City Council - Regular Meeting

Call meeting to order. Pledge of allegiance, Councilmember Lawson.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Roll call, please.

Mayor Larkey.

Here.

Councilmember White. Here.

Yeah.

Council member Thompson here. Council member Davidson here. Council member Brian here. Council member Lawson here. Council member Richardson here. Council member McCallum here. Council member Johnson here.

We have a quorum D personal experiences. Each person list on the agenda to address the city council should step up to the microphone, state their name and address for the record and limit their remarks to five minutes. Number one, Megan Washburn.

Good evening, Council.

I'm super short, so this is going to happen. There you go.

My name is Megan Washburn. I live at 200 Cherokee Drive. Belton taxpayers are currently exposed to immense financial risk on the North Cass Corridor, and we want to know why standard legal safeguards are being bypassed. public budget and cooperative agreement records show the city has already committed 4.8 million dollars in public funds alongside an additional half a million dollars from cass county for a total public infrastructure exposure of over 5.3 million. on April 27th, Director Wright removed $4.5 million on a Mullen Road infrastructure obligation from the private developer via a single email directive without your vote. Yet on May 27th, the city clerk confirmed in writing that a development agreement has not been submitted. My question for all of you, what legal guarantee or binding contract currently exists to protect the taxpayers of Belton if this development fails to proceed, given that the city has already altered its budget and committed $5.3 million in public funds for a closed-door handshake? Thank you.

Thank you. Item E, Appeals to the City Council. Pursuant to RSMO 610.026.1, subparagraph one, documents may be furnished without charge or at reduced charge when the public governmental body determines that a waiver of reduction of the fee is in the public interest because it's likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operation and activities of the public governmental body and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester. Number one, Steven Vaca.

Hi, Council. I'm here to present the public interest case for waiving the $250.81 fee on my act of sunshine request. I want to briefly explain what that request covers and why it qualifies for a public interest fee waiver. Since May 26th, I have obtained written confirmation from the following city staff. from the city planner Fernandez in writing on May 29th, no traffic study was completed before the $4.5 million Mullen Road obligation was removed from the developer in April. From the ESA compliance memo produced by the city's own consultant, the field survey used to clear this site for the bat habitat was conducted on February 4th, 2025, 13 months before the March 2026 clearing. The same memo states, and I'm quoting directly, consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service will be required under Section 7 of the ESA. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service letter in that same document states ESA requirements are not complete. Clearing proceeded anyway. From the MoDNR land disturbance permit, the permit authorized 7.16 acres of disturbance, yet the city planner cited a five-acre exemption threshold as the basis for reduced federal oversight. From the 2022 state auditor's report, the state auditor found the city's process for allocating costs out of water and wastewater fountains, in the auditor's own words, questionable. Nearly one in four sewer dollars is being transferred to the general fund. All three of these findings were formally adopted by this council. The it query I'm requesting specifically targets the emails behind the $4.5 million obligation removal, the internal communications of director, right? Assistant Manager Ecke and Assistant City Manager Rokos, the same officials who received the 800-foot floodplain notice in March 2025 and omitted it from the Council Action Report. This request covers millions of taxpayer dollars, five active federal environmental complaints, a standing litigation hold, and nine months of private developer negotiations that preceded any public notice. That is the definition of public interest. I'm respectfully requesting that this council, one, waive the fee, two, direct the staff to produce the IT query results without further delay, three, direct the city attorney to review whether the federal nexus declaration on the ESA compliance submission was accurate given the EPA-funded SRF connection to this corridor. Four, ask the staff to produce the exact date tree clearing began in March, 2026, and whether it proceeded or followed March 1st, the MDC defined start of the bat nesting season. This council was not given complete information before voting on resolution 11. I'm asking you tonight to complete the record. Thank you.

Thank you.

So where do we go from here? Do we have to make a motion or?

Uh, so I have a motion drafted, uh, as we typically do. All motions are drafted in the affirmative. So this motion is drafted in the affirmative. I have a copy of it written here. I will, take a picture of it and send it to Andrea so she does not have to try and write this as quickly as she can. A motion determining that the public records request submitted by Stephen Vaca on May 22, 2026 is in the public interest by likely contributing significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the city and is not primarily in Mr. Vaca's commercial interest and hereby waives the fees associated with the same.

So moved. Second motion in a second. Any discussion?

Oh, sorry. So from what I can remember, since I've been on here, I think we've only ever that I've ever waived one other set of fees. And I believe that was Allen Edmonds over the, uh, deal with the dispatch, uh, between emails between Joe and I believe Cass County sheriffs. Um, and we did vote to waive that. So I'm just, I'm kind of looking at, we're picking and choosing who we want to do. I think we need to be more consistent on what we do. Cause I think picking and choosing where it's not a good look. Um, that's where I'm on this. Um, I know that we've done it before, so it's a bad look when you're not doing it.

So go ahead.

Do we have an active litigation hold on something related to Northcast Parkway? No, there was... Clarify what you're saying. Well, that's what our presenter here just stated, was that we have an active litigation hold regarding Northcast Parkway or something of that nature.

No, there's no active litigation I'm aware of involving the city regarding Northcast Parkway.

Okay. And we don't know. I mean, as far as I know, there's not anything related to the TDD as well from a litigation standpoint, right? That I'm aware of. Okay.

Go ahead. Are you, go ahead.

Are we aware of any EPA violations or requests for further information or discovery on our part?

No, no requests have been made of the city and our understanding is that we have the necessary permits to proceed with the project. Well, the project is proceeding as needed with the necessary permits. The city's involvement is at a very high level and essentially on behalf of the TDD just to ensure that any infrastructure built is done up to the standards of the city.

Go ahead. So I guess I want to take a second to acknowledge the request and specifically where it's coming from. So this is someone who has stated that they personally have a vendetta against the city because the city has chosen to hold them accountable to codes that we already have in place. This is a... This is someone who is providing inaccurate information at various times that can be verified. But if we remove the person behind this request, we looked at the core of what this request is, This is ultimately a concerned resident that is requesting transparency documents from the government and I have a hard time saying that's not in the best interest of the public. I would encourage you all that despite maybe any kind of rhetoric that might be behind this that we would move forward and also vote in favor would be my suggestion.

Anybody else? Go ahead.

I would just like to point out when we did waive the fees for Mr. Edmonds, he does have a newspaper here in the city. He requested that on the basis of journalism and that we waived it knowing that that was going to be an article published in a newspaper of record here in the county and we waived the fee based on that and it being clearly in the public interest to have journalists access to that information.

You know, I have an issue with supporting this when the requester, Mr. Vacca, put on Facebook that it's a personal vendetta against the city and that he's going to up the ante. So I have a hard time understanding how that fits into what's good for the city, so.

Yeah, look, I'm not, that's why I wanted to bring it up, because I don't want to be naive here, but I think ultimately, you know, this, and again, I'm not, I'm just sharing, you know, you'll vote whatever way you vote, but ultimately, like I said, if we remove the person behind it and look at just the request singularly, from a philosophical standpoint, this is a resident, you know, with concerns that, you know, They're looking for transparency from their government. I'm all about that transparency. And especially in this particular case, it's the first time and it's his only time that he's made a request that is been so large that it's required fees. Um, I know that there's been other requests that have not required fees, right? So I think it, I consider it to be reasonable at this time. Of course that could change, right? If we get a daily request for various amounts of large information, that's why there are potential fees involved. But at this time I think it's very reasonable. That's just my two cents on where I feel we should potentially support this.

Go ahead. Mr White.

I would just hope that with the information that he receives, that he presents accuracy. That's all I want to say.

Anybody else? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. No. Motion carries. All right, unfinished business. All right, this next item is not on the agenda, so there will be a slight deviation in the agenda. After listening to citizens, I just want to take a few moments and explain why I voted the way I did on the proposed amendment to resolution 2026-55 at the last meeting. Let's be perfectly clear, I or the city did not cancel Fall Festival. I voted no because I'm tired of DBMSI pushing their financial responsibility off to the city. and their lack of willingness to work with the city. Since I've been mayor, I've been trying to work with them. They stopped paying for Christmas lights in the building several years back. The city took it on to preserve this tradition. They stopped all support for the mayor's Christmas tree several years back, and the city continues to do it. They stopped funding to support caring nations in the parks. They've taken it on to keep it going. All while donating large sums of money to non-Main Street causes, i.e. Belton Education Foundation, Cass County Health Foundation, While these are great causes, they are not for the traditional downtown business district as their by-law state. Over the years, there have been people and business owners on Main Street, even in these chambers, to tell me they are not happy with DBMSI because they do not do anything for Main Street anymore. With all this being said, I have listened to the citizens and they want to keep the festivals and events on Main Street even if they are supported financially by the city. So I'd ask city staff to create a new policy on the way city handles special events on city property and the cost of city services at them and bring it back to council for their further review. Item one, motion approving final reading of Bill 2026-27.

An ordinance accepting land from the City of Kansas City, Missouri by a special warranty deed to the City of Belton, Missouri.

Present. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, roll call, please.

Council Member Lawson? Aye. Johnson? Aye. White?

Aye.

Richardson? Aye. Davidson? Yes. Bryan?

Aye.

McCallum?

Aye.

Mayor Larkey?

Aye.

Thompson? Yes.

Motion passes. Item G, new business. One motion approving the first reading of Bill 2026-28.

An ordinance authorizing the appropriation and revision of the City of Belton fiscal year 2026 adopted city budget.

second the motion second you're up good evening mayor and council before you tonight is a budget amendment for the FY 26 budget the year that just ended this year we've got some tiff tax incentive amendments you'll see that the funds are fund 14 241 243 244 and 245 so those are all of our tax incentive funds and some of the revenue came in higher which means the expense is If it comes in, it's got to go out. So that's why we need these amendments. And then the debt service fund, 334. There's service fees, expense account. We pay the county to collect our taxes. So we had about 8,900 and more service fees come in than I originally budgeted. So any questions?

Any questions? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Sorry, Brett. Any opposed? Motion passes. Two, motion approving the first reading of Bill 2026-29.

An ordinance authorizing an agreement for dispatching services with Western Cass Fire Protection District.

Present. Second. We have a motion and a second.

You're up, sir. Good evening, mayor and council. Before you is a contract, an agreement for providing dispatching services for the Western cast fire protection district. Several months ago, they reached out and contacted the city and inquired about providing services of dispatching to them. We have taken the data and considered it and just had discussions. And so now you have an agreement before you that, Considerations that we had is that we are providing medical EMS ambulance services to that area already. Last year, their final numbers for last year was 256 calls for service. 75 to 80% of those, the city of Belton responded on already. And so bringing them to the city of Belton to dispatch for them helps streamline a lot of communications efficiencies as far as response and so. Any questions? Any questions?

Go ahead.

Okay, and I know we're going to have a mutual aid agreement here, and I think some of my questions are going to be answered, but I'll ask them anyway. So Western Cass had some significant problems management-wise and financially previously, and have those been resolved to your satisfaction now?

Yes, so yeah, and a lot of that is in the next one coming up, but I can go ahead and touch on that now if If it's in the other one, let's wait. Okay.

But I just wanted to make sure we covered that. Um, also, um, part of the agreement is there to keep information updated on the GIS system for addresses and things like that. And I understand we're doing 80% of their ambulance calls now. Is there any liability? I know that we have the ability per the contract to update that ourselves, but if there's a lap and a gap in that updated information, Is there any liability for us if there's a problem with a call?

So going back to the GIS part and the mapping, we approach that from an ESB standpoint. And so all of the map layers are created from that level that really eliminates any gaps in coverage in that area the way that they are. And so when a call comes in, it plots in a jurisdiction and it lists out the units that should respond to that.

That's all I have. Thank you very much.

Go ahead. Just the way this is worded, and maybe I'm misinterpreting, but I'm going to ask, so they came to us, am I understanding correctly, they came to us and made this request? Yes, that is my understanding as well. Do we know why that they wanted to, because obviously they have a provider at the moment, that's Cass County, right? Correct.

Do we know why they were interested in coming to us instead? Beyond the fact that we work together, we respond on their request, most of their incidents already along with them. Um, and so there's just a lot of, um, efficiency with that. Um, I think that I don't want to put into the wise because I can't say why I wasn't asking that, but they did. They approached us or approach chief sap and that. Okay.

So you think this will save time for their citizens? I do. Anybody else? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Motion approved in the first reading of Bill 2026-30.

An ordinance approving a mutual aid agreement with Western Cass Fire Protection District for fire service mutual aid.

Present. Second.

Motion is second. You're still up. All right. So the next part of this is a mutual aid agreement with Western Cass Fire Protection District. The City of Belton Fire Department has a mutual aid contract in place with every agency within Cass County except Western Cass Fire Protection District. We also have agreements in place with surrounding agencies including Johnson County, Kansas, Grandview, Kansas City, Lee's Summit. This was terminated back in 2022. Since that time, they have, I They have not, I don't want to say they have not missed a call, but there has not been a time. It's a very infrequent time where they have not been able to. They've also improved their staffing levels where they have 15 on staff. They have 90% of their volunteer staff is trained to the firefighter one and two level. 80 to 85% of them are trained to the EMT level. And so they are... meeting our ambulance and EMS crews there and providing assistance in that manner. And so with that also part of the areas that were responsible to cover being Mount Pleasant, they border that area. And so having a mutual aid agreement in place to provide resources in that area is beneficial as well.

So anybody else? Oh, sorry, Brett. Go ahead.

So, uh, with that increases to 90%, uh, Would that have helped with the 22? Would that have met the standards back in 22 when we were discussing this mutual aid?

You hear that? Would the 90%, if they had 90% back in 22, would that have helped?

My recollection is that it was just that we were covering calls because there was no staffing or response or minimal. And that is not the case now. And so they have worked very hard to one, recruit people, retain and train them.

Did you hear that Brett?

All right. What? Oh, go ahead. I'm glad things are progressing with them. And we should have put you in charge a long time ago. You would have squared this up. I'm joking. I'm joking.

Council Member Johnson, you had questions. Are you good?

That satisfies my question from previously.

Yes, thank you. So that was really where my question was going as well. And I just, to make sure I understand, there was ultimately previously there was essentially no response. And now we're getting not only response, but response majority of the, a large majority of the time. So we're seeing a true mutual aid. Okay.

Anybody else? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Item 4, motion approving first reading of Bill 2026-31.

An ordinance amending Chapter 3, Intoxicating Liquor, and Appendix A, Schedule of Fees and Charges, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Belton, Missouri, by removing the Liquor License Application Investigation Fee.

Present. Second. We have a motion and a second. You're up.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. On May 12th, information was provided about the liquor investigation fee in Chapter 3 and in the schedule of fees and charges. After discussion, the City Council desired to continue requiring the investigation for new applicants seeking an annual city liquor license, but desired to eliminate the associated $100 investigation fee. This ordinance tonight removes the fee from Chapter 3 and the schedule of fees and charges. There were no other changes made. And are there any questions?

Any questions? Go ahead. So just based on from our work session, essentially this brings us in line with all the other ones that also did not have the investigation fee, even though an investigation was occurring. Essentially we're being consistent now. Is that accurate?

Yes.

Um, Well, I just want to take two seconds to acknowledge that I appreciate that we had a business, you know, ultimately question why something was occurring. That's great, right? And now because of that, we're making some, we looked at, went back, looked at something and making some changes. So I just want to say, I, you know, glad that process went through and it worked out. Anybody else?

That is assuming we all approve it. Yeah. Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

That would have been embarrassing.

Yeah, I guess I spoke a little too soon. Thanks for not making me a fool. Item five, motion approving resolution 2026-059.

A resolution approving an agreement revision with Vector Solutions, a.k.a. Target Solutions Learning, LLC, for EMS and fire training.

Present.

Second. Motion and second. You're back. All right. Good evening again. The Vector Solutions is a platform that we utilize for training services as well as a scheduling. The scheduling component that we use for our staffing calendars was added later. So this agreement contract is aligning the two so that we're just getting one bill, one agreement. So it aligns the two, and then it's a one-year term to continue something that we've already been using.

Any questions? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes. Item six, motion to put in resolution 2026-060.

A resolution approving a professional services agreement for medical director services between the City of Belton and Dr. Eric J. Stamper, D.O.

Present. Second. Motion to second.

The agreement before you is for Dr. Stamper to continue as our medical director. He served as our medical director for approximately 10 years now. The medical director, we have to have it by the state of Missouri statutes to run an ambulance service, but he's also involved in approving our medical protocols, training. He participates in our EMS committee. This is just a continuation of what he's provided for the city.

Any questions? Go ahead. Chief Zapp sure picked a good meeting to miss, huh? He did. I was going to say, have you asked for a raise? I don't have any actual questions. I just wanted to comment on how often.

Any other questions? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. You can sit down now. H, consent agenda one motion not available to approve recommendations under any member of the council may ask for an item to be taken from the consent agenda for discussion in private separate action. Present. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes. Reports and information that's on there. Communication from City Council. Council Member Johnson.

I attended Cary Nation Days last weekend. It was very good, very well attended, and congratulations to the Park Department for a job well done.

I'll be the first echo of I'm sure many echoes to come here. Cary Nation Days was very wonderful. I appreciate, you know, obviously Parks and Rec took a lot of time to make that happen, but there's a lot of other city staff involved and then a lot of businesses and residents that all came together to make that happen. It was a really great event. So just thanks to everyone involved. I do have some updates from parks. As a reminder, the farmer's market is ongoing currently, every Thursday from 4 to 7. The outdoor water park is hosting a family night that is also on Thursdays from 5 to 8. Each night has a theme, so you can check with the parks or check with their Facebook to see what each theme is. summer camp as a reminder is in full swing at this point so if you're looking for something for your kid to do you can check it out and and it does stay relatively full so keep that in mind you might want to do some advanced planning if you're hoping to have your kid attend We also have, let's see, some upcoming events. I apologize. I don't remember if I've gone over some of these, so I'm just going to go over all of them. Sorry, Andrea. June 13th, High Blue swim team will have their first swim meet. That'll be at High Blue, probably, obviously there. Also on June 13th, the Mud Run will take place at High Blue. And then I guess after all the kids go, adults will be allowed to join in on the Muddy Fun as well this year for a nominal fee. I think it's five bucks. Is that, yeah, I can get in the nod. So yeah, $5. So that's something else being added there. Then on June 16th, there will be another benefit bingo taking place. This one will be for Heart and Hand. That's this month's charity. And then June 19th, there will be a blood drive taking place at High Blue from 1 to 5. And sorry, am I going too fast? June 20th is the Mermaid and Pirate Party at the Outdoor Water Park. And then also on June 20th is the Hatchet Granny Disc Golf Tournament. And I think that's everything I have upcoming for parks. I'm sure I'll have a longer list as they continue throughout the summer. And that's everything I got. Council Member Richardson.

I got a call from Taylor, who's the new manager at Maurice's clothing store in front of Kohl's. And she wanted to say that they're getting more involved in the community, want to help out, join in the chamber. So I'm giving her a little plug there. So I also want to say Cary Nation days went really good. Had a lot of fun. They had a poker run up on Main Street here last Saturday that went really good. A lot of people showed up for that. And then the Chamber is doing a 250th party over, I think they're with the parks at Memorial Station. It's the Fourth of July event. They're doing a fireworks show, food, and they ended up getting this event to be free. You just gotta sign up. And it's, I think, one of the only things we got going in Belton for the 250th anniversary. So I appreciate the Chamber getting involved and celebrating this big anniversary we got coming up. And that's all I got. Coach Member Lawson. Weekend before, yeah.

Yeah, I'll also pile on praise for Cary Nation Days. Well attended. I look forward to seeing Placer AI data about our Main Street events because I think that can help us make good decisions about what events to support. I appreciate the mayor going back and addressing some of the confusion last meeting. I have a follow-up question for that, for the three council members that abstained from the vote. I would like to hear what their conflict of interest is. Chris, I feel like I understand yours, but Wanda and Patty.

Do you want to know what mine is? Go ahead and state it, yeah. Mine is I'm the vice president of DBMSI. Got it. That makes sense. It's a perceived conflict of interest. If I vote on anything on Main Street, it's a conflict.

I don't vote for conflict, so it's a perceived conflict.

And that is because... Hold on, hold on, hold on. I can't hear. It's a perceived conflict because I'm the president of the coalition. And if I vote, it's a conflict. If I don't vote, it's a conflict. So I Don't win either way, but I'll abstain to avoid the conflict as much as possible.

You're saying if you vote for or against something DBMSI brings in front of us, it could be perceived as a conflict of interest?

Yes.

Because the coalition is also a nonprofit group aimed at improving Main Street?

Yes.

Okay. Interesting. Okay. Is that the same for you, Wanda?

No, actually, I felt like it was my responsibility to step away because I am not only on the coalition board, I'm also on the railroad board, which is a nonprofit downtown. And I just felt like it was my right as a city council member to take that stand.

Oh, right, okay. Thank you for clarifying that. I've gotten a lot of questions from residents about why an unrelated nonprofit board would feel like it's a conflict of interest to engage with or vote on that. And I would also pose the question if additional board involvement creates these sorts of conflicts, Is it right for city council members to continue to serve on those kinds of boards? Because we got in a really unusual first time I've seen it situation with only five voting members of the body here and a single vote could take something in that situation. So I am hopeful that we don't continue to have these problems. And I think making it very clear to the public about how the situation even happened is important. Whether or not I agree with the abstention, that's fine. I hear that it's your right, and you'll exercise that as you wish. But for your residents and the people that voted for you, I think they should feel comfortable that you are representing them as needed. And when we get down to five, that's not good for anybody.

Well, I had calls about it after it, and they appreciated the fact that I stepped back. So for my constituents that contacted me, they were comfortable with what I did.

And I've responded to that. people that have asked me the same question. Gotcha.

Is the conflict that you guys, the coalition, are planning a September 12th event?

We're not planning a September 12th.

are you planning anything in the fall that would detract from DBMSI in their fall festival?

Is this, is this what we want to talk about this or could we, you know, when we decide what we need to do, we can talk about it then. I mean, do we want to do this now?

I'm just, I'm truly, I was shocked and curious after the last meeting and I thought if I have these questions and I know other people do too, let's have them out.

Um, well, if you don't, you know, I'm not, I'm not opposed to having a conversation about it. The people who have called me, I've addressed it, addressed it directly.

Got it, okay.

Yeah, go ahead. So does that mean all the times you guys have voted before that you were wrong in doing that? And the $14,000 that you voted to give your own board, that $14,000, are you saying that's wrong or are you saying that was okay? I'm just saying this was a first that you guys have recused yourself And it's like, are you saying all those times before that you voted on that?

Well, I don't know that there was all those times. Yeah, there's been other times, yeah. Okay. I mean, we could have this conversation.

No, I'm just wondering. I'm just saying, are you saying you're wrong for voting on all the times before that you have?

I am not making a statement one way or the other about it, Chris.

Okay. Well, I just wonder, because, I mean, you guys did vote to give your own board $14,000 of taxpayer money. No, we did not vote to give our board $14,000. We did not.

No, we did not. That was not what that motion was at all.

I remember, but.

All right. You're up. I enjoyed the drone show at Cary Nation Days, and I made a grievous error. I kind of made it sound like parades and events were the same thing, so I just wanted to clarify. Parades are shorter and have a short street closer, so they're handled very differently. And so insurance is not required, but you have to have a vehicle waiver for each participant, whereas events have long street closure times. They bring out large groups of people. Insurance is required and with waiver of subrogation. Back to the parades, which I've been involved in. I've never done an event. We do invite parades. There's now one parade map. The parade application is due to the police department 45 days prior to the date of the desired parade. The application fee is $25, and there are no additional costs. And if you have any other questions, I'd be like, there's a whole list, but I'll share everything with you. But I did want to make that clarification that parades and events are two separate things.

That's it. Council member Davidson.

Carla, get on your mic, your mic.

Oh, I think she said, Oh, I'll wait. Council member Thompson.

Um, once again, kudos to carry nation. Um, the train sent lots of people your way, um, that didn't know about it. So it was very nice that we could send people your way. Um, I want to thank animal control this week. I had a very nice visit from Brad on Sunday. He was super professional and super nice and kudos to animal control.

I don't have anything city manager. Oh, sorry, Brett. My fault. Brett?

I don't have anything. Thank you.

All right. Sorry. All right. Go ahead. See you later.

The only thing I have is Juneteenth is June 19th, which is a week from Friday, and City Hall will be closed that day. So that's all I've got.

All right. Items for review and discussion. One, flock cameras.

Scott Lyons police chief I have lieutenant Dan Davis if there's questions that I can't answer but I also have some questions that were provided me right prior to taking Coming up tonight. So our flock license plate reader system The Belton obtained the obtained their first automated license plate reader system in 2018. It was via a state grant. That device is actually mounted to a vehicle. You may see them around the community even to this day. They started appearing in the United States probably 20, within the last 20 years. There's a lot of companies that go around and use those license plate reader systems mounted to vehicles where they actually record license plates. Repo companies use them, tow companies use them, finance companies use them. It's a technology that's been on the streets for quite some time. The system that the Belton Police Department had was rarely functional, and it was highly inefficient. And we decided to go into a different direction in 2023. The city designated funds for a new automatic license plate reader system, ALPR. It was decided to invest those funds with Flock ALPR system, placing cameras at strategic points within the jurisdiction of Belton. There was other communities that preceded us in deploying these cameras. The system that we brought online initially was eight cameras, and the system now has grown to 13. This is a map of where we have devices located. You will see that there is one camera right there that is in the gray. That is a camera that is non-functional and is ready to be remounted in that area. we had the construction for Olive Garden we repositioned the outer road that camera had to be taken down and taken out of service and we've applied with Missouri through flock with the Missouri Department of Transportation to have that remounted in that location we have another one pending at Mullen. The location of our LPRs are East 155th Street and East Outer Road. Southbound North Scott Avenue at East 155th Street. Northbound North Scott Avenue and West Washington Street. Eastbound East 171st Street in Mount Gall Drive. Westbound West North Ave at Cherry Hill Drive. Eastbound East North Ave at Walnut. Northbound Marquee Parkway at East 163rd Street. Eastbound East 163rd Street at Marquee Parkway. Westbound East 163rd Street at I-49. Westbound East 163rd Street at VC Avenue. And northbound Mullen Road at Silver Maple Drive. Westbound East 171st Street at I-49 is pending reinstallation. Southbound Mullen Road at North Ave pending installation. And so Jackson County and Cass County law enforcement agencies, this is just our county and Jackson County, There's agencies in Johnson County, Kansas across the state line. There's agencies all the way up along Missouri and many others in the state of Missouri, but this is just our local partners. Raymoor has eight devices. Cass County has 30 devices. Harrisville Police has nine devices. Grandview has 23 devices. Lee Summit Police Department has 52 devices, Blue Springs has 75 devices, Raytown has 11 devices, and the Jackson County Sheriff's Department has 6 devices. The Cass County Sheriff's Office has a flock of cameras on northbound and southbound I-49 within our city limits. The data from those cameras is shared with the Belton Police Department. The Grandview Police Department has a flock camera east 155th Street at Corrington, which works in junction with our camera, which covers the eastbound traffic on the south side of the road, which is our jurisdiction at 155th Street and east outer road to provide coverage both directions eastbound and westbound on 155th Street. In the spring of 2026, we learned of the transparency portal that Flock offers through their site where we can allow citizens to access not only our policy, but we also can list in their successful operations that we've had in regards to LPRs. It also provides a 30-day list of captures that we have done or inquiries. I'll show you that in a few minutes. And so when it comes to And so when it comes to our policy, I'll cover that in just a few minutes. Well, I'm sorry. It was the next slide. The Belton Police Department policy is 461. It's on that transparency portal. Anybody can go there and look at it. All you have to do is go to the city website, go to the police department page. go down and click the transparency portal. Our policy has been designed by Lexapol. That is our policy management software. They incorporate contemporary best practices and conform with current case law in regards to all kinds of issues that are covered in our policy. LPR is just one of them. The policy prohibits the use of the system for anything other than official, legitimate law enforcement business. The system administrator, who's Lieutenant Dan Davis, designated by me, controls who has access to the system and determines the user's level of access. And that is only police officers, sworn police officers within the Belton Police Department. The logon requires two-factor authentication for security purposes, which has become a national standard. And also, we follow that in regards to the criminal justice information security parameters that are set up by the federal government. Department of DOJ. All inquiries, not the results, are logged and retained indefinitely. And so the system administrator is able to go and audit individual users as well as specific searches to inquire about policy compliance. And we do that. This is a look that we pulled up. You will see that it has information for the last 30 days. It shows the date, the time, and the reason for the officer making that inquiry. This is an example of one of the devices. I think every one of them that we have is set up with solar panels. You can't hardwire them into the light pole, but we have chosen to use solar panels. As you can see from this picture, the cameras are designed to capture the rear of the vehicle. They do not capture the front of the vehicle. We do not have the ability to see inside the vehicle or identify the driver, especially any type of characteristics. The only time that would be an exception to that rule would be if there was a convertible. We would see the back of the person's head, and I don't think there's an app that will determine what the face looks like. So the cameras do not provide a view through the windshield or side windows Like I said, the vehicle that's captured is not a member of the public That is a law enforcement vehicle that we drove for the for this purpose put in this picture License LPR legal precedents license plate readers are are issued by the state and Native American tribes. License plates are within plain view of the public and police while on public roadways. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy. That's a term that's been established by the Supreme Court and many precedents while driving on a public roadway. Courts have consistently held that license plates are public information and carry no reasonable expectation of privacy. And that the means of checking a license plate in a database doesn't constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment. or no warrant or probable cause is required to do a plate check itself. The ALPR system does not run each plate. And so if it picks up on a license plate, it doesn't run every plate. It is actually passing through the LPR device, the system is checking the characters and the plate against a list of wanted plates, which have been entered into the system. They periodically download information from the state of Missouri in regards to wanted plates. I'll come back to this in a minute. And so a plate must be wanted For any member, any number of reasons, there could be a want on a plate, but most commonly this is a stolen auto. Stolen autos do enter our city on a regular basis. Stolen autos are used not only to joyride, but they are used to commit other crimes. Those other crimes could be robbery, burglary, theft from vehicles, shoplifting, more violent crimes, shooting. We'll come across a couple of examples of that in a minute. And so that's the reason that we have a lot of activity in regards to our license plate reader system. And you can see it in our probable cause statements that are filed with the Cass County Prosecutor's Office. In February of 2023, officers were dispatched to a business where shots had been fired and the suspects had fled the scene after a physical disturbance. The investigation included the use of flock cameras, which identified a vehicle that fled from the scene of the incident. The flock identification assisted in the finding of the vehicle, identifying a suspect that was involved in the shooting. In December of 2024, officers were dispatched to a residence on a drive-by shooting. This was the second drive-by shooting at that resident. The caller was only able to provide the description of a black minivan missing the right rear hubcap. Dispatchers entered this description into the FOX system and identified a suspect vehicle leaving that area that had driven by the nearest LPR. A dispatch... I'm sorry. Um... An alert went out to the officers and surrounding agencies with a full vehicle description and a license plate. That vehicle was located in the neighboring jurisdiction at the place where the suspect worked, and we were able to take them into custody safely.

Just real quick, I mean, I recognize at least that last one, but I want to just point out, I'm assuming that all of what you're describing are things that occurred here in Belton? Yes. Okay.

In December of 2025, officers were dispatched to a business at which a suspect had entered the store and assaulted a female employee by kissing her and groping her sexually. Responding officers were able to get a suspect in a vehicle description to include the license plate. A search of the license plate reader and flock indicated the location of the vehicle and the officers were able to locate the vehicle and arrest the suspect. This suspect had also been involved in another incident across the state line in another jurisdiction. In March of 2026, officers were dispatched to a motor vehicle accident in which a driver left the scene. The victim was able to give a description of the vehicle and driver. Officers using flock cameras were able to locate the suspect vehicle, obtain a license plate. The vehicle was located, the driver was identified, and then during the subsequent investigation, the driver of the suspect vehicle was arrested for drinking and driving while under the influence. And found to be armed with a pistol. It's very hard to get my cop talk out of the way sometimes when it comes to the actual crime. Private businesses are now allowing access to their private LPRs. In the last several years, we've seen an increase nationwide in regards to private businesses that are putting up license plate readers on their private property. And so these businesses can create their own hot lists where they have known shoplifters and trespassers. This would be career shoplifters, which is a great is a point of concern in the Kansas City metropolitan area as well as other jurisdictions across the nation. And we've been making some great efforts with a lot of the metropolitan agencies and going after career shoplifting. And so this is going to be a great aid to us and we'll come back in a couple minutes and talk about and it'll already start to kind of prove itself out. And so these devices do not alert the businesses to stolen or wanted vehicles. These are only hot lists that they create themselves or their loss prevention. And these devices can be shared with law enforcement agencies on flock systems and can alert agencies to stolen or wanted vehicles. So them allowing us to have access to their license plate reader systems would check it against law enforcement databases that have been created for wanted vehicles. Currently, Academy Sports and Home Depot share privately leased cameras with the Belton Police Department. And Academy Sports and Home Depot are doing that, and other cities as well. Staff believes that the LPR system has impacted our crime stats. In the area of motor vehicle thefts, in 2022, there were 66. In 2023, it climbed to 74. In 2024, it was 73. And then we started seeing a decrease, 2025, there was 39, and currently there is 10. And again, stolen vehicles are used not only for joyriding, but it's also used in the commission of other crimes. Burglaries, which is one of the... The burglary is a substantial crime that violates citizens' privacy. In 2022, we had 178. In 2023, we had 235. In 2024, we had 303. And now you're seeing in 2025, it went down to 285. And in 2026, we've had 100. Our officers are becoming... better at trying to engage the vehicles when they become stopped. When they get alert on a stolen vehicle, a lot of times burglaries involve stolen vehicles because burglars do not use their own personal vehicles. And so When those happen, we flood the area with many officers and we try to start coordinating a search of those areas and then try to pin them down in an area. The mere act that we have officers moving to the area is very alarming to bad guys and they typically flee our city. That's not the kind of tourism that we like. And so that is perfectly fine with us that they go to somewhere else to commit their crimes. theft from vehicles. In 2022, there was 97. In 2023, 89. 2024 is when it went to 42. And 2025 is 91. And this year, it's 30. It's kind of a crime that kind of ebbs and flows. A lot of times, people don't report theft from vehicles for many reasons. Maybe they think that they were partly to blame. The vehicle was unlocked. Nothing was broken. Some change was stolen, maybe some minor items, and they don't typically report those types of things. So that might be one reason the number went up and down. But the other reason is, like I said before, our midnight crews, when it comes to burglaries, when it comes to stolen autos, and especially theft from vehicles, when they see those stolen autos pop up entering the city, they flood the area. Shoplifting. I talked about this a little bit. 2022, 178. 2023, 235. 2024, it started coming, it came down. 2023, 2025, 285. And this year, 100. There's been a marked difference in the response by retail in regards to shoplifting. During the pandemic, there was a lot of things that changed in regards to social behavior. There was more online activity. But the other thing is that a lot of retail industry took a big hit in regards to their profits, and they started downsizing in several different areas. more important area that the downside in was loss prevention. And so there has been a market upswing in regards to loss prevention in retail. And I expect this to start coming back. In fact, you know, this LPRs that are being leased by Home Depot and Academy Sports, I think you're going to start finding that across the board. There's many different retailers, Walmart, Target, that are very heavily interested in the loss prevention area, and they will be following suit in regards to that. Staff believes that this has been a successful crime-fighting tool. The ALPR system is a force multiplier for police officers. The PD would need 8 to 12 police officers, which would be two or three more police officers per shift. which we have four shifts to cover 365, 24, 7, to offer the same amount of coverage that we get out of these. The typical price of just a police officer is 100 grand. That's somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 to $1.2 million. The annual cost to lease the flock ALPR system is approximately $39,000 a year. The system is maintained and serviced by Flock at no additional cost. It's part of the contract. And it's about $3,000 per device. The system is used to locate wanted stolen vehicles in real time, as well as locate vehicles which have left the scene of crimes prior to the officer's arrival. Therefore, the system is utilized both proactively and reactively. And staff is working on a budget request that we're researching this year for FY2028 to expand the system by adding five additional locations to further close some of our blind spots in the city. And so I'll ask questions, but I had one city council member that sent me a letter What specific requirements for granting entity access to the cameras? It's law enforcement only. As I told you in the presentation, police officers are given access to the cameras. We share our data with other agencies in Missouri and other states. There is no sharing of the data with ICE. We do share with the FBI because they have wanted individuals, and sometimes wanted individuals come into local jurisdictions. We grant that access, not for a specific length of time. It's until it's revoked by us, and other agencies do the same thing. ROI, how many cameras are currently in use, and what is the total annual expenditures? I think I answered that in the presentation. There's 13 cameras right now. Two of them are being reestablished, and it's $39,000 annually through the year. Um, I'm not sure what's met in regards to return on investment because as in the presentation I talked about to get the same kind of coverage, we'd have to add two to three officers per shift. Then that could be anywhere from eight to 12 officers would cost a significant amount of money. Our officers are already getting used to this data. They're getting into the areas. We're not the only agency that employs these tactics. In fact, there's other agencies that we share information with. We get stuff from them and our officers get better at doing what they do and interrupting or disrupting crime. data collection What is actually captured by these cameras, I think I talked about that it's the rear license plate And it's only those the alerts are only created on the wanted vehicles we can go back Reactively and look for a black sedan with the missing head cap in a specific area and checking those cameras in the area and then developing information on the backend to lead us to a suspect. And so, legal compliance. How does the city ensure that flexibility to track and reconstruct movements complies with the Supreme Court decision, Carpenter v. U.S., regarding long-term location tracking? Thirty-day retention is the only thing that's kept by us, and it's displayed on the website. It's transparent. The other thing is, is as there's developments in regards to the U.S. Supreme Court or court precedents, that's built into the next policy revisions that we get from our policy management software, Lexapro. We're also in touch with our Missouri Police Chiefs Association, in touch with Jeff City in regards to any developments that may happen down there in regards to complying with data collection. It's something that we take very seriously. How does the, I'm sorry, what security measures are in place to access Belton PD cameras? It's two-factor authentication like I talked about in the presentation. That is a standard in this business. It's CGIS requirements. It's set up by DOJ. What are the third-party security research Belton conducted to verify Flock's safety claims? None. We have a transparency portal. We monitor the developments in regards to the Supreme Court decisions and court precedents. We're also managing... and looking at what the state has to say about license plate readers. What is the repercussions for individuals, which in this case would be only officers, because that's the only ones that have access to the cameras who violate flock camera usage policies. We have many of dealing with that. It's a personnel matter because that involves the discipline in police employees or in regards to policy violations, which we take very seriously. How many entities currently have access to Belton's cameras? We give access across the board to almost everybody that everybody else does. Like I said before, wanted individuals will come to our community to use our hotels, to use our retail establishments, and stolen vehicles could show up from anywhere in the United States, and so we share that information. Are we aware that the Congress has called for an investigation into Flock due to potential national security concerns? We follow a lot of stuff that goes on nationally. The Missouri Police Chiefs Association also does too. If there's any developments in regards to that, we will be among the first agencies to correct any kind of policy issues or whatever should be erased. So if there's any questions from you, Any questions?

Go ahead. You say we could use one to two more police officers?

That's if we got rid of these cameras. If we got rid of them.

How's our staffing right now?

Our staffing right now, I'm down four dispatchers and six police officers. But to say that, there's other communities that touch these borders that are 16 officers down. It's a very tough time to hire any police officers right now.

On those flock cameras, what would you say the percentage comes across that those are stolen vehicles?

A large number of them. I couldn't give you a percentage in regards to that. But quite a few, though. Yeah, a lot, yeah.

And so if they come across and the police officers turn their lights on and the guy takes off, what's our policy?

If it's a nonviolent felony that the car was involved in in our city, we do not chase, which is also the policy of many of the jurisdictions around us.

Turn their lights off and drive the opposite direction, right?

Yes.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Really good to hear we have a bunch of internal controls, namely making sure that our, you know, first of all, we only have police officers accessing it, but then secondly, you know, that there's you know, somebody that we can go through and make sure that, you know, no wrong accessing or illegitimate accessing is taking place. That being said, how often do we do, you know, you said we look at that from time to time. How often do we look at that?

I mean, we're in there every quarter. Lieutenant Davis has got that access you know all the time and so he goes in and looks at that we even bring up in our our monthly Supervisors meeting you know we see what the officers are checking the license plate for we inform the supervisors on whether they're not doing a good job of maintaining that and putting in what they're checking it for. And then we double check them. But the other thing is that's a continual conversation almost daily in regards to them using it for the right reasons.

So obviously this next, I want to be clear, don't tell me any personnel things that should be kept private. But that being said, have we had an issue of illegitimate review?

No, we have not had any type of personnel matter that has evolved.

Okay. My understanding is some of the And again, I'm really glad to hear that we, it sounds like we have a pretty robust, you know, internal measure in place. But I think some of the concern likely comes from, you know, if surrounding agencies or even, you know, cross state lines or whatever, all those agencies have then access to our data, right? They might not have as good internal controls that we have and suddenly they can be used maliciously. I think that's some of the concern out there.

Yeah, if we found out that there was something like that used maliciously about another agency, we would take action on that, or I would take action on that personally. The other thing is I know many police chiefs, especially in our area, are very concerned about maintaining this in the best way possible. But we also live in a day and age where something happens on the east or west coast, and all of a sudden they're pointing fingers at us in the middle of the country. So we know it's important to keep our compliance.

Brett, you got any questions? Can you bring him back up? Go ahead. Go ahead. What? That's good. Go ahead, Carl.

I just want to say thank you for the presentation and answering her questions. So thank you very much.

Go ahead.

Um, I've, I've also, I've heard this and I don't know if this is true or not. Um, but if County sheriffs are in pursuit chasing and they asked for Belton's assistance, will Belton get involved?

Only if it meets our, our pursuit criteria, which is also a standard across the board with many agencies that have the same policy as us, which is most of the Jackson County when Ray Moore, but most of the time not though.

Probably right.

Yeah. If it doesn't meet our policy, then we won't get in behind it because we're then we're liable for whatever happens after. And then it's outside. It's already outside of our policy.

I myself, I don't agree with that. That's just me though. Um, I know there's certain times that we probably shouldn't, but I think there's certain times that we probably should. And I also know that there's a lot of cities going to the grappler. I think Kansas City's even starting to go with the grappler and to catch some of these cars. Cass County I know has them, and I know a lot of other cities are starting to do them. Is that ever gonna be a thought in Belton, or is it just 100% we're never gonna chase?

The only thing you need to do is get on CaseNet and see the lawsuits.

Well, I actually was told that Cass County had some, and I actually talked to the commissioner, and he said he knew of none. And I know they've grappled quite a few cars. That's just what I've heard. But that's where I stand on it. So I just wanted to hear that and see where we were. Thanks. Anybody else?

Yeah.

Oh, go ahead, sir.

So regarding, and sorry, you may have addressed this, but there was a lot of information up there. Regarding the storage of the data, how long, I know inquiries are indefinite. How long is that data available?

Lieutenant Davis actually researched that question not too long ago. I'm going to turn it over to him because he's the subject matter expert. Sounds good.

that might be overstating it. The actual vehicle data is 30 days. So in other words, if I want to check 155th and North Scott to see if Alex McCollum was there 60 days ago, the data doesn't go back that far. However, what I ran and when that can be audited back to the moment I got access. So I can go back three years and see if officer Bob checked your plate. Gotcha. But the actual image from flock, the daytime location, that data is only retained for 30 days. The inquiry that somebody tried, regardless if they got a hit or not, the inquiry that stays, for the life of the system.

So on that, following that train of thought, so after 30 days, let's say another agency wants to pull data, say, let's see if this person came through Belton or whatever, they wouldn't have the ability to either because it's 30 days for ours system, I understand, but it's 30 days for Belton, period.

That's flock. Oh, it's just flock as a whole. Think about it like a surveillance camera that writes over itself when the hard drive gets full. So flock basically writes over that data after 30 days. So I'm just trying to say Lawrence, Kansas wants to check a vehicle and check our cameras from two months ago. They're not going to find anything because again, every 30 days those pictures, that data is purged.

Okay. Yeah. Um, Okay, well, like I said, I really appreciate the internal controls that we have. I think that's important regarding this data because it's, you know, great power comes great responsibility, right? But, you know, like I said, I think some of the big concerns, my understanding is, is that maybe not us, especially after it's been explained, our internal process there, but

you know what other entities can do and that's unfortunate, but as you asked, what if we found out another entity was inappropriately trying to access our data? I flip a switch and they no longer have access to our data. You know, obviously that doesn't prevent it. Um, there are standards within flock and when agencies sign up, you'll only use it for these purposes, but I can prevent it from happening again. It's, as simple as literally clicking a button on my computer. Have we had to do that? Nope. Okay. We have not.

Okay. I'm good. Thanks. Anybody else?

Thank you guys. Thank you. Item two, Cass County mobility study.

Yeah, the city has been requested to provide a letter of support and be a future participant in the Cass County mobility study. This is through a planning sustainable places grant application that Kansas City Area Transportation Authority is proposing to submit for. I did provide a copy of the letter of support that they've asked for our support. The Cass County mobility plan would lay a foundation for future projects and funding opportunities to connect people to jobs and increase mobility options. for single car and no car households, people with disabilities, and aging residents who currently face limited mobility alternatives for accessing essential services. The other potential partnering communities on this, in addition to KCATA and Belton, would be Raymoor, Harrisonville, and Cass County. and this would be an 80-20 grant KCATA is proposing, or estimated $100,000 for the total project cost, which with the 80-20 grant, the partner agencies would potentially be asked to provide up to approximately $5,000 at the max. If the grant is approved, resolution for the intergovernmental agreement and funding would come back at a later date. and I'm here if there's any questions or concerns with the city being a participant in this study and if it's okay to have the mayor sign the letter of support.

Any questions, go ahead. Talk to me, that $5,000 is for what exactly?

It's essentially to help with the consulting to put together the mobility plan.

Okay, so a one-time fee and it would be a max of $5,000 and it could be less than that. Yeah. And this is, I mean, mobility plan, is this something more than just a bus or is there like, you know,

can talk about that it's generally it's going to explore all different kinds of transportation option since it is through Kansas City Area Transportation Authority they primarily focus on public transportation which can be bus or van service but it's really identifying where the facilities are that people need to get to in northwest Cass County and where those people are coming from to try to be able to connect the dots and not only what is currently in place, but what could be in place in the future and kind of gauging those future needs.

Anybody else? Go ahead.

I remember them talking about specifically at something I did with Mark that they were looking for affordable housing and to provide transportation. Is this, are we leaning that way at all for them to help? And I know this is transportation only, but is, Is Mark looking at a way to maybe establish some more affordable housing, our direction, or is that not part of the conversation?

That's not really covered under this. The primary purpose for bringing this forward is this is kind of a joint application. West Central Community Action Agency has a Workforce U Transportation Committee that's been very active over the past year with multiple different agencies, nonprofits, and communities that have been participating in that. And so that's kind of where this is stemming from.

Because I know that they said there was money available for transportation if you had like as a small community of affordable houses that they could specifically come for that reason. And I just wondered if we could possibly look into tying that together.

Yeah. And as, as part of the study, they are identifying those areas within the, within Northwest Cass County where there is a higher need. So certain neighborhoods or, um, census tracts that have that higher need for transportation.

Okay. Thanks Matt.

Anybody else? Hearing none. Thank you. Item three, car modernity special use permit.

Yeah, we have received a special use permit application for a auto repair minor use to go into 116 Wheel Repair Circle. I have the map there in front of you. It's the kind of western third of the building there at 116. I kind of outlined it there in orange, and then blue is the parking lot. This does require Planning Commission approval, a public hearing which will be held next Tuesday, June 16th. We are still working with the applicant on finalizing their parking plan and accommodating an ADA space to bring that up to code. And then separately, I know it was brought up previously by council when we were talking about no parking on Wilbur Parish, but staff is actively working with the property owner on the removal of the cargo containers and proper paving of that site. separate from, a separate part of the property from the tenant space that's in question with the special use permit.

Any questions? Go ahead. I'm assuming they're familiar with the fact that there is now less parking, street parking available to them as a car business?

Yes. I will say this is also just a single bay garage, so it's not a huge business. It's a relatively small operation.

Anybody else? All right. Item four is going to be postponed until the next meeting. The public works director is out ill, so he won't be here tonight to do that. So with that, I would entertain a motion to enter an executive session to discuss matters pertaining to legal actions according to Missouri State Statute 610.021.1, pertaining to the leasing, purchase, sale of real estate according to Missouri State Statute 610.021.2, pertaining to negotiated contracts according to Missouri State Statute 610.021.12, and that the record be closed and the meeting adjourned from there. President? Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, roll call.

Mayor Larkey?

Aye.

Council Member White?

Aye.

Council Member Thompson? Yes. Davidson? Yes. Bryan? Aye. Lawson? Aye. Richardson? Aye. McCallum?

Aye.

Johnson? Aye.

Motion passes.