City Council - Regular Meeting

[music] [music] [music] Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. [music]

[music] [music]

Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] [music]

Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music]

[music] [music] [music]

Heat up here. [music]

[music] [music]

A city council meeting for March 3rd uh 2026. Mary call roll. Truan here. Garza here. Goss here. Bass here. Mers here. 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. Um we have Kim Barry here tonight to offer the prayer um from Trinity United Methodist Church.

I invite you to pray with me. providing God, we ask for your guidance and wisdom as you bless our city leaders and citizens with discernment and integrity as they make decisions that impact our community. May their hearts be filled with compassion and their minds with clarity. As we strive for progress in our city, we also lift up our prayers for peace in the Middle East. We long for a world where understanding prevails over conflict and where love conquers hate. Grant us the courage to be peacemakers both locally and globally. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Kim.

Um I also want to remind everyone to silence their phones if they haven't done so already. Um Mary, next item, petitions, remmonstrances, and oral communications from the audience.

Uh this is part of the agenda where we hear oral communications from the audience. Please limit your remarks to five minutes and to items not on the agenda. Audience members may address items on the agenda when the item is discussed by city council. Uh if you have any comments, uh please come to the podium. State your name and address, please. Good evening, council members. Uh my name is Jackson Allen and I live at 49 Random Road here in Hutchinson. I want to start by thanking all of you for the work that you do for our city. I know that sitting in those chairs isn't always easy and I truly appreciate your dedication to our community. I'm here tonight as a young father raising a family in this city. Because I love Hutchinson and I want to see it thrive for my children's generation. I've been following our local government closely. Recently, I've been thinking a lot about how we can make our city as strong and efficient as possible. With that in mind, I'm here to ask that the council consider studying the possibility of the city of Hutchinson absorbing the Hutchinson Recreation Commission. The heart of the matter, efficiency. We've all heard the recent conversations regarding the 34% sales tax increase. Regardless of where anyone stood on that vote, and I personally supported it because I believe in investing in our home, there was a very clear message from the public. They want to see us do more with less. They want to see every single dollar being used with the utmost care. I know that you five share that same desire for efficiency and I've seen it in your deliberations. Absorbing the rec commission feels like a natural step toward the shared goal of being the best possible stewards of public funds. Learning from our neighbors. I'm certainly not the first person to think this and we wouldn't be the first city to try it. Our neighbors in Haven recently made this transition. And if we

look across Kansas, cities like Manhattan, Salina, and Garden City have successfully moved in this direction as well. I don't mention them to say that they're better than us, but rather to show that there's a proven path we can learn from. If they found a way to make it work for their citizens, I truly have a lot of faith that we can find a way to make it work for ours. A question of fairness. In looking through the budget, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the numbers seem to show that we may be placing an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. Right now, the rec commission uses city- owned buildings at no cost, charges charges residents fees for programs, and receives an annual subsidy of more than $100,000 from the city. Meanwhile, Hutchinson residents are paying property taxes to both the city and the reccomission separately. I'm not an expert, but to a regular citizen, this feels like we might be double taxing ourselves for the same services. I'm not saying this was done with any bad intent. It's just the way things have always been. But just because it's the way it's always been doesn't mean we can't look for a better way to do it. Looking to the past. In preparing for tonight, I filed an open records request and found communication between the city management and the director of the rec commission from 1994. These documents show that the city management, sorry. These documents show that this idea was not only on the table 30 years ago, but it was actually recommended by the city manager as a proactive step for our community because of the long-term cost avoidance and unified goals. It's fascinating to try and understand why they didn't pull the trigger then. The records list several reorganizational concerns that I suspect that I suspect would still linger today. Fear of losing support. There was a worry that local foundations and service clubs might stop donating if they perceived the rec commission as just another city department. The politics of budgets. Some feared that the recreation commission programs would lose their voice if their budget had to be had to compete with things like streets and

police equipment. Administrative hurdles. There were valid questions about merging different employee pay scales and benefits. These are all appropriate concerns and I understand the fear of this type of merger. Change is rarely easy. But I don't think we should let fear keep us from trying to do what is right for the taxpayer. My request, I'm not actually asking for a radical change overnight or a change at all right now. What I am asking for is a neutral independent study, one conducted by a third party to see if merging these entities makes sense for Hutchinson today. A study of this kind would allow the reorganizational concerns I just listed to be considered alongside their potential solutions. We're currently taxed by the state, the county, the city, the college, the library, and the rec commission. If we use efficiency to responsibly remove one of those entities from the list and create greater financial oversight, wouldn't that be a win for every family in this town? I want to see our city be the best version of itself. I know that you five wouldn't be sitting where you are tonight if you didn't have the same feeling that I do. I hope you'll take this request in the spirit that has been given with an open heart and hope for a better Hutchinson. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Thanks, Jackson.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Deborah Tuful. I'm the president of the Hutchinson Reno County Chamber of Commerce, and I'm here tonight representing both the chamber as well as Greater Hutch, your economic development partnership. Um, we have been hearing in the community questions and concerns about um, the data center industry and we thought it would be helpful if the chamber could partner with other entities to provide an information session that would just help educate the public, maybe answer some questions, dispel myths, but also give people a chance to have a healthy dialogue about this topic. And so, we have scheduled an event on March 11th. It is um beginning at 11:00 a.m. I expect it may last about 2 hours. We haven't really put a hard fast stop on it. Um March 11th at Stringer Fine Arts Center. And we've invited a couple of speakers, but we're still working on a panel of some other industry experts to come provide perspective. And so I have a data center uh trends and data center development flyer that we have put together. I'll leave some of these here for the public to pick up. Um, but the keynote speakers of the day will begin with Paul Hughes, who manages mega projects for the Kansas Department of Commerce, as well as Jason Clint, who is senior director of external affairs for EverGee, who can speak to kind of the state level perspective on policies at our state level, but also policies that have been put in place by EverGy that regulate the way that energy companies sell power to large energy users and how those costs are actually passed on to the energy user and consumer. So um we would like them to speak to that and provide some context. We have also invited some panelists from industries that we know are in the supply chain for data centers and one of those is right here in our community. Superior Boiler, now under the ownership of Wattswater Technologies, actually makes a water cooling system that they'll be willing to talk about how that's impacting the growth of their own

company, but also how it affects the efficiency of water usage within large um consumers like the data center industry in general. Um, we've also invited a couple of what we would consider kind of small to mediumcale developers of centers. So, they could speak to the kinds of factors that they look at when they're considering communities and how they um work with communities to negotiate contracts um related to the sector. So, hopefully it's kind of a holistic conversation. Um, we do have a QR code on the flyer that we would like to ask people to register just so we know how many people may be there. Stringer Fine Arts Center accommodates quite a few people, but we want to make sure it's the right size facility. And we also would encourage questions um in advance. If you want to submit those to the chamber, you can do that or um we'll have a mechanism that people can bring questions that night and have a mo that day and have a moderated discussion on the topic. So, um, just hope that this is a healthy dialogue to get questions that are out there on the table so that we can work to address those because I think any responsible community that wants to look at various industry sectors should do their due diligence and um, consider all the factors when they're making important decisions. So, hopefully this is helpful to you as council because I know cities across our state are starting to look at these kinds of opportunities and you want to weigh them in a in a appropriate manner. Thank you. Thank you, Deborah.

Yes, thanks. Miss Tu, I have a question. Will the meeting be livereamed or recorded? It will be recorded. I don't think it's going to be livereamed. We do encourage people to attend, but it will be recorded and we will post it. Yes. Thank you. Of course. Thank you.

Anyone else like to speak in public comment? I got a question. there. As far as the rec center, what do we what do they what's their meals that they have? Meal that they get? What's their meal? Um, I believe it's 3.8. 3.8 or 3.5. I'm sorry. 3.5. That seems high. 3.5 3.5 3.5. Yeah. Is there other ones? Did I heard him say that the the library and the library is on its own too?

Six. Yeah, six meals. I mean, the reason I'm asking that because I had somebody ask me what the library is doing and I had no idea because they're not part of us. We I didn't know. So, they're the same setup as the rec commission is. Yes. Holy. They're independent. Yes. They are their own taxing entity, the same as the school district. I think this is a good good idea myself. Have a committee and look at it. Uh that's I like it. We'll see. Okay. Thank you, mayor. Thanks, Steve.

I have remarks about the same subject that I was going to say, but I'll I'll bring them now. Um, my concern would be if we did absorb um Hutchre and um by that indication, the library would make sense to do so as well. That um strong programs in a library and in in a recreation commission support a strong community. So when we're doing more with less, as people continue to tell us to do, these both become the lowest hanging fruit and these are your quality of life programming. So not only do they these two entities lose their voice, but they become the first thing that we're going to cut to quote save money. So by statute, Mr. Allen, to um clarify something that you brought up, the rec commission is not legally allowed to own buildings except for their own office buildings. So, they lease or rent them from other entities, being it a school district that they serve or a a um a city or what have you or county wherever their um programs serve. Um and the fees that they charge for the services are in line for the cost of their program and are in line with other competitors such as YMCA or Genesis or etc. for the child care um the enrichment for children and for adults. Um and then also for Haven um they discovered that their wreck commission was actually operating without a proper statute to support them which is why they were absorbed. They were not absorbed due to cost. The other concern that I have is as we um I'm not opposed to um convening an ad hoc committee to look at this issue um as long as we have the right people at the table. Um, I believe that with the current state statutes that are being considered in Topeka, um, the 3% cap for instance, if we absorbed Hutchre or the library by that logic, um, we would be shooting ourselves in the foot because those entities have expenses, they have

programs to maintain, they have facilities to maintain, they have staff to maintain. I'm not saying that they couldn't be cut. I have not dove into their budgets, but um to say that we're going to take on new entities as a library of six mills and a rec commission of 3.5 mills um and stay under the new supposed um 3%. It hasn't passed yet, but it it's leaning that way. Um supposed 3% increase. um we would be absolutely shooting ourselves in the foot to put it nicely. Well, I kind of I think we need to have a conversation about it. Yeah, absolutely.

In the future. Um just to I guess do our due diligence to make sure we're making the right decision for our community. So that's I agree. I mean I don't know when we need to decide that, but an independent study, we get beat up all the time for spending money on studies, but this is exactly why we hire people to do this. So we have information that we can make a good decision on, right? And you know, I I think consolidation is very efficient. Generally speaking, I I don't I I'm still I understand they're doing something at the library and I understand what they're doing, but I've not once heard how much it's costing. Have you gone into the library? No, I have not.

When's the last time you went to the library? Um month ago. Good. Um been to several meetings there. I don't check books out there. I used to do books on tape or whatever. But um I highly suggest getting this document. The documents from 1994. It lays out the If you if you're going to speak, I need you to come to the podium, please. Yeah. Sorry. Come back. Yeah. Yeah. If we're going to open a conversation, for sure. I I highly suggest getting the documents from 1994. Um he should have easy access to them because he got them for me the other day. [laughter]

But uh the it basically so it's Joe it's Joe Palasio was the city manager manager at the time. But the um he basically lays out his recommendation and multiple frameworks and in which the merger could happen and then it includes the response from the the uh director of the commission at the time just um I mean there's a lot of things to work out obviously but they they both seem to think it could work. And then it also includes multiple letters from other cities that have done this like including Manhattan that just basically outline why they like having a combined parks and rec department why it works better for them. And so [clears throat] that's that's the other thing. It might not work for Hutchinson, but I think we should at least look and decide and and decide after we know after we look at the study and say, "Okay, it doesn't work for Hutchinson." But if it does, it's worth you guys voting on. So

yeah, I I appreciate you bringing it up, Jackson. And I know that, you know, I don't think with a new 1520 million dollar YMCA coming to town, we're going to lack on recreational things that services. I mean, I think they'll pick up any slack that might be left if we would do this. But I this isn't even on the agenda, but I I mean, I would we need to discuss this further. No, I think it needs to be a future agenda item, not something for disc I mean a little discussion tonight, but until we have more uh history and information, I think um we uh we could have an agenda item at that point. So, and have a discussion because I think it's worth at least having a discussion and an independent study as well. So,

we should have the discussion and I would encourage you to not make assumptions about the capacity of any of the providers because that is something that you don't actually have any proof to back up assuming that the YMCA would be able to absorb the programming that's currently provided by the Hutchre. Very different programming. Very, very different programming. That's why we need to get some information. I absolutely agree. But there is some overlap, you would admit,

right? But a duplication of services not does not mean that you need to remove one of the service providers. When we lived in Kansas City, um my son was not old enough to participate in the things that he's eligible for now. Um but my friends who also had young kids and school age children um told me how it was competitive to log in at the right time to get your kids signed up for

pee-wee soccer for swim lessons for child care for all of those things. So if we remove providers from the network, you're not enriching the quality of life or saving people money for the sake of um you know having more brighter future for your children. You're essentially forcing everybody to go to the same thing which is a logistical nightmare. There's assumptions of capacity of staffing etc. So

yeah. So, and I would say by no means am I saying we should abolish the the commission, but by absorbing the commission, I think that a couple things can be accomplished. One of those is financial oversight, especially with the library as well. Like I think Steve, did you mention that the uh you mentioned that you don't know what the what construction is going on at the library? I don't know what constru I don't know what construction is going on at the library as well, but that's something that I think this council should have a say and it should it should have financial oversight in. No, we shouldn't. They are their own own entity. You know, again, I think we just need to have a future discussion. We can we can debate it till we're blue in the face tonight. You're on the library board, by the way, as the mayor. Oh, I am. Okay. Mhm. [laughter] Was I Was I when I was Yes, you were.

Oh, wow. I didn't know. I didn't know either. Well, thank you guys. The information you got him, can you email that to us? Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You're welcome. Thanks, Jackson. Thanks, sir. All right. Just making sure that you have public comment. I do. All right. Come on up. He's also on the library [laughter] board.

I know I am on the library board. Uh Jeff Robertson, 37 Circle Drive. Um I'm up here in my capacity as a member of the Hutchinson Public Library Board. Uh we are indeed our own taxing entity. Uh the construction that's going on right now. Um on the north side of the building, a big pile of dirt. Uh we're putting in a new escape um and and staircase for the basement, but the main uh part of the renovation is going to be the maker space downstairs. And if I remember right, I don't have the numbers in front of me at the moment, but it's about $2 million that we're spending. And all of that is from donations. Um that's not impacting the mill levy. Uh our mill levy has stayed flat um with just binary increases. So, uh, all that renovation is being paid for from gracious donors over the years. Um, it's going to be a great maker space when we're all done. There's going to be new bathrooms down there. Uh, we're going to have CNC machines. We're going to have sewing machines, a lot of 3D um, printing devices. Um, it's going to be a great space. Uh, there's also some HVAC renovations that go along with that. So, again, all of that is not paid for by the taxpayers, but by donations.

Thank you, sir. You're welcome. Yeah. Thanks for the clarification. And yes, you are an ex official on the on the library board. I did not know that as [laughter] Greg didn't either. So new. Love to buy you lunch sometime. Well, we'll have to get together. Yes. You never brought me lunch when I was and I didn't even know. So ahead of time, we can make sure you get the order in. So, but we'd love to have you there. All right. Thank you. And also, uh, the renovations up on the second floor with the auditorium and all the meeting rooms was also paid for through donations. So anyway, thank you for that information. You're welcome. Thank you. Um, anyone else?

All right. Nothing else. Next item. Item number five, consent agenda. Um, has everyone had a chance to look at the consent agenda? Oh, yeah. Any questions, comments? No. I do have a question. Um, Dave's not here, so I'm not sure who to direct this to. um probably to Mr. Williams. Um I just wanted to ensure that Mr. Summers and Mr. Cororic had not um attended and voted on any meetings um prior to their appointment. Prior to their reappoint reappoint. Thank you.

Uh no uh they we have not had a meeting in a couple of months. Um but they are being reappointed. So they they did serve last term but yes. Okay. Thank you. I move. Anything else? Nope. I move to approve the consent agenda and authorize the mayor to sign. Second, yes. Garza, yes. Goss, yes. Bast, yes. Mayers, yes.

Item number six, public hearing. Public hearing for landmark CD. The public hearing will not be held and is being removed at the request of the petitioner. Item number seven, ordinances and resolutions. A, consider a resolution fixing a hearing date and time for unsafe structures. Good evening, council. Jason Lady, building official. Um tonight I've provided a staff report for resolution fixing a hearing uh for date and time for unsafe structures. These are uh residential structures. Um there is five on the staff report that I've indicated. The recommendation is the recommended that the city council accept and approve the resolution fixing a time and place for the hearing for the five abandoned residential structures. Uh the building uh the building official has inspected the properties below and determined that the structures on the properties are unsafe and dangerous as defined in chapter 21 article 7 unsafe and dangerous buildings. Uh we have provided uh notices out to these property owners. The properties are as follows. 913 East 5th Avenue, 404 West 5th Avenue, 2011 North Waldron Street, 113 West Avenue B, 827 uh East 1st Avenue. As far as any financial considerations, there is no anticipated additional financial obligations to the city as this is already in the FY26 uh demolition portion of our budget. Uh this does align with our uh strategic objectives. Objective number four, invest in the gateways of the community and neighborhoods south of 17th. This also this action also uh positions the

department to better support community priorities identified in the Reno County housing needs assessment. Um, and my recommended action tonight not only is to that council approve the resolution, but it's recommended that we have the hearing on April 21st, 2026. And I'll stand for any questions if you have any. Have you had any contact back from the uh the owners of the properties on these properties? I do not believe so. And when were when did you say the notices were sent out? [snorts]

Uh, what did you not say? I don't have the I didn't say and I don't have the um I don't have that in front of me tonight. I mean, you could see on the uh on the uh exhibit A um that we sent PMC's out on on this first one on June 23rd of 25. Uh that was a structure fire. Um the next one at 404 West 5th, we opened a PMC on 61925. Um 2011 North Waldron PMC on 51925. The next one was 101525, excuse me. [cough and clears throat] And then uh 827 East 1st Avenue. We opened up a PMC 61625. So there's been various notices between those times and today. Okay. And then I see that the taxes are current on all them except for the the last two. I think uh 113 West Avenue B and 827 East First. Is that correct?

Yes, that is correct. Okay. And these are in addition to the properties that we began the process on um Oh, two months ago. Yes. Last month. Last month. Yeah. The beginning [clears throat] of February, we also brought five uh residential structures as well. Yes. And in the um oh what page am I on? I'm in your staff report the second page of it. It says that sufficient funds have been appropriated in the fiscal year 26 demolition budget to cover all related costs. Um that includes those previous five and these five. Yes. Is that correct?

Yes, it does. Do you have um anticipated demo costs or ballparks on any of these? Most of these based on the square footage and based on the style of house, I would probably if I had to estimate anywhere from $5,000 to $8,000 to demo them. I mean, it'd be pretty pretty minimal

far as the cost in the demolition world. And has there, and you might not know this, which is fine, um has there been any attempts by um any of our nonprofit partners um like Interfaith to reach out and talk to them about donating or turning these over or anything like that? I would have to follow up with uh Interfaith on whether these five specifically have been uh sent out, but I know um Interfaith has sent out a number of notices uh to property owners uh trying to reach out to them to purchase properties, rehabilitate

and are we kind of working the same list of properties as they are? Yes, we're providing that list. That's what I thought. Anybody else have any questions? I don't, but I'd move to approve a resolution fixing a hearing date for April 21st at 5:30 p.m. for unsafe structures and authorize the mayor to sign. Second Truan, yes. Garza, yes. Goss, yes. Fast, yes. Mayers, yes. [clears throat]

Item number eight, new business. A SDF25-2, the Meadows on Monroe final plat. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Matt Williams, director of community development. Uh, while we're pulling this up, um, I'm here to present the final plat for the Meadows on Monroe, a 57 lot subdivision at 36 in Monroe. Uh the public meeting for this plat was held at planning commission on January 13th. The Meadows on Monroe meets all requirements of the zoning and subdivision regulations. The plat also meets the requirements of protective overlay PO1 regarding minimum lot area and minimum frontage at the front setback. Those were the requirements that were put in place after uh we heard comments and discussions from the adjacent neighborhoods. Uh during the review of the preliminary plat, the applicant was granted three subdivision variances by the planning commission, including colllocation of easements, waving the sidewalk requirement along Monroe, and waving the sidewalk requirements on the northern two culde-sacs. There were no comments received from the public at the review [snorts] of the final plat. The planning commission unanimously recommended approval. We've got a picture of the plat here. And then the next steps include finalizing the requested RHID and special benefit districts. The neighborhood is expected to be constructed in two phases uh at what the developer is calling full speed uh beginning with eight spec homes and heavy marketing. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

I have a couple of questions that um were sent to me from residents in the area. Um of the two phases, do you know which one will begin first? I can get you that information. I don't I don't have that. They were going to be pretty consecutive right after each other. I I want to say that the southern two culde-sacs were going to be built first and then the northern one, but I can get you that. Okay, I would appreciate that. Um and then the [snorts] um so on the southeast where I can't read what it says on the screen. Sorry. Reserve D over there. Reserve D. Thank you. Um that is essentially a drainage area, right?

Correct. And that has a specific site or a site plan that they'll have to submit and be held accountable to. Yeah, they'll be held accountable to the maintenance of it. I I'm not sure at this point uh after the final plat gets approved, they'll do more engineering to kind of finalize everything. At this point, I'm not sure if that's going to have water in it or if it's going to be a dry uh Okay. drainage detention. Um but there is the sidewalk that will go through the neighborhood is going to go around it as if it's a pond with a sidewalk around it. Um on both sides.

Yeah. The the sidewalk will come down Madison Street and then circle Madison Court, go around the pond, and then come back. And then um that sidewalk will have access to the adjacent neighborhood if any of the other residents want to utilize that path. Where will it connect to the other neighborhood? Um well, if you can see my pointer up here, that's Arrowhead Drive. So that is going to it's envisioned as um the dead end for Arrowhead Drive to the south. Um, so that sidewalk will bump up against that and then we'll have um an access to the east where it says reserve C where currently that's a platted street in the neighborhood to the east. Um,

it's platted but not built. Platted but not built, but the sidewalk will go up to it so that if once that portion of the neighborhood is built, it will connect to that sidewalk. [snorts]

Is that something that the residents in the area would be able [clears throat] to weigh in on whether or not they want it connected because that has been platted for a long time and never built out and um I don't know that the residents in the Kiswa area were aware that the sidewalk would be connecting. My understanding as from like late April when we first started this discussion and not connecting it into Arrowhead was that they would essentially not be connected um and that we would as a city be making slight improvements to the dead end at Arrowhead Drive to connect it to um drainage etc. so that we ensure that the houses on the south end in the original neighborhood are not like flooded from the new development that sort of thing.

Mhm. Um, so I just want to make sure that they're not or that the residents around there are um a still able to provide some input. I would say the neighborhood to the east when that gets fully built out, they'll have input at that time. The neighborhood to to the south, this pond is going to be in reserve D and there's just going to be a sidewalk going around it. Um, I'm not I don't think that there's going to be a stub off of that sidewalk going into Heroahhead Drive. I just think that the the sidewalk wraps around to a point that it'll be accessible off of Arrowhead Drive. Okay. Um I'm not sure the city would, you know, there's not going to be a wall there or anything, right? I mean, like right now it's it like goes in the dirt.

Yeah. Which is weird, but a street and I don't think anything has been decided about any improvements at that arrowhead drive like camera head or anything. Okay. And Matt, just for my own understanding, what does full speed mean on eight homes? How did they give any timeline on how long it would take them to put up eight homes?

I talked to the developer today and the developer said that as fast as their engineers could go, that's how fast they would be building out the neighborhood. Um, then I asked if there would be any spec homes built, homes built for the public to look at, you know, before someone purchases them. and he said that as they do in all of their neighborhoods, they immediately go in build eight eight spec homes right away so that residents could start looking at those. Um [clears throat] so I mean that's that's going to be much faster than any neighborhood we've seen built in the city in a long time. He also has homes in um McFersonen that [snorts] or spec homes if you will.

Thanks Matt. Was 57 the original number? Um on the plat I thought it was a little bit higher than that. You know I on the original I want to say maybe it was 60 or something but I think [clears throat] with probably our discussions with the the first time you saw it would have been at the zoning phase um before all the lots had been designed. And I think that might have been the idea at that time, but when it came back with the 6,500 ft minimum lot size in the protective overlay, I think this is what they were able to do. Okay. Thank you. Council, have any other questions?

Um, as before, I don't love the um sidewalks on one side. Um I I don't believe that that's a true cost that's passed on or a true savings that's passed on to um the potential homeowner. Um and I I think that neighborhoods are better with sidewalks. You know, I agree with you on that, but if you actually go look at new housing additions, McFersonen, Witchaw, um they're all dropping to single sidewalks. Um, so I don't think that's I'm not going to get hung up on that for somebody want to build houses here. [clears throat] So I think it's still a good addition to our community.

I would suggest that at a near future date then if that's how council feels that we repeal our sidewalk or have a conversation about appealing um repealing our sidewalk code um requirements because right now it is required on both sides. And if council and planning and zoning and residents don't feel like they should be on both sides, which I think the public should be allowed to weigh in on again cuz this conversation has come up in the notsodistant past. Um then I mean we either have a code and we stick with it or we allow variances on every single thing which if you're allowing variances all you're doing is making people give you money to um get the code that they want that you're going to give them anyway. What reason would we want to keep that uh two sidewalks in that code? Any reason for that?

I think um you know walking in an older neighborhood um you see the benefit to it. It's you know big treeine streets, sidewalks on both sides, it creates a great pedestrian environment. Um the negatives are obviously the installation and the cost of maintenance after, you know, when those older neighborhoods are due to have those sidewalks replaced. Um having it on at least one side of the street allows a pedestrian that's going in one direction to just pick the side of the street and walk along it. Um I will say in this neighborhood, the sidewalk is going to be this is a unique neighborhood. There's no sidewalks on Monroe. Um, so the sidewalks in here are going to be on Madison. They're going to be on both sides. They're going to come down, circle that pond, come back up to create a sidewalk loop. Their request was not to have sidewalks on the culde-sacs. A lot of communities don't require sidewalks on the culde-sacs because there's very low pedestrian traffic going down the culde-sac. Um, and there's very low traffic count, very low traffic speed. So if there was somebody wanting to walk down that to their house or circle it, it's a much safer environment than a through street. Um that that was the basis of their request and they felt like planning commission felt like that was a balanced compromise.

Okay. No, I I I feel like it is a conversation we should have since it's kind of going that direction. Um we should have a conversation [snorts] about that. I do want to say that on these with the shorter setbacks, um, you're essentially going to fit fewer cars in a driveway. Um, so you're maybe going to have one and a half instead of two. Um, and when you're looking at I I think these were all three and four two two and threebedroom homes anyway. Um anyway, I mean, you're essentially forcing people to park on the street, which then you have no sidewalks to walk on on these culde-sacs.

Yeah. I I mean, again, I think it's just something we should have conversation about for future developments just to so we're all on the same page with it. You're right. You're right, Stacy. This keeps coming up. We Yeah. I mean, give every variance or change the code. Um, but if we're going to change the code, um, I think we should have a study session on, and I know that's not the point. I will say that meeting wall has sidewalks on both sides of the street if I remember correctly, but across Monroe to the west, there's no sidewalks in in the Corv. Oh, anyway, I'm just thinking here village, it only has one sidewalk down one side. It doesn't have two because that's a Gimm Strong neighborhood and he petitioned for it not to be which is exactly why we went

Yeah. that to this 12 years ago. Yeah. We've got a lot on the future agenda. I hope you're taking notes, Scott. I'm always taking notes. [snorts] Any more questions, I guess, from council. And we don't need to approve this plan. Yeah. I'd ask that you accept and approve the recommendation of the planning commission to approve the final plat. I'll move to accept the final plat. I'll second it. Truman, yes. Garza, yes. Yes. Fast. Yes. Mayers,

yes. [cough] Item number eight, [clears throat] Plum Creek benchmark adjustments.

All right. This item tonight, uh, I'm here to present a proposed revision to the MIH and ARPA dispersement schedule for the Plum Creek subdivision. In April 2023, the Kansas Housing Resources Corporation awarded Plum Creek approximately $1 million in MIH ARPA funding to support middle-income housing. Since that time, the city has also established [clears throat] an RHID and approved related development agreements and aims to reduce the special assessments and support the project's viability. Um, under our current agreement, MIH and ARPA funds are dispersed on a reimbursement basis as specific benchmarks are met. Those benchmarks were structured around a combination of duplex and single family home production. Uh while the original grant agreement expected the development to be completed by June 30th of this year, to date only two homes have been started in the development and none of the grant funding has been dispersed. Because these are ARPA dollars, they are subject to a firm federal deadline for expenditure at the end of this year, December 31st. So if the funds are not properly expended by those dates, they are forfeited. So to ensure Hutchinson does not lose the awarded funds, we're proposing two adjustments. And here is Plum Creek. Just so you have a photo of that and the two homes that have made progress, uh are two proposed adjustments. First, the M MIH ARPA funds would be drawn down to the city in advance of the federal deadline, allowing the city to meet the expenditure requirements. Basically, they're going to give us all the money now and so that they've spent it. Uh those funds would remain restricted and controlled by the city and would continue to be in reimburse to the developer only as performance benchmarks are met. So, the developer still will only get them as he meets the dispersement schedule. Second, we are

proposing to revise the dispersement schedule so that benchmarks are tied exclusively to single family owner occupied units rather than duplex units. Uh this adjustment aligns with the developer adjusted plans while maintaining the original intent of supporting the middle inome housing. Uh importantly, the revision does not reduce accountability and the funds remain performance-based. If units are not built and verified, the reimbursement will not occur. And the city will retain control of the funds until those benchmarks are satisfied. Uh KHRC has indicated they are comfortable with this type of request and they've done this for a couple other communities as well. Uh staff believes the Plum Creek project remains viable um and is aligned with our community needs. Here's a couple of examples of the dispersement schedule. So right now the dispersement schedule uh provides money as uh homes get built. Uh but in the current dispersement schedule uh several of those uh benchmarks are based on duplexes. The revised dispersement schedule is based only on single family houses. So, we'd recommend that you approve the revised dispersement benchmarks for Plum Creek subdivision as outlined and authorize the mayor to sign an amended development agreement and grant agreement. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

So, I guess my question would be um do we have any sort of timeline since it's supposed to be June of 26? I mean, I just to me seems like it's crawling like a snail. Um cuz I I just look at this going, it's supposed to be completed by June, and we have we don't even have one house complete. We have one two houses that are partially done, and to me, it's just like I don't understand why it's taking so long. I mean, I'm sure there's delays, etc. I get that. I understand that. But you'd think you'd have more than just two up at this point.

Yeah. I I wish I had the developer here to answer some questions. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to make it. Um, I know that I spoke with the state KHRC and they feel comfortable changing to this dispersement schedule as long as the city feels comfortable working with the developer, continuing to work with them. Um, at a point if we feel like the development's not making enough progress or the development fails for whatever reason, uh, the state did say they could entertain, uh, discussions with us on figuring out how else the city could use that money in our community. So, I think that's open in the in the future if that needs to happen. Um, but I there's not a specific deadline at this point of

Do you have a recommendation for like a like if we don't see something by X, then we start looking down a different route? I mean, I hate I mean, I don't want to do this to the developer, but then again, I'm like going this to me looks like it should have been a lot more progress than now. Um, to us as a city going, okay, we want this developed uh, you know. Yeah, I think that if that is something that council wants, we could talk to the KHRC about that.

I think the the natural deadline that was already built in, which is June 2026, is the kind of drop dead date that you're talking about. um giving the developer Gemstrong and and company um until the end of the year puts us right at the federal deadline which means we don't have an option of taking this money back and giving it to another developer or giving it to any cuz we could actually take these funds and give them to a different cause. Right. Well, right now if if if you approve what I've proposed, uh that deadline will go away because instead of the state waiting until he builds the houses to transfer them through us to give to him by December 31st, they're just going to give us all the funds right now and that will count as having spent it by December 31st. Then they will have to revise that. Well, our development agreement with Jim Strawn will have to be revised for a new completion date. And if it's not, we can spend the money with another developer or whatever.

KHRC has said that right now our agreement and all of the uh approvals that have been made are with uh Plum Creek. Um my understanding is that if that needs to change at some point, they would entertain that discussion, but right now our approvals and agreement is with Plum Creek and Jimstrom. and contractually he would have to agree to any changes in the date being changed or that sort of thing, right?

We'd have to look at our development agreements. We have an agreement with the state to get the funds and then we have an agreement I believe with Jim Strawn on the uh using the funds. So, we'd have to look at all of that. Did the agreement with Mr. drawn have the same dates built into it as the state's original funding deadlines? I don't know the answer to that off the top of my head. Mr. Brown, do you know?

No. Well, I'd like I mean I' again I'd like to see more progress into this development, especially I thought we were going to have more homes by June, but I think this is a good way to ensure that we keep the money for our community that if this doesn't go through, we could maybe potentially go a different direction. Um, so I think this is a smart tool we can use to retain [clears throat] it. That's my understanding. The state does not want us to lose the funds for our community. Good.

So, back to my original question for clarity because we allocated our ARPA our federal ARPA funds through cuz that was before my time on council. Um through for housing essentially. Um we're at a point that we can't take those back and say we're going to use them for something else. these funds. Yeah. My understanding and I wasn't here at the time either, but my understanding is we had ARPA funds that we spent, some went to housing. I believe these are state ARPA funds.

Okay. So, these are are these are required to go to housing. These are state ARPA funds that we and Straw and the city applied to get MIH. They're using it towards MIH. Um, so yes, it would need to go to housing. It's it's dedicated for this MIH program. Okay. I think the answer is we're unsure. Is that we're not sure if we can switch or No, I that I mean that answers my question. We're we can't switch the funds to another type of um programming programming, but yeah, we can use it for housing.

Okay. I I think that right now the the funds are for the Plum Creek development with Gem Strong if we need to have further discussions with the state, which they said they're open to. If we get to a point where we feel like it's not being spent wisely or in a prudent amount of time, then they indicated it could be used for other projects. I assume it needs to be used for housing. Um but we'd have to we have to pass it as have those discussions when we get to that point. Hopefully we won't have to do that, but we'll cross that bridge when we get there, I guess. Correct.

For me personally, there's there's I feel comfortable passing this tonight in its current form. Um [snorts] with the caveat, if you will, that um we kind of reserve the right to um take this back and and use it for a different housing project. Um there's two guarantees that I want to see and I'm disappointed that no representative from um the from Mr. Shron's company came tonight. Um the first thing is I want to see I I want to guarantee that he's going to build everything that he has said that he would um phases one and two. And then the second one is cuz he said this in a in a previous meeting. Um he said that he was going to sell everything in phase one which is the duplexes which it includes the duplexes. And I want that in writing. Um I think that's the only way that we guarantee that these are really being used these funds are really being used for their intended purpose. um because if these any of these properties are retained as rentals um by one of Mr. Strong's development companies, then um I don't believe that that's really serving the the highest and best use for housing.

So we can actually so we can have this conversation in June if we don't see any progress at this point. Is that would be a correct statement or do we need to wait till the end of the year? I don't think that timeline is finalized um or there is a specific timeline, but if we approve this, I will get back with KHRC and figure out what timeline we would be looking at to meet again. Okay, Mr. Can you also ask them how long it takes them to consider the request and how long it takes to get that approval? Approval of this new thing that we're approving tonight. Yeah. They said they would provide an amendment very quickly for that.

Oh, okay. So, if you guys are okay with that, I'm just looking for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve Plum Creek benchmark adjustments and authorize the mayor to sign. Second. Truan, yes. Bass, yes. Garza, yes. Goss, yes. Mayers, yes. Item number 8 C, receive an update on 3405 East 4th Avenue, the worm farm.

Good evening again, council. Jason Lady, building official. So, tonight I'm going to provide an update um and provide a little bit of a timeline for the 3405 East 4th Avenue. Um we'll start with [clears throat]

uh June 2010. Um, so at that point in June 2010, since it's been a while since we've updated on this, I think our last update on this was uh July um 15th of last year. So, just kind of want to refresh everybody on everything that's happened out there at that property. So, June 10th, 2010, the fire chief at the time sent a letter to Mr. Razer outlined a list of building and fire code requirements that need to be met before an occupancy permit could be obtained. Um at that time it included a new um electrical service, fire alarm system and fire protection system. In June 21st, 2010, in a letter um as part of a special use permit, staff reported um at planning commission uh that Todd Harmon of ADM Crane states his understanding of what is required in order to obtain the special use permit, which included in the list a sprinkler system certified, it's operational and approved, fire detection system supplied and installed by an approved vendor, and power restored to the building. Uh on October 5th, 2010, uh the special use permit was granted for 3405 East 4th approved by the city council uh for the storage of dry wheat. Those conditions included a new electrical service associated with a equipment of a fire alarm system, fire protection system that must be installed. Um there are no records that or any permits that any inspections were ever done that any of this work was ever completed um that would coincide with that SUP and no certificate of occupancy for the building at that time was ever granted but the grain was stored in there and um then we fast forward to June 29th of 2021 and again at that time Mr. Razer was privacy was conducting business inside of a structure with no certificate of

occupancy. We move forward to May 20th of 2024. May 20th, 2024, a strong windstorm hit Hutchinson and is believed to be the cause of a partial collapse of the south portion of the structure. July 11th, 2024, the structure was deemed unsafe in danger and dangerous and was boarded up uh following a visit by the interim building official and the fire marshal. On July 17th, 2024, an on-site meeting including the building owner, tenant, interim building official, and fire marshall. Um all commercial activity at that time was deceased. No customers were allowed to be in the building. no operations at that time and uh there was a deadline set of November 1st that was uh given to completely vacate the building. Um fast forward to October 2nd, 2024, that's when I came on board and made my first visit to the property. October 4th, 2024, the meeting was held between the building official, myself, uh the fire marshall, director of community development, the city manager, the building owner, and the tenant. November 1st deadline um to completely vacate the building was reiterated and a follow-up letter was sent at that time. Uh there were some further discussions also in that timeline um on I believe it was October 8th. We had some follow-up discussions with Mr. Reier and his legal uh team. Um so there was ongoing discussion. um go to November 1st of 2024. Uh the deadline to completely vacate the building that was originally given on July 17th was not met. Uh the tenant continue to slowly remove and vacate the building. on November 5th, 2000 two

2024. Uh we a resolution setting a hearing date for an unsafe structure uh was set for December 17th and approved by the city council. Uh December 17th, 2024, we had the uh public hearing to consider the unsafe structure. Um that hearing was continued um into January and then on January 10th, 2025, some shoring plans were received. Um we wanted to at at that December 17th meeting, we kind of wanted to see what Mr. Razer could get done within this time frame between [clears throat] first meeting and the second meeting. So January 10th, 2025, shoring plans were received, shoring was completed and closed on January 28th, 2025. And again, on January 21st, 2025, we had a continuation of the public hearing from December 17th. And there was a motion to table that until February 18th, 2025 to again provide the tenant further time. Also on January 21st, 2025, there was an interior demo permit that was received to clean up some of the inside in preparation for construction and to terminate some systems properly. And a permit was uh issued and it expired and was closed with no inspections on March 24th, 2025. On February 3rd, 2025, a permit uh was again applied for to demolish the south loading dock. uh that's the portion of the collapse down there. Um it expired and closed on May 2nd, 2025 and the work to this day remains incomplete. Now to kind of explain why the work on that remains incomplete is because uh there was a portion that they could not demo

um in fear that there was another wall that was going to collapse. So, the shoring that was conducted and then the demo of the south portion, the the plan was when they reconstruct the south end was to finalize uh that demo work. So, that'd be a portion that would be included in the construction of the of the new south end if we get to that point. [clears throat] On February 3rd, 2025, um a permit was applied. Well, I just went over that one. February 18th, 2025. Uh we again updated uh made an update to the city council and again tabled that meeting until April 1st, 2025 to again provide Mr. Roger fur for their time. On April 1st, 2025, uh we again made an update to the city council. We tabled that meeting for 60 days to again uh provide the tenant further time to u make some accomplishments. Um at that time there was uh some engineering documents that were going to be coming forward. Um he was going to submit for a permit which he did on May 5th, 20125. A permit was issued for the south dock structural repairs approved engineering plans. Work was never completed and no inspections were ever conducted. That permit expired and was closed on December 17th, 2025. on July 15, 2025, we again provided an update. Um and based on the fact that we had the engineering plans for the structural work, the shoring was done, there were other things that were applied for, demo work that was applied for. Um we felt like we could remove it from council and not give constant updates on it and and uh but we would still consider an unsafe and dangerous structure. Uh they couldn't the understanding was that they

could not operate within the building. uh the only work that they could be in the building for at that time would be for the construction and so we took it off the uh council's agenda on July 15th 2025 with uh your approval based on the fa fact that there was good faith efforts being made by the tenant. Then on november 17th 2025 another permit was issued for the east window replacement. Um, to this date, no windows have been replaced. Um, some have been tore out up there. When I was out there a couple days ago, I did not go out there today. So, if they started placing some in there. Um, but, uh, when I was out there just a few days ago, there had been no placement of windows to this point. February 25th, uh, 2026. So, I made a visit out to the site to review the property and found that business operations had expanded on the interior of the building, again, without a certificate of occupancy or that any of the previous work has been completed. A notice of violation was again sent to Mr. Razer to remove all um all materials and seesaw operations uh within the building within 30 days. Um, again, I think we're providing a pretty generous timeline here because it's a considered still an unsafe and dangerous structure. Um, there's no certificate of occupancy for the building ever issued and we could have just gone out there and boarded it up immediately, but again, we're supplying him further time to uh get this complete and get everything moved out of the building so he doesn't lose all his material that's inside that building. So, since the 15th July 2025 uh city council meeting, uh staff feels Mr. Razer has not made a good faith effort to repair the structure, nor to

remove and discontinue um or discontinue his operations inside the structure. The goal of tonight is simply to provide an update and advise the council that on March uh 26, 2026, uh staff will go out and board up 3405 East 4th Avenue if the material is not removed from the structure. At that time, Mr. Razer will need to provide a complete set of building plans under one permit to complete the building remodel. Furthermore, Mr. Razer cannot operate within the building while construction is in progress and at any time at the remaining items. um and equipment are not removed or operations are being conducted um inside the building or that work halts and the permits expire and staff will issue stop work orders and once again secure the building from any entry of the property owner. Um I believe that as as building official I think we've done our due diligence on this property. I think we've made uh significant uh efforts as a city to assist um Mr. Razer in this matter and uh we're past the point of Mr. Razer peacemealing this project together and we'll require a complete set of plans to proceed on from here and then I'll stand for any questions if you have any. Oh, I do have a video here uh tonight. I just wanted to go over this too as well. So you could see um in this video we were at a point and um I did not bring them with me or provide those photos tonight. Uh but we were at a point pretty close to just the northeast portion of the building. We were down to this is the dirt you see in the northeast portion of the building right here. This is about all we were down to

within the building um to finalize Mr. Razer moving out of this structure. And if you look back um there's a bunch of equipment uh more piles of dirt over there which was completely [clears throat] cleared out at one point. I'll continue on with these videos. [snorts] I have a question here. Is it the difference in lighting? Is it because there's no roof there or is it because there's no wall and you're looking out into an open area? And then another

um the wall would be to the south end, but there is a lot of light being provided in there during the day because the windows on over on the east side plus the openness of the U. So that is not lighting from um lighting. That is natural lighting. Okay. Right there.

So this is equipment that um in July of 2024, Mr. Razer was advised that he needed to move outside. He did at that point, but you can see that it's um back in the building fully operational and being used again. Uh the tanks that were over there were also advised that they needed to be moved out of the building and never were there's 14 slides because there's only three videos. But

well, since I'm the one that kind of stuck my neck out for this deal, um I just have a few questions for you just to get clarity. So, have you guys had any like bi-weekly um communications about progress [clears throat] in the building since February 5th? Just the updates you've seen via email that have gone to the council members as well. So, just like Okay. Not actual conversations.

We've had no personal conversation. No. So, um, yeah, I drove by there, I think it was a couple days as well, and, you know, we just got an email today saying window process is currently in, uh, window replacement is currently in progress, which obviously that's not really happening either. I mean, I was told back in February, the windows are going to be arriving this week. They'll be going in here in the next couple weeks. I don't think I've seen any of that activity. And as you look at there, the stuff's being brought back into the building so we can continue to work. um which is not part of the agreement either. So he in this email it says over $400,000 has been spent on this project but yet there's been no really building permits to do any of that type of work. Is that do I understand that correctly as well?

I don't know where the $400,000 would have been spent. That's [clears throat] another question I have. Um let's see what else was there. And unfortunately bathroom buildout uh within a week of approval. I mean, there's just all sorts of I I think we just need um I'll I'll look for all your comments as well, but I think we just need to proceed with um your recommendation. I mean, I'm I'm kind of at the point of being done with it because it's just we just kind I kind of feel like we're just being strung along at this point. I stuck my neck out. He kept giving us progress. He was making progress on things and then it kind of just like stopped. And so, um I just feel like it's it's time to to move on. That's just my opinion.

I agree. And I think that that we all did. We all wanted this to be a success story and we wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it kept being to the point to this summer when we stopped receiving the regular updates because we I and and Greg and everybody else on council said, "Yeah, you know, it feels like he's making progress. We can stop having this as a a particular item on the agenda." Um but since then like literally nothing has happened and to your point of the videos and um your presentation um he's never stopped working in there. And the frustrating thing is is that we did give him the benefit of the doubt. He's not here tonight to speak for himself even though this this was on the I mean this was on the agenda for days now. Um, and he's sending us emails with claims

at 330 today, right? And claiming that all this money has been spent, but I mean, if I had spent $400,000 on something that um [clears throat] a a council was looking to hold me accountable for, I would send some receipts. So, I will say that um Mr. Razer did purchase the property from Mr. Deainy back in December. It was near the end of December.

I think it might have been right at the end of December if I recall. Um, so we will with this notice of violation uh that is sent out uh this week or this last week as far as no certificate of occupancy. There will be a follow-up notice of violation um coming um shortly. And with that notice violation, it'll identify all the things that are wrong with the property. It's not going to be an all-inclusive list. That's not our job. Um, part of our job is to provide a list of unsafe and dangerous items. And it's the job of an architect to design the building appropriately with the building code and then for us to review that and obviously oversee the construction at that point. But um so that would kind of be the next step in this process and then after that he would have 30 days to comply um with the um property maintenance code violations and then if nothing was happened beyond that point, we would bring this back to council for condemnation.

So we're still looking at probably a couple months down the road if nothing else at this point. we actually know who we're dealing with instead of both parties. And there was some fingerpointing on ownership and taxes and who was responsible for what and for how long and at least now we know who the true owner of the property is and who to um work with and to hold accountable.

And on another note, Mr. Kendall Evans is here tonight um and uh he has been in contact with Dan and discussing a few things. And I did sit down with Mr. Evans the other day and I've kind of outlined and explained all this stuff to him um because he's been kind of following up on some of this for Mr. Razer at this time. Mr. Evans, do you have anything to say? Yeah. All right.

So, I'm Kendall Evans, Knackle Studios 13 East Sherman. I'm a marketer, podcaster. Uh, best way to describe it is we're brought in to communicate because it is completely broken down and and we know where the fault lies. And so I reached out to Jason, I've reached out to a few council members. Uh why we're impressed with it and we're willing to put our neck out on it is that we attended a conference with Dan to do podcasting and I know nothing about agriculture. The people that talked about what he's creating. It's special. Now that doesn't excuse not being special and taking care of your business. So that's kind of why we were brought in. I have a better understanding now than I did the other day. So, with that, you know, we'll get back with Jason and see where we can go with it. Um, but I'll be a point person on it that you can talk to on a weekly. And I think that's the key to it is that we need to start having some communication. The other thing I told him was you got to have somebody handling operations and he has hired somebody to handle operations that's going to be here local that could be in touch every day. So, that's going to make a difference. So, that's where we're at. Any questions?

So, this person who's handling operations is doing so in a building that does not have a certificate of occupancy. No, no, no, no. She works out of her home. Okay. Yeah. But for people who are working in a building that doesn't have a certificate of occupancy, and I know this isn't your Yeah, this is wrong to write, but the people who are working in this building are they don't have working bathrooms. They don't have safety. They don't have exit lighting. They don't have fire extinguishers that we know of. They don't have a [clears throat] sprinkler system. They are in danger just by showing up to work every day. I appreciate that

that that's why when we say that this is an unacceptable way to operate. It has nothing to do with the really cool stuff that he is doing because honestly I was in I was a little bit in awe when we had the farmers and ranchers come in that one night and they told us all of the cool stuff that he was doing and all of the agricultural ties and we're an agricultural community in Reno County and that's important but at the same time like allowing this business to operate in its current form we're putting people's lives in danger and that's not something that we and take lightly.

No, I don't think that's up for debate at all. In fact, you know, with Jason, that was, you know, his job is important because of what it does. And so, I agree with you. It's it's, you know, there's a fundamental breakdown in communication and when that happens, this is where it ends up. And I've run a couple of businesses and been a part of some startups and had some success. And the key to is you got to surround yourself with good people. And that may have not happened yet, but now we're making that effort. Sarah Haskins's been brought on as operations and I've met her, impressed with her. I think we do an effective job communicating with people and reaching out. And so, it's not an excuse for what's happening there. It's just this is a new trend that started this week. This was dropped on our plate Monday. And I'm excited to take the challenge on.

Well, I'm glad you're taking the challenge on. You have a steep mountain to climb. Oh, it's a huge amount. We will continue the communication via letters and Oh, yeah. I am not going to be played the fool again. We've had two projects that have gone on for eight years and I am done. So, you guys have already honestly Yeah, I agree. At this point, I think any communication between Mr. Razer or yourself, Mr. Evans or anybody in the group should not be directed at council by the process that we are following, it should all be directed at staff. I believe Mr. Lady is that point [clears throat] person, but it is completely inappropriate for Mr. Razer to call, text, or email anybody on the council as long as we're in this process moving forward.

Okay. Absolutely. And that's something that with Jason, you know, a weekly meeting, I think, would be appropriate. I I would totally disagree with that. I mean, we have tried that route, but [laughter] I'll let him speak to the We tried leaving the bear alone. Here we are. Yeah, I I agree. I mean, I'm not I'm not here to fight you, Greg. You're not. I'm here to try to help a guy that's in a in a in a situation of his creation. If Jason's up for a month, our weekly meeting, that's up to him. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. It's [clears throat] at his leisure. Yeah. I will say I did check today. He's current on all the taxes. So, yeah, he is.

Uh but anyway, I I would say I I will say one more thing. And Jason, you said that March 26 would be the 30 days. Is that right? Yes. March 26 be the 30 days. Mr. Evans, I just think he needs to understand that [clears throat] if we're not seeing significant I guess cease operations and we're not seeing Well, I think what he just communicated, he needs to see the whole package, right? And that's what needs to happen. And if if we're not seeing that, that is accurate. It needs to be shut down March 26th [clears throat] until it's Jason. You're giving him till the 26th.

Giving him until the 26 at this point. Yes. And that includes not anything operational going on there in there. That strictly holds to the fact that he's removing product, not continuing operations in there. And uh I can reply to him on one of those emails and because the other day strictly state that the other day it didn't look like he was re he was moving product out. They were in full operation in my opinion. Yes. I believe the other day when you and I and um and Rico went out there they appeared to be still in full operation and not moving any product out at that time. Y

and just to be clear that anybody if we come to the 26th and we board up the property, it will be there will be a trespass order and anybody who is in the property after that point without essentially a city escort um would be trespassed.

Yes, they'd have to get strict permission from myself to enter the property. we would be the ones to remove um any uh board up for them to go into the property to retrieve any items at that point. And um not going to put staff out there on a full watch or to have staff sit there on a full watch to watch them remove product from a building. Um so if we're not there, it's boarded up.

Thank you. Thanks for coming forward, Mr. Evans. I I wish you well. I hope you I hope you can turn this project around. I have my doubts. Um, but hopefully you're the point guy that can get it taken care of. So, I always thought this could be a successful business is why I kind of threw my uh threw my name out there to go, hey, let's let's give it a let's give it a little bit so we can't do something. So, um hopefully you can turn it. I again, I have my doubts, but uh the best to you, I guess. Like I said, it's a challenge. Well, [laughter] and I like a good challenge. So good. Hey, thank you guys for your time. Thanks. Thanks, Kendall. Thanks, Jason. Any further questions for me? Thank you. All right. Thank you. [clears throat] Um, next item, Mary.

Item number nine, report of city officials council. Mr. Garza. Okay. On February 21st, I had a meeting with the one of my meetings. It turned out to be very good meeting. And I had oh probably about 30 people maybe a little bit less than that. I didn't count them all but all my donuts were gone and all my uh tables were full. Uh we had a very good meeting and um uh they can't wait to the next one. So um I just was pleased with that and thank you for coming to my meeting. That's all I got. Thank you Mr. Truan.

I don't have a whole lot. I did go Mr. George's meeting and it was very informative. I did leave a little bit early so I could go to the uh meeting with the county appraiser and learn about how the appraisals are done and I was very impressed with that meeting. In fact, he's in the back. So, thank you for that. And uh just been watching the election tonight and it looks like we had a heck of a turnout. So, be anxious to see how it turns out. So, that's it.

Mess. Um, ditto that. Thanks for staff uh trying to get information out to people. Um, however the vote turns out, we will deal with it as a council. Um, I I appreciate the fact that it it looks like there was a better turnout than most people expected. So, um, we'll know here in a little bit how that goes. and and again, thanks thanks to staff and thanks to people that were communicating for us and trying to explain what we were doing there. Um, [clears throat] again, appreciate all of that and thanks to the public for saying via your vote what you think. We will listen. Um I do think the stuff that was shared earlier we need to move forward on uh with the study on consolidation and those things. Um that's all I have.

Okay, Stacy. I don't have anything. Okay. Um Oh, no. I'm I'm moving on. Please. No, Stacy, please. Nope. Next. She said no twice. We're moving. I did go to the otter's birthday party. Okay, there we go. There were cupcakes. It was great. It was really fun and really cute. [laughter]

Yeah. I So, I don't have much either. I just want to thank staff um for everything they've done uh getting towards this election. I want to thank all the community members that reached out, all the conversations we have. Um I felt like we had a lot of really good conversations about stuff that people were confused about, uh that I think people got the information they were looking for, whether that changed their vote or where they voted yes or no. Um, but it was a good conversation just to get transparency to our community members. And again, we're open still to [cough] if anyone wants to have conversation, we are here. We'll have that conversation um about anything that goes on in our community. That's what we're here for and that's who we represent as the members and citizens of Hutchinson. Um and I do want to encourage everyone on March 11th um the um the deal that chamber's putting on stringer fine arts about data centers um it's surrounding our community um conversations are being had um about data centers everywhere um so I think it's something that our community needs needs to become aware of um so when that um I guess it comes through our front door we have a a basically an aware an awareness of what what we're looking at or what what to expect. So anyway, March 11th, Stringer Fine Arts. Um I would I would like to see as many people as we can get there. Um and then I think that's all I have and Mr. Enrio is gone tonight. Um and then Paul um we need to have an executive session.

If we do it will be very brief. What do you want ahead? You want five minutes? Three minutes. I'm thinking 10 minutes. 10 minutes. So, uh, I need a motion to recess into executive session pursuant to the confidential data pertaining to financial affairs or trade secrets of corporations, partnerships, trust, and individual individual proprietorships. Exception KSA75-4319B4 in order to discuss financial affairs of a private sector entity. the open meeting to resume in the city council chambers at 7:04 p.m. Is that a motion? Yes. Second. Tran. Yes. Garza. Yes. Goss. Yes. Bass.

Yes. Makers. Yes.

[music] [music]

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

[music]

Heat. Heat. N.

[music] [music]

[music] [music]

Heat. Hey, Heat. Good.

Move to adjourn. Second. Yes. Yes. Yes. Can't write that fast. Druan. Yes. Garza. Yes. Goss. Yes. Fast. Yes. Meggers. Yes. Thank you for coming.