City Council - Regular Meeting

City of Hutchinson council meeting July 7th 2026 a merry-go-round Truen here Garza here got here fast here makers here pledge of allegiance We have Pastor Victor Halfmoon here tonight from New Resurrection Church to give us the prayer tonight.

It's actually Legacy Bible Church.

Oh. Must have the wrong card.

But we love the resurrection. All right. Let's pray. Father, we come before your throne of grace, Lord, and we thank you for the blessings that you have bestowed on this great country. Thank you for the freedoms which have been secured for us by your grace and by those who have served to defend them. We lift this meeting up to you, Lord, and ask you to pour out your wisdom upon the council members as they discuss solutions to meet the needs of our community. Father, give them insight and unity as they work together to serve one another and the citizens of Hutchinson, Lord. You alone know every need here tonight for those present and for their families, and I ask you, Father, to meet their needs according to the measure of your grace. We thank you for our Savior, Jesus Christ, and we ask these things in his name. Amen.

Thank you, Victor. Item number four is the approval of the proposed agenda. Council members requesting amendments to the proposed agenda at this time, including the addition, removal, or reordering of items on the agenda. Anything we need to change or modify on that?

I haven't. I don't need to change or modify this, but I think in the future, I don't know if, Mayor, you can require that when we're appointing to these different boards that we get all of the applicants so we can look at all the applicants instead of just the ones that are presented to us.

Yeah, I think I've made a comment to request that, and I don't think that came to us.

I just think going forward that might be a good idea, and the only reason I mention it, we've got four or five here that we're going to appoint, I assume.

Yeah. No, I think that's a very good idea. Is that something, Enrico, that you can take care of for us, make sure we get those? For sure.

It may make more sense to share those as a SharePoint file instead of

in the packet because people put their personal information in there and if they're not being confirmed they may not want it well it'll still be blacked out wouldn't it I mean wouldn't we black it out there's still a good amount of personal information available on those packets I think I agree with Ms. Goss I think I would like to see that information but I'd like to see it separate from the agenda so that it's confidential to us and if we have questions it would be my suggestion

No, I think it's a good point, so we'll make sure that happens in the future then.

Yeah, we can do that. Thanks. Thank you.

I would like to see 6H moved off of the consent agenda, the approval of WTC bypass professional services contract recommendation. It seems like it's a complicated matter and deserves time to discuss it outside of the consent agenda.

So 6H, we would move to, should we move that to new business?

I believe that would be more appropriate.

Yeah, so we'll move 6H to new business.

Okay, so I move to move item 6H from the consent agenda to new business, making it item 9B. That would require a second.

I'll second it.

Truen? Yes. Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Bass? Yes. Magers? Yes. Mr. Mayor, I don't believe there's anyone here to present on that. WTC? Oh, there's not? I don't see anybody from engineering.

I'm asking if Dave Gwynn can come back if he's not already here.

Okay. So I guess we're waiting on that. I guess we can figure that out later in the meeting. Is there anything else that needs to be moved or amended? If not, I would be looking for a motion. So moved to approve the consent agenda.

Second.

Or to approve the proposed agenda. Truen? Yes. Garza? Yes. Voss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Maggert?

Yes. Next item.

Item number six, or five, I'm sorry. Petitions, remonstrances, and oral communications from the audience.

This is the part in the agenda where any person wishing to address the City Council shall first be recognized by the Mayor, come to the microphone, and state the person's name, address, and the subject to be discussed, and if appearing to be in a representative capacity, whom the person represents. Remarks shall be limited to five minutes. Comments during this portion of the meeting shall relate to matters not on the agenda and within the business and jurisdiction of City Council. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole and not to other speakers, members of the audience, or city staff. Rebuttal statements, back and forth, exchanges, and debate are not permitted during this portion. This portion of the meeting is where the City Council will receive public comment. The Council will generally not engage in discussion or debate with speakers. To avoid repetitious presentations, the Mayor... May require spokesperson for a group. Audience members may address items on the agenda when those items are taken up by city council and comments relating to those items shall comply with city code. At this point, if anybody would like to come to the microphone, come forth now.

I just typed mine out. It's what I would say, but so I remembered everything and typed it out. Is that okay if I just read it? Yeah, absolutely. All right. You might state your name. Yes. Okay. Good evening. My name is Marcella Velasquez. I live at 308 West Avenue A. Alongside my 89 year old mother Maria. We also own the house next door to us, which is currently vacant. As the homeowners of the only home that is situated right next to the recently completed roundabout, I wanted to update you on what it is like to live at 308 West Avenue Bay. I hate it. It is dreadful and miserable. I now live next to a racetrack and it is very loud. The sound of the traffic is thoroughly intrusive. The peace and quiet I enjoyed and deserve both inside and outside at my home is now gone. This is not what I pictured for this era of my mom's life or mine. The project cut deeply into the property in front of our house and brought the traffic to our front door. In the past, the hill, the bridge, and the trees in front of our house all acted as sound barriers to the traffic that passed through. Now that is all gone and I live in a concrete land and it all reverberates directly into my house. There's also an evident increased volume of traffic now. Being at home is to be on the receiving end of harassment by engines revving ceaselessly. It is the first thing I hear when I wake up and all that I hear anytime I am inside of my home, no matter what room I am in. My home is where I retreat to get away from the world. Now that the world has been diverted directly in front of my home, now where do I go? From its inception, this project has been deeply unsettling for my family and I. For months we endured heavy equipment tearing down our neighborhood, the constant noise, and our house shaking. Unless you have lived next to a construction site, you will not understand how unnerving it is for your home to shake for months. Not days or weeks, for months. And now the grand finale is to be stuck living next to a perpetual racetrack. In addition to the cacophony of traffic, there are headlights. All westbound vehicles headlights shine directly into our kitchen and living room. And incoming cars from South Hutchinson's lights shine directly into our front door. In addition to, the drivers are not respectful of the speed signs and take the roundabout at high rates of speed and then further accelerate when they reach their exit, ripping down West Avenue A up into South Hutch or to East Avenue A. This is what I hear over and over and over. I don't only hear it, I see it because I stay outside when I get home from work and I observe traffic. Twice I have almost been rear-ended trying to park at my home. Drivers tailgating me, speeding through the roundabout, not paying attention. Yes, I had slowed down. Yes, my blinker was on. I feel there should be some type of retention on the north side of the roundabout for the cars that will one day leave the roundabout and head directly for our home because it will happen at some point. In regards to the parking, the lane is barely wide enough to turn into park. There is zero forgiveness to fan out and pull in so as to edge my medium-sized SUV to either side with a parking pad to allow for another car. Backing out, my rear tires hit the median. That is how little margin there is in that lane to maneuver. There are other citizens who feel parking isn't adequate on our street because they have decided to use my driveway. I had to get towing company and law enforcement involved, and this was in the last two weeks, and that is the least of my concerns. I have done my best to describe what it is like to live at the place I call home, and I am deeply angered at what I view as a decline in the enjoyment of my home and tranquility. It cost approximately $36,000 to outfit one house with noise-canceling windows. And I say that in quotations. I've never had it. I don't know if they actually work. Multiplied by two, because as I mentioned, we own 310. That's $72,000. I thought fencing could also help as a sound barrier. Again, tens of thousands of dollars for two homes. That is roughly $100,000. If I had that amount of money in my bank account, it would be in a retirement account, not allotted for pained windows. I would have chosen 100 times over to pay for crumbling sidewalks myself rather than to live in this noise and chaos. This renewal was not worth it to me and my family. I invite all of you to go spend 24 minutes listening, fully observing the madness of traffic in front of my home. I'm open to conversations and Steve Garza has my contact information. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Jennifer Garrison. I reside at 1912 North Chambers Circle in Wichita, Kansas. And I am the co-founder of Passageways in Wichita, Kansas. My mother is here with me today. She is the other co-founder, Susan Mullinger. And we had the privilege of partnering with your incredible Stratica to host Mission Underground for our heroes over the 4th of July. We had 23 combat vets come in from, we had Nebraska, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas of course, and we went 650 feet underground to give them a respite from the 4th of July fireworks and it was a complete success. We have had the most incredible phone calls coming in from around the country wondering about Stratica and Hutchinson. We have had Mission Underground, the story was shared by USA Today, CNN affiliates have picked up the stories. Eagle Media, the radio stations in Florida have picked up everything about the event. Kansas City and, of course, numerous television media outlets in Wichita, KTV, KWCH, and KSN TV. And I just want to let you know, we partnered with your police officers. We were in contract with them to spend the evening with us. Our veterans were eternally grateful. They said they felt so safe just having police down there watching their backs for the night. We had 14 volunteers, four police officers and Stratica. employees actually volunteered the entire night to be with us underground. That was seven that did the volunteering. We are already taking names for next year. We're going to be growing this event and look forward to partnering again with Hog Wild Pit Barbecue was phenomenal. We had sponsors pay for all the food for everybody. We went through enough food for a hundred people that evening and And it was just remarkable. You guys have a gem here, and we are so excited to show it off to everybody we talked to. You are the only one in the Western Hemisphere that can pull this off, and you're right in our backyard. So we, again, we look forward to introducing Stratica and Hutchinson to more people that are calling and wanting to know about it and just want to... Thank you guys for having such a remarkable place for our combat vets to escape. Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else? My name is Ari Gold. I live at 406 East 900th and Kansas. I heard that there's a laws being put in place to manage the new different kinds of vehicles. We have electric bicycles and motorized bicycles and all different kinds of stuff like that, and I ride bicycle a lot. I've ridden all over the country. I'd say that I've been in most small towns in the United States. And what I see scares me, so I wanted to get involved, and I got a contact for one of the police officers, Jared Gilmore, and... I am, so getting involved. There you go. Thanks. Bye. Thank you.

Thank you. Hello. My name is Tom Broomfield. I live at 4209 Panorama. September of 25, a rainwater line broke there and flooded my house. We have been waiting for some kind of resolution. I respectfully ask you guys if you could get involved a little bit. We have been through the insurance companies. I have numerous emails to the city. I have numerous emails to everyone. We're just looking forward to try and get stuff fixed. I've done a lot of the work myself at this point in time. I still have, like ServicePro is some outstanding debts that I have that are not being addressed. I look for, like I said, and I'm respectfully speaking, please. I understand. But the insurance company has told me that it was not the city's fault. There was a subcontractor. Then they came back and told me, oops, our engineer made a mistake. It was the city's fault. That was over two months ago as well. Then I was informed by the insurance company that all of the information I submitted in September and October, the city had lost. So I respectfully ask for some kind of relief on this. If we could look into it and do anything, I would appreciate your time and efforts in this. Like I said, it's been almost 10 months now. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else?

Duke Duvall, Hutchinson, Kansas, 2501 Canterbury Drive. I'm speaking now as a private citizen. And Elmdale Senior Center East parking lot has some horrendous chuck holes in it that will swallow a car. I witnessed a couple incidents and I've made calls in the past, but nothing's happened, so now I'm addressing the whole city council. And that is basically why I'm here tonight. There was other things I was going to bring up, but this came up in my mind a little earlier, so I wanted to share that with the city council. Thank you.

Thank you, Duke. Anyone else like to come forward?

I'm going to pile in here. All right, good evening, everybody. My name's Dayton Gates. I'm the professional standards captain with the Hudson Police Department. You're probably wondering why there's a bunch of cops over here in this building, probably otherwise being known as the safest building in Hudson, currently. Part of my responsibilities at the agency is I'm in charge of the accreditation program, which brings us why all these officers are here. For the past three years, we've gone through the accreditation process through the Kansas Law Enforcement Accreditation Program, known as CALEEP. Ultimately, it's going to be described here in a minute, but ultimately that means we're setting our agency up where we're following best practices put forth in motion. Um, so for the past three and a half years, everyone behind me has been a hard work and have been dedicated to making sure we're updating our policies, procedures, and making sure we're following our best practices. That's again, put forth in motion. Um, And that's why we're here. So I'm happy to announce that after three years, we have been approved for accreditation as of June 10th of this year. And I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the council and the community for giving us this opportunity to celebrate this milestone with us. With that said, I'm going to introduce Michelle Patton. She's our accreditation manager at the agency, and she's going to provide a little more information about the accreditation process.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. As stated, we are happy to share that on June 10th, the Hutchinson Police Department was officially awarded accreditation through the Kansas Law Enforcement Accreditation Program. This is an important milestone for our department. We enrolled in the program in 2022. And since that time, our staff has worked steadily and intentionally toward meeting this goal. Accreditation required a significant department-wide commitment to reviewing, updating, and strengthening our policies, procedures, training, and daily operations to ensure that they align with established professional standards. This achievement reflects our ongoing dedication to continuous improvement, professional excellence, and accountability to the community that we serve. Accreditation benefits both the department and the public in several important ways. It helps improve operations by promoting best practices and leadership training and resource management. It strengthens transparency and accountability by ensuring agency information is organized, accessible, and aligned with recognized standards. It also helps reduce risk through verified compliance with policies and procedures while reinforcing professional excellence through an objective external review process. Most importantly, accreditation demonstrates a clear commitment to providing high quality law enforcement service and to building and maintaining public trust. And while we are very proud of this accomplishment, we also recognize that accreditation is not a one-time achievement. It is an ongoing process that requires continuous evaluation, sustained effort, and continued compliance as we work toward reaccreditation in the future. This recognition reflects the hard work of our personnel and our shared commitment to serving the Hutchinson community with professionalism, accountability, and excellence. At this time, I'd like to introduce Sheriff David Folletti with the Cali County Sheriff's Department. Sheriff Folletti serves as a board member for the Kansas Accreditation Council, the policymaking body that establishes, approves, and oversees the Kansas Law Enforcement Accreditation Program, and we are honored to have him with us this evening. Go ahead.

Thank you very much. I'm honored to be here. There's only a handful of cities and counties at this time that have gone through this immense process. Michelle's done a great job, as has the staff behind her. It's an agency-wide process, all the way from administrative policies dealing with how you ID somebody through their police IDs down to evidence. I mean, it is a very detailed process that they have to go through. And we're actually in that process now, so I'm kind of jealous. I don't want to steal your staff away from you. So I'm very honored to be here. Like I said, this is one of the very few agencies that have gone through this process. It shows a lot of dedication, and you're very lucky to have such a good police force here at Hutch. I'd like to present this to Chief Burley for the Hutchinson Police Department Accreditation Agency, effective June 10, 2026.

Today what we're celebrating should be something that's celebrated citywide. This was a big undertaking. While we spend five minutes up here in front of you, understand this is three years' worth of work. And the only reason that we were able to achieve this outside of Michelle, our accreditation manager, Captain Gates, and all the rest of the officers that are standing behind me, is because of the teamwork. We recently changed our core values and we included one of those as being teamwork. It's one thing for me as a chief to get up here and say, hey, we're going to become accredited. This is going to be a lot of work, a lot of policy reviews, a lot of proofs, policies, procedures, and so forth. And the only way I can get that to work and have that accomplished is because of the men and women that are standing behind me they were on board from the very beginning and they want to see that we are an agency that we practice what we preach we're going to be an agency that hold ourselves accountable and to the highest standards possible that we're going to be transparent at any time that we can be fully transparent and and that we're going to do the best that we can to provide the highest level of service to all of our citizens as they deserve. So, again, I'm just so proud and so happy for everybody at this agency and everybody that helped get us to this point, and I look forward to us continuing, evolving, and progressing as an agency to continue to be one of the best agencies in the state of Kansas. So, thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else want to come to the podium?

All right, Barry.

Next item.

Item number six, consent agenda.

Does everyone have a chance to look through the consent agenda? Any comments, questions? If not, I would just need a motion.

Move to approve the consent agenda and authorize the mayor to sign.

I'll second.

Truen? Yes. Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Magers? Yes. Item number seven, public hearing. A, public hearing regarding Meadows on Monroe.

Council, we've actually already opened this hearing. This is from the last city council meeting we had. We're still waiting on some agreements to be finalized, so we're going to be asking that this be continued to the next city council meeting scheduled for July 21st. All right. Paul, do we need a motion for that?

Yes, go ahead and do that motion to continue to July 21, please.

So moved.

Second.

Truin? Yes. Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Magers?

Yes. Next item.

Item number eight, ordinances and resolutions. Consider a resolution to set public hearing on modifying the boundaries of the community improvement district for Landmark.

Angela Richard, Director of Finance. Last council meeting, we approved the CID for the landmark, the mayor's landmark CID at 501 North Main. At that meeting, it was asked whether the CID would apply to the residents. After doing some research, we found out that it would, in fact, apply to the residents. So we are asking that we set a public hearing on August 4th I'm sorry my memo was wrong on the date. We have other public hearings we're setting for July 21st. And after talking with the Kansas Department of Revenue, our contact there, if we can pass this modification to the CID district before October 1st, those residents will never be affected by the CID. We just need to let her know that we have passed that or whether it's Did not pass. So tonight I'm asking that we schedule the public hearing for August 4th to modify the CID district to exclude the residents and only include the commercial on the main floor.

And I would like to thank Council Member Goss for bringing this up. I thought it was a really good observation.

Thank you. It was a very good question.

Council, any questions inside of you? Anyone from the public have any comments or questions?

Mayor Dick with the Meyer Landmark, and I just want to reiterate what Enrico said. That was never our intention, and I'm so glad Stacey asked the question, and we were able to get it amended because the tenants were never supposed to be part of this incentive. So thank you.

Thank you.

The language in the agenda doesn't include a date for the hearing. Does it need to have a hearing date in the motion?

No, it's in the resolution. Just approve the resolution.

Okay.

And I just need a motion.

I move to approve a resolution to set a public hearing on modifying the boundaries of the Community Improvement District for Landmark and authorize the mayor to sign.

I'll second.

Truen?

Yes. Garza?

Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes.

Makers? Yes. Next item.

Item number 8B, consider resolution to set public hearing on proposed special assessments for Plum Creek Livestock and Drainage Special Benefit District.

Before you is a resolution to set the public hearing for special assessments on the Palm Creek Lift Station and Drainage Special Benefit District. Why there's two items and two public hearings is because they are two separate phases. We have phase one and phase two, which would be the lift station and drainage phase of the project. We had issued temporary notes, and those will become due October 1st. So we are trying to schedule the public hearing in time to meet the timeline so that we can include these projects with the next bond issuance, which we anticipate to close on before October 1st. So are there any questions in regard to that?

Any questions from the audience on this?

If not, I would... Mayor, I do have a statement, but it's more of a question specifically for the developer, Mr. Strong. Specifically, I would like to know when the homes will be built. Contractually, that's actually lapsed, so we are in breach of the contract. And due to how long it has taken for homes to be built, we've had to modify an agreement with the state for the MAH money. So the state had to pay us so we can at least hold on to the cash so they don't have to hold on to it anymore. And I bring this up specifically because in the past, we've had lots go to the tax sale that we've bonded. That means the city is not getting paid back. And I have concerns, are we on the same path for this one? While I recognize that we have a letter of credit that should in theory make at least a portion of this development make us whole, that's kind of besides the point on the timeliness of this project. I did ask for staff to reach out to Mr. Strawn so he can at least address some of these concerns as we move forward. But I think if the city is going to continue to take on debt in good faith, that we should at least know and have an understanding of when these homes are going to be built. Over the course of this development, we've had two homes, or at least in the process of being constructed, with one building permit pulled 15 months ago and then one pulled nine months ago. And I understand that six lots have been sold to another developer, but that's still, if you include the six plus the two, that's still just a little more than a quarter of phase one. So what about the other three quarters of the first phase? I mean, there are so many unknowns to this, and I'm not trying to be unnecessarily harsh here, but I'm just trying to act in the best interest of the taxpayer. We should have answers to these, I think, as we move forward. I mean, if we're expecting to take on debt, then we should know what we're walking into. That's really all I have. I believe Cody, Angela, and Matt can also help advise on some of the RHID implications. So essentially it's a TIF, but for residential. But the RHID only kicks in after the homes go up. So, I mean, there's a lot of moving parts here. And, Cody, if you could advise on anything that I may have missed. I just think it's important for the council to understand.

Yes. I mean, basically what this created was this machine. Like Enrico said, there's all these moving parts, and the idea was – for the vertical construction to remain on schedule because that was going to create an increment, and that increment was meant to cover some of these costs now that we're going to be seeing. So obviously if we don't have any construction, we don't have any houses completed, or we have two that are in the making, but all of them were supposed to be completed, we don't have then the increment on all of those then to pay these assessments. The way the RHAD helps with that is essentially so eventually those homeowners aren't paying for that. It's the increment that's going to pay for it. But again, if we don't have an increment, then we don't have anything to pay for it there. There are some provisions in the contract that essentially state payments, once we do have increments come in, can be withheld until the contractor, until the developer is compliant with the terms of the contract. There are some other provisions in there that we're looking at, essentially looking at all of the city's options, and we may be discussing those here in the future if we don't get some type of answer that we can work with going forward. But essentially, like I said, this was all created based on the primary premise that vertical construction remain on task and on progress, on schedule, and we are far, far behind on that. And so that is going to cause the city to cover some of these costs going forward until we can collect on that increment.

So the way the development agreement is wrote, and I confirm this with Kutak Rock, is that until certificates of occupancy are issued, the developer will pay the specials on those properties. Then once a certificate of occupancy is issued, then it becomes part of the RHID and the increment will pay the bonds.

Correct. But if the developer doesn't pay them, which we've had problems in the past with, then those sit unpaid for a period of time. And again, then the city doesn't have those funds that are paid from the developer who does owe those specials. But then it's dependent on the developer actually following through and paying those.

Is there any provision either within the development agreement or within state law to withhold funds if back property taxes are owed on other properties by this property owner?

Yes, from what I'm reading at the developer agreement, and I just was kind of pulled into this today, I reviewed the agreement today, but there is a clause in there that states it's a condition precedent that all taxes be paid in full before any disbursements from that increment are dispersed to the developer. Okay. And it's pretty general, so I believe that would include, it doesn't say specific to this project, it says in general. Okay.

Cody, since that's handy and you've been looking at it, can you send the council that development agreement? Because it seemed like there were dates in there about how many houses were going to be built at what time by what time. And I'd like to look at that again. Yes. Thank you. That way I don't have to dig for it. Sure.

I think that's the only part that gives me any peace of mind is knowing that at least there's a provision – Possibility of making us whole or at least of clawing back or holding on to some of the funding but again if the houses aren't built and the liability never shifts to the owner who's occupying the new home, then, I mean, this is exactly what we saw happen on, I think it's Morris Street. And those all went to, not all, but those went to tax sale and some were donated to the school district. And I think this is exactly what we, as a council, were afraid of happening. And I guess I don't know what our path forward is here.

Well, and as Enrico stated, there is a letter of credit. That was not included in what I received, so I'm going to review that as soon as I get it because I think that is built into something that would give the city some recourse. Preferably, it is more offensive, so to speak, than defensive. Most of what I have reviewed is more the recourse is defensive, so to speak, in terms of reacting after the fact, but The letter of credit could have some terms in there that would allow us to automatically have some type of recourse. So yeah, we are looking into that. We do know that technically it's not an official breach yet. We need to provide the developer with notice. He has the opportunity to cure. So we will be following through with that. in the near future, also speaking with outside council, Kutoc Rock, just to make sure we have all of our bases covered on that, because I believe they're the ones that drafted this developer agreement. So, yeah, we will be coming back, I imagine, in the near future with some options for the council on how to move forward.

Council, any more questions? Mr. Strong, do you want to come speak about this?

MR.

I'm here to answer any questions that you all have about any history that we have with the city. So we've been in the city of Hutchinson building houses for years. I've got to guess 40 years. We've put in several subdivisions. And I noticed you brought up Morris Street. I think it's going to be best if the city staff and I maybe would sit down and have a conversation on what we could tell you about what happened in what we call Oxford Point. It has to do with the city of Hutchison and the school system. And I don't think I want to talk about that publicly, but I think I'd be more than happy to inform you in a private meeting if you'd like to hear that. I just don't think it's right that I talk publicly about some issues that popped up on that project. Other than that, on the Plum Creek project, it was a terrible long delay. on getting the engineering completed. At that time, you know, we were coming out of COVID and I think it took us three years or better to get the engineer drawings completed. And I think we may have started this, you know, the RHID and the MIH. I think we got those funds quite several years ago. But we still had to get the development built. In the build of the development, several things have happened. We've had problems with the lift station. And first of all, we come in way over budget from what the original project cost was supposed to be. So I think our company has spent, I'm not going to say, but it's hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars that we've invested on that project to this date. So it's not like we don't have an investment in that piece of real estate. when we did finally get the streets put in and they agreed to have that, you know, the streets completed, which was drawn out because the engineers wanted to push the construction of the street in. Anyway, once the street did get done, we had to put in the underground electric. We've had a real challenge with the underground electric. A lot of that has to do with my subcontractor that I hired, which was on the list of Evergy that they gave me a list of people that they said we could use. So what we did, we used one of those people, and he had some health problems apparently along the way. We brought other contractors in, and then he would show up. That's not anybody's problem but my problem. But we finally do have power. We have two houses sold. We have spent a lot of money investing in marketing for those homes. And the city of Hutchison on their website had on their website that anybody that was requesting an MIH house grant, it was on their website that it had to be for first-time homebuyers. I picked that up off of a customer that came in and said, you know, I said, well, you know, I think that you'll qualify for an MIH. And he says, no, we won't qualify. We looked it up on the website in the city of Hutchison because Historically, I've built many of these MIH homes in Lyons. I've built them in McPherson. I've built them in Mound Ridge. I've built them in Marion. I've built these things in several places. And generally the city takes care of, a lot of times, trying to market that and get their customers to come in. They get approved, because I can't approve the customer to get the MIH grant. It has to be turned into the city. And then the city has to turn it into the state. And my website linked. to the city's website so they could go straight to the city website, fill out their form to get the MIH. When they were doing that, the city said it was for first-time homebuyers only. That's not the case. So anybody that wanted to get in on being a first-time homebuyer with this MIH grant, the city's website was saying, you know, it's only for first-time homebuyers. I have no idea How long that went on? You know, I didn't read through their website. I kind of figured the city of Hutchinson had their act together because they have to work with the state. So just clarifying, the customer has to go through the city of Hutchinson to the state to get the application approved to come to me. Then I can build a house. So that happened. And I think that only got cleaned up about maybe, I'm going to say within the last three months. And that was one of the items that we have no idea how many customers we might have lost on the marketing to tell people to go to our website, look up in the city of Hutchison, and they were being denied if they weren't a first-time homebuyer. And the main customers that we sell these homes to are teachers and policemen, firemen, just city employees, county employees, just nurses. Those are the type of people we sell these homes to. These houses are selling for $250 to – on the average, I'm going to say right now that what we see right now is $250 to – $350,000 homes. And there's a variety that we have. The other thing about an MIH home that the grant was for, I hope I don't take up too much of your time, but the grant was for $20,000. Well, we have to pay somebody because generally in the history that I've done every project that I've done an MIH with, the city went out and got the MIH. and put together the RHID and done that. I had to pay somebody to come in and do that. And so I still have to pay him. So I discounted that, I think it was $2,000 or $2,500 that we take to pay the person that put together to get these grants for us. Let's see. From that... We got some grants from the city and the state. So the incentives that we have here, with the specials being what they are, I mean, at the end of the day, I think it's hovering between $80,000 and $110,000 in incentives. We marketed that, and we have two houses sold. I can't tell you if that has anything to do with the website. I can only tell you we're here to sell. The other thing that happens in a MIH home, we have to qualify. let's see, we have to meet a guideline set by the state. Now, if I pre-sell those homes, if I go out and pre-sell, it takes away the guidelines because the state looks at it as saying, okay, if it's an MIH and they're going for an MIH, before, this gets really kind of confusing, but if they get qualified for MIH and then it's better if we have the house under contract because we don't have to meet what the state requirements are. State requirements is no steps going into the house and it probably adds I'd hate to say, out of the $20,000, it probably adds $15,000 to the cost of the house. So if we're able to pre-sell, if we're able to market and pre-sell those homes, it puts more money in the customer's pocket. So we've been marketing to sell those houses in advance because we don't have to meet their guidelines because the state looks at it like it's custom. So at this point, I'd prefer to try to pre-sell because I think I could put more in the customer's pocket. We also had some other problems. The lift station, we've only put two of them in. We've probably built over 20, 25 streets in different towns in the state, but a lot of them here. I've only put two of those lift stations in. The last one I did was $65,000. This one was $300,000. I'm going to say $345,000, $350,000. And then Evergy's changed what they do on the electric. So then we had to spend, so far we've paid for the lift station. And then we've also paid for the underground electric to get to the lift station, because Evergy doesn't use the same power, I guess you'd say. And so we had to bring overhead power into the lift station. And nobody from the city picked up and called me and said, Jim, we have a problem here. No one did that. I had to go fish that out because I was wondering why the lift station wasn't getting hooked up. Well, that took us probably a month or two just to try and figure out how to get the power to the lift station with what it required. So anyway, we probably spent another $45,000 getting the electric to the lift station. And at that, that's probably about the end of where it's at today. I have a lot of people calling right now. But we've had a slow time since we started on the two houses that we had. We have other houses going. But those two, we didn't have electric there on site to be able to power up those houses to get electricity. power there, other than we built most of them on generator. We probably just got power to that subdivision and street lights maybe a little over a month ago. And here we are today. And all I can tell you is I'm doing what I can do, but then I guess I'll kind of leave it up to you to ask any questions. And I hope I didn't cobble this up and hopefully I was clear on how I said it.

Council, what questions do you have?

So I do think that this lift station thing coming to the city staff, I didn't have a clue until, to me, It may have been sent to an email, or they somehow maybe got to some of my emails, but I didn't find out about this until last Wednesday, that they were going to have this meeting and start looking at the special assessments and how to do that, and they were going to talk about the lift station, because I've requested that the lift station be put out on specials, because there's actually 90 houses that that lift station is going to... Take care of so no matter if I die tomorrow You know that lift station is still going to be there and it's still going to be there When when those houses are built all the way through? The other thing is the city of Hutchison also can tie into my lift station so far I've paid to that for that so if there's another if there's another subdivision that goes in the city can hook up to my lift station that we've paid for and And hook up to that And so all I'm trying to do is get the specials. I have requested with Matt that returns my calls He I did request that we spread that out over the 90 homes Because it will be spread out and used for the 90 lots not just phase 1 not phase 1 and phase 2 But it's going to be for 90 of them So it's a long term deal. It's great location But right now, recently, we've had some people calling in. But most generally, I had one person from Arkansas that I met today. Entry level home, $260,000, $70,000 home. Looks pretty positive. Other than that, we've had a lot of seniors looking at moving into Hutchison. I've had people from Colorado, Texas, Arizona, Michigan, and there's a couple of other states. But I see more seniors moving in here right now. The other thing that we have done, and I hope you can hear me OK, but we're working with Liberty Homes. It's another developer that we sold some land to up in McPherson. And they bought six lots. And they're a very specific builder. When they come in, they'll probably build six homes. I'm guessing. And and they're a very specific home and you get what you get But they mainly build ahead of time and then they sell they've asked about the mih grant in the state of Kansas and they've made a request for being able to make a variation in the in the plans that they have and They're waiting on a reply So I've also asked another builder over in Wichita, and they also have put in to build with basements like what we do. So we also have asked another builder to come in to build here as well. And he has asked the state to not have to be able to do a zero entry with a basement, because that itself probably adds $10,000, which takes away from the grant to the customer. And so to keep the, anyway, I feel like I'm starting to ramble a little bit. There's a hell of a lot of moving parts in this, I can tell you that. So from there, I'm happy to answer any questions. And I hope that helps a little bit.

Okay, I have a couple of questions about, so I looked at your website and on the first screen it shows Hutchinson and Burson. When you click on Hutchinson, it shows properties that are on Kisawa Parkway and they're sold. You can't find Plum Creek unless you go look in another menu. So your website doesn't even show Plum Creek as available homes or lots. Not listed in Hutchinson. When you click on Hutchinson, it shows 311 Kisawa and 15 Kisawa Parkway.

Those houses are sold. I don't know where that comes from.

Right. This is your website that I just looked at within the last five minutes.

You should be able to click on Plum Creek.

You have to go to a menu. But if you click on your main screen, it says Hutchinson and McPherson. You click on Hutchinson. It does not show as Plum Creek even being an option. You may want to fix that. The other thing is that council has been informed that you're charging $2,500 fee for MIH applicants. Is that true?

That is true. I explained it a minute ago. That's what I'm paying Ross Vogel for. He's the one that went out and got the MIH, and he's the one that put together the RHID. I'd been to the city. The city didn't have anybody that could do it. So I went and got him because I know he'd done it for me in Inman and McPherson and other towns. But generally the city itself will go out and get the MIHs, but not here. So we had to go out and do that. So I have to pay him. All I'm trying to do is recoup what he's charging me to do that.

Okay.

But it should be because I don't know on my website. I find it pretty easy to be able to get to it, but maybe I'm wrong. But I wouldn't say I'm an expert in website design.

That's okay. It's actually part of what I do for a living. So looking at your properties, because the lots are listed on Zillow with floor plans. So what you're saying is that You can't sell, you can't build and sell, right? Because then those wouldn't qualify for MIH.

I can build and sell. But if I build for MIH, if it's not pre-sold, I have to build for the Kansas State regulations.

And that gives you so much pause that you've decided to not know.

I mean, the HVAC changes the, the stairs going into the bay. You can't have any steps going into the house.

None of these floor plans have basements.

Sure they do. If there's stairs on the main floor, there's a basement. Well, they might be shown, but there's a, if there's a set of stairs on the main floor, there's a basement. There should be two of them that are slab homes.

I'm looking at the Winston plan, the Perry plan. I'm looking at multiple floor plans.

There's stairs on the Perry plan because that's one of our most popular plans. Okay, there is on the Perry plan.

I see that one. I apologize. Megan's Way plan, Winston plan.

It's a slab, if I'm right.

Right.

Stanford's got a set of stairs. I think we've got four, but we have more. But those are just what we have listed. Those are probably some of our most popular plans. But it gives people the idea. All I'm trying to do is get a phone call to come into my office. At that point, I start questioning them, you know, are you married? How many kids do you have? How old are they? I have to go through that. Then I ask for what kind of amenities. Because I try to somewhat qualify them so that I realize if they have a $200,000 budget, it's probably not going to happen. If they've got a $180,000 budget, that's probably not going to happen either. But if they can hit up to $230,000, $240,000 and up, I can do that. We have a ton of incentives. I can't tell you why they're not coming in. But right now, our phone's ringing. Maybe it's got something to do with the interest rate. I'm not here to cry on you guys. I'm not telling you that. We have other houses that we built. But, you know, we're not just not building houses. We're just not seeing a lot of activity in Plum Creek. But at the end of the day, we've had more than our share of challenges in that subdivision. Another thing that happened was when this first got set up with the city of Hutchison, You know, I had to come up with, I can't remember how much it was, but they wanted me to cut a check for anything that was over the, what was that, 900,000 or 1,100,000, the city? The city was picking up on the RHID and from that I had to pay for? Do you remember? I don't know what it was, but it was several, I mean, all I know is, I've spent a heck of a lot of money, and I like to see houses going up there, too. But I have to do it in the right way in order to really get the money to the customer. I've dropped off flyers to the city of Hutchinson, you know, flyers, and asked the city of Hutchinson if they'd pass them out to their employees. So I asked the employees, have you got any of these flyers? No. Fire department? I took them to the fire department. They didn't get them. Those are my customers. I took flyers to the police station. They didn't pass them up because these people are like, it's a surprise. And at the end of the day, I'm just here to try and get it built. I'm looking for another builder. But I don't know what's happening with the employment in Hutchison. I'd like to know a little bit about things myself.

Firefighters and teachers and the occupations.

Teachers are what we sell to. Those are our people.

Right. The occupations that you've listed, even with a married, being married to a spouse who also has a job, there are very few in Hutchinson, Kansas, who are making $240,000 or who are going to move into a $240,000, $260,000. Well, they do in McPherson.

They do in Marion.

They do in other towns.

I can't build them for free. We can't build them for $150,000 or $200,000. When you see Liberty come in, they're very specific on their prices. They'll probably be in the $250,000. I don't know if they have one in the $250,000. I'm going to say their market is mainly going to be in the $250,000, but I'll bet they're in the $270,000 and up. Slab, no three-car garage, no basement. They don't offer them. It's what they sell. And they're good builders.

And you've removed the pool and the playground from your amenities. Is that correct?

Well, no. The playground is right next door at the school.

That's not it. That's... Hmm? Okay.

It's open to the public. I mean, it's school. That's where the kids are going to go to school. Now, we told them we were going to put the pool in phase two because somebody's got to pay for that. So we really didn't want to put the parking lot in for the pool, and I told them not to do that. So if you look back at their budget when they set that amount of money that the city was going to pay, it was either $900,000 or $1,100,000. Or a million point one whatever that was I guarantee you it didn't have the parking lot for the pool in it Because when I drove up there they were pouring the damn parking lot and you talk about somebody surprised and not happy That was me I have a reputation of being a little strong.

I have two questions. Shoot. So the first one, do you have a professional realtor that is helping you sell these properties? Because why is it the city's responsibility to bear the burden of marketing your property? We're supposed to be impartial to all developments. But you repeatedly say, why isn't this city marketing your property? That's not our job to market your property.

You want houses, right? I think that's one of the top three things. But that's not the city's job.

We're supposed to be impartial. Okay.

Is there another guy out there that's got one of these?

And then I would ask, too, for the sidewalks, while I understand that we made a concession that it was only going to be on one side.

Yes.

Is the savings for not having to pay for the sidewalks going to be passed on to the person that's going to buy the house?

Everything does. It goes into the cost of the lot.

I'm just asking if that savings is going to be passed on to anyone that's going to buy the lot to build the home.

We have so many incentives on this project. We have... The sidewalk is pretty minimal. It's kind of like... You know, the city's talked about houses. Okay, and I don't want to, it's just, this could take a long time. But, you know, things need to be changed. I fought big time when Jade Pirosky, D. Carvella was here. You all know her. She was on the city commission. Okay, I fought that like crazy. Again, I don't want to bring in another group that came in and was totally against it. There was maybe two builders here. And the city council voted to change and have the sidewalks on both sides of the street, whether people want them or not, you had to put them in. Then they wanted to put them in when the streets were built. Well, what happens is we drive our big equipment over those sidewalks. We pretty much tear up a pretty big chunk of those sidewalks, getting them out of there. Then we go home to the dump. And then we're going to come back and pour them in. To me, I look at that as a waste of money. So what I try to do is just say, hey, let us pour the sidewalks. We'll pay for the sidewalks. And they're not put out on specials. We'll pay for them. The builder will put the sidewalks in because that's what's required. So we go in and put the sidewalks on one side of the street, and that gives people a choice. Some people may not want to have a dog walking and doing their business on the people's yard. And they may not want to scoop it. They may not want to edge it because they're elderly people. And we see that in Plum Creek right now, we see that people are calling on Plum Creek. And a lot of them are seniors. I'll bet I've got five or six people. I don't know why. My phone started ringing a month ago. But it's been slow before that. So I don't know if I answered your question appropriately.

No, but that's okay.

I'm okay because I could keep... No, it was your questions. I'm sorry. It was your questions about... What else was there? Because I really want to clarify this.

The one if you have a realtor that's helping you sell the properties.

Why we don't have a realtor?

Because I feel like I'm more comfortable selling direct to my customer. A realtor a lot of times... Now, I'll pay a realtor. If they bring me somebody, I'll pay a realtor. They're not always happy with what we pay them, but we'll pay them for a fee. But I do not have one realtor that just sells my houses. I try to sell those houses, and I've been very successful in doing it for a lot of years. I don't have a problem working with realtors. But again, it's better if I'm able to talk straight to my customer. This is how I do it. I'm not saying every builder does it this way. When liberty comes in, they have a realtor. They're a not me. I couldn't tell you how many houses those guys build a year. But they're all over. I sold them lots in McPherson. They build in Wichita. I think they're out of Iowa or Ohio. I don't know where their main base is out of. But they build a lot of homes. But they use a realtor. But they're a very specific home. I build more almost like a custom home. I build more when you bring my customer in that front door and I talk to them about what their needs are and I try and fit their budget. And that's how I do it.

And I can respect that everyone has a different business model or business approach. But, again, I think that when it's being asked repeatedly, you know, why isn't the city marketing my properties or why there was a little snafu on the city's website.

Snafu?

If you had someone assisting with selling the properties, could that have been mitigated? I don't know. I'm just asking. But again, I think just continuing to ask, why isn't the city marketing your property? That's not our role to do that for you.

It's got to start somewhere. They've got to be able to go to the city website. read what that form says, and fill it out. But if they read on there and say, hey, this is only for first-time homebuyers, I have no idea how many people walked away because it said first-time homebuyers only. I'm not saying that the city has to market it, but like I built in McPherson. The city had it on their website. They made a big thing out of it. Oh, look here. But look at all the incentives we've created. We've created the RHID. That RHID probably saves those people. The buyers are probably going to be saved at least $200 to $250 a month, a month. And then they're going to get the MIH grant. And if we do that right, if we do the MIH right, where we are able to pre-sell, I put more money in their pocket. And I got grants from the county for first-time homebuyers. I got a lot incentive from the county. And all I'm trying to do is, I mean, I think that the city ought to say, just like the Chamber of Commerce, I can't say as I've really seen it on the Chamber of Commerce website, the incentives that we've built. But I'll bet there's over 100, I'll bet there's between 80 and 100 and some thousand dollars worth of incentives that are available to people to come in and buy. And it's just not all out there. And I can promote it as much as I can. And, you know...

And then the other question was on the sidewalks. The concession was made that instead of having it on both sides of the street, to have it on one. And I can respect if you're self-performing anything, but the savings of not having to install sidewalks on both sides, is the savings going to be passed on to whoever it is that buys the lot to put the home on? And then I also had questions about the neighborhood pool as well. About the what? The neighborhood pool and whether or not that's going to get put in.

We plan on putting it in phase two. We just didn't want the parking lot in. We're going to move the parking lot. Now we have a parking lot. I can't sell that lot. It's a corner lot. But we'll get there. I mean, we'll get there.

That's the question. When will you get there? I mean, you say you have these two houses sold, right? They're sold. So when is the actual sell date? I mean, is it like still?

Oh, they're within probably 60. I got one of them in the drywall stage. But like right now.

You've had a hole in the ground for what? Almost a year?

That's probably getting close. We had no power.

Right. We didn't have any power. And I think I remember you coming to one of the other council meetings and talking about this problem, if I remember right. We talked about the lift stations, no power to them. It was different to have a power source that had to go to the lift stations, if I remember correct. You talked about this before, yeah. I'm sorry. You've talked about this before, though, correct? So why is this different than any other subdivision? You had these issues in McPherson? Because I'm assuming you're still building houses up there, right? Yeah, the street's in place there. You're still building houses there, right?

We try to sell out.

Do you have any for sale up in McPherson?

No, I don't have any in McPherson.

You don't. So you only have two houses right now going? The two in Plum Creek?

I just finished up. There's probably five.

Okay.

But not everybody wants to live in Plum Creek. I don't just build there. If I'm slow, I mean, I'm not going to just go twiddling my thumbs until I sell a house. I'm selling houses. But I, you know.

So what's the, I guess, I'm trying to figure out the advantage of you bringing in another builder.

Two other builders is my goal. And what's. The incentive to get more houses built.

Okay. Because you can't get them moving, I guess, to get them sold.

Well, I can get them moving, but they'll move faster if I had two other people. When there's a guy that'll roll in there and do six houses on a slab, I'm good with that. If I can get another builder out of Wichita, because I can't really get, there's not that many builders that want to build this price range of homes in Hutchinson, Kansas. Most of the other builders you'll see are kind of trying to do more custom builds.

So why wouldn't you just build a slab home just to get them sold?

Because not everybody wants a slab house. Do you have a slab house?

No, but there's a lot of them probably out there that want them.

Well, there are. And we're building. But that's their choice. But we have an area for slab houses. I mean, the five people that I'm dealing with right now, I've got one or two doing basements, and the rest of them are slabs. And it could be seven people. I mean, you can never tell what they're going to turn into. But you just don't... I mean, on my mind... You have to have a mix. In that area, that's next to a school. You're going to have families there. Families grow. Not everybody can live in a three-bedroom house with no basement. I can build them. I can put them in on a slab. I think we should sell more slabs, but whatever happens, happens. But we will have seniors come into town. But... I just am not seeing all the workhorses that are supposed to be demanding all these houses. And with all the incentives we've got, it just surprises me that we don't have people jumping up and down for them. I'm just telling you how it is.

Well, I have another question for Angela. Angela, he had mentioned spreading the specials out over 90 lots, and I think you had a comment about that.

I'm sorry?

Just to clarify, so like this, we have two public hearings. This first one I'm asking to set is for the lift station and drainage, which will be the specialist assessment. It does not really relate to the RHID. And I do believe these are supposed to be over phase one and two, but I will double check on that. It doesn't specifically state that in the resolution.

that the total amount is 380 000 for that and that includes the lift station and as well as like a 30 000 change order to for payment to get electricity to the lift station that was yeah okay whatever that is i mean that's what we spent i just but you know this is the first time i've heard about it so what surprises me is when they're getting ready the city's ready to go out to say hey we're going to put this stuff out on specials and nobody picks up the phone and says jim This is what's going on. I think I emailed with you today, and you're going to have a meeting on the 21st.

Right, and we usually send, we mail notices and we put it in the newspaper as well. So you would be notified, and really we don't usually go into this detail at this meeting, just at the public hearing. We would discuss all this at the public hearing. And so this is how we, or these are the dates we have to meet in order to get it bonded by October 1st to get that technical paid off. And then the other resolution for a public hearing would be for the RHID and that in the exhibit A on that, it does say that you paid the $306,642 directly to the city to contribute so that the RHID amount would be, so that the feasibility study worked out. Like that's what you had to contribute so that the city was comfortable with the amount that we were bonding and the RHID would pay off those bonds.

This just happens to be the first time. And I'm really happy to stand here and talk as long as you want, because my goal is to get this project moving and get it done. I can't tell you why. I just explained to you as best probably as I can on where I'm at. I'm not sure Enrico understands when, I'm not asking the city to sell my houses. I'm just asking the city to go to their employees and say, hey, look at this gift we're giving to the employees of Hutchison, firemen, policemen, teachers, all those people. What would be wrong with handing out some flyers to these people and let them know the incentives that the city of Hutchison has been involved in and tell them what a great deal there is out there Because when I drop off flyers, then I ask people, have you seen our flyers? No. So I'm okay with that. I mean, I'm marketing it.

I do want to share that. I mean, staff, including myself, we have talked about the Plum Creek development with folks. And, hey, check it out. I mean, you know, it's a good land. I mean... We have in just general, in the general sense of it, talked about your property with folks. But the way in which it comes off is if we should be marketing it for you.

I don't mean that. All I mean is I think that you should show more interest in it if the website is wrong. I mean, I can't believe that.

Strawn, I think we have shown interest. I mean, we've done a lot to help you. I'm sorry? We've done a lot to help you with this project. I think we have shown substantial interest in making sure that this project is successful. We have helped a lot. Just to clarify.

Okay.

Mr. Strawn, your website is also incorrect. It says to complete the state of Kansas moderate income housing grant application and send it to Carissa Paxton's email. She hasn't been at the city for like four to six months or so. Okay. So you should definitely fix that. I thought that phase one was going to be duplexes.

I wanted to bring that up too because you were going to build those whether they were sold or not. I remember having that conversation.

Those weren't in my age. Those were like...

MIH still works for those, but we've looked at putting those duplexes up and leasing them out. And it doesn't look like they won't cash flow. So we're looking at pulling off of that. And we went to a certain design for a, I think it's a 1,250 or 1,300 square foot slab home. And there will be, we're going to build them as a pair. We sell them off in halves or we build them on individual lots and there will be an HOA up there that takes care of their yard and things And when does that start when does that start then as soon as we get up I mean there again We're back to the hand my age if these people are able to qualify for the in my age, you know I mean I can build them but some of those, you know, you just have to look at It's better if we can get them to go to a straight sale. So some of the people, so I only have, in the lots that we have, I don't know who else has lots in Hutchinson, Kansas. But we have lots up in Kissawah Village. I've only got two of these small lots and one larger lot. I finished up a couple of houses down there. So I only have three lots left in Kissawah Village, a couple scattered in this project. And I don't know of another project that I know. I know the city's working with a couple other developers. And so we'll see how, you know. But I know what they're going to build. That's why I think that the basements need to be here as well as slabs because when Liberty comes in, they won't build basements. And I'm only guessing there's a company out of Manhattan. Is there still a Manhattan group to come into Hutchison on 11th Street? Yes.

Yes.

I'm only guessing, but I'm only going to guess they'll build six to ten houses, and then they'll sell them, and they'll see how well they sell. But it's easier for them to be able to do an MIH, and I don't know if they're going after the MIHs or not. But if they go after the MIH, it's easier for them because they're on a slab. It's harder when you're on a basement. But, but that market, you cannot not have that market, not just Kansas got to have the basements.

And I will say again, that the reason for me being very direct, there is a contract between us and the residential units were required to be completed June 30th of this year. And we're past June 30th. Yep. Um, in addition to any liabilities that the city is exposed to on the debt, I mean, I'm strong. I'm just doing my job here. Um, and I have concerns. I mean, again, I understand you don't want to talk about what happened prior with other lots going to the tax sale, but I don't want it to be a rinse and repeat on this one.

Mm hmm.

And I hope you can see how I'm arriving at that conclusion.

I don't have a problem with that. I think you should hear the rest of the story. But I don't think we want to publicize it on TV.

I mean, I was like probably 12 years old when it happened, so I'd love to hear the story. I'm sorry? Nobody up here is responsible for whatever happened at the Morris Street, Oxford Point properties, so I don't have any idea besides that they went to tax sales. So if there is something else... that you're saying is not your responsibility, but allowing something to go to tax sale automatically feels like it was some fault of yours. And if it wasn't and there's more to the story, we don't know that because none of us were on council. Some of us weren't even in town.

Sure. I'm just telling you, I'd be happy to tell you that story. I could put it on a piece of paper.

Okay. I don't know that this conversation is very productive. I think the point of the motion or the item being discussed is to set a public hearing, and I think that we should move on.

I have an agreement with that. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

I'll move to approve a resolution to set a public hearing for July 21st. on a proposed special assessments for Plum Creek Lift Station and Drainage Special Benefit District and authorize the mayor to sign.

Second.

Truen. Yes. Garza. Yes. Goss. Yes. Fast. Yes. Magers.

Yes.

Item 8C, consider a resolution to set public hearing on proposed special assessments for Plum Creek Phase 1 Special Benefit District.

So this would be the next part of that is setting the hearing for the special assessments. These would be under the RHID. So it would create the, well, we've already created the special benefit district. It would just allow us to continue with the bonding piece of the project.

Okay. Same deal on July 21st?

On July 21st, yes.

All right. I move to approve a resolution to set a public hearing on July 21st on proposed special assessments for Plum Creek Phase 1 Special Benefit District and authorize the mayor to sign.

Second. Truen? Yes. Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Magers? Yes. Item 8D, consider a resolution to set public hearing on proposed assessments to the Spyglass Hills Waterline SBD.

Council, this is again the same thing. We're setting a public hearing to propose special assessments to the Spyglass Hills Waterline Special Benefit District. So we have created the district. The improvements have been made. If my understanding is correct, we may still have some sod to put in place, and we're wrapping up the final invoices. But continuing with this process and having the public hearing on the 21st would again allow us to bond this with the other bonds that will close on before October 1st. So we're trying to take advantage of consolidating a lot of bonding by bonding them all together. After this, if you approve setting the public hearing, we will mail letters to all the owners of Spyglass and we've already sent the notice to be published in the Hutchinson News. So that's how we will notify people of the public hearing, and then they will have a chance to come to the public hearing and speak, and then we will talk about what the next steps forward with assessing those to the properties will be.

Great. I move to approve a resolution to set at public hearing on July 21st on proposed assessments to the Spyglass Hills Waterline SBD and authorize the mayor to sign.

Second.

Truen. Yes. Garza. Yes. Goss. Yes. Fass. Yes. Meagher. Yes. Item 8E, consider an ordinance authorizing issuance of geo bonds to pay for certain improvements. Shout out HVAC.

Hey, before you get going, I think we need to take a break for five minutes.

Okay.

That will work. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

The next item on the agenda is to authorize issuance of GO bonds for certain improvements for Shattuck Park HVAC. So IRS requires that we pass this ordinance authorizing the issuance of GO bonds before spend any hard costs any capital improvement costs before we actually bond the project so by doing this resolution we're allowed to continue with the project and then when we issue the bonds before october we'll be able to reimburse ourselves um the feedback was budgeted in in 2026 for 177 000 THE CONTRACT OR AWARD AMOUNT IS $183,789. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE ORDINANCE IS $192,000, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE BONDING COST. SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT. SO LIKE I SAID, THIS WILL ALLOW US TO BOND WITH OTHER PROJECTS IN OCTOBER 2026. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?

I THOUGHT I SAW THIS LISTED IN THE CIP the roof for next year. That is Public Works. I'm pretty sure. It said Shattuck.

No, the roof's been done. The roof is good on Shattuck.

Good evening. Justin Combs, Director of Parks and Facilities. You are absolutely correct. The roof for Elmdale was complete last year. Oh, sorry, Shattuck. Shattuck, it's in the 27 budget. Okay. We will most likely hold off on actually installing this unit at the same time we do the roof in 27, assuming it's approved in the budget, just so we don't have to cut a brand-new roof. But there's a really long lead time on getting these units manufactured, so that's why we're moving forward with it now.

Okay, I was confused. I was thinking of roof, and you're talking about rooftop units. Is that right?

Yeah, the HVAC, the actual air conditioning system. Okay. Yes. But good question, good clarification.

Any other questions, council?

You said the total is $192,000? Yes. I'll make a motion to approve an ordinance authorizing issuance of GO bonds... for 192,000 to pay for certain improvements, Shattuck HVAC, and authorize the mayor to sign.

Second. Truin?

Yes.

Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Magers?

Yes.

Item 8F, consider resolution of intent to exceed revenue neutral rate.

Angela Richter, again, resolution of intent to exceed revenue neutral rate. So after this afternoon's budget discussion, we need to determine whether we want to exceed revenue neutral, what the max mill levy would be, and the date of the public hearing. So in front of you is That resolution, if we do choose to exceed revenue neutral, then we would be setting the public hearing date. I apologize, I did not print off this memo, so I can't remember the date off the top of my head that we would have to do that, but I believe it's the first meeting in September.

September 1st.

Yes.

Okay, so for me, this is just like such a a CYA type of thing because passing it means it just gives us the wiggle room to still figure out our budget over the next give or take three months. If we don't pass it, then we're saying we have this really firm number that we have to stay within and if we don't, there are some

real consequences and they did change that okay in legislation they changed it so the county clerk now has the ability that if you submit a budget that exceeds revenue neutral and she doesn't have proof that you went through the procedures and everything the county clerk can lower your mill levy to be within revenue neutral and if your valuation changes it'll still get lowered so that you'll be below revenue neutral so that it there isn't that terrible consequence of what if our valuation changes and we accidentally go over revenue neutral. They've taken that away by giving that authority to the county clerk. So what this would really do then is give us the ability to work out what are the levies going to be. It would give us more time. So that's what it would do. It would set our max mill levy, but we don't have to do that. If we want to set a revenue neutral hearing and set a mill max levy and then we decide to reduce it and remain revenue neutral, we can. It gives us that ability.

Council have any more questions for Angela?

I think that we should pass the resolution to potentially exceed, and we don't have to list a potential rate, correct?

We do have to list a max mill levy because that will be on the notices sent to homeowners. Okay. So Mary just saved me here. Revenue neutral rate would be 40.945 mils. In the 2027 budget, if we kept the same mil, it would be 42.096. So in the examples I showed, we showed revenue neutral halfway in between.

Council, do you have any direction on which way you want to go?

And if we say, I feel like this is a stupid question, but I'm going to ask it out loud anyway. If we say that we're going to be flat, that is different than revenue neutral and we still have to name our max mill levy and pass this resolution to exceed. Correct.

If we want a flat mill levy to keep the mill levy the same as last year, we would need to do this. Anything above that 40.945 would need this resolution.

Based on the presentation that we saw earlier today, I'm leaning towards the flat mill paired, of course, with the sales tax. And I think I like those projections better than the neutral with the sales tax. And so that would be exceeding it. That would be the language provided on page 194. the resolution would be the exact same as that, right?

So I guess I have to have some sort of motion on the direction we want to go with this.

Well, I agree with Stacy. We have a resolution to exceed revenue neutral and a flat mill, no increase.

And it would set our mill levy at $42.096, correct? Yes.

Any other discussion, council, on that? No. If that's the case, then I just need a motion. Oh, yeah, I guess we need some comments from the audience. Questions, comments? Okay, if none, then looking for a motion.

I'll move to approve a resolution of intent to exceed revenue neutral rate... setting the mill not to exceed 42.096 and authorize the mayor to sign.

You know what? I second that.

Truen? Yes. Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Magers? Yes.

Thank you, council.

Thank you, Angela.

Thank you.

item 8g consider resolution fixing a hearing date and time for five abandoned structures 102 west 9th avenue 300 east avenue e 315 and a half north cleveland street 615 east avenue a and 1109 north elm well good evening council jason lady building official

So tonight I have before you five abandoned structures, which were just mentioned. 102 West 9th Avenue, 300 East Avenue E, 315 and a half, North Cleveland, 615 East Avenue, AM 1109 North Elm Street. And this is to Senate. So I believe on page 195 of your agenda packet are these houses and my staff report. So it is recommended that the City Council accept and approve the resolution fixing a time and place for a hearing for five abandoned residential structures. We have, and I say we, I mean staff, city staff has reviewed these houses and you'll see the information that I bring before you tonight. So all these we've reached out to make contact with the owner with no A real response as to what they're going to do with any of these properties. Staff has mailed certified letters as far as property maintenance violations and then we'll mail the certified letters regarding the hearing dates as well. So this is the first one, 102 West 9th Avenue. Residents currently vacant since 2024. There was a structure fire. There was a PMC open in 2025. Also in 2025, there was a full home remodel, but that expired in July 2nd of 2025 with no inspections. We've had four property maintenance violations since 2020. It was boarded up in 2024 at the time of the structure fire, and there's no active utilities since that structure fire in 2024, and this property is delinquent on taxes only for 2025. The next one is 300 East Avenue E. The Individual that owns a home is deceased. However, there is It's kind of convoluted on this one, but we're working through some things but So the residence has been vacant since 2022 we did remove a resident from that house recently who was squatting in that house, but the individual stated that he knew the owner and had permission to live there, and so we weren't able to get ahold of anybody to clarify that, but we did remove an individual and board this up recently. So it was boarded up in May of 2026. There was a PMC open on this house in May of 2026. It has had 12 property maintenance violations since 2018, and the taxes on this property have been delinquent since 2022. This is 315 1⁄2 North Cleveland Street. Again, the property is currently vacant. Again, like the last home, we recently removed someone from this house that was squatting. And so we have a PMC that was opened in... February 27th to 26th also has a nuisance violation case that is still active since 11-12-25. This photo doesn't do it a lot of justice as far as what the yard looks like, but we'll get into that a little bit more when we have the hearing as well. And then there's four property maintenance violations since 2025. It was boarded up in 2025, and there's been no active utilities since 2025. And the taxes are delinquent for 2025. This is 615 East Avenue A. This had a structure fire in 2024. Currently remains vacant. To date, we get a lot of C-Click fixes on this and questions asked to our office about what's being done with this property. It had a current PMC that was opened on 4-3-26. There have been two property maintenance violations on it since 2018. There was a board up since 2024, but their utilities are current on this home, but I checked with utility billing, and there's been no usage on the property for three years. And the taxes on this property are current. And then 1500 West 12th is our last one. It's been vacant since 2023. There's a PMC open on it in October of 25. Eleven property maintenance violations since 2023. Um, as you can see, we have another one coming up as it needs to be mode. Uh, the board up in October of 2025, no active utilities on the structure since 2023. And then it has been on taxes since 2023.

And I'll stand for any questions on any of these properties on the 615 East Avenue, which is your slide prior to this slide. Um, You mentioned that the utilities are current, but they haven't had any usage. So are they paying the minimum water fee plus their stormwater fee each month?

Yes, paying the minimum fees.

And that's the one you guys have the insurance money for, right?

We do have insurance money for it currently, yes.

Can you tell us what that means again?

So there's a percentage of the insurance money that goes to the owner and a percentage of the insurance money that goes to the city, and we hold that until something is done with the house, whether they revitalize the house and they get a certificate of occupancy to move back into it and we clear it, or they demo the house completely. And I can't remember what the number was off the top of my head. I want to say somewhere in the $40,000, $45,000 range is what the owner had originally given us, but this was some point last year when we talked to the owner as to what it was going to take to demo this house. I can't imagine that it's going to take that much, but we do have the fire proceeds that if the city has to demo it, then... That money is effectively there through the fire proceeds, and then we would return to the owner the remaining.

102 West 9th, which was your first property, it's listed as also having been a fire. Were there any insurance proceeds from that one?

I'm not sure if there were insurance proceeds. I'll have to follow up on that.

That couple, Hispanic couple that were here last week, is this their house? No. No, okay.

No, this is not.

Okay.

Council, any more questions for Jason?

I think so.

Any questions or comments from the audience? If not...

I do want to make a comment. I received a message from a resident earlier over the last couple days, and it seems like she expressed concern about... I don't know if it's really about the process that we're going through with these properties or the speed at which they're being considered for... unsafe and dangerous status but I think it's apparent that you're starting with properties that have a history of property maintenance violations they have they're an eyesore they have they've been burnt out things like that they they it's not like you're taking somebody's home that somebody's currently living in and it's a maybe just has some code violations because they didn't paint or got down on their luck or something like that, and now we're saying, hey, fix this or we're going to tear your house down. That's totally not the case that's happening here. We have a set of rules that we're following with this process, and the alternative is that we also have multiple housing programs that people can take advantage of through interfaith through down payment assistance financial literacy the Neighborhood revitalization program and that's I'm just scratching the surface of what's available to people so I I think that there are people who don't understand this process and that the goal is to

essentially make the property owners rehab the property tearing it down as a last last resort and effectively demolition should be one of the last resorts i mean when we tear down a lot of the times what you have is is vacant properties um and they tend to sit there just because no one wants to build on some of those vacant properties no one wants to build a A couple hundred thousand dollar house next to a house that's $50,000, $60,000. It is a hard decision to make. And we're going to talk about it a little bit later during the city manager's comments. I have another presentation that we're going to talk about some of these things tonight and some programs that we're looking at and some things we're talking about and hopefully some things that will come to fruition and because we're not just out there to tear down houses. I mean, we're out there to help the community. We're out there to revitalize the community and make our community better and make it look good.

Yeah, and I think that the society provides the carrots, if you will, of maintain your home and your resale value increases, et cetera, et cetera. And then your neighbors are also incentivized to maintain and upkeep their homes. And it's a cycle. us sending property violation notices and condemning properties is is the stick of of the situation and um I think for so long we didn't we didn't do much um with this process and I feel like we're still making up for for lost time I know you guys have been busy working on a lot of a lot of different, um, projects with this in this vein. And, um, I appreciate it. And I think the, the results are, they're, they're going to be tangible soon.

And I will say too, that for the person that reached out to you, they didn't reach out to me, but, um, through a lot of the community surveys, cleaning up blight has been a top priority. And so we're just listening to the community. And if, if that's, you know, we're trying to deliver on some expectations there.

Yeah. And I, I think it's, uh, Part of the concern is why haven't you tried empathy and sympathy first? Why haven't you reached out to the owners and said, how can we help you? I mean, the owners are deceased. The owners are out of town. The owners have chosen not to engage with the city in many of these circumstances. And it's not just the residential. It's the commercial side, too.

And to add to what you're saying, Stacey, I mean, from what I've noticed, most about every time we've been up here, nobody's contacted, you know, I mean, send out letters, you get no response.

Yeah. I mean, these five, have you had, did any phone calls or letters, emails come in?

Oh, the owner of, um, six 15 East Avenue a, but not recently. I mean, we had those conversations. Almost a year ago. I mean, maybe not that long, maybe eight months. I didn't follow up with staff because the individual who talked with him is on leave this week. So I wanted to follow up with him for this meeting, but wasn't able to.

That name returned multiple results in the Reno County partial search.

Well, looking back in time, some of these came up, and I had concerns about the same thing you were talking about and what the public's had a concern is, like, we're just wanting to come in and tear down houses. And so I met with Jason at one point because I'm like, okay, what's our process? How does this happen? Are we making sure we're contacting people so that we're not tearing somebody's home down? And he walked me through the process, and we are doing our due diligence to make sure, last resort, this is the path we're going down. So I had concerns about it in the beginning, but now I'm going, I think we're headed down the right path and doing what we need to be doing to take care of some of this blight, but yet making sure we're not taking somebody's home away.

Yeah, and if there's comments out there, I mean, I'd absolutely love to hear them because if there's something we can do better, different than other communities are doing or, you know, I mean, as long as we're staying in with the guidelines and the state statutes and our city ordinances and things of that nature, then if we can make our process better, let's make it better.

But, you know, also this 615 East Day, I've got a gentleman that keeps contacting me because he owns a house next door. runs a business out of it, and he's got to look at this eyesore every day and gets comments on it, and he's just, you know, he calls me, man, can you do anything? Can you do anything? We're doing what we can. So when they're like this, sometimes it affects, you know, the neighbors and other people around.

And in my slide presentation later, we'll actually talk about this house specifically again.

So if there's no other questions or comments on these, I just need a motion.

I move to approve a resolution fixing a hearing date and time for five abandoned structures at 102 West 9th Avenue, 300 East Avenue E, 315 1⁄2 North Cleveland Street, 615 East Avenue A, 1109 North Elm Street, and authorize the mayor to sign.

Second.

Truen.

Yes. Garza. Yes.

Goss. Yes. Fast. Yes. Magers. Yes. Item H, consider an ordinance regarding ceremonial proclamations, recognitions, and similar matters policy.

Mayor, council members, I don't have much for you today. I think this is maybe the third time I've appeared on this matter. At the last meeting, we had a brief discussion about the draft that I had presented. looked at some of those comments, sent an email last week kind of giving some feedback on those comments and asked for any additional feedback. Receiving none, I believe this resolution, which would adopt the policy that's attached as Exhibit A to it, is ready for approval unless there's been something that's come up between our last communication and now.

Council, do you have any questions or comments on this policy?

I do not. I read the proclamation and felt that it looked good.

I don't have any additional questions. Thank you for the time that you spent on this and for reading all of our remarks on it and finding the middle ground that I think we were all hoping for on the subject.

You're welcome.

Council has no questions. Are there any comments or questions from the audience? If not, again, I want to thank you as well, Cody, for getting this straightened out for us and getting more clarity so we can proceed forward with this item.

Next step we'll improve this. We'll put together kind of a more of a easier to read public-facing document that people can understand how they can present a suggestion and all that so we make it clear for the public how they can follow this process. But we'll work with staff to get that going. Okay. Sounds good.

I move to approve an ordinance regarding ceremony proclamations, recognitions, and similar matters policy and authorize the mayor to sign.

Second. Yes. Garza. Yes. Yes. Fast. Yes. Mayors.

Yes.

Item eight. I consider an ordinance regarding temporary text amendment to chapter 27 of the code of the city of Hutchinson.

Let me get this PowerPoint pulled up real quick. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Matt Williams, Director of Community Development. Tonight I'm presenting a proposed temporary amendment to our zoning regulations related to large-scale data centers and utility-scale battery energy storage systems. Over the past several months, these types of facilities have become a topic of public interest here in town and also around the country. While the city hasn't received any specific applications or any applications at all for these uses, we believe it's prudent to craft some regulatory framework before an application is submitted and we're under a time crunch. These are intended to be temporary regulations that provide a reasonable review process while we continue developing a more comprehensive permanent regulations. So the temporary amendment has three primary components. First, it creates definitions so everyone has a clear understanding of what is and what is not regulated. Second, it establishes where these uses may be considered. And third, it identifies information that applicants must provide to allow the city to evaluate potential impacts. So I'll briefly walk through these. So the first definition is for large-scale data centers. The key point is that the definition applies to facilities whose primary purpose is large-scale digital processing, cloud computing, artificial intelligence, co-location, or other similar commercial operations. It's not intended to regulate the typical server room that exists within an office building, hospital, school, or business. This definition provides that distinction. Businesses routinely have server rooms or IT equipment that support their own operations. Those remain permitted as an accessory use and are not affected by these regulations. Likewise, this definition for utility scale battery energy storage systems focuses on commercial or utility scale battery storage facilities that provide power to the electric grid or function as a principal land use. These are fundamentally different from a battery that serves a single home, a business, or a solar installation. And then similar to the server room definition, this accessory battery energy storage system clarifies that smaller systems serving individual properties remain accessory uses and are permitted. Staff is recommending three land use standards. First, prohibiting these large-scale facilities in all residential zoning districts. Second, requiring a conditional use permit in commercial and industrial districts. That means these uses are not permitted by right. Each proposal would receive a public hearing before the Planning Commission and ultimately be considered by you, City Council, based on the characteristics of each individual project. And then finally, the accessory battery systems and accessory server rooms remain permitted throughout the city where appropriate. The temporary regulations also identify the types of information that applicants would be required to submit to us with their application for conditional use. This includes site plan and operations plan, electrical demand and utility coordination, information on water demand, discharge and cooling methods, fire and life safety systems, traffic impacts, noise screening and lighting, environmental impacts, decommissioning and site restoration, and then emergency response. These requirements don't predetermine whether the project is going to be approved or not. They just give us the information that we need so that staff, planning commission, and city council can have enough information to make an informed decision on them. And then, like we've talked about in the past, right now we're on track one for temporary regulations. Tonight represents that second step there. The planning commission reviewed these temporary regulations on June 9th and recommended approval unanimously. If adopted this evening, these regulations would take effect while staff begins working on permanent regulations. We've already begun this process, and over the next few months, we'll work with the Planning Commission, utility providers, our emergency responders, different stakeholders in the community to craft what we think would be appropriate regulations for our community. Those permanent regulations will ultimately come back to both the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration. And before I get to our recommendation, I wanted to again say that Planning Commission heard this on June 9th. They voted to recommend it seven to zero. There were five members of the public who made comments at the public hearing. They voiced concerns, not necessarily with the temporary regulations, but for data centers in general. They voiced concerns about fire risk, low job creation, water usage, environmental impact, decommissioning, sound and light pollution. And then we received emails both in support and against the temporary regulations or data centers in general. I've included all those comments in your packet. So staff's recommendation is that based upon information available prior to tonight, we recommend approval of the text amendment. So I'd be happy to answer any questions.

I have a big problem with you going this far. I don't, people are going to ring my phone down because we're not approving nothing on data centers. This is just a process that we have to go through. Am I right or wrong?

Am I right or wrong? So right now, because we don't have definitions for data centers, if someone applied to build a data center tomorrow, it's possible that they would be able to do that by right, depending on the zoning.

they would they'd be able to do it without this recommendations if we didn't have recommendations they still can do it right so right now we don't have anything on our books so well

We are crafting permanent regulations that will look into every unique aspect of data centers and battery energy storage systems. While we're doing that, we've temporarily come up with this plan, which means that if someone applies for a data center tomorrow, they don't get to build it right away. They have to fill out an application. They have to provide information on all of these different areas. They have to give us information on their traffic impacts, fire and life safety, decommissioning, noise screening. They have to give us all information about this so that we can go to the planning commission We'll send notices around. We'll put it in the newspaper. We'll tell people, hey, we're going to have a hearing about this. Planning Commission will look at it. Staff will provide a recommendation. Planning Commission will give you a recommendation, and then it would come here for you to look at all of their information and decide yes or no. So today, they potentially could just get a building permit. If this passes, they would have to do all of that, provide all that information, have the public hearings, have public input, let everybody know about it. So that's what we're trying to put in place right now so that we can come up with permanent regulations that may be just as strenuous as this. They may be more strenuous. They may be less strenuous.

I still really don't understand that. If we don't want it, why do we have to go through all this? I don't understand all that.

Well, if we don't want it and they applied today, they could still build it. Tomorrow, if you approve this, it can come to you and you could tell them no.

How is that possible?

The reason why it's possible, Steve, is because they can do that by right based on our zoning now. So because we don't have anything on the books, that's how they're able to do that.

Which is the whole point that I brought up when I brought this up a couple months ago, which was we don't have what defines what is a utility. And a data center or a BESS is, by definition, could be considered a utility which is exempt from all zoning. They could build on residential. They could build in any zone right now, today.

Unless we have rules.

Unless we put rules in place, which is why we asked Planning and Zoning to adopt temporary rules, to adopt temporary regulations, and amend Chapter 27. Without them going through... Matt is basically giving us an update on the process that we asked him to do, that we asked Planning and Zoning to do.

At that time, I... I was mostly for the thing till I read, then I went to all these study sessions. I've been to a lot of schools since I've been here last and I don't see how it, I don't know. I just, it's just terrible for me to say that we, we say no and they still can do it.

But Steve, it's like any business, a normal business. If they want to come in and start a business, they come in and get a permit. They can build a business. I mean, it's free enterprise. We can't control that unless we have special, usage regulations, which is what this does. Plus, you know, in my opinion, we need this because the litigation that they could bring against us could go on for years.

And right now, Steve, I mean, this is a good stopgap. It's at least creating something.

What this does is this lets us set the playing rules And then we have the ultimate decision. If we decide we don't want them, we can vote no. I understand how you're concerned. There's been a lot of pressure on us. But my thought is I want to be able to control our own destiny. I'm not ready to give up yet, but I also want to be able to control what comes here and doesn't come here. And I can tell you right away... If what wants to come here is not safe and good for a community, I would vote no on it. But if they can prove that what they are doing is safe, not a lot of water usage, Abergy can supply their electrical usage, not a lot of sound, or we're not going to be injured from that. I think it could be a benefit to the community. But I have to wait until one comes here and tells me what equipment they're going to use is my thought.

So Matt, can you correct me if I'm wrong? A yes vote on the item before us tonight establishes rules the rules that we asked the Planning Commission to draft, these definitions. And it closes the gap that would have allowed a data center or a BEST to build on any zoned property within the city limits by right, meaning they would have Just gone and pulled a permit without having to jump through these extra hoops, right? That's what a That's a yes vote.

That's what I guess that is correct.

It would mean that any battery energy storage system or data center would have to come to City Council to individually be looked at and approved before it could get a building permit and a no vote returns us back and reopens the loophole which would allow a best or a data center to, by right, build on any zoned property within the city limits?

The only thing I would say about that is my interpretation is that it would only be allowed on commercial or industrial properties currently. But yes, it would close that loophole.

So it closes the loophole and it gives us an opportunity to build our regulations even further.

To me, it puts a stop gap in while this summer we're coming up with permanent regulations. Yes.

And I think that while there's misinformation and depending on how, I guess, the news writes this story tonight or tomorrow, that'll determine... I guess the public backlash, if you will. There's a chance that people understand what, if this passes in its current form, that people do understand what we're doing, which is closing the gap. And there's a chance that people don't understand and they say that we're paving the way for a BESS or a data center to open because we've now created the parameters which they would have to operate within. I think that that's simply the, you know, that's the downside of our job, that we have to take those phone calls and explain that to people who are willing to listen.

I think that's a good way of putting it. Right now we have no regulations on data centers, and we're asking you to regulate where data centers can go so that they can't go anywhere.

Well, what I would say is I think by approving this, we're doing the best we can to protect our community and control what comes and doesn't come by voting yes. Whether you form or not, because I've got the same phone calls, same emails, a bunch against, but a bunch say, hey, let's develop regulations and be smart about this. That's all I can say to the public is I think this is our best way to protect the community and like I said, control our own destiny and determine what we will or won't allow to come in.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT- And this is ultimately the process that we asked the Planning Commission to work through temporary, what are you calling it, temporary rules? Temporary regulations. Temporary regulations first, followed by permanent regulations later this summer, which you had a slide on. So I feel comfortable passing this.

I agree. I couldn't agree more. I think maybe some of those points we've even gone a little further than we would go on any other business coming here. You know, what do we do with your building when you leave? We don't ask anybody that. but we are concerned about some of these issues that have been brought up, and I think that shows by our reaction and our instructions to the Planning Commission and to you. So I understand what's going on here, and I feel like trying to do my due diligence by approving this,

I think that we've done a good job of being transparent with what we're proposing. We haven't had a bunch of people show up at our meetings angry. We've had a few people. Our website is very clear with what we're proposing, why we're proposing it, and I'm hoping that means the public is trusting us with the process that we're undertaking.

Yeah, I agree with all your comments as well. I think this is a good way to set some parameters going forward. But knowing this is not where we're going to stop, I think this is a good start.

Well, and I would further say I appreciate our planning commission. I mean, they're the ones probably taking as much or more heat on this than we are. I mean, we haven't had a big bunch of people like they probably did at their meeting. So thank you to them, and thank you for helping us.

Yeah, and I want to say that, too. Make sure you tell the planning commission. Thank you. I think they've done an excellent job, and I just want to put this out there. If they need any special guidance, you know, please let us know. I mean, I want to do this right and do what we can to protect the community. So if there's anything special they need, I mean, because they probably know about as much about data centers as we do, so. But anyways, thank you.

Yep. Thanks, Matt. I agree. Thank you. Thank them as well. So I'm going to open up for public comment. If you want to speak in public calling, just remember limit your comments to five minutes and name an address. So if anyone wants to come forward and talk about this.

Bruce Miller, 1804 East 26. Thank you for your time. I've listened to you guys. I'm not in favor of data centers, but I'm not going to say that tonight. I think the decision you're making tonight is a good decision. I think we need to look at regulations. And honestly, what's going to happen here in the future is going to fall back on your lap when the data centers come here and they ask for permission to build. That response is going to fall on the city council, whether you're here or not. So I would hope that your input and the citizens that we have that have voiced their opinions, many of them are not in favor of this, would at least regulate it tough enough that it wouldn't look so attractive to the city. And at the minute these temporary regulations are passed or submitted or changed, that we have a bunch of knocks on the door all of a sudden from these data centers filling out applications. I think what needs to happen is that you need to sustain any applications until these permanent recommendations are in place. The temporaries you have to look at. And you have to decide whether they're going to be functional for the city in an adequate manner that's going to protect the rights of the citizens. If we don't do that, then the wording in the permanent regulations is not going to be good for us. So I'm looking at you to do your due diligence in helping the planning commission understand the needs of the citizens. And thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Bruce.

Come on up here.

My name's Alexia Welch. I live at 402 East Avenue F in South Hatch. I have a question. Could the people who bought the parcel come back on the city later saying that there were no regulations in place when they bought the land? Does that make sense? Or does it begin when they apply for a permit and whether that would be approved or not in the first place?

Matt, I'll let you come answer that.

So if I understand the question right, because they bought the property, would they still have to abide by the new regulations if they bought it before the regulations went in place? No. First of all, I've had one meeting with somebody who expressed interest in maybe building a data center over on East 4th Street. That's what was in the newspaper. They know we're going through the regulation process. They're totally fine with that. They weren't sure that they were going to build here, but if they did, it was going to be months away. And whenever they pull the building permit, that's the regulations they'll be subject to. So I have no idea if that project will come to fruition, but if this passes, it'll be subject to this.

And then the other thing I wanted to ask was, are we going to look at our geology, our unique geology in the salt and the current industries that are here already and how they have impacted the environment? Is that going to be taken into consideration? I know back in the 1950s, The geological survey came and did a bunch of surveying and assessments of the abandoned mines from solution mining and mapping a bunch of them out. But I think there's probably still some that we don't know about, like with sinkholes and subsidence, like Highway 50 is sinking right now. It's slowly, but we have a very active underground Is any of that being taken into consideration or like the Arkansas River has been deemed unusable since the 1950s once it passes Hutchinson to Wichita. It's 303 is the status. I don't know what else it's called. And I could look it up and I can send it to you guys. But I know like the Cargill plant has had some violations recently. The chlorides in the river were like 17 times the limit that they're supposed to be at. I think things like that, especially with the public and demanding transparency, and then the lack of federal oversight recently is going to put more burden on counties and cities and states to regulate these things. And so since there's already some things that aren't being regulated, And it literally comes down to, like, some of the positions at the state level, they're vacant, you know, as far as oversight goes and who's going to come investigate. I mean, those positions are not filled. So it's not, I'm not, like, saying anything against the salt industry itself, but, you know, that is what we're known for, but it's caused a lot of issues. It's also really cool, you know, like the veterans thing. I mean, that's awesome that we can do that. The city of South Hutchinson's tap water, the sodium level is 350 milligrams per liter. That's extremely high and just because something's not regulated doesn't mean it's safe. My doctor told me I should be dead and gave me a prescription for medicine I didn't need. I just didn't know I wasn't supposed to drink the water because it's not posted anywhere. I think that there's a lot of things that could be improved. I think it's hard to trust that these industries that are coming might be regulated when there's already things that aren't, I guess.

Yeah. Thank you. Anyone else?

One thing that I want to point out is that The conditional use permit or the building permit or whatever process we're using isn't the only means by which we have to hold a future new industry to Hutchinson accountable for environmental standards and safety standards and whatnot. We already can assume by looking at data centers in other places, in Kansas, in Missouri, and throughout the Midwest, Texas, that there are incentives and forgiveness, like tap fee reductions and all sorts of things that we should anticipate were going to be asked for as well. And that The incentive package is, in my opinion, what gives us the ability to say, if you're not meeting certain standards, we can take back certain incentives, or you'd have to repay certain incentives and whatnot. So this piece is... basically one part of the technical process of changing, closing the loopholes, but then there's still more work to be done. I do believe that we should be prepared for a conversation around job incentives or building incentives or tax breaks or what have you. in the near future and how we want to craft those agreements so that we're protected in case buildings are vacant within 10 years, in case there's a move to solar at the 10-year mark when the Evergy requirement expires from the Senate bill. I think that that's something that is outside of the planning and zoning responsibility and that's something that council's going to have to work on probably at the end of the year.

Any other questions or comments from council? If not, I just need a motion.

I have a comment. Would we, if Sunoco was coming to town right now, would we be asking these same questions of them? They used almost 3 million gallons of water a day and a whole lot of electricity. And I don't know how bad they polluted the air. I just want people to think about that. And as we move forward with other businesses, and I know that they provide many more jobs than a data center would, but I think about that a lot. It's like, again, these data centers are problematic in many ways, and we want to be sure we mitigate that and understand what we're getting ourselves into. But I do think, and I alluded to it earlier, that We're putting requirements in for them, and we think very differently when we call it a data center than we do a nacelle maker.

I think if we had a crystal ball, wouldn't we have been prudent to ask Sunoco, what are you going to do with your building when you leave town? And what should we expect of maintenance or demolition or, that kind of thing wouldn't we have been prudent to ask them i don't know how many years ago they opened up 100 okay so you know because now we have a an ancient building huge building that is just sitting there empty that is owned by a huge corporation that does not care about hutchinson kansas i think somebody's bought it and they're going to tear down that old part Oh, that's cool.

Yeah. But I'm just, I mean, I know that we're probably going to move on here and pass this, but as we move forward, it's just troublesome for me. And maybe it shouldn't be. Maybe I should be thinking the opposite, like you said. Maybe we ought to be asking these questions on everybody.

I think it's the known entity versus the unknown entity, right? Like, we don't have... hundred years of data centers look at and say oh this is how they operate and here's all of the ways it could go right or wrong yeah but with Sunoco with a an industry that had been around for a really long time they had plant salt and I'm just using them as an example because you used them but what did they they recycled cardboard yeah they made the paper that goes on on sheetrock and I mean they

They had these big electric motors and these big bats.

Known processes, known regulations. I mean, and I would say that their regulations were probably evolving as they were in production. But how many years of history of a data center do we have to look at to say, oh, this is how they operate? How many abandoned data centers can we look at and say, oh, this is what... what it's going to be. And it's going to be an empty building with nothing in it, I would say, because they're going to take all their equipment out more than likely. But an abandoned vest site, what's that look like?

Yeah, I don't know.

But I think we can also use mistakes that other communities have made with their current data centers and make sure we don't make the same ones.

Well, you know what, guys? I'm going to tell you something. I went to Washington, D.C. with Mr. Fast, and I was for data centers. I have not seen one commercial or anything on TV positive about data centers. And I'll tell you what, I have 15 grandkids. I have to worry about their future. I'm here making a decision sitting in this chair for their future. There's a lot of people out there that just... And I'm just telling you how I feel. I've always have told you how I feel. And I respect you, Mr. Fast. I understand what you're saying. But what I'm saying is that I have been to so much stuff since I've come back. So many... I was in Haven. I was at the Reno County thing. And I was four data centers until I seen so much stuff on them. It's crazy. And I have to look at the future. I'm going to make a decision on the future, on these data centers. And it just came across me one time, I just said, this stuff is bad. It's the health. They're going to have noise problems. They're going to have water pollution. And I didn't think the water pollution was going to be a problem until I went to a conference. And they stick stuff in their machines, and they put it down, and it goes in the drain. I'm not here to tell you not to vote for it. I'm just telling you how I feel. And I respect you, Mr. Fast. I respect all you guys. But I have to tell you how I feel.

I have no problem with that. You understand that. Oh, yeah.

And we're a good council. We get along. We don't scream and yell at each other. We're a good council. But I still have to tell you how I feel. And what I found out about data centers is not good. And we are responsible for the future of this town. We are responsible for the future of the health, safety of our kids. It's going to go, hopefully they stay. So I'm just telling you, it changed my mind. And it just, yeah.

Well, luckily, Steve, tonight all we're making is a decision on regulations. I understand.

That's what I'm trying to tell you. I understand.

I am not looking forward to the day we have to make that decision.

This is probably the hardest. I've been on this council eight years, almost ten years, and this is the hardest, hardest decision to ever make. It's the hardest decision I ever made. I'm telling you the truth. That's the hardest one. This is the most hardest decision I've ever had. And since I've been to all these conferences and all these with people and talked to people, I can't sleep. I get a ball head now. I'll probably be ball headed before this is over with. But I'm just telling you, there's nothing wrong with ball heads. You guys are great. Thanks, Steve.

It's hard, Steve, because it's the unknown.

We don't know what we're looking at. Here's the point. I see the unknown on TV. I see the unknown on tapes. I have never seen one thing good on TV or anything about data centers. But I'm just telling you how I feel. So let's go on and put the worst in the water.

Again, I think that it's easy to confuse... what we're actually voting on tonight with the overall approval of data centers and BEST. This is not a statement of approval of data centers or BEST. Tonight, what we're doing is we are adding regulation. Because without it, anything could happen.

But it's my job as a city council member to represent the people and tell you how I feel. And that's what Mr. Fast did.

And that's what we're going to do that tonight. We're going to make it. We're going to try to protect for now.

Let's go ahead and settle this horse.

All right, so let's settle this horse. I'm looking for a motion.

I'll move to approve an ordinance regarding temporary text amendments to Chapter 27 of the Code of the City of Hutchinson and authorize the mayor to sign.

Second.

Druin?

Yes. Garza? Well, guys, here's the deal. I'm going to trust you guys. I don't like it, but I understand. I just learned today they still can burn the dink, still build the darn thing. So we're going to have to make these things because these people are going to be on my phone. I bet they're ringing my phone now. But what I've learned, I'm going to have to put my vote to the last. No. Yes. Yes. We're going to stop it. Yes.

Goss. Yes. Fast. Yes.

Yes.

Item number nine, new business. A, disposition of former information technologies building at 220 South Poplar Street.

Good evening, council. I'm Todd Davis, director of IT. I wonder if you'd like the fast version of my presentation or the I've been 44,000 hours in this building version of my sappy version of my presentation. They're not going to respond. I told you they wouldn't. So tonight we're talking about the disposition of the former IT building. My purpose here is to ask the city council, using council policy 14, to start the sale of this building using the private sale approach. I also am going to talk a little bit about the building. I'll talk a little bit about what policy 14 is in case you weren't here in 2001 and let you guys determine what the next step is for this asset. So, policy 14, in case you're not familiar with it, is the policy that lays out how the city disposes of a building in this case. I've never done this kind of thing before. I'm the computer guy. And so, I had to do a ton of research on this. Luckily, we found this and I have a framework to work with now. What step number one is the city manager needs to say this building is no longer needed for the city of Hutchinson purposes. Step number 1B is the city attorney to say we own it, we can sell it. And those two have been fulfilled. Step two is where we're at today in that asking the city council how you want to dispose of this property. And then after that, I'll return to the council with how we're getting rid of it based on what you decide. So this property is the former IT building. There are actually two parcels involved. The blue area here is the IT building itself and its parking lot. And this second parcel is the parcel that has a shed on it and the land around it. So there's approximately 6,000 feet of building and parking lot with approximately 2,000 square foot building. The outbuilding is approximately 3,500 square feet with a 400 square foot structure on it. But that structure, the park department would like to pick it up and move it to the zoo. And so that's a good idea in my mind. And obviously, we own that. So that would be something that they would take care of. And it's not really included in here, except that when we start talking about dollars, that'll change the dollar amounts just a little bit. If you notice right through here, there is an easement. This is a vacated railroad, a private railroad, and there are a ton of utilities and things in here, and at some point we hope to be able to do a project to remove the railroad bridge structure to help drainage from the north. So we want to keep that easement. The city acquired the property in 1954 and we built the IT building in 1966. Originally was Public Works Administration and Central Garage Administration. All of the buildings on this property here were all part of one campus. In 2003, All of this part of the campus was sold to an adjacent property owner and the IT department moved over to this building. It was renovated at that time, 2003, so there's my 44,000 hours or 22 years in that building. Almost everything has been removed from the building. There's only a few things that we'll talk about that need to be moved out so far. So there is nobody in that building right now. It is vacant. The only thing that's left is this server rack, and it has mostly been vacated. It just needs to be forklift over to this building. And then there's also a generator on the property, which is going to go and serve another city purpose. So we relocated without any service interruptions. No mission-critical functions are left in the building. We don't have an active purpose for it anymore. And we can get it back on the books and get it back into the tax rolls.

And I did want to offer, too, that part of the purpose as well was to try to find efficiencies within how we do our work. And we were easily able to accommodate the IT staff that were housed out of that facility in City Hall. So by moving them here, that saves the city money on maintenance and upkeep and just utility bills and things like that. But that's a reason why I was just trying to find any sort of efficiencies we can.

We're estimating it'll save $20,000 a year in costs. So this building has a few properties. The first problem that we have with it is located in the floodplain. And this is the old floodplain that probably won't be able to move out of or we can't put it on stilts or anything like that. So it's always going to be in the floodplain. We've had water coming in the building before when we had a couple of 500-year floods. We'd always have to get sandbags and kind of sandbag around the doors and everything. If you look on the picture here, you kind of see this stair step. If you look at the outside of the building, you kind of see the same thing. It looks like this part of the building has fallen off. So we would need to do more work, you know, in renovation repairs in order to continue to use this building if we were to use it and not to sell it. It's currently vacant. It's got the driveway access issues. The driveway to the south belonged to the adjacent property owner. They just allowed us to use it all those years. And then, of course, the easement. And we need the ability to get into the creek. So what I'm asking you to do is to give me a recommendation on how to dispose of the property. The first thing I'd like to do is start with a private sale approach. I would like you to give me the opportunity to visit with the property owner that owns the rest of the old campus and see if they're interested in purchasing that property. If not, then the next step would be for me to do whatever the council said they want me to do as the next step. And then if we can come to some kind of agreement, we would come to the council before that agreement. If we can't sell it, then we need to look at removing the property, raising it. So the adjacent property owner acquired the campus. owner is in the best position to reuse this property and in my opinion so that's actually the most practical path and if that's that's obviously not a not guarantee so the county valuation on the building is approximately eighty thousand dollars the shed side is two thousand dollars but that also includes the shed which won't be there anymore so basically just be land We have not done an appraisal. I needed to get this step done before I started spending any money anywhere on anything. So we need an appraisal, title work, legal review, an environmental review, survey, all of the things that you have to have. We also have not gotten any prices on demolition. Again, I need to get past this step in order to get more details. This does fit into our strategic and comprehensive plans. I can give you those details if you're interested, but you're all yawning at me, so I'm going to move on. So my request would be for you to make a motion to allow me to approach the adjacent property owner, find out if they're interested in purchasing the property, and if not, then what the next step would be. and a few pictures on that building. If you notice this spot on the floor, this one back here, those make me nervous since we've cleaned out 100 times and it's percolating through the concrete, so something's underneath the building. Since this was the central garage property, I'm concerned that there might be an environmental something going on here. So we definitely would need an environmental review. This is kind of the hallway from the offices. And let's see, a couple of the offices, my old office. Oh, sorry, I had to get sappy for a second. This is the old server room. If you notice, there's water intrusions here that we couldn't keep this tile dry, so we finally gave up and just didn't have a tile there anymore. And then, of course, I showed you the block wall that's having issues, and that's this part here. A few... One of the interesting points about this building is this pocket park right here is actually not part of the parcel. That's part of the street right away. So this will continue to be city right away and not part of the shed property. But I wanted to make sure to point that out. My car for scale, if you're wondering how big the building is. That generator is the one that I described would be removed. And there's a picture of the shed in the backside of the building and the cold storage building from the old campus. And that's that driveway that I referred to. So if you look at the property line, there is a property line dot right here. And there's a property line dot right here, which means you can't actually get into the property without crossing somebody else's property, which has always been, which would be interesting since we owned it before, but for a new property, owner, we would have to have some kind of an agreement with them for use of that easement. So if you've got any questions, I just wanted to point out that this was a city employee who happened to be on the roof at the time that we did the flights over the whole city, and he was repairing that water leak that I pointed out or attempting to and uh still leaking i'd be happy to show you the building if you if you ever want to see it so um greg this is the parking lot that you made fun of me about a few years ago when i wanted to repair it yeah so we won't have to do that we didn't spend the eighty thousand dollars it wasn't eighty thousand it was eighty thousand dollars so anyway uh do you have any questions do you have anybody

Approach you at all or talk to you?

I'm not allowed to talk to anybody about it until I get from the city council what you want me to do. Because if you want me to just put it up for auction or if you want me to give it to somebody or you want me to tear it down, I don't know. That's why I'm here so you guys can decide what to do with it.

When the shed is removed... Will the footings, like does it have concrete footings?

It does. It's on a big concrete pad.

Okay. Will that be removed and leveled or just?

That's not been discussed.

Okay. I think it makes sense to move forward with the process, approach the neighbor who owns the other lot and find out what. if they have any intentions on this property. Do you have to, I've read policy 14, but I can't recall. Do you have to go through with the, appraisal and whatnot before you can approach them?

No. You guys get to decide what the next step is. So we don't have to do an appraisal. The city council gets to decide how we dispose of the property. I guess my question is... And an appraisal will cost us.

The way I would prefer to handle it is to give you permission to approach the other person and then from there work with Mayor Meggers about how best to move forward.

I agree with that, but Cody, Paul, being a public building, are we allowed to do that? Yes. We are allowed? Okay. Then I agree.

So, yes, moving forward with private sale is probably the best option.

Okay. I probably ought to have a motion since it's a policy.

I think you had a pretty good one up there, didn't you?

What's that? Didn't you have a motion up there you wanted us to do? Yeah, and I think I attached it.

Or did I not attach it? That's okay. I moved to authorize the city manager and staff to proceed under City Council Policy 14 with a phased disposition process for the former Information Technologies Building at 220 South Poplar Street. beginning with a private sale approach and including such valuation, notice, marketing, and due diligence steps as are appropriate, and to return to the City Council with any proposed purchase agreement or other final disposition recommended for Council approval.

I'll second it.

Truman? Yes. Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Magers?

Yes. Next item.

Item number 9B, disposition of former information. Oh, no, I'm sorry.

We need to hold 6H.

WTC bypass professional services contract recommendation.

Thank you for staying up for this. Hey, no problem. Yeah, I got a phone call. I needed to come back. I just wanted to talk about this. So David Glenn, Director of Utilities. I don't know what exactly the questions you had for it, but I can tell you what it is, or I can answer questions, or how do you want me to go about this?

Did you have a, you didn't have a presentation for this?

I do not, no. This was in the budget, so it was already approved, so we were just... going forward can you briefly just i'm not quite sure what it's about okay so we currently we do not have a way if the plant goes down we do not have a way to bypass the water around the plant so we have about eight hours of water in the system in the towers and in the clear well if we don't do this bypass we just have those those eight hours If a main break happens, something bad happens, we could be in a time crunch. So this is basically redundancy so that we can bypass the plant, get more water to the system, in a nutshell, is what it is.

So it would basically just come straight from the wells and go to the tanks, or to the...

Yes. We have two wells right now that we can hook straight into the system to help that. But again, August, main break, you know, I... I like the redundancy of it. I like the bypass idea. I want to get in there and I like to be, I want to have a little more water in there for the people that need it when they need it. So that's why we wanted to do this.

And if the city were to go on bypass, would we be under a boil advisory?

No. Okay. That's why this makes sense is because we would not. If we ran out of water in the towers and I get past the eight hours, yes, we would.

Okay.

Yeah.

This also includes, it would have a different treatment process. So the bypassed water would be chemically treated so that it would be safe to distribute to the community. That process is included in this project. So there is a step kind of in between, but yes.

So just to, so I know, basically we're just contracting their services to design this for this actually to do the project?

Well, this is just for the designs.

Okay.

It's in 27 for the completion of the project. Okay. Yeah. And it was already in the budget, according to the notes.

Do you know what the amount is? $150,000, I think, for this? $150,427.

And that's the amount that was also budgeted in 2026? The amount hasn't changed?

I don't know if that was for sure or not. It was a budgeted amount of $698,000. Okay. And they're using $150,000 of that. Oh, I see. And then the construction is going to be, will be, the money left over, the $548,000 will be for construction of the actual bypass.

That's correct. Yep. I see that now. Thank you.

So when I was an electrician, you still have the chlorine still in there. It's still going to chlorinate the water. Turn on and chlorinate the water. And then the water treatment plant, I assume, they put more chlorurcation in, I guess. But we still have that chlorination because our pumps and our pump houses have the chlorination because I remember working on that.

We will have the chlorination, and that's what Alex was talking about. It will meet compliance with KDHE, and it will be safe to drink when it happens. bypasses the plant. It's just not going to go through the RO system. It's not going to get the caustic hit to it.

So you still have the system with the, I don't remember what it's called, the SCAD system? SCAD. And it puts the chlorination in there and all that stuff that I used to work on. It'll still be there. It's still there today. And that comes out of the water plant, is it not? Anyway, it's still safe water.

Yes, it will be. And that's what they're going to help us design is to make sure that all that, whether that's a SCADA analyzer or... SCADA is going to look for you.

And because this is budgeted and a part of our professional services, this wouldn't have to go out for RFP for this design project?

I don't believe so, no.

Okay. Okay, I don't have any additional questions. Sorry, I had to wait until the end.

No, it's okay. Not a problem.

Council, any other questions on it? No, it's to citizen safety. Right. It's citizen safety. Yeah.

And this requires approval. I move to approve WTC bypass professional services contract as recommended.

I'll second.

Truen? Yes. Garza? Yes. Goss? Yes. Fast? Yes. Magers?

Yes.

Item number 10, report of city officials. Council?

Hmm. Stacey?

I want to express my gratitude to Hutch Fire and Hutch Police for all of the, what I can't imagine wasn't overtime over the holiday and keeping everybody safe. I know things got a little crazy on the 4th of July. There were a ton of fireworks going off. And I know there are a lot of people who call in to dispatch for things that shouldn't be called in. But regardless, always appreciative. We heard sirens a number of times. I don't know what all of those were about. But appreciative of our first responders and dispatch for working over the 4th of July weekend and keeping everybody safe. And the parade was a lot of fun. My family had a lot of fun at the parade. And yeah, I think that. Okay.

Darren? Well, a couple things. I've seen a request for some information on the Rec Commission, which I'm on their board. The question was where we were at on the MOUs. I confirmed with Cody tonight that the Salt City Splash MOU has been signed and is done. We're still in the process of getting the ball field MOU done, but a lot of that's been the rec center has been meeting with the YMCA to sort some stuff out. And then I've got some information. I can't really divulge it right now, but it's very positive, and that's going to be incorporated into the program. the MOU, and once we get all that finalized, I will let everybody know. The only other thing, and again, the rec commission, they are going to be taking applications for a board of commissioners person who will, their appointment will run from September 26th through August 2030, and the deadline for that is July 10th, so if there's anybody out in the community that's interested in serving on that board, please go to the Rec Commission's, I believe it's Rec Commission's website, and you can download an application. So that's all I have.

Greg?

Thanks to city staff, as always, especially those of you that are here tonight or were here tonight. There seemed to be a lot of meatiness to this meeting and things getting done at the city, and that's because of our very competent city staff. Thank you. That's it.

Steve? Well, I want to let my peers know and all the people that I represent I did the best I can. They changed my mind because we still can put a stop to this on our regulations. So I depended on my other city council members to put a trust in them that this is gonna work, that we can put a stop to it. August 4th, I'll be on vacation. I'm going on vacation. I won't be here. I'm meeting Tennessee. July 18th, I will have Steve Garza meeting over there at the zoo. Everybody come and throw tomatoes at me. I did the best I could on the data center, so come and talk to me. It's August 18th at the zoo. From 9 o'clock to 12, 8 o'clock to 12, come out there and visit with me and sit down and have coffee and donuts. I appreciate my commissioners listening to me. You guys, we are all calm and stay calm, even though I changed my mind. For the people, of the people, by the people. So I hope we get through this, guys. I'm concerned about the future. So I hope we make right decisions. And I mean what I say. This is the hardest decision I ever made being on this council. So with that, I'd like to see everybody on July 18th. Thank you, Mayor.

Okay. Thanks, Steve. So a few things. I want to thank Mike and Laura Dick for their huge investment into downtown Hutchinson. Ribbon cutting this week for the landmark is going to be a great addition to our downtown preserving history. I just want to thank them again for doing that and everyone who was involved getting that across the finish line. We also had the ribbon cutting for the Woody seat. I understand that's been a long eight to ten year long process to get that across the finish line, so it was good to see that reopen back up again so people can go back and forth now on the new bridge to South Hutchinson. We have the Salt City races coming July 10th. So get out and watch some races. Mel Hamilton Ford putting on some good races out there that weekend. And there's also a dedication of the Freedom Tree at the new YMCA on the 4th. So that was a great event as well. I think that is all I have. How about you, Mr. Enrico?

Just one comment and then I was going to have Jason come up. But also on the witty seat, I appreciate a lot of the partners that were involved in that. But I also want to extend gratitude as well just to the neighborhood. A lot of this I kind of expressed in my speech. In working with the neighborhood, a lot of concessions were made, and I know no project is ever going to be perfect, but we don't claim to ever make something perfect. But I do appreciate the neighborhood and working with the city, and specifically the southwest Bricktown neighborhood. So with that, Jason.

I do have another PowerPoint presentation, so don't yawn at me too much. Your boss did this.

Just blame me. But hey, this is going to be a good thing. It's not just a good note.

This is positive out of the code compliance division.

And we have an executive session.

And so we always like to hear positive out of the code compliance division.

Just so you know, you have five minutes. Short of the timer now.

We need to talk about this. The mayor tries to keep me on a five-minute leash. You've exceeded that far too many times already. Anyway, we'll get to abandoned properties and rehabilitation programs. So this is some potential use of kind of a little-known... part of the kansas abandoned housing act and and what we do for this is part of the state statute when we talk about our condemnation process so there's a little part in there i say a little part but it's it's a greater part than that about abandoned housing and how we how we deem these as condemned or abandoned now by deeming them as condemned when we go through this process of condemnation there's really no change i don't need to bring these houses back to you and say okay they were condemned now i need you to call them abandoned. We don't need to go through that process. By putting them through the condemnation process, we're meeting those standards of what the KSA 121756A. So this is really for those salvageable residential structures. And we all know that we've been through the Reno County Housing Assessment. We need houses in our community. And part of that is reusing our existing housing stock. So by going through some of the process that we're going through now helps us get on down the line a little bit, especially if some of the things come to fruition that we're going to talk about here in a moment. So the purpose of this update is just to inform you as the council some potential tools to address abandoned residential properties. Just another tool in our toolbox. Help us out in the Code Compliance Division. Help us out as a city. And then assess whether rehabilitation can be a better public outcome than demolition in select cases. And then outline the preferred partnership model and local fallback option. We'll talk about that, a couple options that we have. And then get any council feedback regarding a pilot implementation and the next steps in this process. So some potential public benefits were identified through this process, and I'll make that policy point over there first, but for some properties, limited rehabilitation support may produce a better public outcome than demolition. We all know, like I said, we have a need for housing in our community, and part of that is not the $250,000 starter house. for someone to purchase. We need some existing housing stock that is affordable housing. And so some of the public benefits to this also that were identified is actually to reduce blight and nuisance conditions, improve public safety and health, and preserve our salvageable houses and restore our housing stock in the community, support neighborhood stabilization, avoid or reduce demolition costs, and it helps preserve our taxable value and our existing utility customers. When we demo a house, we get this property that we lose taxable value on. We don't have any utilities going to that, and so... And so we're losing some money there. And then we encourage the nonprofits and private reinvestment. Some of this process, you'll mainly hear about the nonprofits throughout this presentation, but I will talk about some of the private reinvestment as we get to the end. So KSA 121756A at a glance. So this is qualified Kansas nonprofits. They petitioned the district court. The goal of this is to take temporary possession of what we call an abandoned property. The purpose is to rehabilitate the property for housing use. The process is part of the Kansas Unsafe and Dangerous Structure Framework that we regularly go through on a regular basis. This tool is for qualifying nonprofits, not just general private redevelopment. So this isn't just for your contractors and private redevelopment to come in and take these houses. It's for the nonprofits. But again, as I said, we'll talk about that private redevelopment a little bit later on. And then the petitioner must be a Kansas nonprofit with housing improvement among its purpose. So it can't just be any nonprofit. It can't be an out-of-state nonprofit. It can't even be an in-state nonprofit where housing improvement is not part of their purpose. In the KSA, it does have some basic thresholds. This is very similar to the Missouri Act, Missouri Housing Act, which doesn't include the two years of tax delinquent, but in Kansas they did put in... that the previous two years preceding the petition, the taxes must be delinquent on a property. And then the property has to be continuously unoccupied by a person's legally in possession for the preceding 90 days. And how we kind of determine that, and I've talked this over with Cody a little bit, and I've talked with one of our partners that we're trying to work with here, and they believe we're on the right path of just looking at utilities and seeing whether the utilities have been utilized in the house for any more than 90 days. So if water's been shut off for a couple years, like we tend to see on a lot of these abandoned houses, then that's kind of our standard for how we move forward. How the process works. So number one, you have a pre-filing notice. That's a notice to me. That's a notice to the enforcing officer and parties of interest 20 to 60 days before the filing. They have a verified petition. The petition is filed in district court. The parties in interest named as defendants. This is the nonprofit petitioning myself. This is the nonprofit and the legal counsel that the nonprofit would have that's going to petition the district court to take possession of this property and rehabilitate this structure. Number three there is service in response to the service under the statute. The owner and defendant may present a rehabilitation offense. So if the owner comes forward at district court, they could present a defense and the district court can grant them the right as the existing property owner to rehabilitate the house as long as they have a plan, as long as they have the means. So you have the court hearing. If the court rejects the property's owner rehabilitation defense, then they would hear the nonprofit's rehabilitation. And so the nonprofit presents a rehabilitation plan with evidence of the capacity to rehabilitate the property. They take temporary possession of it. The court may approve the plan and grant temporary possession. And then there's a bunch of reporting that's in the Kansas State statute. They have to report to us. They have to report to the court. And so there's annual reporting. And there is a process in which the owner may regain possession. But that, again, they would have to pay back the cost that the nonprofit has already spent to rehabilitate the property. And there's a whole process that we probably don't want to get into tonight. So option one, and this is staff's preferred path. This is the path we've already started. Some of you have met with this neighborhood legal services group out of Kansas City. So this is the preferred path we're looking at. We filled out an RFP that was due by April 1, 2026. The legal neighborhood support came and visited Hutchinson on May 15, 2026. They met with some of our community partners, with some contractors. They met with some nonprofits. They met with some city council members. And we had some discussions. We toured the city. We looked at a lot of structures that we would consider abandoned housing. And they kind of evaluated those structures. And then there is a community selection July of 2026. So we should be hearing back from them this month as to whether they are going to select Hutchinson to partner with. So what does this do for Hutchinson? It gives the nonprofit petitioners independent legal counsel. So this would allow the nonprofits to work with the legal neighborhood support group out of Kansas City. And they would represent them by doing all the legwork to do everything, to take it to district court, to petition me, and to work through this process. It keeps the city in a cleaner, more defensible role. We're out of it completely except for the fact that we maintain the abandoned housing list, and we maintain a list of the nonprofits, and we share the information with those nonprofits of what that abandoned housing list looks like so they can petition us. This allows for a partnership approach before relying on any local building program. And then if selected, we'll document the roles through an MOU or some similar agreement. We haven't talked about what that looks like yet, but that'll be part of our process. So the question is, why start here? Like I said, for the city, this is independent legal counsel for non-profit petitioners. It presents a cleaner role and avoids representing private parties on the city's part. There's a better legal and policy. It makes it more defensible on our part. And then opportunity to test out a pilot program before we create a our own program. We don't know how long this program is going to last. We haven't had those conversations yet. So if we are selected as a city and we do take on this neighborhood legal support team, then we don't know what that's going to look like down the road. So it does give us a pilot program to create a more local program for the future as well. So if selected, we'll document the relationship, like I said, through an MOU or something similar, a similar agreement. Clarify that the nonprofit represents the petitioner and the city does not represent the petitioner. And then we will assist identifying salvageable candidate properties. So that's part of it to the neighborhood legal services team. We can bounce things off of them as city staff and say You know, would you consider this an abandoned house under the state statute? So they would be looking at all those things to make sure we're we're doing the right things as well. I What's an appropriate role for the city? What the city can do is provide a neutral technical information. All we're providing is information as far as the list of abandoned houses in the city. What we consider condemnable, what we consider abandoned, we would have two separate lists for that. So we maintain a list of not only the houses but interested organizations. We share factual records. We share the code history. We create a short demolition, diversion, review period. And what that does for these houses that we've already brought, they kind of sit and wait through this process to – And it creates something that we can sit and wait for some of them to see if they're rehab-able or if anybody is willing to rehab some of those properties instead of just demoing them. And then it provides limited financial support if properly... So what the city should not do, we shouldn't act as counsel for the petitioners. We're not the counsel. We're not the ones going to court. We're not there to control the litigation strategy. We don't want to blur the lines between the attorney and the client relationship. We don't want to make any legal conclusions for the petitioner. We don't want to represent any private petitioners in court, so that isn't our part. And then option two. So if that option fails, we don't get selected, or we do get selected, and then later on down the line we kind of use that as a pilot program to build our own program locally because we don't know how long that's going to last. go on for. So it would help us in creating a local ordinance. So we could create our own local ordinance as well, option two, if option two fails completely or time runs out. But we would still run through that same process of what the state statute requires. We would limit applications to qualifying Kansas nonprofits. We would focus on residential properties that meet those statutory requirements. Part of this is to reimburse the nonprofit for the defined legal title search filing and some other costs that are defined by the ordinance. But through this process and talking with our neighborhood legal service partners that we've been talking to through this process, that's much cheaper than tearing down a house. And on top of that, once the place gets revitalized, you have a taxable, you know, there's something coming back to the city instead of just an empty lot. And then we would use written agreements and those same reporting requirements. We would put all that in the ordinance and require the court orders, the annual reports, all that would be in place just as it would be if we went the other route. And then the nonprofit is still responsible for their own individual legal counsel. We're still not providing any legal counsel as a city. It's still the nonprofit's responsibility to go out and get their own. individual legal counsel. So some possible controls, and this is just some ideas that we've just kind of tossed around just based on the fact of what we talked with the neighborhood legal services team. Reimbursement is based, So this is a reimbursement-based structure. It's preferred up to $2,500 or something like that for some pre-petition costs, up to $5,000 to $7,500 for the filed case running through the hearings and the temporary possession order. Talking with the Neighborhood Legal Services team, they said it usually runs anywhere from $5,000 to $7,500 to run a case through the district court as of this nature, and that's cheaper than demoing a property again. Larger requests would be required by the governing body and that's something we could put in there or we could work through some other language or something for that. So some public purpose findings. We would stick to some public purpose findings and those would be to reduce blight and nuisances Like I said earlier, I went through these earlier, improve health and safety, preserve the salvageable homes, avoid or reduce demolition costs, stabilize neighborhoods, preserve that tax value, and then encourage nonprofit and private investment back in the community. Winston Churchill said, we shape our buildings. Thereafter, they shape us. And I think this is a good opportunity for us to shape our community, reinvest in that existing housing stock, and use it for more affordable housing. So some next steps. And my last slide, because I see the mayor looking at his clock. It's about five minutes up.

Your ship has sailed. Oh.

I thought I was doing good. So the next steps are obviously to pursue the neighborhood legal services support team. Identify pilot properties, create lists. Identify those qualifying nonprofit partners. Prepare public information packets that we'll put out there to the public. Prepare an MOU if we are selected. And if we're not selected, we develop a fallback program because it's something out there, like I said, that just gives us another tool in our toolbox and I think is a good reinvestment for our community. And then we consider a small pilot budget. And really when we're talking about the budget, we're just talking about our demolition funds that we're currently using. So a lot of this is pre-programmed into the budget already. So it's not like we would create anything new specifically for this program. So I'll stand for any questions if you have any.

When are we going to find out if we're selected or not?

July. That's all we know. I wrote them the other day. I tried to put in the last little select touch, but haven't heard back from them. I didn't expect to hear back from them because I don't think they're going to give anything away. I can't remember. I sent you a list, but what was there, like 12, 14 other jurisdictions, roundabout there, that could be selected throughout the state too.

Can you give that statute again?

12, 17, 56.

We also are working on another pilot program to help people pay for improvements to their home if they've been considered to be on the demolition list, whether that's a city revolving loan program or grant money with strings attached. We're still exploring options, but I think it should also help pair with what Council Member Goss had brought up from the community member on it just looks like we're trying to smash people's homes. I mean, we're actively taking an interest in blight but also trying to offer as much assistance as possible. And I think that this at least demonstrates that.

So like Enrico said, we are working on another program as far as a minor repair program that would help do things like minor repairs to siding, plumbing, fixtures, electrical, case-by-case basis. And what that looks like, we don't know at the moment. But something for, you know, helps with some reinvestment back into the community. And... Just minor repairs. And some of those minor repairs, those are instances where we have to remove people from their home because it's a non-habitable home. And that's not what we're out there to do. We want them to feel safe. We want them to feel like they can be in a position where they don't have to worry about the government removing them from their home and just feel like we're demoing houses throughout the city because that's all we ever talk about. Um, and then, um, I just did want to bring up again, um, I brought this up during our last hearing, but, uh, part of this process is working too with the fact that we have five out of the first 10 houses, um, that we've put on the condemnation list. We have five that have active permits to the state or four that have active permits, one that is working towards it right now. And, you know, we're seeing some progress and some movement on these houses too and revitalization in these houses. So, you know, that's a good thing too. And the hope is that through having more tools in our toolbox and having a program like this, having the condemnation process, and you see some active reinvestment in these homes, that by the time you get to the end of it, you have ten houses, maybe only demo three. that really need to be demoed so that's kind of the hope and hopefully there's some future potential for some repairs as well out there so we're working on some good programs so but thank you for your time thank you Jason next slide

and number eleven future agenda items uh... council of any future agenda and you don't see them upcoming jennison i have one i would like to take a look at our fireworks not saying that for july is a great time of year uh... but i would like to take a look at talking to fire department party uh... part heads uh... take a look at maybe shortening the length of the fireworks sails and potentially looking at shortening the time that we can shoot fireworks. I'd like to look at that in the future. It's a lot of extra time and time that the fire department puts into that. Again, we're still having a great event, but I think we might be able to, I've looked at some other cities too, shortening that time frame up a little bit. So I would like to see that on a future agenda item.

Mayor, don't gut me for this, but can you guys vote on that? Just so I know, like, this is coming back.

Oh, yeah, absolutely. I just want to make sure nobody else is coming back.

Okay.

So I would make a motion to have the fireworks discussion on a future agenda item.

Second.

Truen?

Yes.

Garza? Yes. Goss? No. Fast? Yes. Makers?

Yes. And then, if nothing else, then we need to have an executive session. I move the city council recess into executive session to discuss a legal matter involving the city pursuant to KSA 75-4319 for consultation with the city attorney, which would be deemed privileged in the attorney-client relationship and the open meeting to resume city council chambers at 915, 920. 920. 920. I just need a second.

Second.

Truen.

Yes.

Garza. Yeah. Goss. Yes. Fast. Yes. Snager.

Yes.

Thank you. Bye.

Second. Who seconded? Greg. Okay. Druin. Yes. Garza. Yes. Goss. Yes. Fast. Yes. Meggers. Yes. Thank you for coming.