City Commission - Regular Meeting

Duck. I got to go. Good evening. It's now six o'clock and we will open the February 17th, 2026 meeting of the Manhattan City Commission. Chelsea, would you please call the role?

Mayor Adam here. Commissioner Mcola, yes. Commissioner Fox, here. Commissioner Morrison here. Commissioner von Lentil here. Mayor, we have five commissioners present. The quorum of three is met. Thank you. Will you please rise and join me in saying the pledge of allegiance? I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. We have a few minutes for um public comments for items not included on today's agenda. Is there anyone who would like to make any comments? All right, seeing none, we will close public comments. Commissioners, any comments from you all? Andrew Jim,

you know, we've all been watching the Olympics and America won again with the pancake race in Liberal and we beat out the Brits. So, um, look, we can look forward to that. And if you haven't had dinner, uh, Pawnie is has a pancake dinner at, um, early edition on the west side till 7 o'clock and the proceeds go to Ponyie Mental Health. Thank you. Um, commissioners, I'd just like to discuss the invitation that we had from K State's student government association. Um, the commissioners participated in this event last year. Um the entire commission participated and it they propose having a joint meeting at which we can discuss topics of concern to the students as well as to um to the city and they've invited us um for March 5th. They've not proposed a time when we did this in the past. I think it was six o'clock maybe

it was evening early evening. Um is this something that you would like to participate in? Okay. And I'm not technically skilled as Mr. Fox is and I don't have my calendar. Okay. I'd have to see. All right. I think so.

It we got a lot of positive feedback when we did this in the past. Um, the students really appreciated having the opportunity to speak directly with the city commissioners and I seem to remember they might have had cinnamon rolls or something else that was really yummy as refreshment. But um, maybe Chelsea, I'll ask you to just poll the commissioners tomorrow and we can check if everyone's good. All right. Thank you all very much. Um, we'll turn now to our consent agenda. These are items of a routine or a housekeeping nature or items that have been previously reviewed by the commission and may be approved in one motion. Uh, a commissioner may request that an item be removed from the cons for separate discussion and considered after we consider the consent agenda. Item D be removed.

Item D. Done. All right. Anyone else have any concerns or questions for staff? All right. Um, we again will allow comments from the public. Is there anyone who'd like to make any remarks on the consent agenda? Seeing no one approaching, we will close the public comment period. And do we have a motion to approve? I move we approve the consent agenda with the exception of item D.

Second. Thank you, Chelsea. Call the role, please. Commissioner Mcola, yes. Commissioner Fox, yes. Commissioner Morrison, yes. Commissioner Bon Lentil, yes. Mayor Adam, yes. Motion carries five to zero. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Mars, would you like to discuss your concerns with item D, which pertains to rejecting a proposal from Icon Structures for as a dedicated sign vendor services for parks and wreck? Well, do you want to do it now? Yes.

Okay. First of all, I didn't have what I thought was reasonable information. They agreed to it just automatically on the consent agenda. Um the information I had, apparently it was assessed to be deficient for what they wanted and it was the only bid they got. And so I think rather than cavalerely saying, well, they didn't like it. Was there some basis for it? And I don't know what the cost is. When they say go go back and do it the way we've always done it, doesn't tell me anything.

Aaron, would you like to approach and offer some additional information? I had a question as well actually. Um given that we do have inhouse sign building capacity, um why is it that you were seeking outside assistance? So we so the type of signs street signs is done internally. We do utilize that when it's appropriate and it's signage that we would use in particular locations. Uh for example when we remove the fuchsia zone out of um the CPAC and we fall pavilion uh uh traffic made those signs for us to put up for the no parking and things like that. So it's not that we don't utilize that where it makes sense we do. These are really specific to the different types of signage that we use all over the city. So everything from uh banners that are created that you'll see on the side of the discovery center to uh trail markings and wayfinding things like that. So there are different specs on each of these signs. And what we found is it was really difficult for one sign vendor to produce all of those signs at a reasonable cost. One of the biggest things that we do, especially now that we're getting sponsorships, uh, is our vinyl signs that will go into outfields. We typically approach, uh, these different vendors based on the signs that we're trying to make and the spec, and we'll go get three or more quotes and choose the cheapest vendor off of that on a per item basis. So, as they come up. So, uh, anytime we're doing say outfield ballfield signage, we would approach the various vendors, get a quote, and go with the cheapest one. In reviewing that, based on past expenses, if we had gone this route, we would end up spending more money rather than less money. So, the intent was ideally to create a single sign vendor that we would end up saving dollars by ordering through one uh one group, but uh it turns out that's probably not going to

happen because several of them specialize in different signs. So, that's really the crux of why we're asking to reject them all. So, was that a deficiency in describing what we wanted to get out of a vendor? No, it's really that each sign company has different specialties and so different types of signs would cost them more. Um, some of them don't have the ability to do the installation. And in fact, that's what you saw in this one is they actually tried to partner with Icon to do the installation on some of these whereas some of the other companies that didn't necessarily submit will do the installation that's included. So,

Commissioner, is that sufficient information? All right. Uh, thank you, Eric. Um, do we have a motion to um pursue item D, which is rejecting the proposal from Icon Structures for dedicated sign vendor services for the parks and recreation department. So moved. Second. Chelsea, would you do the role again, please? Commissioner Fox. Yes, Commissioner Morrison. Yes, Commissioner Von Lentil. Yes, Mayor Adam. Yes, Commissioner Mcola. Yes. Motion carries five to zero.

Thank you. Um, we will now move on to the general agenda. Our first item is to consider ordinance number 7814 amending the code of ordinances and charter ordinance number 67 related to Riley County Police Department animal control officers enforcement authority. I believe this is largely housekeeping to reflect the change with Riley County assuming the RCPD assuming responsibility. That's correct, Mayor. Good evening. Katie Jackson, city attorney. Um, as the mayor said, this is wrapping up an effort that we've had um been working with RCPD on in the last year, in the last year to 18 months. Um, the city shifted from being the primary enforcer of animal control ordinances in the city and the RCPD providing supplemental services to the RCPD providing sole enforcement. This was a studied um transition that allowed um for improved efficiencies and cost effectiveness. Um just as a clarification since this is a a new topic for this commission. The animal shelter services are not part of this. The RCPD does not have responsibility for the animal shelter. We have the prairie pro pause contract which you heard about at a prior meeting to handle the shelter services. The city commission has taken several steps in the last year to make this transition. Um the commission adopted a resolution of support. In May of last year, summer and fall, each entity adopted a budget reflecting this transition. And in December, the commission passed a resolution to transfer remaining city equipment and vehicles to the PD. We're bringing this up tonight because as the mayor said, this is the last kind of housekeeping for this transition, but it's also the first time this commission

will have a charter ordinance before it. Um, so our purpose tonight is to clean up some language um from the Kansas Municipal Court that uses law enforcement officer in a different context than the RCPD. This change is really just to make it really clear that both sworn and non-sworn officers of the RCPD can enforce the ordinances. The two ordinances, the ordinary ordinance as they call it, will amend your city code book. That's the code of ordinances found online. It takes a simple majority to pass and it'll be effective on upon publication. But as I noted, this has includes a charter ordinance. The city had already chartered out of these statutes before to represent our municipal court practices. The update to that charter ordinance is this new or charter ordinance number 67. It just changes the terminology. Um but as a as a note for this commission, it requires a four votes to pass a charter ordinance. It has to be published twice and it's effective 61 days after publication if it's not protested. That's all I have for the presentation. Happy to answer any questions. I'd move adoption of the code of ordinance 7814.

We need to ask for public comment. Excuse me. Public. Is there anyone who would like to make public comment on the changes to this ordinance or these two ordinances? Seeing none, we will move on. Um, okay. Now, thank you, Commissioner. Now you can make your motion.

I will finish the sentence. I move that we adopt and approve ordinance 7814 with the changes required for the code and also adopt the charter ordinance number 67 as to the legal adoption of those programs. I'll second that. Chelsea roll call. Commissioner Morrison. Yes, Commissioner Bon Lentil. Yes, Mayor Adam. Yes, Commissioner Mcola. Yes, Commissioner Fox. Yes. Motion carries five to zero.

Thank you all. Um, we will now consider a citystate agreement with the Kansas Department of Transportation, also known as K DOT, for the K18 Fort Riley Boulevard mill and overlay project ST2510.

Yes, mayor, commissioners, Brian Johnson, director of public park, city engineer. So this item is actually a city-state agreement which is part of a grant application that we received from KOT about a year ago. We received $500,000 to Millan overlay part of Fort Riley Boulevard or K18. It's through the CCIP city connecting link improvement program CCIP program which has been around since about the mid to late 80s. Uh this is the third uh Ccl that we've got here in the last four or five years. This one is for Westwood which uh runs from about the bridges at Palisa to just past Westwood to where the for boulevard turns the concrete. So the background on this one this one's actually quite complex. Uh the grant is funded through KOT. Uh 500,000 total city 100,000 participation. This is actually the third award that the city has received for maintenance along Fort Riley Boulevard. About $4 million total in the last five years. uh third to Juliet and Juliet the 10th for concrete street repairs in 2020 2021. This is a mill and overlay of the existing asphalt between Palisa and Westwood. The project was originally awarded in 2010 but was pushed back due to the impending Wildcat Creek Bridge projects. Uh then in 2012 when they were supposed to bid the project was cut uh during the Brownback administration with budget cuts. Uh both the asphalt and the bridge project were then put on hold till 2018 when the bridge was rebuilt. Uh now with those completed, we applied and received the grant last year to finish off the street maintenance. Our plan right now is to bid this early summer of 2026. So this is a reimbursement uh program. So we have to spend the money up front and then we can send in for reimbursement on the back end. We can't reimburse any money until June. So we would anticipate doing construction May or June and then asking for that reimbursement shortly thereafter. So, with that, I'll stand for any

questions. This has nothing to do with this probably, but u several months ago, you all approved a sidewalk, a new sidewalk for along Fort Riley Boulevard. Is that in within this? And where are we at with all that? That is not within this. It bids tomorrow. So, I need a good number. Hold your fingers. I need a really, really good number tomorrow.

Brian, is the intention to do those tasks concurrently? No, they're two separate operations. Uh the sidewalk projects bid through KOT, so it'll be K dot managed project. Uh we actually got some good news on that one. I I guess I can share. Uh the original grant was for 1.4 million. Uh about three months ago, Kot sent us a letter saying due to inflation, which should all sound familiar to us, due to inflation, they think that the project's going to be about 2.4 4 million and they're actually going to cover they are going to cover 80% of any overs. Super. So they're going to kick in about another $800,000 to us. So we were very happy to get that letter in the mail.

I think we all went out and had coffee in fact. So uh you'll see that we've got it scheduled for March 17th for an award. There'll be an award uh concur with KOT to award on March 17th, but that does bid tomorrow. Obviously, we're hoping for a good number. That project's It's complex. It's It's very complex. That's why it's still in the shape it is today. Um Brian, talking about sidewalks, that sidewalk is not contiguous. There's a place, isn't there a place where it sort of stops? That's what Commissioner Fox. Yep. Yeah. It's actually about right here in this picture. Yeah. From about there to the west is all sidewalk all the way down to the trail.

Yeah. Uh with the bridge project, the city participated in that sidewalk. We paid it was under 100,000, but we had a cost share in that bridge project for that trail on the north side. Yeah. Well, I see people, you know, walking on it and it stops. Oh, it's busy. And there's a um sort of a wall there, right? There's a retaining wall there. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. Big huge one, in fact. Okay. I would just like to parenthetically call attention to the dates that Brian mentioned when he was talking about this and that this project was is now 16 years old and chased this one a long time.

When uh people complain about the pace of change at city hall, sometimes it's due to factors that are pretty far out of our control. So, I would just remind people that it's great that we have the institutional memory and the commitment to continue pursuing these projects. Yeah, this one's been around a while. The asphalt that is there was actually late in the late 90s, so it's almost 30 years old. And we've patched it and patched it and patched it. If you drive it, you'll see it. But finally, we're going to get some relief hopefully. You know, talking about inflation, what was the original

I was just thinking about that. I think the original grant in 2010 was under $100,000 and now it's half a million dollar. Yeah. Yeah. It's I think we had about a $40,000 cost share and it is all and now we got a hundred. So, okay. Thank you. Any other questions for Sidewalk Project bids tomorrow, Commissioner? So, they do take electronic bidding if you want to submit your bid. A number that starts with a one would be greatly appreciated. All right. I think we have to consider conflict of interest issues before we go down that. No, it's K. We're okay.

Uh, any comment from the public on this item? Nobody's doing their happy dance that the road is going to get fixed. All right. Do we have a motion to approve item B? I move we authorize the mayor and city clerk to execute the city state agreement with Kansas Department of Transportation for the city connecting link improvement program grant funds for the K18 Fort rally boulevard mill and overlay project from proliscoa lane to westwood road second. Thank you Chelsea. Commissioner von Lentil. Yes. Mayor Adam. Yes. Commissioner Mcola. Yes. Commissioner Fox,

yes. Commissioner Morrison, yes. Motion carries five to zero. All right, moving right along. Item C, consider amendment uh number one to the construction manager at risk CR agreement. Amendment number two to the agreement for professional services and resolution number 021726B authorizing financing for wastewater treatment plant bioolids upgrade and expansion project SS2207.

Yeah, Mayor Adam Track and commissioners, thank you for your patience on this item. you all did have a work session um on this item and we had told you at that time that it would likely be on your consent agenda. However, um as the after following that meeting and um before this agreement, the uh GMP has gone up about $300,000. And so I've asked um our utility director Randy Dwit and our engineers and Seymar to um explain why that uh change has been made before you all take action.

Thank you. Thank you, Danielle. Okay. Well, good to be back in front of you. Uh we are kind of at a major milestone for this project. So, it's time to uh really move forward towards construction. So, uh as you mentioned, there's three things things associated with this action tonight. Um so, we've got those three items you mentioned uh with the GMP amendment. There's several other things that uh we're going to highlight that we talked about in detail before, but just as a reminder, this also sets our schedule. Uh this sets a list of allowances that the Sear has asked for that total about $300,000. Uh those are kind of just comparable to a contingency that they have a little bit more say in, but we ultimately have team team say in that. uh we're gonna we're going to set the assumptions and clarifications that that the uh contracting or the team put together that was the basis for the GMP and uh we're adding a a a an exhibit for contingency usage guidelines to help us as we go through the process make determinations on on what we can use the contingencies for when we'll use it versus doing a uh change order something like that. So that's not a typical part of a Seymar project, but that's something that we work with Crossland and Corollo to incorporate into this. So, uh, if we if we get approval here tonight, uh, the next steps are Crossland is going to really start getting together and and taking the next month to fasttrack getting subcontracts in place. Uh, starting to prepare for all the many, many submittals they'll have to put together and have Corolla start reviewing. And the hope is we'll get through some of that stuff in March. And with any luck, we'll mobilize in April. So, as Dale Neil mentioned, we've we got about $300,000 increase from the draft

proposal permitted pre uh presented in January. It's a 1.4% increase. So, we did want to provide a little bit of information and detail on what caused that increase. I will step back and say that we knew that that was a draft proposal. Uh we wish it was a little more final at that time, but u Joe Barnes is here. He talked a lot about the process that once we get all those bid packages for 24 bid packages and even more equipment packages, they go through a very very detailed descoping process to check the bid forms to check all the bids to make sure they were correct. They met all the specifications. Uh there was a couple items that they were still reviewing at that time. So we anticipated the cost might change a little bit. We we hope we were hoping it wouldn't change this much, but uh it did and that's why we're here to kind of give you a little bit more information uh so you can ask some questions. Now, I I uh I did want to go back and show this this GMP progression chart that that was put together and shown last time just kind of reiterating that we took a different path than what we thought we were going to from the 60% cost model. Uh but uh in the end even with these increases we we kind of hit that we're within that target range at the lower end of that targetage range that we thought we would be within when we were doing the 60% design cost model. So um really we just we have a breakdown of of what those cost increases are. And actually these aren't all increases. There's one that's actually decreased. So we got at least one winner in here. But I can provide you a a highlevel view of what changed. Uh Crossland's here, Corolla's here. They can get into the more details if you have very detailed questions. But a lot of these, like I said, these were processes where they went through and they they really dove into these uh bid packages further. they saw some discrepancies that they wanted to review with these subcontractors

and ultimately they decided that maybe there was some some bid errors or they didn't fill the bid form out correctly or maybe there was a mis misinterpretation and some specs and most of these aren't that big but the the top one there is the primary one that caught our eye which is $173,000 with our subcontractor who is Ariradi who is our SCADA SCADA integrator instrumentation controls contractor ctor. We work with them a lot. But really what boiled down to in this particular item, we had two two pieces of equipment. One of the one of the more primary pieces of equipment of the project, the thickening facility. And we were we were pitting two vendors against each other to get some economies for the project. Two very similar but different different pieces of equipment. And that vendor obviously had their specifications that they had to meet and Patradi had to bid in order to make sure that equipment worked with our SCADA system. So thus the the instrumentation and control integration. So they had to bid each one of those differently. And when we came back uh and looked at those bids, the uh the piece of equipment that was lower cost also had a lower cost for the SCADA work. And the equipment that was a higher cost that we didn't obviously select, it had a higher cost for SCADA integration. And so we thought that was odd. So we started looking at more detail. And um in the end, they should have been they should have been bid exactly the same. And so we asked Petrity to go back and look at the specs, look at the look at the bid documents and they determined, yeah, for that piece of equipment it should have been 103 $173,000 more. Um, so now we have apples and apples bids. Next step is we go back and look at the other contractor or other subs that bid that particular uh bid package and they had

had the same issue. So there was a general misunderstanding maybe of the specs. Um, that's my high level understanding. Again, Garrett and Joe are here with our with our team. They can probably get into a lot more of the details of of how that happened, but a majority of these are similar situations. We do have one uh this $20,000 was an increase for uh just an additional allowance for some uncertainties that that uh they still have. Hopefully we won't use these um use that cont or use that uh allowance. But um the the other large component of this is of course if you have a cost increase we have these percentage based fees the contingency the semar fee those go up because the semar or the GMP went up and some of the bond costs went up because they're obviously based on the cost of the project. So, um, that's really it on what's changed with the with the GMP. Um, I'd like to go through the rest of this and if you have questions, we can you certainly answer or ask those questions and if I can't answer them, we'll let the the team uh answer for us. So, the next item we want to talk about is some of the construction phase engineering services. So, uh this would be amend amendment number two. It's a $ 1.975 million uh cost. And yeah, that seems like a lot. Um we've talked about a lot of times when we're checking whether or not our consultant fees are within a reasonable range, we go back to general understandings that, you know, engineering design should be within a certain percentage range of a project cost, which that's what we looked like looked at with the design fees. We looked at that with this with construction phase services that has a wide range of two to 13% if you look at some of the criteria set forth by the American Society of Civil Engineers. It really depends on the project size. Right now this fee sits somewhere

between eight and 9% of the total project costs. So yeah, it's a lot, but also there's a lot that goes into that and tried to provide as much information in here that kind of shows just the level of work that they're going to have to go into helping making sure that this project is successful. You know, we've got over 12,000 hours of labor that goes into a 24-month period of having full on time full on-site inspection. Um, there's reimburseable expenses, but you know, I've listed here, and these might not be 100% accurate, but at least 10,000 hours for continuous on-site observation, over 2,000 hours to to review the many, many material submitts, um, uh, shop drawings, test results, etc. So, there's a lot that goes into that. um they are they're tasked with QAQC and making sure that the project meets that 280 page plan set and over 2,000 pages of spec. So um it's a lot of information to have to oversee. And bottom line is that last bullet point here is we have to have somebody to help us protect that investment. You know, we're we're putting a lot of money into that facility. We have two new buildings that we need to make sure are built correctly. I said well over seven and a half million dollars of equipment underground piping. We've got a substantial above ground tank that's going to have to sit on a bunch of fill and we have to make sure that that fill is just not just randomly brought in and piled up and we build a tank on it. We got to make sure that it's the right material that's compacted. It's settled appropriately, been preloaded so that that tank won't fail in the future. So, uh, a lot is going to go into this and then I said, I got a whole other list of things that we can go through, but these are the kind of things that they're going to be doing for us. So, yeah, it seems like a lot of money, but it's it's it's a to protect our investment. So, uh, the last item to talk about is the project authority and the financing. I

was asked to give a little bit of a breakdown of of what that entails. We got into it a little bit at the work session. We sat down with uh Rebecca in our finance department and really lined out the details of what goes into this. So obviously we start with our GMP. Uh we know that that GMP includes a small contingency. I think we're like 2.6% which is still a lot of money on a $22 million project. But within our financing we also factor in our own contingency. Right now it's sitting at 6%. A lot of times when we plan out these capital projects, we actually estimate about a 10% construction contingency, but because of the size of this project and because we've already got a little bit of contingency baked into the GMP, we reduce that to 6%. Um, it's kind of an arbitrary number, but that way we're covered in case we do have any project scope changes or the contingency is not efficient. You know, it's rainy day fund. we hope and fully intend not to use it but that way if we do have to increase it we don't have to come back for another project authority resolution um in front of the governing body of course that includes the cost includes the pre-procurement of the bio solid stretch that we bought all the pre-construction seamar services all engineering services and miscellaneous fees like recording so we ended up with a total a total project cost of about $28 million So then we go into the cost to finance the project. So I've listed there some of the estimated temporary cost um temporary note costs, bonding costs. We really plan those out assuming about a four to 5% interest rate. So there's a little bit of buffer in there. We hope that those come in quite a bit less. Um and then as we talked about before, we got a total bonded cost of about $33 million. just short of $34 million annual payment if we do a 15-year bond

of $3.15 million. And of course, you know, the the lower payment if we did a 20-year bond, but I think we all concurred that 15-year bonds the way to go. Uh was asked to remind the commission about these basic bullet points here that obviously the payments for that are going to come from the wastewater fund. Uh all revenues from the wastewater fund are generated through user fees and no sales tax, no property tax. And of course, our debt does not count against the city's overall debt. So very important things to to note when when those are important topics to the governing body. Uh same chart that we presented before. Uh I had except last time this was assuming a 20-year go bond. Uh I plugged in the information for a 15-year go bond. Obviously the red is the recommended fund balance. The green is the projected uh and last time we presented this that the outy years really are the only thing that changes. So, you know, that that gap between the green and the red was a little bit smaller, but it's not a significant impact to do that 15-year versus the 20. So, um I I want to backtrack a second because I forgot one thing about the uh construction phase engineering services. That is a not to exceed. So, it could be less. Um, it could be it could be substantially less, but we plan for a 24-month construction period. It could be less. Uh, if you know, we have good weather. Uh, we got a phenomenal contractor and subcontractor on board. Not to put any pressure on you, but we could get done sooner. And, uh, you know, some some Seamar projects have a reward in it for the contractor if they get done early. We don't have that here because this wasn't really a time crunch type project, but just want to throw it out there that that's a not to exceed amount. Corollo has a history of of uh not using everything in their um in their construction phase engineering estimates. So with that,

I'll stand for any questions. Hopefully I can answer them, but if not, again, we'll have my team members here. So hopefully that was enough information for you. Really really wanted to Yeah, I just wanted to comment that I really love especially your last two slides and I just think they help visualize what your budget looks like and and how it's going to so I just really appreciate that. Thank you.

Well, last time I'm the one that grided about the fees and the cost and if we've done a good proprietary job in designing I think the reserve fund is exceedingly large a million dollars. What was screw? What could be so screwed up that they missed that we need to have a million dollars at risk as far as what we put into the financing contingency or you had up one of the schedules you had your reserve fund or

like so this is just really standard practice. Um I would probably look to administration or even finance department but like I mentioned this is Generally, we would look at a 10% contingency. Well, and it's really just to cover really I'd really argue about 10%.

Exactly. That's why we that's why we dialed it down because it's such a large project. Really, this is something that is we don't want to have to come back for a higher bond authority. If if something comes up in the project that it that it does increase the cost, last thing we want to do is have to go back to bond council and say, "Let's we got to redo this bond resolution or the ordinance or what the bond resolution." So, um, I wouldn't really truly consider that a a construction contingency that that we are we think we're going to use. That's that's just standard practice for when we when you put together these bond packages.

Well, then I think we ought to use one we would expect we might have to use because of some error of design, construction, or fact. I mean, I assume there's not much rock out there, so it wouldn't be a rock surprise.

Oh, no. No. Um I think I think that contingency you're talking about some of the contingencies in the allowance we've baked into the GMP. Those should more than cover everything. Trust me, I'm I'm I'm pretty confident of that. That's why the they have a confidence level why they reduce that contingency to 2.6%. Um but those allowances are $300,000. Again, we may not use those. And a matter of fact, we're going to be proactive in trying not to use those. Um, you know, I would I would maybe look to administration. It's like ex more experience with projects of these size and why we do that. It's it's like I said, it's a common practice and and it's just we've never done zero contingency in these financing that I'm aware of.

Reena probably has more background and experience and she can expand on that if she'd like. We typically size these things in a way to where we're not reapproaching bond counsel in the event something surfaces during a project that no one anticipated. You asked what could possibly happen for that 1.39 339 million to be leveraged. You will be the first to know. Yeah.

Because if it happens, we're going to be in this room talking about it. If it exceeds 1.33 million, we got to go back to bond council, get more authority, issue more temp notes. So, this gives us the cushion not to have to go through that process again. It costs money to go through that process and it costs money to go out for temp notes. So, we'd rather make sure we have enough when we go out and we typically have money left over and then we have flexibility to either pay down that debt with that money or use it, you know, for project costs. I don't anticipate we'll use it. It's our standard practice. We don't like to do things twice and cost the taxpayers money again. So, we build it in upfront and it's cushion we typically use to pay down that debt.

Well, I'll be a lot more comfortable after about three of these when I'm not a newbie and they come back and they haven't used any of it, then we'll have a good argument to take it out.

And Seamar projects design bid build design build. We all have experiences in all three. I would say under Seymar and I think that's why Reena agreed to go to a smaller percentage design bid build we typically 10% I think Reena's got experience where that 10% actually came into play with the amount of effort and energy going in on the front end of this versus dealing with change orders on the back end of a project like you typically see in a design bid build. There is a higher confidence level that GMP will be realized and not exceeded. Um, will we need more staff to um take care of this expanded?

No, a lot of the equipment is replacing some aging equipment that will be uh decommissioned. Sorry,

but there is some expansion going Yeah, there is some expansion and really we hadn't really thought looked into that because there's really no reason that it would result in us having more uh labor costs. Of course, with anything, you know, in 10 years, 15 years, we'll have to start planning for more capital improvement or capital maintenance projects to to take care of this new equipment. Um, Governor, a lot of this is about building in some redundancies. So, we extend the life of some of our equipment when when it's redundant, we can rotate between the two things. Um, this isn't really anything that's going to cause a need for more more staffing

and um liability. If we have some kind of accident or something on that reverts to our the person we've contracted with generally yeah they're going to have it depends on what you're talking about what could happen but it depends on who might be at fault for that but there's obviously b significant amount of bonds and insurance that come along with a project like that. So, um, I personally don't have any experience with ever having to use something like that, but these guys have been in this business for a long time. They they might, but generally hope it doesn't happen.

Is some of the cost due to the fact that there aren't many people in this business or are there? No. Okay. Yeah. I think we have a good wide array of local contractors and subcontractors. Uh I would say that in general it's the smaller waterline type projects that we have fewer contractors around that can do that kind of work. Um this this big highle heavy construction stuff. There's there's ample outside contractors outside this reg within the region but outside Manhattan that that do this. Thank you. No problems there.

Thank you. I look forward to showing you what we're going to be doing here next week. I have my tour scheduled next week if anyone would like to join me. Um, staff offered an open invitation. Um, thank you, Randy. I concur with Andrew. I think this was a very helpful presentation. The information you included in it was elucidating. Anytime.

Commissioners, any final comments or questions for Randy? Okay. Um, we will now open this item up for public comment. Is there anyone who would like to make any remarks? All right. Seeing none, we will close public comment. Is there a motion? Do we need to do three motions, Katie, or is this Can we do one? You can do them all in one motion. Okay. All right. Who wants to read all this? You could even just move to approve items C3 A through C.

So I move to approve items C3 A B and C. Second Chelsea. Mayor Adam. Yes. Commissioner Mcola. Yes. Commissioner Fox. Yes. Commissioner Morrison. Yes. Commissioner von Lentil. Yes. Motion carries five to zero.

Thank you all. And given the quietude of the public up until now, I suspect many of you are here for this item of the agenda, we will now consider resolution number 021 726C for the edge district. This is a nonbinding resolution. I just want to reinforce that we are not committing any uh city resources at this time other than staff time that is required to continue engaging with the KSU Foundation if this project does move forward. So, um can we have the presentation, please?

Yes. Thank you, mayor, commissioners. Uh Jason Hilers, deputy city manager. wanted to just really introduce the foundation and as you stated mayor that the resolution of support is that to continue to work on this project. They do mention four tools within the resolution tax incubate finance star bonds industrial revenue bonds and a community improvement district CI. Uh those tools um be happy to answer questions after the presentation if you'd like to get into any specifics. We have experience with all of these tools in Manhattan over the last 30, 40 years in our community. Happy to draw on any of those examples if you'd like us to. But at this point in time, I would introduce president and CEO of the foundation, Greg Williams, and he'll walk through this presentation. This will be interesting. Can you hear me from here? Good.

Good. So, good evening, mayor and commissioners. We appreciate the opportunity to be for you before you tonight. I'm Greg Williams, president and CEO of the KState Foundation. I'm here on behalf of the one KState family representing the Edge 3.0, a visionary project that we hope that you'll find as uh aspirational and impactful as we do. So in what I do in generating philanthropy for Kate in my career, I think it's always important to start with gratitude. And so I think there's a number of people that we've got to thank to get to this point tonight. So this process for where we're at and what we're talking about in Edge 3.0 began in April of last year and it began with engaging our state partners. And so I want to uh give a shout out and a special thank you to the lieutenant governor and Bob North and their staff for working with us to get to this point and explore some of these opportunities. I also want to thank um our city manager Danielle Dulan and deputy city manager Jason Hilders and their staff. They've been incredibly helpful to this point to explore this process and what would be involved in this. And so without their assistance, we wouldn't be here tonight uh to inform you on this project. The 1K state partners, as I'd mentioned, President Linton is sorry he can't be here tonight. Um we also have Marshall Stewart, our executive VP, Provost, uh Jesse Perez Mendes has been part of this process. Adam Walker, the alumni association CEO, and then Gene Taylor, our athletics director are all integral partners in this and arriving at what we're going to present. And then finally, I want to thank each of you. So, mayor and commissioners, each of you have chosen to serve. It's an important service in our community, and I'm grateful for it. So, thank you for the opportunity to be here. I'll also mention if there's questions in the end, I'm joined by two of my colleagues, Greg

Loren, who's our CFO and chief operating officer and leads much of our real estate empire, and then Trent Arrest, who's a consulting partner that's been helping us with this process to date. So, Trent is here with us as well. Jason, do I click this to go forward? No.

There we go. Magic. So, I think it's important that uh I reiterate that this is not the beginning of construction or beginning of the edge. This is a continuation of an evolution of infrastructure development that has been going on for over a decade in Manhattan, Kansas. So this slide really intends to iterate and highlight for the citizens and for you the commission what has been the progress to date. It's kind of broken down in increments of five years but gives you a sense of this journey that we've been on for the past decade and kind of where we're at with Edge 3.0. As you can see Edge 1.0 and 2.0 were kind of micro steps. Edge 3.0 know is a quantum leap in our mind of multiple elements at one time that would really allow us to accelerate get a quantum leap and what the impact can be from the edge and what this community can yield uh from this uh evolution and so again this slide represents a number of different elements that we're going to go through in the presentation and I just wanted you to have this context that this is a continuation not a beginning so this next slide is a a slide that we've used quite often and it it really gives a a representation of the multiaceted zones that exist in the edge innovation district. This is not a a one dimension enterprise. This is a multiaceted comprehensive innovation district that represents the very best examples of how this is done nationally. So, the color-coded zones really highlight the different kinds of activities and focus vectors that exist in this district. So, I think it's important as we talk about what this project is and what it isn't to really highlight what a comprehensive innovation district is nationally. There are many just research

zones affiliated with universities and this is much more. This is a comprehensive economic development district that has work, live, play, multiple other elements that blends together and provides a lot of synergy value uh and a lot more magnetism and attraction than just being a singularly focused research and innovation district. So what we've found nationally and what I'll share with you is other details and facts that highlight that this comprehensive district that has work, live, play elements and other elements is much more vibrant. Uh it operates uh 247 365 days a year of attracting people to be engaged in this in in multiple dimensions in multiple ways. examples of this nationally that are other similar examples at NC State. Uh the Centennial Campus District has taken on this model. Purdue University's Discovery Park, Witchah State's NAR campus, Iowa State's research park are just other very similar examples of a very comprehensive district. Uh and that's what we're trying to highlight here today. So I think it's important also to understand what are the DNA elements or attributes that exist in these districts. Uh not singular dimensions but there are kind of nine basic DNA elements that exists in a very comprehensive vibrant district today. When you look at what we've built in the edge we have about two of these checked off and maybe some parts of number four beginning. What edge 3.0 0 allows us to achieve is points two through six. So we get most of the other elements on the ground and working for us once we get through this next evolution. Uh items eight and nine which is a culture of collaboration and more global connectivity. Those are going to happen when you have mature assets and time for these things to work together. So I just

wanted to highlight that of the many dimensions that we need edge 3.0 helps us achieve many of these with this next iteration. I think it's also important to highlight that this is more than just an asset for Kansas State University. This is benefiting the entirety of the state of Kansas, Manhattan, and the local region, uh, and multiple other partners beyond the KState family, MATC, local not forprofits, uh, the city, Riley County, USD 383 are all going to benefit and have a a role to play and benefit from this district. the people beyond the students and the faculty and staff of KState and the employees, the citizens of this community and as you go broader with the assets that are going to attract visitation here, they're going to benefit from what we build in Edge 3.0. And then you get to the physical assets which are the easy the iconic physical tangible things to understand. R&D facilities, office, entertainment, hotels, restaurants, residential. That also feeds over into the soft assets, all the synergy value that's created with uh the collision value that's created uh the clusters of accelerators, incubators, startup space, all the synergy value connections that come from a vibrant district like this. So, I just wanted to highlight this is not just benefiting Kate. many citizens, many sectors of the community and region are going to benefit from this district. You know, as we've gone through and engaged the community more broadly, uh Trent, Greg, myself, and others have met with uh done over 50 plus individual meetings or group meetings to highlight and share the details of this. It's been very very important for us to share facts to be transparent about this and then dispel the myths and kind of urban legend that exists with these. So we

crafted this slide to kind of highlight what the edge 3.0 is and then what it is not. And so I think it does capture uh the essence of something I've stated previously. This is building on a decade's worth of proven work to this point. our office park and other iterations uh have been those proven steps that prove that we can perform. Uh this is going to be adding new tax revenue for Manhattan on day one of project completion. And I want to stop right there and remind everybody day one the city is net positive in this project. property tax, sales tax benefit to the citizens of this community, fueling the budget needs of this community, leveraging significant private and state investment, uh over $294 million in total build uh in this infrastructure, a tremendous amount of private money, federal money, other university investment that is being leveraged by the city. And this is about the community and the many partners that can benefit from this. As I said, this is not just about KState and the foundation. This is about what we can do for this Manhattan community. And I want to be clear about these last three. I've had to dispel this myth rumor uh or, you know, multiple times. This is not about enriching the foundation. We are not going to own these hotels, this restaurant, the restaurants, and we're going to benefit from this district, but we are not going to own these assets. They're going to be operated, a lot of them by other local operators and other uh private business owners. We are not requiring debt from the city to do this. We are not putting the city at risk for any of these bonds or debt. The city would have no risk in this. And we're not requiring investment directly from the city's budget or from their economic development funds. We're not asking the city to take a dollar out of its pocket to make these work. So, why is this a KSU priority? One of

the things I've been asked by one of the commissioners and others is why are we doing this? This isn't our role. Well, this is a KState priority. This goes back two previous administrations asking for us, the foundation, to partner with the university and build out a comprehensive innovation district that could be a force multiplier for this university and this community. So when we think about former President Kirk Schultz, former President Meyers, and now President Clinton, this is a continuation of our partnership and work with them to build out a vision and a dream that we believe would benefit this community. Uh more to this point, it provides through these public financing tools 17.5 million direct investment in assets that they're going to own. And I'll walk through that in just a minute. The Edge District 3.0 also directly addresses nine of the imperatives of the nextgen KState strategic plan. So the strategic plan that's guiding this university to be a nextgen uh uh strategic university are going to be fueled by this activity out of the edge and then this is a quantum leap in the edge. One of the things that we realize and lament uh as a university community and I think more broadly is that we are behind those other innovation districts I mentioned in those other states and other communities. They are a decade or more ahead of us and we have got to get a quantum leap and catch up. So, and I've just got a couple of other findings here through national publications around innovation districts that just validate the importance of these being comprehensive and what they are as as a value ad in a community. So, a couple of other things that I think is really important uh to reflect on is our shared truth and challenge as a community. So, I've lived in this community for 11 years. Uh, been involved with the chamber economic

development have invested tremendously in this community. Our existing tax base is stressed. I don't think anybody will debate or refute that reality. Job options for our citizens are not growing and quality of life is eroding. So, as this tax base has stayed flat, it's really hard to stay ahead of the inflationary growth and demands and needs of this community. peer communities are going to leave us behind. When I look at what's happening in other communities in Kansas, whether it's in Witchah, Salina, Kansas City, Garden City, other communities are taking advantage of these uh public financing tools. They're being aggressive about smart growth, trying to add value that adds property tax, sales tax, and helps their citizens and their city address the needs of their communities. to change. I believe we absolutely have to have conditions that energize people and attract investment. The edge 3.0 is part of that solution. The critical mass of that will re-energize this community and outside investing partners will see promise. They'll see a community betting on itself and want to be involved. We think all of us have to participate. So when people ask why the foundation is doing this, we're in a position to leverage our expertise and our resources to do something special for the city. And as a citizen here in this community, we think it's important to do that. And then we need leadership and execution. You're providing leadership. We're trying to do that as well. And all we're doing is presenting an opportunity that we absolutely believe is good for everybody involved. And I want to reiterate one last point. I want to remind the commissioners there is a significant cost to doing nothing. I want to remind everyone that we bought this land and are trying to do something bold and audacious that will absolutely support our city's tax base and provide revenue. But if we don't have support,

we're not going to be able to move forward. The land that we've bought, what we're developing there, never was paying property tax, never providing sales tax to this community. and we're trying to create value for the community this way. So, I just think it's important if we do nothing, there is nothing for this community and for the city. I want to talk a little bit about our foundation service to Manhattan. So, we've been trying to act and lead with great humility. We do have a core mission that is something we do focus on heavily. Our traditional mission of fundraising and endowment management is for the university is something we take very seriously. This additional mission function in real estate development is not new to foundations like ours. This is done quite widely nationally. We've developed the expertise and the capability to do this to the benefit of our university and to our community. And that's what we're trying to do here. So embracing our opportunity to act and operate as a developer to simultaneously serve our core mission for the university and our city is something that we believe as a citizen we should be doing for Manhattan. We've also been listening very thoughtfully, as I mentioned, 50 plus meetings with individuals, community groups, Rotary groups, the Aggieville business community, and many others to listen and understand their concerns and thoughts and dispel myths and rumors and address their questions. But what we've heard time and again is this last quote. There is a desire for people to see this community grow through smart strategic investment. And that's precisely what we believe this is. So, in our service to Manhattan and beyond our core mission, we are leveraging our assets and taking risk. And I want to reiterate that last statement. We are taking risk to do this for the community. Uh we're in a position to leverage our expertise and

assets. But I'll just remind on these last full of handful of bullet points. The foundation bought the edge site from the university at market rate over $8 million to buy that land and begin this process for our community. The 1880 and 1960 projects that we've completed, we used commercial loan debt to do that. We used that debt to collateralize those assets to create them to borrow and to build. And those assets are paying property tax to this community today. Champions Gate is going to require us to borrow a little bit more money which we've done in some respects and partner with other developers and then we are using uh there's no philanthropy funds used in this at this point and nor can there be philanthropy funds used in Champions Gate. So we are fully committed for our endowment and our philanthropy funds fueling the mission of Kansas State University. So there are no extra dollars in our foundation to fuel this project and this activity. So I just make this last statement. Without these financing tools, there's no project because I have no other resources to use to fill the gap that exists in this capital stack. So I want to walk through and we think these visuals and many of you have attested to this have been very helpful in the community understanding how these work. So this first one is the starbond increment financing tool. These are publicly available tools, widely used. We've used this twice in our community for the Discovery Center and for the Museum of Art and Light very successfully. So, uh, working with Lieutenant Governor Toland and their staff, this has been a made available in the Edge district. So, what this shows you is what I said before, immediately the city and the county operations are benefiting from new sales tax revenue on day one. Once these assets are in place,

you're going to get the base plus an increment that's not subject to capture and there's an increment on top of that that is the public financing tool that will help with the capital stack of this project. We're also, as Jason mentioned, we're asking for a tiff. So this property tax revenue as I said day one the base and the increments not subject to capture is going to be coming to the city to the county and the stool district fueling their operations on day one. There's an increment that will be part of the financing tool that does this but the city is net positive from the beginning in this. And then the CI, the community improvement district. This is a a sales tax revenue tool. Again, we're not touching the base. All of that base is immediately available to the city and fueling the city's budget. And there is an increment on top of that that would go to help with the financing of the district. So, this slide really highlights for you the different elements that benefit from these public financing tools. And so I mentioned the comprehensive nature of this. The edge is the attraction and that's what the the state partners have reminded us of is it's not just one attraction venue. It's multiple. So the indoor track facility, the Champions Gate uh development at the corner of College and Kimell, the EdgeTech facility, and then the Bilbury Family Event Center are the elements that are getting direct benefit. And I'd also remind you that there is money coming to the city either for dealing with street debt or what other improvements that they'd like to do with those resources. So I'll just remind you there's immediate benefits to the Manhattan business community and to the region. You know, we've had to do a number of studies that will be part of this

process if you vote to approve and continue on with us. Um there is a couple of studies. There's a feasibility study and an economic impact study that have been part of this. And their estimates out of this is out of the attraction and the patronage that's going to come to these venues, there's not going to be enough uh rooms or places to eat in Champions Gate to support all that patronage and all that attraction that's coming here. So the estimates is up to 75% of these individuals coming for these venue events are going to be eating outside of that district or staying outside of that district benefiting our local hotel operators benefiting our local restaurants and creating opportunity and business for them. Significant construction employment as I mentioned nearly $295 million worth of total build a number of construction jobs. accelerated completion of the built environment. As I mentioned, this quantum leap is a big opportunity for us to bring other assets here that are accelerating the work we want to do to attract students to build workforce and talent development and attract new businesses to this community. And then the new economic development assets. When we think about our chamber partners, uh their ability to have other assets to attract businesses here through their noble work, uh we think this this is a a really great contributing force for them to go out and market this community. And then last but not least, fulfillment of a vision. As I mentioned in the beginning, I think when site selectors and others think about where to go with our business, they want to see bold investment. They want to see communities betting on themselves. They want to see progress and growth and this would be a quantum leaf that would be really representative of that. So I want to reiterate and I'm almost done with this that just as a reminder of the benefit from day one. Again net positive from day one for the city, the

city budget, the county, the school district. The base sales tax collections in the district are fully funded to the community. City Eco DVO sales tax fully funded plus captures the growth. The city road sales tax the quality of life sales tax fully funded plus capturing the growth sales tax and TGT outside the district boundary fully funded plus the growth. There's the addition of all the private sector assets that are being built. They're going to be paying property tax uh to the county, the city, and the school district. and again with no obligations against the city's current property tax base and you're getting dollars toward either the city's debt or whatever they choose to apply that to in this project base. So I'll stop there and I'll I'm happy to answer any questions.

Um Greg I I'll start. Um we're main in the presentation and some of the conversations we've had, we've focused quite a bit on uh some of the commercial investment um the KState track and the Bilbury Event Center. um the what are what's the status of the aronomy research and innovation center and other research facilities that are considered part of this edge 3.0 O

sure I think of those research and innovation facilities the aronomy research and innovation center is under construction and should be complete within the next six months.

Yeah within the next six months. So that's uh coming out of the ground and will be ready to go to work. The edge tech facility that we refer to is going to require a combination of federal, state and institution investment. uh Marshall Stewart and his team have been working on that at the federal and the state level to secure some of those assets. Uh but the financing tools and this investment that would accelerate some of the site work uh contributes to that and accelerates the opportunity for those other extra dollars to go to work. Then there's a high bay facility that they're working on that largely would be supported out of the university directly perhaps with a little bit of uh philanthropy involved. uh that's in the neighborhood of a $10 million facility as envisioned right now. That would accelerate pretty quickly. I would also mention the edge tech sector of this. We're talking about a phase one of this that's probably about a $40 million total build. There's a vision for that to be as much as 120 million over years, but the first phase would be about a $40 million build of edge tech. Oh, I was so looking at the map. Um I was I did I didn't see the fire station and I didn't see the housing um the corners. So like what's maybe the time frame? What what are your thoughts on those?

Well, rest assure they still exist and there's no intentions around those. So as I opened in my comments, this was a long range vision document of what this might look like in 2035 and beyond. And so what I'm aware of is over time the city and the university has communicated and engaged about that fire station. We have no designs on that uh about where it's going to go, what elements exist or not. Uh and certainly with the public housing district along Manhattan and Kimell Avenue. Again, uh the director Aaron Estorbrook has interacted with our CFO in the past and talked about a future state, perhaps another site for other development of that long range, but that is very long range out. So what we were trying to do is project a vision of what this might look like 15, 20 years down the road, but no specific design on that. So, it's a guesstimation at best, but it does give you a flavor of the districts and how they flow.

It it just gives a lot of us heartburn though to see it on the map like

Well, and my apologies for that. That's not the intent. Um certainly those are other decisions and conversations that deserve more engagement. We're just trying to show the totality of the district there. Greg, I would just u echo Andrew's point in that it's kind of a red flag, particularly when this commission or prior commission has had a a very strong focus on workforce housing, lowincome housing. So for your future presentations, I'd probably make it a little bit more clear that this is a a long range vision and what things might look like. Agreed.

Um the other thing is that I would just mention is I understand that the um I'm sorry. Um that the Manhattan Housing Authority has uh land use rights till about 2038. And I would argue that 12 years, given what we heard earlier about road construction and road projects, um that's not necessarily a short time

or a long time to find another location to construct multiple units. Um I think the community needs some assurances that this consideration of what might have happen with that housing is a is part of your thought process. I I would just point out that their their grand vision of this area has some of the same issues as the grand vision of the East Gate Gateway vision where that vision shows many businesses being displaced. Uh which I had heartburn with as well. So that that's just one of the the hazards of doing a a grand vision of an area. So,

could I just add that there is HUD housing there, but there's also um the Manhattan Area Housing Partnership has quite a number of units there which can only be um gotten to through the HUD housing. Sure. And um it's a Chudau, so that should also be, you know, considered. Yeah. Well, let me just reiterate and be clear again. Edge 3.0 or Edge 4.0 has no design on that property. I think we were trying to show a bold vision and probably overstepped a bit in that. So, I want the citizens, the community to rest assured. Uh there's no scheme or strategy to try to move that in a different direction. Oh, you're not through.

You said you're about through with the response. You're not in the progress to date on edge. Who has been the biggest contributor to making sure it could happen as far as street sewer, water, and development? And what did what did the city pay for all of that? Well, if I understand your question correctly. Yeah. How much money we already put in that that party?

Well, and I think the word we is the correct one. So, the city and the community has invested between 55 and $60 million as I understand it between all of the streetscapes along there contiguous to Enbath. a large part of that vision and investment required by INDath as I understand it. But I'd also reiterate another fact that the KState community has been part of that investment as well. $8 million of investment from the city university community fund, money from KState athletics, and this renewed commitment here of additional money. So I think there's been many partners in the streets in terms of the investment in the infrastructure of the buildings. That's been the foundation and Kansas State University going at risk to build those assets and help the community realize benefits from that.

But that was an economic decision by the foundation andor the university to build all of those things. Sure.

If the number you gave of 55 million is correct. If I understand correctly, city's got 30 million of that 55. We've given you guys and the community a big investment. And you're right, we don't get any money from any of it right now except for the two office buildings. They get some, but it's not going to come around for what, another 15 years. No, I think as I've reiterated, when these projects are developed and built, you're built, you're net positive day one. Property tax and sales tax. The faster we do this, the faster the city benefits from the revenue that can come from those. And when we do all the alphabet financing that you're going to ask for, you you as I understand, you don't think you can do it if you don't get the alphabet of the tiff and the star bonds and all of that. That's

um there's not going to be a whole lot of money left for the city or anybody for 15 years or 20. Well, that's the next step of this process would provide uh very precise financial details on the projections of what's expected for the financing tools and the benefit to the city, the county, and the school district. So, that would be the next step for the zone maps and the arithmetic to be shared. So, you could see the windfall of property tax and sales tax that would come from the city. And does the foundation or the university own the land adjacent to the fire station there? Because we've been told in what, four years, five years, we're going to be evicted at a cost of 10 to 15 million to replace what's there. Is that not an incentive to work with us? Also,

I think we always have an incentive to work with our city partners. So, let's start there. The land that the fire station exists on today is university land as I understand it in a lease partnership with the city. And so correct I know that there's been iterative conversations over time with the city in good faith to be a partner and address what you want from your fire station, your training center and those assets. So I don't have a role in that or any decision authority in that. I assume that you were involved or somebody on staff with the proposed resolution to approve going forward. Have you seen the draft resolution? Yes.

Well, a couple things in there picked my interest. It says whereas the university and the foundation want to develop improve university educational and athletic amenities. What else athletic amenity do we need one or have to have out of these projects 3.0?

Yeah. Well, again, the only project directly getting public financing tools through this is the indoor track facility and and you may remember Commissioner Morrison when we discussed this. We're trying to be a nextgen land grant university and using our assets not only to benefit our education and teaching mission, but to do be economic generators for the city. So the stall barn in the arena can be a tremendous asset. We're going to have a rodeo next weekend and look at the number of people who are going to come to town. Imagine that 30 times a year. The same with the indoor track. Right now it's not used to generate any value for local businesses. And so by investing in this, we think we can bring other meets and activities here that will fill the hotels, fill the restaurants and leverage those assets for the good of this community.

And the people are proposing to develop this on your behalf for the community. Are they not financially able to build their own building, hotels, and other things?

Well, they're certainly able to build them, but the financing economically making this work out and pencil out. There's not many projects that do work without many of these public financing tools. And so if you're asking the question, can these be achieved without these financing tools? I think I've tried to be really clear, they cannot. And it's unfortunate, but that's the reality. I think the benefit though is I'm not asking the city to use current city budget or the EcoDVO fund. What we're doing is partnering together to start from zero for both of us and bring a tremendous windfall of property tax and sales tax revenue to the city budget without taking a dollar out of their pocket to do it. So, this is a partnership that everybody benefits from.

So, of that $40 million that we think may be invested in that corner, how much of that's actually going to draw property tax value to the city for the first 15 20 years? Well, if we talk about the corner of College and Kimble, right, where the Champions Gate area is, the condos, I I have to do an estimate on the value of that in property taxes and what it's going to yield, the different restaurant pads, and then the hotel. All of that is going to be paying property tax and sales tax immediately to the city. So,

how much of that has to be used to pay for the alphabet? Well, that's what these these financial uh all the financial work that we're doing with our outside legal partner and we intend to do with our city staff will develop all of those financial realities and lay that out for you. So I don't have an estimate for you today, but that will be clear and realized as what is the public financing estimate and then what is the benefit to the city through sales tax and property tax and is that that's a part of the star bond financing for valuations and asset and values. Yes.

And how long is that going to be for we know here any idea of what that is developing? Well, with your approval tonight, it would begin the process tomorrow and working with our legal partners, working with the city, and so within the next couple of months would be my guesstimate of when we'd have more precise numbers and details to come back to the commission and present a more formal request. And as it says, this is no commitment. It's just kind of a promise we'll be open-minded till we know something critical. Is that correct? That's precisely what it is.

Well, advise staff to continue to work with us, believe and have confidence that this is a promising opportunity for the city and for this community and and work with us to prove that we're trying to earn your vote and confidence in this. And so, that's the next step we need to take for you to be able to make a wise decision about this.

Greg, I have some questions. I know that you're um continually reworking those financials and the potential budget. So, I'm just going to I won't refer specifically to what I was provided in my briefing, but it looks as if the amounts that you would hope to obtain from these public financing tools is about 16% of the total cost of the project by my estimates. And this is from uh I had my briefing with Trent maybe six weeks ago. It's been a little while, so I don't know how much they've changed since then.

Um the incentive numbers might have gone down a little bit, but not by much. Um, you mentioned that philanthropy was not going to be part of this, but are you but when I did talk with your consultant, it was mentioned as part of the overall package. So, can you just clarify the distinction between philanthropic dollars that are going to the foundation for use by K State and its aspirations versus what you might recruit for this project?

Correct. Yeah. No, that's a a a great uh point. So, at present, what philanthropy is at work in this edge 3.0 know is the philanthropy we have attracted to build the Bilbury Event Center and that's over $25 million and then the money we provided to Kate when we bought the property to go into the aronomy innovation and research center. Um, we believe that the indoor track facility that we will attract some philanthropy to that, but there will be no philanthropy or foundation money in the hotel, the restaurants, the condo. Um, perhaps some in the edge tech district, but roughly $37 million out of that 294 point some odd that I've referenced is what's at work in that capital stack at this point. I think to both Jim and Susan's point on, you say it's a $294 million total project. I think we're going to need to want to see the various sub projects, the cost of each, and then how each of the uh whether it's tax incentives or loans or, you know, private funding are going to pay for each of those things. So, $294 million sounds like a lot of money, and I sit here and try to add up all the projects, and I don't come up with 290 million. So uh and I think like the the Bilbury Center is part of that. Am I correct in that number?

Yes. And as you say that was all philanthropy. Correct. So there is philanthropy within that 290 million. Correct. Um so we we just need to see philanthropy is not going to build the hotel, the condos, the restaurants. And

so we're happy to provide detailed information. I do think it's important to note and to remember that this is a very complicated puzzle to put together to make these work and there are elements of this build that are the revenue generators. So maneuvering money around is not a possibility. This fits together perfectly like a puzzle. And I think my hope is that the commissioners will look at this from the standpoint of zero today and what are we going to gain when this is achieved versus looking at the individual parts and judging what amounts were applied to those different elements. It's it's it's a slope that I just don't know we want to go down because when you start trying to extract certain things, it'll fall apart. It it says here we're um talking tonight about indicating support and I think of course we will indicate support but we really need some hard numbers and we need to also look at the fact that when the foundation buildings went out there you pay no property tax and we put in $50 million of streets and concrete and that kind of thing um using the city university fund which I did not agree with but um it seems to me you know you've got certain things out there which are paying property taxes, but there's a new business going in 1 of March, this um psych psychiatric assistance thing, and they're not going to pay property taxes. So, I think we're missing talking a little bit about how this can really help, you know, tiff, the increment goes to helping that area. It does not go to somebody that lives by city park to help them pay their road. It's and the base there is very low because there's nothing there. So the increment is obviously going to be quite significant. Um you know I I just I

think the idea of um enhancing equestrian issu um activities is brilliant but you need those pony barns before you can really attract you know you know I think that's kind of a a number one thing you should be doing. And I think also track and field should get more attention than they do every four years when the Olympics comes around because we really have a superb track team. We have worldclass people there and we don't really support it the way you know football gets all the all the dollars.

I do think though if you're going to have um a science an egg science and all that kind of thing the foundation should also look at how they're going to support the scientists. when we see um K State going to the legislature and asking for dollars for football instead of dollars for biology or botany or physics that just really the people I know on campus that are in faculty are quite disheartened by that and so um I would just say the the idea of new tax revenue if it's going to everyone that's great but I think We also have to think about the hotels and businesses that we already have in Manhattan. The hotel occupancy is only almost 60, you know, percent and that's not great for the hotels. You know, they're busy on certain weekends, they're crazy busy on other weekends and then they're sitting empty um or partially empty. So, you know, how can we bring how can we have more scientists that bring other scientists to camp to campus to work on science or something like that? That that's all I think. You know, let's don't tell the no the public that this isn't going this is there's going to be this increase in taxes and increase in property taxes and sales tax unless it's really going to the general public and not just for specified area like like tiffs do.

Okay. Commissioner McCulla, I think you make my point well. We're bringing the additional visitation with this edge 3.0 know has attractions and amenities are bringing additional visitors for those businesses to thrive and to be successful more than we can handle in that district. And that's what we think was the smart investment part of this is how is it not just good for the district but good for the other businesses that need that help. And then when you talk about the faculty bringing other faculty the research and innovation district of edge 3.0 know all the new infrastructure, technology tools, innovation centers, the work that they can do there is only going to create more magnetism to bring more faculty and do their work. So we believe this comprehensively provides all the solutions you're looking for.

Um Larry, did you have I do. Um you say you paid $8 million to the university for the land. How much land did you buy for $8 million? more than the 17 acres. No, you paid $8 million for 17 and a half acres. 17.62 acres, whatever. Roughly. Yes, that's correct. We did. And under some of the financing alphabet, the city has to own the land, be able to do some of the financing. And I don't know if those are in yours, but if for example, if there is um industrial revenue bond to be used, we have to own the land as I understand during the term. It's the tiff.

I'm gonna let I'm going to let our deputy Yeah, it would it would be the tiff tool that would allow for land purchases to be reimbursed with tiff proceeds. There there are a lot of conversations to be had about whether or not TIF is going to be involved and how it would be involved, but land acquisition is a TIFF eligible expense.

Well, that's why the $8 million I mean they've owned it for a while, but I don't know fair market value. I didn't know. So, it is the 17 acres give or take whatever it is. If the city has to have it, then I think we are required to have to buy it to be able to get it. And so is our price, in your opinion, $8 million for the buying the land. I'm not going to ask the city to buy land. If they do, they do. Jason, do you want to correct me on that? Well, it it kind of depends on what you want to how you want to approach

part of your financing. Just as an example, on the north end in the redevelopment, Steel and Pipe owned land that they ended up selling to our developer. The developer ended up assembling all the property. They end up doing a transaction with the city to make it a TIFF eligible expense, i.e. they sell it to the city. City then sells it right back. It's not for the same amount of money. If it's going to be TIFF eligible, it's going to be at a discount. Okay? So there is a land transaction that would be necessary for it to qualify under TIFF.

So if we work through that and create a simultaneous transaction, not the city owning and retaining the land in perpetuity, we'd certainly work that out and provide that as the next phase of the discovery information that you're going to need to make a decision. But we still get the ding for the discount. That's all I'm trying to get to

if if that particular tool is used. And I I think one key piece of that TIFF is really getting back into the cost and the benefits. The the tool itself we've debated with the foundation. We do think we should explore the IRB tax abatement route. I'm not saying we're not doing, you know, one or the other, but I think we should put it on paper so the governing body and the community can see those two tools side by side. tax increment finance is also going to take the school district and the county and the city to agree with that has its own set of political challenges we've talked about in the past much like the RHID did recently IRBs are at the control and discretion of this governing body and it would include the city the county and the school district's revenues for a 10-year period tiff allows it for up to 20 so those are the two tools those have that's brief how they work can evaluate both of those and bring back that data for you all to consider.

And will that be in part of the financial evaluation for STAR and all of those? Well, STAR and CID really won't involve that level of analysis, but in our talks with the foundation, packaging district boundaries for all tools and having comprehensive cost benefit for all tools at the same time would be desired. They are on a tough timeline with star bonds and we're going to try to accommodate that as much as we can. I don't know if we'll have all the data for the other tools, but we will definitely have it for the star. Thank you. Yep. Commissioners, can any other questions or can we move on to public comment? Sure.

Greg, thank you very much. Thank you. Um, sounding a little bit like a broken record here tonight, but um, is there anyone who would like to make public comments regarding item D, the resolution of support for the edge district. And I have a feeling not many people signed in in advance, but if you have not, please, following your remarks, sign in at the D.

Yeah, I'd be happy to. Um, good evening, commissioners. Um, I'm Grant Hill, deputy chief of staff at Kansas State University. Um, I live at 1604 Green Valley Circle, but um, really that I'm in Anderson Hall more often than my actual home. Um, I am here another purple person on behalf of Kate to in support of the 3.0 edge 3.0 project and to request the city commission to allow additional costbenefit analysis to be completed um and review the concepts that were presented this evening. Um I first want to thank the city staff, the the state of Kansas for helping us get to this point. There's more to be done and so we appreciate their partnership up to this point. Um the edge initiative um really builds on year years of steady progress in Manhattan and just when the chamber was here recently and at their growth summit talked about some of the recent successes of the community and edge 3.0 will help build and accelerate that over the decades to come. Um it's important to note um that the KSU Foundation is taking on the risk and the debt in this project and they're proposing to share um the future tax revenue growth that does not exist today to help finance the infrastructure that unlocks new development opportunities. Um our current base u tax base stays in place. um the city doesn't have to draw down the economic development funds and those tools remain available for other priorities and other developers that would like to unlock those tools. Um going back to the initial construction of the north campus corridor, now the Edge District, um many longtime businesses in Manhattan benefited from that initial construction. um Blueville, Central Mechanical, Manco, Larsson, uh Midwest Concrete, CBS, Manhattan, Macau, Gore, uh Macau and Gordon and many others benefited from that initial investment. And we think that the future is bright for Manhattan businesses. And if this project continues down that pattern, um local companies will benefit from the local work that will help um support future local jobs. So, what is

the impact for Manhattan? We see some jobs that will be growing. Initially, there will be some construction, but how do we create those permanent jobs? And it's this district that will be um that will build it out. Um the Bilbury Event Center will reach its full potential. Um our student athletes will have a new facility to attract additional um uh competitions and it'll bring thousands of new visitors who will stay, eat, shop, and return to Manhattan um to check out something else in our community. and these visitors will want to come back and hopefully some of them are learners um that will be taking some case classes to live here more permanently. Um we see that the tax revenue of new buildings will mean new property taxes for the city, county, and school district that are not being collected today. And visitors and new businesses will generate um sales tax that the community isn't collecting today. Um KState needs modern facilities to attract students, faculty, staff, and industry partners. Manhattan needs amenities to that help attract businesses and young professionals. These projects strengthen both efforts and help Manhattan stand out among cities um around the region. Thank you for your time and appreciate the consideration tonight.

Thank you, Grant.

Anyone else who would like to make any comments? Good evening. Um, my name is TJ Vilcans. I live at 3417 Vanessa Drive. I apologize for my casual attire, hoping to catch KState beat Baylor here later. So, um, my company, Backn Development, um, I've owned that for about 14 years now. It's a small, uh, privatelyowned development company. We build custom homes. We, um, own multif family units, and we're in the process of building a hotel in Aggieville. Um, I think that background is important because in many ways I would be considered a competitor to a project like this, particularly Champions Gate. Um, I am here today to give my 100% support for the project that the foundation is attempting to do. Um, it is good for Manhattan. I've lived in this community and called it home since 1982. We are at a point um in our community where we need to see significant growth to help with the stress that we have on our property taxes. Uh the incentives or the alphabet as Commissioner Morrison refers to it are consistent to what I see requested in other communities around the state that I'm in. They are consistent with the need to have them to get projects accomplished and completed. We oftentimes think about the short-term implications and we don't think about the long-term implications. By doing a project like this today, what does it mean for our community in 20 years, in 10 years? I know Commissioner Mcola sat

on the commission in 2013 when we approved um an incremental tax property tax abatement for Civics Plus. At that point in time, I believe we were earning about $5,000 a year in property taxes, and today we are earning over $350,000 a year in property taxes. This on a much larger scale will be something similar to that. Unfortunately, sometimes the decisions we make today um they happen a long time in the future, but that's what we have to be here to do. Um, I'll wrap things up by saying, you know, I look at the foundation as another private developer, right? If they weren't this if they weren't the KState Foundation, would we not be bending over backwards for a project that was $294 million in our community? Would we be concerned with the $50 million that we put in the streets if it was an outside developer? If the foundation sold the land and an outside developer came in and requested these same types of things, would we not be jumping for joy that we're seeing this kind of investment in our community? I like seeing this thing forward. I want to see what they propose. So, I'm in support of advancing this forward. If it is not the foundation doing this, then who? Thank you.

Thank you, TJ. Good evening, Madame Mayor and members of the Manhattan Commission. Uh Trey Kman, Manhattan Area Chamber of Commerce, 1601 Woodrest Drive. Um, you all should have received a uh letter by email um on behalf of the Manhattan Area Chamber um board of directors uh earlier today and I am just here to um reiterate those comments made there for um you to hear and for the public to hear as well. Uh the Manhattan Area Chamber of Commerce is committed to supporting initiatives that strengthen our community's long-term economic health. We believe the Edge District represents a meaningful opportunity worth continued exploration by the KSU Foundation, the Kansas State University, and city staff here in Manhattan. For that reason, we support the commission's approval of this non-binding resolution. Signing it does not commit the city to implementation. It simply allows planning work to continue so that more details, information, analysis, negotiations, and community conversations can occur. We recognize that additional details are needed before any decision can be made and should be made, and we share the community's interest in seeing a complete proposal, but continuing planning is essential to understanding the full potential of this district and how it could contribute to Manhattan and to Kansas State University's future prosperity. We encourage the commission to move this resolution forward so that everyone can fully evaluate the project and its potential impact on Manhattan's economic prosperity. Thank you.

Thank you, Trey. Amber Stling, 408 Houston Street. No grand vision of redevelopment is ever perfect, but I do want to thank the foundation for their presentation and recognize that it is the tip of an enormous iceberg of effort. One of the things that caught my eye in the plan is a positive impact in visitors and bed tax and how that will interact with the current landscape. This is intricately interrelated. Bear with me. In the 2025 CVB annual report, I saw a very interesting trend. Estimated visitors last year down 1%. Hotel bed tax up 2%. Short-term rental bed tax up 17%. Isn't that odd? So, I asked myself, what was pulling the data set? And I found it. In the same year, the number of Airbnbs in Manhattan went from 421 to 499, an increase of 18 and a half%. I'm obsessed with data because it tells the truth. What this data tells us is that short-term rentals are double competing. They're gobbling up long-term housing while cannibalizing hotel revenue. Hotels like these. As an affordable acquisition, workforce housing gets hit first. According to the last housing study, we already needed 950 workforce housing units. I don't think I need to describe how 499 Airbnbs affects that demand. Hotels are not perfect, but they're healthier for a city's infrastructure and its residents. hotel centralized work, providing a more reliable job than the gig economy. Workers are W2 employees, covered by general liability, and importantly, workers comp. Um, and their taxes are factored into their pay, which is a great expense for those employers.

Hotels are accountable to guest safety, especially with regards to sprinklers, evacuation routes, and egress. again at great expense. But presently, hotels are forced to compete against short-term rentals who aren't held to the same employment or safety standards. Guests accept risks that they're not aware of, and residential streets are degraded. Loud guests and high traffic detract from everyday life. Everyone loses. Mr. Vancicus' hotel makes 14 hotels in Manhattan. The Edge Hotels are 15 and 16. That's fierce competition amongst giants, but not competition at all when short-term rentals don't have to pay that by the same rules. Make no mistake, Alphabet Soup taxes, which are taxes not yet collected, are still a city investment. I agree with you. And if we do decide to support this district, we must more than just hope that it succeeds. We have to set them up for success. Our current conditions are a pol policy choice. Part of this equation could arguably should be to regulate short-term rentals in an effort to fill these hotels, free up workforce housing, safeguard guests, and improve residents quality of life. Thank you.

Thank you, Amber.

Is there anyone else who would Excuse me. My name is Ken Noble and I live at 1641 Anderson Avenue, known better as the Holiday in and Hulah Hills. And I'm in the hotel business in this town as in several other towns. And so I'm not speaking for or against the exciting ideas that the university has come up with. I think they're terrific. Sound great. And I've read the brochure. My goodness, it sounds terrific. Except for that one line that says they're thinking about encouraging a hotel here. As you mentioned earlier on, Karen, the hotels are at about 50% occupancy. That means 50% not occupied. And to build more rooms to not be occupied doesn't seem to make sense. Um there's the the big one that is going up in Agieville is that's a 120 rooms. We've no idea how big the other hotel is going to be. Say it's 100 rooms or 120. We're getting close to another 250 rooms in Manhattan. And I it all all it's going to do is reduce the price that you can get for your room and it's going to reduce the number of hotels are going to survive and it just that's the only bit of this old presentation that I'm uh you know you take the everybody talks about a football season's coming and boy the hotels will be humming and so on. No hotel in Manhattan was filled more than twice in the whole season. That's nothing. That's

absolutely nothing. and uh so to to add to it and to find out where even the taxes that were going to be raised there it's by building more hotels isn't going to raise the taxes because it means there are there aren't many people coming here except if this program helps the thing by making things happen we had the same excitement to a degree with MBA it's going to be thousands of jobs are going to be the greatest thing and and I think it's Terrific. We've got it here. But it just didn't pro come. I I think that I would be cautious about anybody risking putting money into hotel. And I don't know why you'd want to do it in Manhattan. Why do you want to do it? Because we haven't got enough hotels. We've got plenty. Because they're not of a good enough standard. You're in rural Kansas. You don't get the super super hotels in rural areas. It's man ps coming to watch their children play football or whatever what we've got the mix we have at the moment is pretty good and it'll be interesting to see where this goes and I would just preach caution on where we are with any more hotels in Manhattan.

Thank you Colin. Please sign in. Sign in. Okay. Oh, you got got me a little turned around here.

Is there anyone else who would like to make any public comment? Um I would seeing none but seeing um Dr. ant in the room. I would just indicate that um we have also received a letter of support from Manhattan Area Technical College um endorsing that we move through with this particular proposal which once again I will underscore is nonbinding. It's an opportunity to get more information, more detail about the cost and benefit of these these uh investments. So, is there anyone else who would like to make a comment? Going once, going twice. All right. I will now close public comment on this item. Commissioners, do we have any additional

Um, I'd like to start by saying I support parts of this resolution, but not all the resolution. I support economic development north of Kimble in the Edge district. I want to see those areas succeed and be fun, useful properties for our sports, tourism, and other important university andor city events. I do not support the property tax abatements that are being proposed. Manhattan has substantial real estate that is not taxable and I do not want to add eat more even if it is for 10 years. I'm confident that the Champions Gate development will be extremely successful in attracting residents and guests and see no reason for the city to subsidize certain groups using tax abatements. I believe it is an unfair advantage for these businesses while competing with other businesses that are currently be being taxed in our city. I would encourage the foundation to focus its energy on the star bonds and see if we can reach an agreement with those. I will reiterate my stance that economic development should lead to less taxes for current residents and businesses. If we can use star bonds to build build the facilities that will bring more tourism, then I am interested in hearing about about it more from the foundation. Um, as as uh has been brought up, we had re we're gonna here in a couple years we're going to finish off like the the tiff some of the tiff districts and you know it was a big economic development plan from 20 years ago. And while that economic development plan was, you know, we implemented that plan, we've seen sales taxes sales tax go up, we've seen property tax go up. So, I'm I'm very very committed to trying to lower sales taxes. Well, first property taxes and then hopefully sales taxes. Thank you.

Well, two things. One, um, if a developer came and wanted to do a light project, I would say if they're willing to win or lose their shirt, that is the American economic entrepreneurial way. and they ought to be able to lose their shirt. My caveat here is where I've struggled is the foundation as an adjunct to the university being an economic driver. If that is their direct interest to survive financially, even though they're not going to own the hotels, own the restaurant, own the condos, where do you think they're going to send their business now? Then there may be a plenty of excess to take care of all the others. I don't know that. I do know that the hotel people say I'd heard 50% is where the occupancy is and so we have to be willing to let one or two die if in fact those numbers are not correct. I can do that. But my question is, is the university the proper economic driver on those kind of competitive retail? And I still struggle and I probably will support the resolution to go forward, but it ain't a done deal for me because I still have those concerns. Thank you. So, I would start out as most of you know, I had a uh a 24-year career with the KSU Foundation, and I know there are questions out there amongst people as to whether I should recuse myself in this decision. Uh so my my answer to that is no, I do not intend to do that because first of all, I retired from the foundation two and a half years ago. Uh, I have no financial ties of any kind to the foundation. I don't have a spouse that works there or the university. Uh,

so there's no reason for me to do that. Uh, uh, what I do have is a probably a better appreciation for what the foundation and the university does for this community than a lot of people do. Um, I I can tell you that that everything they do is for the advancement of not only the university but the community. And so, you know, they're they're I know personally they're not out there making a profit for themselves. uh when I was working there, we got no bonuses of any kind for the work we did doing developments of this nature. So, uh, I know that, uh, my focus now is on this community and, you know, along with, uh, Andrew and Jim trying to get our taxes down, uh, I I railed against, uh, residential tax abatements through the, u election season. So, I I'm I'm hoping we can figure out a way to minimize those as much as possible. So, uh, as for commercial abatements, uh, you know, that's that's a whole another story. Uh, those are very unique. But my focus is on the community and I have enough history in this town as long along with Jim and Karen here that we were around when the mall was developed and the the controversy and the struggles uh, with that development uh, whether that was good for the city or not. Well, and as as well as the north and south uh areas of downtown. Uh

clearly that that has turned out to be for the benefit of the community. Uh do we need more hotels? Uh I I if if we create the uh tourism we're trying to create with the the Billy Center and the track facility, uh probably yes, we will. Uh clearly we must need more because Hilton Garden Inn is building 40 additional rooms right now as we speak along with TJ's development. So somebody thinks we need more hotel rooms. So um but so the mall the north and south develop Fort Riley Boulevard was another very controversial and that's been a great community uh addition. So, uh, I want to see more numbers as I said on this, but I I think this is just this is one of those opportunities that, uh, uh, a whole lot of communities would like to have in front of them. Uh, I also see what's going on in Salina and Witchah and Lawrence. Uh, I'd like to be able to compete with those guys. So, uh, I'm hoping we can do that. So that's all I have.

Larry is dating us.

Yes, the mall was a brilliant idea. Quite frankly, keeping it downtown saved our downtown. Yeah, I'm I'm uh supportive of looking into this. There's no question about that. Um I do think it's really important that the I think often the public doesn't always understand tax increment financing means those increments go to that area. So, they're not going to pave points for you or something like that. So, I, you know, we'll get all the numbers. We'll look at what's coming. We'll look at the um what you can advise us on the equestrian thing, which I do think is a is a winner. And we'll look at the um other hotels. We have to we have to protect, you know, our what we've got. And I don't mean we should stagnate, but we have to take make sure that those um hotels and restaurants are viable. I was very disappointed when St. Gilmore moved out to the edge district because there were a lot of people who went to lunch downtown and so you know it was kind of a negative for that area but yeah um go for it.

Um I have a couple of comments also. Um, I think we need maybe some clarification about this abatement uh that Andrew referenced because we will be getting a tax increment from day one and I believe that the increment that is subject to capture particularly in the star bond is primarily the six and a half% of our tax that goes to the state. Is that correct? With industrial revenue bonds, there is the option to get into an abatement. With tax increment finance, they're going to pay their taxes. You're just going to capture them and use them back within the district itself.

I think what um Mr. Williams was speaking to are the ancillary benefits of 200 plus million dollars being invested in your community. They'll be able to highlight the period of time under construction benefits back to the city. The sales tax 0.95% the 0.5 that goes for economic development, recovery and relief, 0.2 for streets and the 0.25 for park and wreck. Those will continue to grow and be captured and we'll be able to use those within the community. This project will not receive that cash. are 1% it would. So there there are different ways to look at the revenue streams. That's why those costbenefit analysis will be so helpful per tool for you all to see what would be coming in to the city and what would be staying within those districts.

The other comment I'd like to make is a personal one. Many of you know that I spent my career as a freelance consultant and a longd distanceance employee of a company. I ended my career with a company in North Carolina. Um I do see the value of both the hotel and restaurants in this area given the growth that is projected in the research facilities given that NBF is going to be operational. People will be able to walk to their laboratory and then return to that hotel or return to those restaurants in the evening. right now there it would be a little bit more of a hike. It's doable, but to get down to TJ's hotel uh might not be where I want to go if it's raining or snowing or elsewhere else happening. Um, I myself have spent probably a couple of years of my life in hotel rooms and having that convenience of being walking distance to my place of employment and to have a place to have an adult beverage at the end of the night um is was much appreciated and um so I would just that's my tick of support there. Um, do we I will at the risk of sounding uh I will again reinforce that this is merely a resolution of supporting the ongoing investigation and research necessary to move this project forward. We are not approving it tonight. We are not committing ourselves to spending money or to supporting uh

anything else other than ongoing analysis. So with that being said, is there a motion to ex consider resolution number? No, it's 021726 C. Mayor, I would move to approve the resolution 021726c indicating support for improvement of Kin State University amenities and further development of the Edge District. I'll second that. Chelsea, would you please call the role? Commissioner Mcola, yes. Commissioner Fox, yes. Commissioner Morrison,

yes. Commissioner Von Lentil, yes. Mayor Adam, yes. Motion carries five to zero. Thank you. I move we adjourn. Let's just see if Danielle has anything. Danielle has something for us. I do not have anything for you this evening. Thank you. Thank you. Um I will second. All in favor, please say I. Thank you all for your