please?

Yeah, let him finish.

it's really hard to fill that type of position. So some of those do stay open for longer. But the amount we pay in overtime that each of our officers gets in overtime, it's actually more beneficial to fill the spot and pay and not pay as much in overtime. So yes, some of these positions stay open because they're more specialized. But if we are paying staff overtime to fill the gaps, it saves us money in the long run. And I don't think to just blanket say all 11 of these jobs can be cut.

I didn't say that.

Well, how many of the 11 do you think should be cut?

Well, the police staff position is . We just filled three new positions just recently. And it's taking us a very long time to fill these positions.

I don't know why.

But we just recently added three police officers.

And I agree with Casey. We do need to keep the police funded and operational. Yes, we do.

But when I started looking at where is the fat, guys, just like these people that spoke tonight, there are many people in our community that have had huge, huge increases in their expenses on fixed income. And those families and those households do not get to make it. They have to make hard choices. They have to live within the income that they have. And we're looking here at significant increases in spending. And I really believe that we could trim it substantially. I'm not trying to yell. I'm not trying to be forceful or disrespectful to anyone, including you, Jim. You're disrespectful to me most of the time. But you don't answer my phone calls. You don't . You know, I'm not going to bully you, Jim. But what I'm telling you is this. We are spending. And the one gentleman out there said, we've got to start paring this down to the means versus wants. I do that in my household. I had to cut $1,200 a month this year out of my budget. My taxes are going up another 12% next year. Insurance is going up again, too. On fixed income, just like the last lady that spoke, this stuff is real for our citizens. And I know y'all don't believe me when I say this. I've said this for two years. You're hearing tonight what's out in the community. And I've been telling you for two years it's out there. And I'm going to tell you one other thing, guys. Tax reform and property tax reform is real. It's a major issue in November this year. And if it gets passed, we are going to have to make some hard, hard, hard choices. And I just want us to be ready to do that.

Steve, how many of those positions have been open for more than 60 days?

About six.

What's the total value, like, ish value of those positions?

It's about... About $250,000.

CHRISTIE WOODFORD- Does that include the police officer position? No, sir. I'm in. CHRISTIE WOODFORD- OK, so that excludes that one?

It's all. CHRISTIE WOODFORD- So which positions do you think should be cut? It is procurement specialist, operator, customer service rep, customer service rep, maintenance worker, maintenance worker. We didn't do Cecil. And we've been looking for a SCADA specialist, which is a high voltage guy, for a long time. Police officer, no, I didn't touch.

When we purchase new equipment, like a dump truck, like police cars, what do, are they replacing vehicles? What do we do with... the old ones that we had? Do we sell them to other cities who are even smaller than we are? What do we do?

We either trade them in, or if we've got additional needs, we will keep them. We'll keep one maybe every year, but we usually trade them in.

I will say too, you delay, you run the chance you don't get. So those vehicles that you say, well, we're going to hold off on doing it, like the police vehicles or the cruisers. We've had instances in past years where we've either had to make a decision right away, or if you delay, you don't get an allotment of vehicles out here, and you just can't get it. You won't get it done. You won't clean it in. So it's one of the things that you have to take into account as well.

Do we have on city staff, police officers too, I'm sure we pay some overtime. What is the value of the overtime that we're paying each year?

I don't know off the top of my head. It's substantial.

Just to give you guys an idea, this is out of my personal household, so I'll share what numbers that I know to be a fact.

We have three vehicles.

The mileage that is on those three vehicles combined is 686,000 miles between the three of them. We can't afford to buy new cars. We can't afford to buy used ones. That's why it's so irritating to people out here in the folk tonight that we're out here spending this kind of money and not considering their households.

So when I first did the Citizens Police Academy 11 years ago, we didn't have a fleet program. We had let the cars go and on my first ride along, we got a call and we went out to the car and it didn't start. And then we had to go find keys for a different one and then go get in that car. I don't want to ever be in a position like that again with our police vehicles.

Would you like to go for a ride in my pickup that has 343,000 miles?

So if you were going to have a call for service, you're okay if the police car doesn't start?

That's not going to happen.

It did happen in this city 11 years ago on my ride-along. I was there. I witnessed it.

I wasn't there, so take your word for it, Casey.

But that's where we were at. Our cars were so old, they weren't always starting. And so we came into a fleet program to make sure that our cars were always being taken care of. If we let that go, again, if we said no cruisers this year, that delays us. And then they cost more next year, and we're going to have to keep those up.

At some point... You have to start saying wants versus needs. I'm not saying we're there yet, Casey. I appreciate what you're saying. I really do. And I agree with you that we have to take a very balanced look at what our wants and our needs are, what our true needs are. I've had no less than three people come up and say, man, you guys are doing better. That fleet that Gardner City operates, it's shiny and new and gold-plated. That's the perception of the citizens of our community.

Am I correct? Yeah. Definitely.

Okay. So that's where I'm at, guys. I'm going to get it out of my soapbox now. And I've had my say. This is a very serious, this spending is a very serious issue.

Thank you. I completely agree with you. I think the wants versus needs has been whittled down to this, and this is the needs. Now, you may disagree with a 200,000-mile police car, but, you know, I'm saying the mileage on it. I'm saying, but, you know, I was on the council way back when, when we had that recession. I don't know, was it a long time ago? I don't know. And we cut down on the bare bones. We wouldn't buy anything. And as things came back a little bit, we were so far behind, we had to raise mills. I mean, we had to play catch up, because we tried to just cut everything we could.

I'm with you 100%, 100% with you. Because try to operate in a household with fixed income and things going up as crazy as they do. I understand having to make hard choices and hard cuts because I have to do it every month.

I guess my point is, to me, that we've made those cuts and that we've discussed some of those things. Holding off on these positions, you're going to have to build them at some point. Do we know that? We're just delaying that. Well, that's where we have our staff board to say, yeah, we need these positions. And then they go before Jim. Jim says, well, you can only have one. You can have none. And then he whittles that down even further. But I do trust the staff that they come forward with their needs for their department. And then we cut that down even more. And then we get to this point. I guess we got a vote tonight. I know. I know. It's easy to just say, yeah, let's cut 10 mils. I mean, that'd make everyone happy. But it's not always, we have to be concerned.

I spent three days working on this.

I know. I appreciate that.

And working very diligently to try to make sure that the cuts that I suggest are legitimate ones. That's all.

But the dump truck, so you wanted to cut that. Yes, ma'am. But that's not coming out of the general fund. Is that correct?

But it's still money being spent.

And then, sorry if I missed it. I know you kept saying only the ones open for 60 days. Which position do you think we do not need to fill specifically?

I'd like to know which ones of those that I mentioned specifically have been open for 60 days or more. I think that would be a good place to start. Because if we haven't had them for 60 days, we could probably do without them.

That's not accurate.

If we haven't filled them in 60 days, that means we haven't had qualified applicants. But we're still seeking those positions.

So what are we doing in 60 days?

What do we what? How do we survive with the 60 days? We're just covering it with other staff.

And overtime.

And overtime.

That's not fair to the rest of the staff either.

I mean, to do more with less.

You know, Jim, in the Marine Corps, we did more with less. We did so much with so little for so long, we could practically do anything with nothing.

Yeah.

And that's where I'm coming from. I would venture to say I'm probably the most senior person in age on the diet. And in 70 years, I've learned, particularly in the last 10, about wants versus needs. Because like I said, next year at some point, the taxes and insurance on our home We'll exceed the principal interest on a monthly basis. And five years ago, six years ago, five years ago during finance, it was not even close to half. It's went up $700 a month, and it keeps going. It's going to go up 12% next year for us, because my tax rate is going up 12%. These people are being hit with 10 and 12. And like I said, guys, the school district gets three times the money we do. So that's where your money's going. But taxes are getting to be a very, very, very serious issue. And we on the dias need to take our citizens' money and use it very, very wisely. And I'm seeing some spaces here where I'm not 100% convinced that's the case. I'll shut up.

So here's where I'm torn. Because I agree, life is more expensive. I'm somebody who works three jobs currently because life is expensive. One thing I hear time and time again is how grateful people are for our city services. At the last winter storm, we were all up here praising Public Works about how great they did, how our city was plowed better and faster than all of our neighboring cities. We do that with staff and we do that with equipment. If we cut back our staff and we don't keep our equipment up and upgraded, we will not be getting compliments for those city services. When power goes out in town, we get compliments for how fast services are restored. You want to cut line maintenance? That was one of the positions that's open. we're not gonna be able to provide those city services. That's one of the things that I hear a lot in the community is how much people love to live here, how happy they are with our city services, how happy they are with our amenities. If we start cutting those, because it costs more money, are people going to want to live here? What city services, what amenities are we going to serve?

I'll just share this, because we're struggling with this as well. As a 100% disabled veteran, my wife and I's home state of Iowa offers those veterans for their primary residence, two acres of land, a 100% exemption on property taxes for life. For us, that's about $7,000 a year. And what we're struggling with is whether we leave our kids and grandkids, go back to a state where we can afford to live, or pay the high taxes here. And that's a decision that's excruciating. And I feel for these people out here, because they're facing the same problems and the same situations. Guys, veterans, if you're 100%, go up to Iowa. No taxes. Nebraska, too. Missouri's going that way, too. So guys, we have a serious issue here in Kansas. And I've mentioned this two or three times in the last 60 Property taxes are going to go down as a revenue source for us. We need to be ready to deal with it at some point.

Kelly, I'd be curious, now that you've kind of heard some discussion, since you wanted to lower it, what are your thoughts now on what cuts you think should be made?

lean towards Steve's suggestion about positions that have been open for a while. I know that we are paying overtime on those. I don't know that the overtime that we're paying is as much as filling those positions would cost. And if we are paying, $70,000 a year to someone in overtime, then we would fill the position, but then eliminate the overtime so that it washes. In my corporate experience, I mean, people will, if people have the option over overtime, people will take it, myself included. I, like you, work three jobs. And right now I'm working three jobs with my husband in New Jersey taking care of his parents because his dad has cancer. So I understand what it's like to be trying to balance all of this. Our mortgage went up $400 a month, which may not sound like a huge amount, but it is a huge amount to us. it means every single day i have to look in my pantry and figure out what we're going to eat and we've been doing some creative meal planning with just what we've got because we don't have the extra pennies to go to walmart because it's cheaper than price chopper to buy whatever we feel like eating that night because we got to work with what we've got so i i feel that i get that i think we need to find that $261,000 somewhere. And if open positions make sense, then I'm okay with it being there as much as I hate to say that because I've been the one also in a short staff position putting in the overtime and doing the extra work. I know what that feels like too.

So

That's where I am. I think we need to find the $261,000 and cut it somewhere so that we can keep that revenue neutral. I'd like to hear what Mark's thinking. He's been really quiet. He'll kill me later, I'm sure.

I think some of the staff positions that Council Member McNair listed out caused me concern to cut those as openings, specifically the ones at water treatment, electrical, any of the utilities. And I do say, I do think, I guess I disagree that it being open for 60 days is some sort of indication of not need I think it's just an indication of a tight labor market from that standpoint or an inability to find a person. I know in my particular role in my corporate life, we are constantly looking for people and our position has been open for more than 60 days. And it doesn't mean that that person isn't needed. It's just can't find that person or it's a constant turn. And it's a similar thing that we have to our officers right now. And what we saw when I first started on the council was the churn that we were seeing as being the minor league, sorry, for the rest of the county are being the training ground for all of the informed officers to get their start and then find a time to, oh, I'm going to move up to the sheriff's office or someplace else in Johnson County and get paid more, which required us to readdress our rates to be able to compete. And I think that we've done a fantastic job and are going to continuously hire to then go and tell those officers, hey, you also have to drive, if you can get it to start, a vehicle that doesn't, this vehicle that has 200,000 miles on it, for somebody to help serve and protect the rest of us, I have a hard time with that. I think that's where I sit. And I can't disagree with the comment that was made You know, I think we could look at the $300,000 dump truck. I always think there's a nuance in where that funding comes from. It's never, I mean, we'd love to say that it's all black and white. We're trying to give you guys an indication or everybody in the audience an indication that the funding source isn't always property taxes um i think that was eye-opening for me as well even if you look at the budget that's presented tonight the numbers that are in there for certain light items are what could be totally what could what is in that fund to be able to be spent that doesn't mean that's going to be what what is going to be spent so um

Did you get this sheet, Mark? Did Matt send that to you? Did you send this out to everybody? Yeah.

Send it to everybody.

One of the things I've had to do to survive is I took my real estate license out of retirement. Just this last week. That was the worst thing ever. And one of the things I'm concerned about with the growth of our community and people coming to town, especially younger people, is the fact that I now know that when somebody tries to buy a house, they better have $300 or $400 or $500 left in their budget because in two or three years they're going to do that. And because they're going to need that to pay property taxes. And I can assure you, with all certainty as I'm sitting here, that is not part of the equation. Prices of homes, it takes about $225,000. I just wrote out on MLS today, I saw One of the townhomes that backs up at the interstate on Winston Lane.

Seven years ago, those sold for $75,000, $80,000.

It's on the market pending today for $250,000. What's happening, guys? We have to deal with it. The price of everything is going up. Everybody across the board is going to get what it wants to be. And I would encourage all of us to take a hard look, as I did. Thank you, man. You did a great job to send out to us to look at for considerations of places that we think we can cut. See, this is information that we've never had in the past. This is great information. Thank you, Jim. It helped me tremendously in coming up with some things that I think are common sense. We may not all agree with what it is, but I think we all agree that we need to cut the budget back substantially. So thank you, everybody, for your time and patience and understanding. I really appreciate it. Thank you.

How much is currently budgeted for the police vehicles?

258, I believe. 248, 110, sir. Is there... That's for four, right? Yes.

I guess I'm wondering.

Chief, I'm not dumping on you, sir.

No.

I said I'm not dumping on you.

I'm trying to do some creative, I gave my own budget, creative finagling. Is there any way that the costs for the dump truck or for the fleet could come from Statutorily, would it fit within the requirements of some other fund? For example, could police vehicles come from the drug prevention fund that's funded by alcohol sales? Is that anything? Is there anywhere where those things could be funded from something other than the general

fund that it would still fit. When I talk about the one-time revenues for like the dump truck, so the increased need, like as we go further east, Grata continues development. The commercial's taken off. We have clear crossing. We have two brand new neighborhoods out east. I mean, that's where the one-time revenues come in. And you need that additional equipment to serve the bigger area that we're getting ready to serve. And that's not even accounting for velocity and all the things that are coming down the pipe where we're going to need additional personnel for police officers and engineers and things like that. And as much as we've grown over the last five years, we've been very, very We've been cautious about adding a bunch of personnel out front, and we're always playing catch up with that. Like with Matt just leaving, our engineer, there's no way we can do without that position. I mean, we're looking at a need for an additional engineer. There's no way we can do stuff like that. And same thing with utilities. I mean, we've got, you know, these guys are running around every day with huge projects and trying just to play catch up.

Mark, do you have anything else? I'm going to hit a couple of points here. So it just floored me that people came up and attacked us. And you made accusations like we don't live here. Like this isn't our bill too. We get nothing out of this except the same services you do. So it's not like an us versus you perspective. And that's kind of how it came across. I mean, we don't want it any harder on ourselves either. I've been here 23 years. And I'd like to be here longer and let my kids grow up. I don't want it to be any harder either. That part just kind of dumbfounded me. The kicker is, now you guys have all heard this too, they haven't. I've equated government to a Ponzi scheme in the past because you have to keep growing the base to afford all of the expenses. I explained. The one gentleman said he couldn't believe I said it, but the facts are the facts. It will get more expensive next year. That's not my choice. It just is. It's going to be more expensive at your own house. It just is. Part of the problem is that we're fighting economies of scale. If it's $100 a month at your house, that's tough. I'm not discounting that. But let's say that's a 10% increase for you. A 10% increase on a city budget is a lot, right? So it's harder to scale back. And because government is, you know, we try to run a pretty tight ship, we really do. And you want to have those services. We don't wanna have crappy roads. You don't wanna have bad police vehicles. Steve made the comment that we have nice vehicles. We have nice vehicles because literally you could put your feet through the floorboard before that. And we had to replace the entire fleet. So right now it's pretty and nice, but give us five more years. Maybe it won't be as many because we can't afford to replace as many each year. Olathe is doing the exact same thing. They were building schools like crazy 25 years ago. Now they're closing six to eight of them. Things change. If you take the $261,000 and apply it to the 29,000 people here, that's $9 a person. I feel like staff has done a good job of trying to keep the cost down. I hear the comments. I'm not opposed to pushing out something. But what I gathered from most of the conversation was that we were already talking about needs, not wants. You know, a PD vehicle, in my opinion, is a need. Part of the problem is that it's always an uphill battle because you're robbing future Peter to pay past Paul, okay? And even if we add no new services, add no new sidewalks, just to maintain what we have from yesterday costs more tomorrow. We have that in our home. The difference is if you don't paint your house for two years, you might get away with it. Maybe it doesn't rock on you. We don't paint a water tower. We've got a serious problem. So I'm 100% on board with these conversations. I have them with many people outside of this room. But it's easy to say cut and that we pay too much. I'm not saying that we don't. The problem is, what are we going to cut that will suffice for everybody? And there's a mentality of, I already pay for these taxes for these vehicles, for these roads. So I should get these roads and police vehicles. So I... I'm not going to throw the fact that the county gets this piece and the school district gets four times what we get. I got that. That sucks. It has nothing to do with us. I will say if you do the numbers, which as you guys know I have on my spreadsheets, we actually trend on the downward side of increasing year over year, which is good. My concern has always been that we are already spending into our

reserves.

We're doing that on purpose, but we're going to be at 34%. That's if we cut nothing. Once we hit 30%, we've got to stop. Otherwise, we're raising taxes. Where this really hits home is that Like I said, Ponzi scheme. As we add more housing developments, you have to be able to provide services to those and roads and so on and so forth. So everything becomes more expensive because it's bigger and the next year it costs you more. I already said that. What we have to do is add revenue, which means we have to have development that provides a good ROI. And we haven't had any significant development that isn't residential

in quite some time. I agree with 100% of what you said. And I just thought this just popped in my head. We're talking about one side of the point, I think. And we're completely missing the other side. If we have a revenue amount that we need to spend that is one, or that is actually truly needed, and we don't want to have to hit the citizens that own homes for more, then there is another alternative. And the alternative is to grow revenue in commercial and industrial, which, by the way, appraises attendance 100 times more per acre basis than residential land and assesses at 2 and 1 half times the residential rate. So maybe what we should be doing, Mark, is looking at developing, maybe as a governing body, we should be looking at possibly Really taking a very hard look at expanding commercial and industrial. What's your thoughts there, sir?

100%.

If we're having trouble cutting, let's grow the pie.

I mean, obviously what we're passing today isn't a revenue increase, right? We can't control that piece other than property taxes, which this is another thing. It is extremely hard looking at those budgets to really kind of get a grasp of what's happening where. I mean, you gotta go through it a lot. As we said tonight, we've already talked about different funds, transient guest tax, property taxes, sales tax. Do you realize that we bring in more sales tax than we do in property tax a year right now? Which is awesome.

What would we do if we had twice the commercial? What would happen if we had twice the restaurant and retail that we do now? That would be $18 million. Then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Well, I mean, obviously, you can have more revenue for a while. And like I said, even if you add nothing, the expenses are going to get there eventually. You're still going to have to leapfrog. Right now, we're lucky that we can still grow. Once you're landlocked, then good luck. I really feel like unless somebody has a specific item that they believe we cannot spend the money on for next year's budget, what we're passing, in other words, do we think we can delay something a year? Maybe we could delay a couple of positions. The problem is that we spend a lot of money in overtime already. I don't want that number to get bigger. I also don't want that to mean that we overwork our employees, we lose them, and now we're trying to find a third person or a second person in a position. And now we lost the tribal knowledge in that position, and we can't get somebody in there. That's even worse.

Apprenticeship.

Jim, I was going to ask you. We talked about this a month or two ago. I just wanted to know your thoughts on this. Another area where we could possibly delay a year. I know it's terrible what we got now. Could we delay the phone system one year?

I believe when we had that discussion, we were already at a point where we have no ability to replace I think we've had that discussion and the answer from Charles was no we'd be put in a position where we're looking at system failure and then we have no way to recover okay

Was there any other, who wants to talk about closing the pool?

Yeah. We could, that's a separate fund. I mean.

I mean, closing the pool is right back to, I mean, I didn't say that specifically. I mean, I didn't get to the pool but twice this year, but I mean, that's another amenity. People enjoy it. It's always crowded. I see it on Facebook.

What's the utilization over the last month?

I can tell you it's going down. I can tell you we spent $300,000 to $500,000 to maintain the darn thing. Now, the one thing I will say, and you'll never probably catch me saying this again, because we were elected to, yeah, record this. We were elected to make these tough decisions, but that one, because it was passed with the bond issue, I would want to go back to them. Not just us. So that's also not a tonight decision, but it does save you a mill every year that it's closed.

What about the Independence Day Festival? What about the Independence Day Festival?

I mean, you're talking about wants and needs. Jason, how much of it was for entertainment versus fireworks? And probably staff overtime.

Fireworks, I wanna say around 24,000. Entertainment this year, 50, maybe a little more. And it varies from year to year on entertainment.

So when you add in staff overtime, you're looking at?

Almost 50.

That I don't know. That's a dish. The line item for next year is $125,000. And if we paid $25,000-ish for the fireworks, that means between the entertainment, all the overtime, all the expenses is about $100,000.

So that would be almost half of the?

That's actually more than half.

Does that generate people coming into town? Does that generate sales tax?

What if we charged for admission to the entertainment? Help defray some of the cops? We can do all kinds of things. I'm not trying to be Dr. No here, guys. I'm just trying to encourage a rational, thoughtful conversation.

Have you thought about charging admission to the Penn State?

We have not.

How about selling more advertising?

We do have a sponsorship program for all of our events, sports leagues, things like that. So we do have some of that each year, but it varies from year to year.

Have you looked at corporate sponsorship? We said that last year. I mean, I'm not saying that it's a bad idea. I'm just saying we didn't have a whole lot of takers, did we?

It was a rough environment because of World Cup, too. But we do do sponsorships.

We had a lot of discussion. Thanks, everyone. Any one way? Any more discussion?

Anybody find any one thing that they want to cut or a combination that will make up a quarter mil?

Sorry. A million, $261,000.

Ryan, I have a question for you, sir. Sure. Tonight, we have already voted on the issue that I think is the only thing that's really critically time sensitive for tonight.

And that is the intent for R&R to the state.

We've got that figured out. Is there any way that we could delay

talk on the 27th budget for a while i was looking at the statutes on that i need to find the budget law statute because they've amended that date within the last couple of years i know you have under the r&r statute you were required to hold the public hearings that we held prior to september 20th i want to say it's like a day or so after that that you have to adopt budget, which I'm not sure when's our next meeting.

21st.

I don't want to be out of time.

Before I give an opinion on that, I want to find that statute, because they've adjusted that date over the last couple of years. So it looks like we've got to make a decision.

Could we? have a special meeting prior to the 20th?

Just to be clear, we exceeded the R&R, and we put down a mail rate. That's what will happen. That is going to happen. The budget, remember, is a placeholder. We can still say, we can pass this budget. It has to go in. But it's essentially a, here's that bucket of money. There's what we plan to spend. If we come back and say, Jim, I need you to tighten that up and don't spend X, that happens. It's no different when they come to us in February and say, hey, we have to do whatever. What are we going to do, guys? Right? So it's not like this has to be the conversation stops tonight. The gist of it is, you know, the broad framework is going to be done tonight, but we can hammer down some of these details over time.

The budget is a placeholder.

When you adopt the budget, you formally set the mill levy rate and you certify it to the county. That's what you're doing by that ordinance.

I guess what Mark and I are both asking for, right, is this. Is there a way that we could, through the middle levy, which we just did as the report to the state, have a conversation? Because I would be inclined to say, I'm tracking Mark's idea, but I'd like to see it 180 out. I'd like to say no to the budget tonight and let staff come back and show us what they hope is reasonable that we could all agree on. With that, I'm going to put forth a motion that we do not approve the budget tonight.

Hold on. Until Ryan's even considered that, I don't want to be out of legal compliance for not passing a budget.

Okay. Matt, do you know any number, any dates?

I know we have to certify to the county by October 1st. It's October.

I knew it was quickly after that September 20th date. And so, like, not taking action on the budget to approve the ordinance before that date, then, well... We can argue. We can have a conversation about what the penalties are for that. I've seen it not go well for another municipality. So I don't think you want to do that because then your certainty in setting the mill levy rate is not served. Right.

But I also think, just to add to your point, you still have the vote for each and every – so like when – maybe not the nine positions, but when the cars come up, you have the ability to say no.

Well, Mark, I agree with you. Here's the thing. It's far easier for us to say no to the budget now and let staff come back to us with what is realistic and get something put in place before we are statutorily required or liable do so, even if we have to do a special session.

Hold on. I hear what you just said, but let me, you know, I like to play devil's advocate. Jim, you spent, the budget season started in April, right? So you've already looked at this. You already trimmed it. It's already come here. Staff's already done it. So realistically.

We started in February.

Well, you guys did, right?

We did. But even if we say we're going to wait until the 21st to talk about this more, Is anything from staff going to change based off our conversation tonight?

No.

Okay.

If we say we approve the budget, and then as things come up throughout the year, we say no, so we end up having a savings, and we don't end up spending all of the money that's budgeted.

what happens to that difference does it just go into the reserves well we don't it's not a reserve or do we refund it to all the people who paid it and then no we didn't need it it would sit in the general fund balance and instead of having 34 at the end of next year you might have 36 or 38 exactly so and then to spend that down we would then say oh well the mill levy doesn't need to be 17

whatever it is, 17 something, it could be 17. Because it's what, 16, 9, 33 is the revenue neutral rate.

So we would be closer to that. You're correct. But remember, right now, the expenses still exceed the revenue. So we're still eating into it. So if you save some, maybe we end up at 36. Yes, we have to look very carefully at one year. I like to look at 1, 5, and 20. The five is not good. So right now, if holding the line, I said this last year, hold the line, it goes up $3 and change per house so that we can get some more revenue in here to help offset our expenses. The only alternative will be to raise taxes or cut services drastically in the future. When you look at it five years, it's not good. And then you lose your bonding capacity. That's the reason you've got to keep the reserve, not reserve it.

Mark, I'm going to ask you just for clarification. Let's say we take Chief's fleet. We're not really going to take your cars. But say that $250,000 comes up for a vote. It's more than likely going to be put on the consent agenda. It will be. And then Jim Shayton said, yes, it will be. There's no reason it wouldn't be. And then we pulled off the agenda. And we have a big, long conversation like we did tonight. And one or two of us says no, and another three or four says yes. And it was time wasted. And it really didn't make any difference anyway. So that's the concern of the guys. We can say all those nice things we want to say, but the reality is it's probably not going to make a hell of a difference the way it comes out in the end. And I think Jim's shaking his head yes, because that's probably the case. It won't make any difference anyway. If we have individuals go through these items and go through the year, it's probably going to be the way it is tonight at the end of that process.

Well, I mean, if more people feel like they're necessary that don't, then yes.

Well, that and also, like I said, broad strokes, but whatever we pass tonight for staff, that's what they're going to operate. That's their assumption all of next year. So until something comes up and they go, oh, they said no to that one, they're going to assume it's happening. So you have to keep that in mind. Sure.

Well, I mean, I feel like we've debated this a lot. And I feel like, personally, I feel like staff has done. They did a great job presenting us with what they feel like the needs are. A city of our size, a growing city of our size, a growing community. If you look at when the mill rates come out, the city of Gardner, for a city of its size, is on the lower end of city mill rates, or it has been for a number of years. No one likes extra taxes. No one likes any extra costs, fees. But our responsibility is to take what we feel the needed appropriate amount is to keep the city functioning the way our citizens want. And it may be keeping the mill level flat. And if their house value goes up, they may pay more money. Well, they're going to pay more money. Well, yeah, if their house goes up. But. Prices, appraisals have appreciated over 100%. I know, I know. That's a, that's. It's going to keep going that way. Yeah. But. I think we kind of need to decide tonight. Okay. Correct, Matt. I think you called for a motion already. Is there a motion? I just. You called for one. You made a motion. You made a motion.

I was going to.

I can't make a motion. You had called for a motion. If there's someone, yeah, so would you like to make...

I don't want to get into the city.

So...

I'll move that we take a vote on the budget now. Okay.

Is there a second? Second. Okay, so we have a motion. Ween. Second, Baldwin, that we adopt ordinance number 288.

Is that what you said, Mark? Yeah.

He's talking about the ordinance. Yeah, I'm saying that's the ordinance? Yes. OK. Yeah, well, you can vote.

I just wanted to clarify the case before I go.

Adopt ordinance 2888, an ordinance adopting the 2027 budget of the city of Gardner County.

Could I offer a friendly amendment to just make clear that we're setting the mill levy rate as specified in the previously adopted resolution from this evening?

Sure.

Because it's not, that level is in the ordinance. I just want to be, just be safe.

Okay, city clerk?

Council Member Wiege?

Yes.

Council Member Johnson? No. Council Member McEar? No. Mayor Winters? Yes. Council Member Baldwin? Yes. Council Member Deaton?

Yes.

All right, so ordinance number 288 passes. I appreciate the discussion. It's not easy. And again, Mark made a good point. We all feel the effects of this and it doesn't improve our lives anyway. So OK, we are going to move then to public comments. So members of the public use this time to talk about city manager items that were not on the agenda or not part of a public hearing. So if you'd like to come forward, please come forward to the podium. There's a time clock on your left. There's a five minute time limit. Just state your name and address for the record.

Come forward.

We'll move to consent agenda. Is there an item on the consent agenda that council would like to remove? Hear a motion for consent? So moved.

Second.

Motion McNeer, second Johnson. We approve consent. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstain. Consent agenda passes. We'll go to new business. New business item number three. Consider adopting an ordinance to condemn property through eminent domain action to construct the plant 167th Street improvements. And you probably want to talk about all three of them.

Yeah, so the next three items are very similar in nature, so I'll discuss them all together and we'll vote individually. At the August 17th council meeting, we passed three resolutions to acquire property through eminent domain action. action for the 167th Street Improvement Project, 175th Street Improvement Project, and the Grand Street Improvement Projects. These next three ordinances detail the remaining properties that have not been worked out in the negotiation process at this point and then allow us to move forward in that eminent domain action while the city's property acquisition consultant continues to negotiate and try and get to a resolution. These actions are necessary to construct the projects and maintain the project timelines. With that, if you have any questions, I can answer those.

We will allow public comment for this item. Anyone? Not? Council, do you have any questions on this? I do.

Is there anybody that's not watching this at all?

I'm not sure those negotiations are done by the consultant.

Yeah, Milo, similar, is this more of a getting in touch with actual property owner or working out a negotiation?

It's possible. Sometimes we don't get responses back, sometimes until they get a notice of action. Okay.

So do I hear a motion for ordinance 2889? VOTE. Second. Motion McNair, second Wayne. We adopt ordinance number 2889 to condemn property through eminent domain action to construct a planned 167th street improvements project.

Council member Johnson. Yes. Council member McNair. Yes. Council member Baldwin.

Yes.

Council member Deaton. Yes. Council member Wayne.

Yes. Ordinance number 2889 passes. And then a motion for. ORDINANCE 2890. SO MOVED.

SECOND.

MOTION MCNEAR SECOND JOHNSON THAT WE ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 2890 TO CONTEMPT PROPERTY THROUGH IMMINENT DOMAIN ACTION TO CONSTRUCT THE PLAN 175TH STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCNEAR. YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER BALDWIN.

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER DEAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER WING. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. YES.

ORDINANCE NUMBER 2890 PASSES. AND THEN FINALLY NEW BUSINESS ITEM 5. Do I hear a motion on this? So moved.

Second.

Motion, Wayne. Second, Johnson. We adopt ordinance number 2891 to condemn property through imminent domain action to construct the planned Grand Street Roadway improvements project from Pine to Center Street.

Council Member Baldwin.

Yes.

Council Member Heaton. Yes. Council Member Wayne.

Yes.

Council Member Johnson. Yes. Council Member McNair.

Yes. Ordinance number 2891 passes. Thank you, Callum. New business item six, consider accepting voluntary annexations with landowner consent. Mr. Prudy.

Good evening. This is a request to voluntarily annex a tract of land located on the southeast corner of US 56 and Waverly. The attached voluntary annexation agreement outlines the terms agreed upon by the city and the property owners as conditions for this consent annexation. The terms are consistent with the governing body's direction on annexing rural properties. Recommend we accept the voluntary consent annexation agreements from the property owners identified and adopt ordinance number 2892. Thank you, Jim.

Is there any public comment for this item? Council, any question?

I have a question. Real quick, Jim. I do have a question.

Sorry. No, that's OK.

When it's voluntary, are we giving them something or some sort of consideration?

No, for voluntary. How does that work? This is a little unusual because there's a de-annexation provision in here if the development falls through. But this is one of the properties, the Baker properties, and this will allow us to annex across Waverly Road and take control of that roadway that's been gravel for a long time up to the railroad tracks. Awesome.

Okay.

So if it's possible at some point, get a paved street there?

Mm-hmm. It will get paved if the development goes through. It will get paved if the development goes through.

Okay, thank you.

Do we have a motion? So moved. Second. Motion McNeer, second Johnson. We accept the voluntary consent annexation agreements from the property owner identified within and adopt ordinance number 2892, an ordinance annexing land to the city of Garner, Kansas. Yes, yes, yes Yes Ordinance number two eight nine two passes Okay that concludes regular business We will move to council updates Let me start with Dave over there. You've been pretty quiet. I thought you saved up a bunch of stuff. Jason? Nothing.

Dave?

Nothing. Kelly?

Nothing.

I'm sorry, nothing.

Dave? No. Renee?

Nothing, thanks.

Matt? No. Thank you for your work on the budget and everything together.

Thank you.

Just want to say thank you for your patience Letting the whole process get heard all the way through. I really appreciated that. Thank you

I just want to say thank you again to everyone who came tonight and who spoke um we really do appreciate hearing from you guys and thank you also to city staff and everybody who worked on the budget because I know that's a huge job and it's a big part of what you do throughout the year and I don't take it lightly um so thank you for that um I also want to wish everybody I I can't think of the right word. It's not happy, but Patriot's Day is coming up this morning. A reflective? Reflective. Thank you. A reflective and just honorable Patriot's Day on the 11th. I will wish my mom a happy birthday because that's also her birthday, but. To everybody else, I hope that the day is good and reflective and that you're able to spend some time with your family and the ones who really matter because that's how we all got the crash course and what was important. So I hope everybody's able to enjoy being with those who are most important to them.

nothing for me nothing tonight thank you yeah just remember everyone that died on 9-11 and those that died after from the effects of it I mean it's crazy to think that was 25 years ago it's just wild but we came together as a nation then You know, there's differences in opinion on things. There's politics. There's social media. But as a country, we came and we were stronger. It'd be nice if it doesn't always require something like that to get to that point. But we definitely need to remember everybody that day.

Thank you. I have nothing further tonight. We do have an executive session. And... Probably, what, about 10 minutes?

Yeah, that should be enough.

Yeah. Do I hear a motion to go into executive session? So moved. Second. Motion, Baldwin. Second, Weed. We recess into executive session for consultation with an attorney. for the body or agency which would be deemed privileged in the attorney-client relationship pursuant to KSA 75-4319B2 beginning at 9 p.m. returning to regular session at 9.10 p.m. All in favor?

Aye. Opposed?

All right. Motion to resume regular session. So moved. Motion. Baldwin. Second. Eaton. We resume session. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstain. Back in regular session. We're in motion to close the meeting. Second. Motion, Baldwin, second, McNear, that we are closed. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Abstained? Thank you. The board of researchers is adjourned.

Adjourned.