City Council - Regular Meeting

to tonight's city council meeting on August 10, 2026. Roll call, please.

Brewster? Here. Walters? Here. Rourke? Here. Ewer? Here. Parton? Here. Myers? Here. Thompson?

All right, tonight's invocation will be given by Travis McGee, First Christian Church.

Good evening. Will you join me in an attitude of prayer? God of grace, we lift up to you tonight our police and first responders who are in an active situation. We ask for a peaceful resolution. We ask for hope to prevail. Lord, we come before you asking tonight for a spirit of patience and peace as we listen to each other. A spirit of discernment and guidance for those who are making decisions. and an attitude of care and support for all of those who are in Hayesville. We trust in your grace. We trust in your peace to be our hope. We ask all this in your name. Amen.

I'd call Brent Black up here. He's the mayor of the Mayor's Youth Leadership Council to start us off with a pledge of allegiance.

and justice for all.

All right, so tonight we have a special order of business. I can recognize the Mayor's Youth Leadership Council. We have several members here tonight. We have 16 total, but I think a couple could not make it tonight. So I'm going to ask them to introduce themselves. You'll hear from the officers and the rest of the Mayor's Youth Leadership Council. Go ahead, Rick.

Hi, I'm Brent Black. I'm the mayor of the Mariners Youth Leadership Council. I'm a senior and this is going to be my fourth year on the NYLC.

Hello, my name is Zoe Port and I will be serving as vice mayor for the Mariners Youth Leadership Council. This is my second year and I will be a junior.

I'm Kylie Chan. I am serving as the secretary of the Mayor's Youth Leadership Council this year. I will be a junior and this is my first year. I'm Scylla Harold. I'm the treasurer. I'm a senior and this will be my fourth year.

I'm Zachary Thompson. I'm going to be a sophomore and this is my first year.

I'm Gloria Thorberg. I'm going to be a sophomore and this is my second year.

I'm Griffin Mortensen. I'm going to be a senior, and this is my first year.

I'm Kamri Huff. I'm going to be a junior, and this is my third year.

I'm Hadley Bain. I'm going to be a junior, and this is my third year.

I'm Paxton Bain. I'm a sophomore, and this is my second year.

I'm Kimber Huff. This is my second year, and I'm going to be a sophomore.

My name is Jocelyn Faust. This is my fourth year and I'm going to be a senior this year.

I am Bryson Welch. I am a freshman and this will be my first year on the NYLC.

I definitely want to welcome the Bay Area City Leadership Council to tonight's meeting. The department will save the whole meeting. It could be a long meeting, but of course you are more than welcome to stay if you like. I know we have a lot on our agenda tonight. But I just want to welcome them. And it's just important for our students to be involved with government and learn how government works at all levels, local, county, state, federal. So thank you for being here tonight and showing an interest in government. Thank you. All right, we will move on to our next item, which is the presentation and approval of minutes. Minutes of July 13th, 2026. That's the person for it.

Make a motion. Make a motion we approve the minutes as presented.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes of July 13th, 2026. Is there any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Martin? Yes. Clother? Yes. Martin? Yes. Myers?

Yes. All right, next up we have public comment. A, we have Emily from Parents as Teachers regarding getting the head program. Welcome.

Hi, thanks for having me. And I definitely am from Parents as Teachers, but I am representing as a community member tonight. The Getting Ahead class that we're having is a community class and being done by volunteers. Pastor Travis and I are actually partners in this. So the Getting Ahead class that is going to be held, we already have funding and we're taking applications, so it is going to happen. August 25th is our start date, and it is a class for any individual who wants to take a look at their current resources and where they might want to make a change, hence the name Getting Ahead. Taking a step forward or getting out of a place where they might feel stuck in life. So this class is 16 weeks long. Each participant who attends the class receives a free family meal, free childcare, and a $25 stipend for coming. We will take up to 15, and we have just a few spots left to fill here at the last part before we get started on the 25th.

did I forget anything lots of things no I mean it's we're very hopeful that this class will be something that will benefit the participants that join in we call them investigators because we are investigating together we're diving in and Learning things together. I think even those who are leading the classes, those who are helping volunteer with meals are going to learn something. But we're also hopeful that this is something that benefits our community. This is a community that has a lot to learn, a lot to share with each other, and I think that this really helps to show people that they're not alone. they do not have to stay stuck where they're at, but there is a community that can be a great resource and a good support for what's going on. We're very hopeful with what this is going to be and hope to see this program continue for many years to come.

let me tell you it's an uphill climb getting something started for the very first time uh but uh we're excited to get it started now like you said the hope with the hope of continuing you know every year um getting the word out being our first class under our belt and get some word of mouth to spread just um what a wonderful experience it was um hopefully and then or it will be and um Yeah, we're going to meet at the First Christian Church and use their beautiful facility that they have. And that's it. Does anybody have questions?

Not really a question, but I just want to thank both of you for being involved in our community and being champions for those in our community. I think this is a great program I heard about a while back, and I'm excited to

I don't see any other questions.

If you do want to apply, we've got some flyers. I'll pass some more around here. And again, talk with us. There's contact info on the flyer. You can also find our Facebook page, which is Getting Ahead Hayesville. All right. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

All right, continuing on with public comment. I'm just going to go into order. We have one person that asked to speak. That's on the agenda. And the rest, I have the cards. I'll just call you up in order as I receive them. So you'll have three minutes to talk about whatever you'd like to talk about. And Angie has a timer. So once you get down to one minute, she'll... put the sign up. Alright, the first person is Dusty Stuckey, is that correct? Yeah, when you come up, if you could tell us what your name is and address.

Okay, I'm Dusty Stuckey, I live at 711 Alexander Drive here in Hayesville. I just want to talk about the flock cameras. To be honest, it's all the automated license plate breeders. But I want to talk about flock specifically. And even though it is 2026, it feels like 1984. And for those that have not read it, I highly encourage that you do. I know that the arguments are for safety. And if you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to worry about. But as far as safety, here in Kansas, in 2022, the Keechai Police Lieutenant Victor Javier, I probably butchered that, I apologize, used fog cameras to track his estranged wife. It wasn't detected until she reported her suspicions. That went on for 18 months. Also, former Sedgwick County Police Chief Lee Nagar resigned after admitting he used flock cameras to track his ex girlfriend and her new boyfriend for over four months. Now I'm pretty sure that they probably did not feel safe once they heard what the police chief and center County and teach I were doing as far as if you're not committing any crimes, you don't have anything to worry about. But in Sherwood, Arkansas, A AI camera, it wasn't even blocked, misread a family's SUV plate and thought it was a stolen one. So the family got pulled over while the officers drew guns on them. In Minnesota, a misread or misformatted manufacturer plate caused four police vehicles to box in an innocent automotive journalist, Joel Fetter, all because his Range Rover was reported stolen in California, and the one that he had was all the way in Minnesota. So I'm going to let other people talk because there's plenty of other keys, but these flock cameras do not make me feel safe. They do not make me feel, like I said, a law-abiding citizen. I have nothing to worry about. And does anybody know how many flock cameras we have?

Eight.

Eight. Eight. And how much is the going rate for leasing each one? $2,500. Thank you. So that's a lot of money that might be put elsewhere.

Thank you. Thank you. All right, our next speaker is Robert Cornett.

Robert Cornett, 310 Wire. Been here all my life. I don't like the flock cameras either, just because I've been doing a lot of research on this. One of the research is because in Georgia, here a while back, there was eight police officers fired because they were misusing the flock cameras. I will say this. I think they do bring safety, but I don't think we have enough security in the system right now to be able to stop the people you know we're all human beings we're going to do stupid stuff and I don't think there's enough security in the system to be able to do that and until they do that I think that we should not have the flock cameras in our system the other thing I would say is which everybody else is saying well Derby's got him or Wichita's got him or everybody else has got him we're not Derby we're not Wichita we're Hayesville we all live here we're in a community I don't want somebody looking at me and looking at my tag and telling me everywhere I go. The other thing that I would like to bring up is that geofencing, flock cameras, are on the way of using geofencing, which geofencing can also be used, they use it on cell phones to be able to track people the same way flock cameras did. And just here six months ago, a federal judge in Mississippi said that you can't search thousands of Americans just to stop one. And that's what basically you're doing with these flock cameras. It said, Judge Carlton Reeves in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi said that it is unconstitutional and you cannot do that. Exactly what the flock cameras do. They search and look at other people and watch them all day long just like they could do with the geofencing on the phones. They could do the geofencing on the flock cameras. There's also called an open source intelligence. It doesn't take much to get into an open source intelligence to find somebody's tag and say you did a road rage on somebody, and that person looks up your license tag number, finds out where you live, because it doesn't take much, and come and assault you or even worse, kill you for the road rage you did. I do not like these flock cameras, just because of the things that I've seen. Like the gentleman said about the Sedgwick County Chief of Police, there are just too many things to go wrong with them for us to even have them. And I think we shouldn't do it, even though everybody else is doing it. Thank you very much.

All right, thank you. Next, Daniel Rosendale.

Good evening. Daniel Rosendale, 350 Hillcrest. Just briefly, I want to remind everybody, while we are talking about flock tonight, flock is also known as an ALPR. It is going to be more important to distinguish going forward The issue being ALPR, not necessarily just flock in general. States and cities that have given gone away from flock are seeing Axon and Motorola and other companies like that come in as well. Same technology, sometimes even more stringent in what they do and track. A review of cases for my July talk. We covered Carpenter v. U.S. 2018, Commonwealth v. McCarthy in 2020, and Chattree v. U.S. in 2026. Tonight I'll be discussing what's called a mosaic problem or aggregation of data. Aggregation of data is an idea that you take individual pieces of information and while each individual piece may be innocent, may be a name, may be a birthday, may be this or that, you can combine all of those things to gain a larger and better picture of that individual And as a whole, when you start combining hundreds of thousands, if not tens of millions of points, I think it was 20 million or 20 billion scans, even in a month, that we're starting to see. Those data points can be used to attach the license plate data, damage on a vehicle, color on a vehicle, stickers on a vehicle, all of that. Flock cameras are now being able to track Bluetooth information and grab the Bluetooth signals, Wi-Fi signals. You get all of that attached to the license plate of your vehicle. That is put into a database that has been compromised. already and that database is, all of that collected is gonna be able to be searchable for those people intending harm. Just further, we had USV Maynard in 2010 and a quote from that was that, 28 days of GPS tracking data create a picture about movement no realistic person could obtain. 2018, Chief Justice Roberts also held, a person maintains a legitimate and reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of their movement, even through each individual movement, even though each individual movement happened in public. What that sounds like is not hundreds of thousands of data points being utilized to create a public profile, searchable without a warrant, without protections. If you guys are going to insist on continuing with the use of these, we need warrants, we need protections for your everyday citizen or there's going to be further and more problems than what we already have seen and already been talked about this evening. All right, thank you. Thank you.

All right, next we have... John T. Eichelberger. Thank you.

Rescue. Yeah. 568 Caleb, North Caleb. I've got a lot to say. I have a little time to say it, and I have MS, so I'll read my nationwide surveillance cameras. Hayesville is paying $20,000 to cover eight cameras for one year. Flock cameras are AI-powered camera systems. attacked a car, stolen. Officers swarmed the car with guns drawn. Five occupants, two female adults, kids 17, 12, and 6. Police had them lay face down on the hot pavement. handcuffed the 17 and 12 year old, AI misread their Colorado SUV tag as a similar number stolen in Montana as a motorcycle plate. Police finally figured that out and that they got it all wrong, but not before AI or all occupants were severely traumatized. The six year old reportedly is still asking police if the police are going to show up to shoot her for no reason. This mistake resulting in a multi-million dollar settlement, which is what we could have for a wrongful arrest in this city. This is not an isolated incident, it's happening all over the country. Flock advises a 10% error in their technology. This can happen from a single alert that happens when you release multiple cameras across Hayesville or potentially thousands of cameras across the Wichita metropolitan area. How many cameras are too many? Where does it stop? Is it in your front yard? These cameras don't belong to the police. Police call it safer streets, which It's debatable. It is a database that all of you are, it is a database of all of your driving history which can be searched by police or anyone other than the flock partners up with. Police or any other organization flock partners up with, all without a warrant or without consent. So who is using them? Flock now serves 48,000 or 4,800 law enforcement agencies, nearly 1,000 businesses across major retailers and health care systems. Private companies from account for about 30% of its revenue Police, police, sheriff, big box retailers, shopping malls, homeowners associations, schools, to name a few. I'll skip down one more thing. Go ahead. Pardon me? Yeah, one more thing. Okay, yeah. Landmark carpenter versus United States public. uh... court ruled long-term tracking of individual movements through a cell phone violated their privacy specifically said the police accessing the detail they detailed days or weeks long of someone's location provides an intimate window into a person's life, revealing not only the particular movements, but through them, familiar political, professional, religious, and sexual associations, such that these records hold many Americans' privacies of life. And I've got a lot more, but I ran out of time.

All right, next we have Ron Hartwell.

Hartwell. Hartwell. 222 Champion Street. I guess my reason for opposing them is that in another town we lived at, camera did the same thing. They recorded a front picture and the license plate. And they claimed the lady was in there with somebody else. and they almost went through a divorce. But in the court, they found out they didn't have a good camera reading. So I'm opposed to this because we're just trying to live our peaceful life and what you guys are gonna do with this is get in there and mess everything up and it was after that, and I testified against that at the time too, but it was after that And the big lawsuit that they got, they took the cameras down. I'd hate to see Hayesville be involved in a huge lawsuit over a stupid camera.

Thank you. Next we have Elaine Chaffee.

Is that how you pronounce it? Eileen Chaffee, 233 Stewart Avenue. I'm opposed to it because... we should all have the, we're not automatically guilty. We are supposed to be guilty until, we're not supposed to be guilty until proven innocent. We're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. And this feels like we're already guilty of living. That's all I have to say.

Thank you. What about Eli Rubin?

Hi, so I'm Eli Reda at 5.9 South Sherry Circle. And similar to everybody else here, I'm not really a big fan of these mass surveillance cameras. Right now we're speaking about flock, but it also applies to the Exxon variant. For me, and it's... I work in the technology field. I specifically work in the security technology field. So I understand how useful it is to have these kind of tools. I deploy similar things when I'm doing forensic analysis with SQL servers or other Windows and Linux servers that I work with. The problem is that being on that side of things, it's very easy to see how you can abuse the mass surveillance system. In fact, all you ever have to do is want to find a reason someone is doing something wrong and then find a reason to justify it, which is what I feel happens with these cameras a lot. People have given a lot of examples here, so I'm just going to kind of skip over that. think what I really don't like about the the flock system right now is that they don't make it easy to audit in fact recently my understanding is that this summer flock actually made it harder to be able to audit the systems by redacting officer names or excuses for why they had access these cameras there's actually the biggest case that I saw recently was in happened this month in I lost it. But it happened in Texas where they suspected a woman of having an abortion. thousand cameras and that just seems like a really big invasion. Eventually it was deemed unconstitutional from the Illinois side but it seems crazy to me that if you're a citizen of one state and you break the law according to them in another state maybe you go to Colorado and you know buy marijuana or you do get an abortion like this woman did and then you get prosecuted when you get back that seems crazy to me. I really don't like that. The Flock CEO actually recently called the Flock a terrorist organization. He later retracted it when there was some pushback on it. But the fact that the CEO would feel comfortable in saying that and not even redacting it until later seems crazy to me. So for me, it's fundamentally a question of trust. Flock makes it really hard to get these records. Police departments generally necessarily ours makes it really hard to get any of these records and my understanding is Kansas is making it harder to even do freedom of information requests now and that just makes me less more nervous about something like this going into practice so the only thing I want to say in closing is is that if we're gonna spend all this money in cameras I'd much rather just use it to hire extra police officers and let them you know do the legwork instead of instead of taking away people yeah money

Next we have Chris Eisler.

Howdy, my name is Chris Eisler. I live at 221 North Moycourt. A lot of my fellow citizens here have pretty much already covered all the things I have in mind, so I'm going to ad hoc this. I do want to say that I believe that a lot of us here do trust our police officers. And like the last person talking, yeah, I want to piggyback on that. If we're going to spend this kind of money on flat cameras and surveillance, more police officers, more on duty, I think would be a better use of our money. The other one too is, is what I'm uncomfortable with. This is that we are actually handling, we're giving this data about all of us driving around the city in which song to that. A technology company is one that has data governance overall with us. And my belief that the city of Hayesville should be in control of that data. And if. Police station really deems these things necessary. There are other alternatives out there that keeps other police departments, other agencies from being able to get into our data automatically. And our own city would be in control of that system. So I'll leave it at that.

Those are our last speaker that signed up to speak. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak?

I don't have a speech prepared this time like last time, but I just wanted to go over a couple things that other people did. Like, for example. Could you tell us your name again, please? Oh, yeah. I'm Tobias Wilson. I'm from 5 East Spencer Drive. One of the things I wanted to talk about was I hear a lot of people talking about other cities that do have flawed cameras, such as Wichita and Derby, but I don't see a lot of people bring up how Mulvane, you know, it's a city that's pretty close by, and they actually haven't adopted flawed cameras, and their police department has been pretty vocal about how they don't, how they refuse to accept the contract with flawed cameras, and I think... They've been doing well. I don't think they've needed Flock. And they're a pretty similar town to us. And I just thought it was a good example of how not having a Flock camera isn't really an issue. And I just thought we could follow suit with Mulvane and stuff and kind of be an example of you don't need these cameras. We can do without them. So thank you guys. All right, thank you.

Any other members like to speak tonight? All right, so this is the last chance we have to speak for public comment. All right, I do appreciate all the speakers speaking tonight. We will move on to item two, approval of licenses and bonds. We have none. Item three, introduction of ordinances and resolutions. an ordinance rezoning real property located within the city of Hazelville Kansas and admitting the official zoning map or maps of the city to reflect such amendment all pursuant to the zoning regulations of the city good evening mayor and council before you is a zone change from light commercial to

to single family. I'll wait just a second. This is for property generally located at 510 West Grand. On July 23rd, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the zone change as presented. The property owner is here tonight and I can stand for questions as well.

Do any council members have any questions? signals all right that's the first part there's nobody has any questions I make a motion we approve the zoning change second we have a motion and a second to approve the zoning change as presented any discussion question please Brewster yes Walters yes Martin yes Clothier yes Martin yes Myers yes Mayer yes Next item B, an ordinance denying a request for rezoning of certain liberal property located within the city of Hayesville, Kansas.

So this is another zone change. Instead, it's light commercial to heavy commercial for property generally located at the northwest corner of 79th and Broadway. We had multiple community members attend the public hearing on July 23rd requesting that the zone change be denied. They cited concerns about property values, heavy business use, well water contamination, flooding, public nuisances, loss of farmland, and foot traffic to Dorner Park. So the Planning Commission did recommend denial of the zone change. We also had a protest petition submitted last week. So if you want to override Planning Commission's recommendation and go for approval of the zone change, you'll need a super majority or seven votes. But to approve Planning Commission's recommendation, you'll just need a simple majority.

Councilman Byers.

Kaylin, so just to be clear, this is not what was intended to be pushed through, that the business owner is actually going to do a conditional use permit that is still in planning, correct?

They originally applied for the zone change to go to heavy commercial because that's where gas stations are a permitted use. They weren't interested in conditional use at first, but after they heard that there was some public engagement already happening with this zone change, they went ahead and submitted the conditional use.

Oh, so they did proceed with it. Oh, so they are doing conditional use? Yes. And then, so my question was, could I watch the Planning Commission meeting? And it sounded like before we even went into that Planning Commission meeting, before they went in, that they are already kind of Drop the case on it. Why didn't we just stop this process and avoid having to hear it in planning and hear it here? And just continue continue with just the conditional use Jenna. I'm just looking at this from a time aspect of you know the Planning Commission our time Is there is it do we have to put it through? Is that what it was because they filed it they can't say hey, never mind We're gonna pull that

They could have pulled it and rescinded the application. They didn't suggest that that's what they wanted to do.

It wasn't until the planning meeting that you heard about that, I guess?

Yeah. They wanted to see if the zone change, as far as my communication with the applicant is, they wanted to see if the zone change would get approved and if not, the conditional use was the backup.

Okay. That makes sense. All right. Thank you.

Justice Person Horton.

If there's no other questions, I make a motion. We approve the denial of the zone change.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the denial of the zone change as presented. Any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Vernon? Yes. Clother? Yes. Hartman? Yes. Myers? Yes. Mayer?

Yes. All right, next we have item C, an ordinance amending and restating chapter 16A, the zoning regulations of the city of Hayesville, Kansas, and amending the official zoning map or maps of the city to reflect such amendments. All pursuant to the zoning regulations of the city.

So these amendments were first presented to you guys on July 13th. but then ultimately sent back to the Planning Commission for further review so staff could continue to look at the interpretations of SB 418. At the time, we had interpreted the bill to require that all land zoned for any type of residential use be also zoned for single family and two family. We've now decided that it'll just be zoned for single family. So we've made changes to Article 4, the general regulations, and then Article 5 and Article 6, and then also that appendix for the by-right housing. Generally, the changes were to all references to two-family being allowed in all residential and mixed-use zoning districts. Planning Commission recommended approval as presented on July 23rd, and I can stand for questions.

Any questions for Caitlin? Councilman Myers?

I wanted to reopen up discussion because there wasn't really any response from the council on my comments last month in regards to the borders around the all-weather surface? Is everybody in council just in agreement that they want this? Do we understand what I'm talking about? Because from what I'm seeing, it's not being applied. Like no one's, and this is for gravel, you know, gravel driveways, gravel lots that are mostly industrial, requiring a border around it. and i thought it was just kind of an arbitrary rule that was made up that's not the chad our our city inspector is not in enforcing it our zoning enforcement is not enforcing it nobody has it and i mean i don't see why it's in our zoning so is this something that we want to keep and i'm just opposed to it or is this something that we just don't care about or what

Where does that add in here?

So 320A, and it's been in the, this isn't new, this has been in our code for a while. So it's saying that all weather surface shall require borders installed around all four sides extending three to four inches above ground and not to impede drainage i mean your driveway doesn't have that your driveway doesn't have a curve around it so i just don't understand why we have something in our code that is not practiced or enforced any council members have any thoughts if we're not forcing it there's no reason to have it any other input so I WOULD, DO I HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION? CAN WE GET THAT AMENDED AND REMOVED, THAT SECTION REMOVED? DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT OR?

WELL, I THINK WE WOULD WANT IT CLEANED UP.

YEAH.

I mean, if that's the desire of the council.

I do have other things, because we're not doing like last time where we're going live. Okay, so the other little thing was 302G. While we're on the topic, before I move on, does anybody else have any other input on it? No. 302G governing body, the mayor and the city council and the city of Hayesville. I believe that the mayor and city council should be uppercase. We're correcting it to be the city of Hayesville to be uppercase. And this is addressing, it's using the mayor and the city council as like, right? Correct their nouns or whatever, like where it should be uppercase, right? I think.

I'd have to open up a graphic. Okay.

So yeah, 302G was that. And then on 404, which is 116 of the agenda, hang on one second. Yeah, so on 404, so that whole zoning districts chart, can we get it to where each page has the use type at the top because like if you're on you know three pages down and you're trying to decipher the chart you got to go back four pages to look at what the legend is yeah so can we do that And then also I noticed that the retail fulfillment center, which I am one, right, it's like a .com website fulfillment, is in the table, or it's not in the table. We have a description, right, but it's not in the zoning use authorization chart.

It's underneath commercial at the bottom of the page. It's third from the bottom.

Third from the bottom. Okay, I didn't see it. Okay. And then... I talked about it before. I don't know if this is, agricultural processing, it really needs to be updated that it should be expanded to canning, drying. I think it has something, I forget what it had in agriculture processing, but it was something that's not really happening. I mean, most agricultural processing happening in Kansas is gonna be like drying, canning, I guess what I do at my facility. But yeah, so at minimum, I would say the governing body thing needs to be updated. the 404D, page 116, all that table. And then if, unless somebody is against this, remove the part about two to three inches above the ground. So far we have Councilwoman Parton is for removing it. I don't see anybody against it Unless you guys would like to voice out but um Yeah, so I would make a motion to send it back to you planning for those Corrections which would be removing the two to three inch requirement We can't send it back if you want to make a motion to make revisions Okay, just need to make a motion and describe what okay? I would make a motion to make revisions that would include um oh so we're just gonna we can just amend it it's already since it's already been back now it's time for you guys to make a decision so we can make changes to it

amendment or you can approve it with amendments okay and if you want to approve it with amendments i recommend making the motion for those amendments and if it passes have the amendments made so we can have the written ordinance back in front of you at the next meeting so so to be clear make a motion just for the amendments first or do it all together um i would make a motion including the amendments that you want made okay um Okay.

Uh, so I would make a motion to make amendments to the, um, proposition as, as presented, but with these amendments of removing the two to three inch above ground and not to impede drainage requirement for all other surfaces. Give where it's at. In 320A and wherever all weather surface is mentioned. And then on 302G, just uppercase, the mayor and city council. And then on page 116, the use chart, it just needs the use type at the top of each page. Additionally, that was it. Yeah, that's all I have that's really written out.

So that's the motion. I think for, like, mayor and city council, if it puts a title before someone's name, I think it's capitalized. But other than that, I don't think it is.

But it's talking to them. It's defining the governing body. It would still be capitalized. It's making.

Is there a second? Second.

Council Member Brewster. So on the tables on page 116, you're talking about the actual chart you want, not on the top of the page, but on the chart you want it broke out. So that you can read it, right? Is that what I'm understanding? Yeah.

So if you go to 116, right, it has that use type with the SF-15, SF-3. Yeah. That should also be on every page after that, right? It's just so you don't have to go to the first page to read.

No, I see what you're saying. So, yeah, okay.

Yeah, I got what you're saying. Okay.

Yeah, I have a question on that three-inch lip that you're talking about. I just don't understand. Why did we put that in there? What's the value of it? What would happen if we take it out?

This all-weather surface was a pretty big point of discussion with the Planning Commission as well. I was not able to find where we got that code language. And with discussions with Public Works and the Code Enforcement Officers, we decided to leave it in. Since it isn't something we enforce proactively with development, I'm not sure how much of an impact removing it would have. I know we like the depth of inches for code enforcement so that if someone isn't compliant, they can tell them exactly what they're supposed to have.

Okay. So I guess I'm wondering, as Council Member Meyer says, we're not enforcing it. But there was a value that we could show that they needed this but we don't care if it's enforced or I mean What's the I I'm back?

I'm a little confused that in the all-weather surface There's a depth that you need to have for the gravel councilmember Myers was talking about this border That's supposed to be elevated above the surface of the ground Retain all the all the gravel or whatever you have for all their surface. It was already in the code and It was left in the code by the Planning Commission, but now the amendment is to take that portion out. But then we'll still have the depth of the gravel that constitutes an all-weather surface. So just removing the requirement to have a board that's above the ground level.

So it would be a move point. Nothing would happen if we just took it out. That's what you're saying.

It would take it out. We're not enforcing it now, so it's no big deal. Thank you.

Any other discussion? Angie, could you read back the motion?

I have a motion to move the two to three inches, remove the two to three inches above the ground in section 320A, 302G, uppercase the mayor and the city council member, to on the use chart on top of each page, make sure it's included in I'm calling second with that.

So I don't think it was to remove the two to three inches. It was to remove the border.

The border, yeah.

Angie, the motion referenced 320A, it's in section 302A.

Oh, I typoed it?

Yeah, just for clarification, I assume that as you're asking for these modifications that the underlying is that we're going to approve the changes with the exception of this, because I didn't hear that. Is that right?

It's going to approve, yeah, we're going to approve this and then add these amendments to it. And then it won't go back to planning, it will just be approved. Okay, so the motion is to approve with these exceptions. Yes. Got it.

All right, any other discussion?

So just for clarification, the motion is to approve. Approve the ordinance with the revisions to remove the border above the ground level in 302A, 302G, to make mayor and city council uppercase, and to put the use chart titles on top of each page.

Yes.

Yes.

All right, so we have a motion and a second. No further discussion. All right, question please. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Next is item D, resolution waiving the gap requirements of KSA 75-1120 alpha for the city of Haysville, Kansas. So this is an annual resolution that will be passed every year. If anybody has any questions or if anybody would like to make a motion to approve.

Councilor Walters. I make a motion we approve waiving the gap requirements as listed in section D. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the resolution waiving the gap requirements as presented. Any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Martin? Yes. Hogan? Yes. Martin? Yes. Miner?

Yes.

All right, next item four, notices of communications, a governing body announcements. Anybody have any announcements? Councilman Brewster?

Sorry about that. I was pulling it up. I had another email open.

Let's see. What's going on at the library? is uh friday august 14th at 4 p.m bring your favorite cuddle friend to our stuffed animal sleepover for children's ages 2 through 12. wednesday august 19th 4 to 6 p.m come build and create have fun with the lego club thursday august 27th at 5 30 p.m is a friends of the library board meeting then thursday august 27th at 7 p.m is the library board meeting and that's all i have for the library all right thank you any other members

All right, so from some of the senior center announcements, the exploration place outing is on August 11th. Commodity is August 19th. Mobile market is on August 27th. And the senior center dinner is on August 28th. Some ongoing programs, coffee and conversation, games, crafts, bingo, bunco, exercise classes, All-Hamburg support group, and line dancing. And talking to the senior center staff, It's also where the Hayesville Food Bank is. They do need some food donations. They're extremely low on, they put a list out, but it's pancake mix, the syrup, canned meat, chicken, tuna, and beef, canned chili, jars of Jail Deer Jam, boxed meals such as hamburger, tuna helper, Velveeta dishes, home-style bakes. oatmeal, cereal, canned fruit, ramen noodles, macaroni and cheese, and Chef Boyardee ravioli and spaghettios. Some of the things they have overabundance of and don't really need at this time are canned vegetables, canned beans, soups like tomato, cream of chicken, et cetera. So if you could support the Senior Center by donating to the Hayesville Food Bank, it would be good. All right, we will move on to item B, Sedgwick County Fire Department Station 34, monthly report. It's in your packet.

I'm just going to bring that up just because we had a resident here in Hazel that passed away due to a house fire. He was smoking on oxygen, so I just want our residents to be aware of that. I don't know if the smoke detectors were working or not. I do know that they took care of the fire pretty quickly. Central County Fire Department, Wichita Fire Department, McConnell, Central County EMS, and then our police officers did a

someone passed away thank you yeah there are there are options for free smoke detectors I don't do which stop fire the county Red Cross yep I don't know if there's smoke in that instance or not beforehand probably not if it's explosion All right, item five is old business, a consideration of an agreement with Christopher Davis regarding the court probation services. Josh.

Yeah, so I know there were questions about Mr. Davis' contract. Chief and I, I'm glad Chief popped in there. We met with Chris, kind of went through sort of his duties and stuff. I think some of the confusion, interrupt me, Chief, if I'm wrong here, is that Chris had had a partner for a number of years. had an old contract with the city his partner is now retired so he's kind of taken over that role so i think chief and i are confident now as far as the information that we kind of share with him sort of his duties with the city and that sort of thing you know the discussion about the specific fee that he had you know asked to be paid was that he works for a number of small communities and sometimes there isn't any work involved with him showing up to court just kind of cover his gas that. So I recommend we go ahead and move forward. I think he's a worthwhile asset in the city and I'll pass it on to the chief if he has any comments.

Yeah, no, we were, we were fine with everything. Once we, we verified what was going on, we updated that contract. It was actually from several years ago updated it with the new names and everything and made sure with him that the fees are the same that everything was good with that and then we added the extra in there that he'd been asking for so we were both okay with it josh and i and he was also very relieved that we got everything all straightened out all in one contract now so we're not looking at two different pieces of paper does gulf have any questions

Council Member Ward?

There's another question. I make a motion to the contract for the probation court for Christopher Davis. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the agreement with Christopher Davis regarding the court probation services. Any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters?

Yes.

Vernon? Yes. Cloutier? Yes. Martin? Yes. Myers?

Yes. All right. Next, we have Item B, Walk Camera Discussion. Chief.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I apologize for not being here earlier. I'm going to get an active As you know, this was already on the agenda during the last meeting. Um, it was pulled back at that time. Um, this is just something that we just need to get taken care of. Um, there's a lot of misinformation floating out there, so we wanted to make sure that we get, um, the correct information out there. Um, I'll start off by saying that the information that I'm going to give is for the city of Hayesville. I don't have jurisdictional responsibility as the chief for anywhere else. Not Wichita, not Sedgwick County, not some other agency in the state. I'm worried about the city of Hayesville, Hayesville Police Department, Hayesville Citizens. So we'll start off by saying that. We have a presentation here. We'll get Alan to put it up there. So basically what we're going to talk about is we're going to talk about the flock use in Hayesville, Kansas. Again, we're talking about here, not everywhere else. Next slide, please. So the proposal, this was not something that just came about that we just decided to do. This was done February 14, 2022. Council meeting proposal outlined installing eight flock cameras in the city to capture images of vehicles coming into the city at no other locations in the city except for the ones coming in. These cameras would assist the police department as a force multiplier and help us locating stolen vehicles, trailers, other equipment, as well as assist in finding missing or endangered persons, dangerous individuals, fugitives, things like that. The council approved that proposal with a vote of 7-1. Over the course of the next six to eight months, all the necessary permits were drawn. Everything was taken care of. They installed the cameras on main thoroughfares entering the city. Flock owns the equipment. The city owns the data. That was established through contract. Through the network, we do share information obtained from our cameras with certain law enforcement agencies in Kansas and some other departments outside the state if there are circumstances that dictate that. The connections are considered on a case-by-case basis after an agency requests access. We don't just give blanket access to anybody. They have to request that access. They have to ask for it. And usually, if it is someplace that's not local or someplace out of state, there has to be an ongoing case involved with that that we'll look at on a case-by-case basis and decide, OK, is this something ongoing that we may need to see their cameras or they may need to see ours? We wait a period of time. If we haven't heard from them and the case is taken care of, the case is done, will actually revoke that access at that time. The yearly cost of the cameras, a total of $20,000, is paid from the general fund. The cost covers the use of the equipment, repairs and updates, storage of the data. They've always had good customer service with us as well if there are any issues come up, which we haven't really had any the entire time we've been up there. I don't know if you can read that in the red down there. In Hayesville, policy dictates that any information in the system is considered to be criminal justice information. just as any other personal identifiers on people or property that employees have access to. This would include like driver's licenses, tag information, if we run a tag, if we run if somebody has warrants, those kind of things. Records from other agencies, all those things are considered criminal justice information and restrictive. There's strict civil and criminal procedures and penalties for those if they violate those and the information is misused. Now, the other side of that is that's the civil and criminal part of that. If I find that we have an employee that abuses the system or misuses it, I'll fire them. There's no if, and, or but about it. They're going to get fired for misusing information. And that goes for any of that driver's licenses, tags, the flock system, or other information that we might have access to. Next slide, please. Okay, so what exactly does it do? This is where we've kind of run into some problems lately with... There's definitely some misinformation out there about what it does. Now keep in mind, there may be other technology out there, there may be other companies, there may be other cameras out there that do different things. Talking about Hazel. The equipment that we have takes a picture of a vehicle at one point in time at a one fixed location. We don't drive up and down the streets with these cameras attached to our cars like some other agencies do. These are at a fixed location within the city monitoring vehicles coming into the city. Public streets also say that. Cameras are designed to cover one to two lanes of traffic within a very short distance from the camera to capture those passing vehicles. Those vehicles that we're capturing are capturing the vehicles and their tag numbers. The software reads license plates, partial license plates, It discovers vehicle make or model, color, special features of vehicles like spoilers or things like that, not special features of what kind of engine it's got or anything else. It doesn't tell us that. We're just looking for special features on the vehicles. If it has a toolbox in the back, if it's pulling a trailer, those kind of things. It should be noted that these reads are good but not 100% accurate, and it's also in our policy that they have to be verified by officers in the field. We can't just go out there, get a flock hit, and go, oh boy, we've got to stop that car and see what's going on with it. That's not how it works. It's got to be verified by an officer. It also happens that, I mean, running a tag, you can run a tag and have the wrong tag number. Somebody can transpose a number or a letter. Somebody can see a Frank as an Edward on there and an F as an E on a tag and call it in wrong. Mistakes happen. We're human. I'm telling you, the system's not 100% easy. That's why it has to be verified by a human. We have to see it, and we have to know. We're not just going to arrest somebody off of a hit from Flock. That would be irresponsible, honestly. Software also checks the tag number against the NCIC, which is our National Crime Information Center files, as well as for Amber Alerts through the NCMEC, or the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Officers that are logged into the system get an alert that a vehicle may require further investigation. Those are the ones that are logged into it that are out on the street at that time. Uh, since it is a network, as opposed to a standalone system, departments are able to share information and keep officers in our communities as a whole safer. A networking is key to solving crimes. We're really close to Wichita right now. The call that we're out on, there's a highway patrol. There's the sheriff's department. There's a Wichita police department, the Hayesville police department. We're all out there together because we're all responsible for a jurisdiction that all runs into each other. We're all dealing with the same people in the same streets and the same cars. So understand that networking is key. You can't do something by yourself. You've got to have your partners there with you. The system then holds our information for 30 days to allow officers to make an inquiry on the details of a vehicle in case they find that that vehicle was in a crime to help us build a case. For example, if Billy's over at the park and there's somebody over there taking pictures of him and Billy doesn't like that and Billy's thinking, that's not right. Somebody's taking pictures of me in the park. which is your right under the Constitution, your First Amendment right. You can go take pictures wherever you want to at the park. But Billy doesn't like it. It doesn't make him comfortable. But most of the time what happens is Billy forgets about it. He goes home, and then the next day he tells his mom, there's this creepy old guy taking pictures of us at the park. His mom immediately calls the police, calls us, tells us what's going on. Then we can try to go back and ask Billy, well, what about that car? Will it have bumper stickers on it? We can go try to check the system because it's going to hold that information for 30 days. If we've gone out there, we might have caught that car at that time, but a lot of times the kids don't say anything to us. And I'm just using this as an example of how this ends up helping us. But we can go back, we can take partial tag numbers. To give you an example, we had one where we had a guy that was innocently passing out Bibles and money to kids walking home from school. We got a call, said hey, this guy's not doing this stuff, that's really creepy, that's not good, that's suspicious. And we agree with you, that's suspicious, we wanna know why this guy's doing that. We go out there, run the tag, the tag doesn't come back to anything, the one that we were given doesn't come back to anything. We put it in the flock as a partial tag number, and then we find a vehicle that matches that description at that time coming into the city. That way we can go back and investigate it. Again, we're not going to do anything just because that tag number hit the block. We're going to go out there because we're humans. We're cops. That's our job is to investigate things. We're going to go out there to that location. We're going to ask the guy, hey, what's going on? We had some people say that you were handing out money and Bibles to kids. What's up with that? The guy says, oh, yeah, I just do that when I'm home. I'm an over-the-road trucker, and that's what I do. OK, I tell him, well, it's not a real good idea because you're creeping people out, and people are getting upset about it. might might be good just to not do it but in that case did it solve a crime not necessarily because it's not a crime to go take tear or take pictures of people but at the same time it's helping our community feel safer because now we know who this person is we know where this person lives if something does happen and they say well yeah they were in this car with these bumper stickers on it now next time we know that might be where to go start Again, it's not a know-all, end-all, but it does help us out. So that's what it does. Now let's talk about what it does not do. Next slide, please. Oh, there we go. It's been a long afternoon, sorry. Okay, so what it does not do, it does not detect or record people. I put in most cases in there because in most cases it will not detect or record people. We had a recent case on a domestic violence where the victim was trying to jump out of the car as it passed the flock camera. Well, guess what? It caught her on the video hanging out of the car trying to get out of the car going 50 miles an hour down Broadway. Yeah, we have her on video, so I can't tell you it does not detect or record people because at times it does. But it's not going to take a picture of a person by themselves. There has to be some other other reason in there that's doing that Doesn't have any facial recognition components System does not check your tag through DMV or license doesn't we don't know who's driving Doesn't get your personal information. You can't see the driver can't see the passengers again unless they're hanging into the car and It doesn't detect your gender, your race, or other personal identifiers. It doesn't detect, connect, or record cell phones or other electronic devices in the car for the driver or any passengers or anybody else in there. It cannot detect vehicle speeds, step-by-step travel routes, traffic infractions, or final destinations. In fact, we've had several people in the last couple months ask us if we will put up more cameras in town because they're concerned with speeding drivers, speeding down their streets, and they want to get them identified, they want to get them ticketed. Well in Kansas, our statutes don't have any provisions for issuing citations for traffic violations by camera. So that's not gonna happen. If somebody tells you they got a traffic ticket from a flock camera, that's not accurate. That didn't happen. Not in Hayville. Okay, next slide please. Okay, so successes in case charging. This one's a little more difficult because, again, as I just described the other situation to you, FLOC is a tool. It's not an end-all to solve criminal cases. Because of that, assigning an exact number, exactly how many cases to solve would be nearly impossible. As officers, they probably need to do a better job of notating that somewhere, putting some hash marks down when this stuff happens so that that way we have them documented. But not all of them do. It'll usually end up in a report somewhere and going back through Case narratives, we're on case number 6565 right now, which is 6,565 cases for this year. So to go back through that many cases and look at narratives and to say, well, how many times do we use flock on this? That would be really difficult and really time consuming. We do know in Hayesville this year alone, we've recorded several stolen vehicles and recovered them. We've cleared multiple warrants. We've solved hit and run cases where vehicles have been run into and then somebody drives off. We've used information from the system to assist us in apprehension of suspects in domestic violence cases. Again, it's a tool. It's not anything that's going to solve every crime that we have. Without the hard work of the officers taking the case, the networking involved with other agencies, these crimes are going to be much tougher to solve. Cameras also act as a deterrent. As an example, in retail stores, which we don't have any of them here in Hayesville that have these, but you'll see at some Lowe's stores and things like that, they may have cameras out there. Criminals know the cameras are there. In some cases, it'll cause them to go elsewhere and commit their crimes. In other cases, they go ahead and commit their crimes, and then that networking between those places and local law enforcement will usually give up some more information, and they're able to catch those and solve those crimes. Okay, now the next few slides that we have, we're going to show you what we see, because it's not a big secret, okay? I'm going to show you what we see. So right up here, you're going to see we followed a patrol car for 24 hours. This is what you see. We're going to pull it up there. And we'll look closer, so you don't have to squint. We'll pull it up and make it a little bit bigger. We'll show you each instance that this patrol car passed a camera because we want you to see what it's showing us. Up here, you see down there in the lower right-hand corner, you see a map of Hayesville. Over there on the left-hand side, we watched this. October, August 2nd at 2 p.m. through August 3rd at 2 p.m. We put the tag number on the car in there. We have this car. We want to see where it's been, so we put the tag number in there. Next slide, Alan. This is what it brings up, that picture right there that you see. Right down there on the bottom tells us where it was. North Main Street, northbound at 71st Street, which is actually right out here at Main and Grand. So it is there. Tells you the date and time. Shows you the picture of the vehicle. You can clearly see the tag number. You can see the stickers on it. You can see that this one has a light bar on it. Things like that. It's a darker picture. It's getting dark outside. You see that. Next slide, Alan. This is in the dark. It went by at, it looks like, 10, 18 p.m. You see the same thing. Now you see this time, well, it's pretty flushed out because you've got the IR hitting a tag and a reflective tag, and that's why some people have sprays and stuff like that that they put on their tags, thinking that they're going to get away with it. Next slide, please. The camera's smarter than that, and it knows, okay, don't put a flash on the next one, and it just takes the picture, and you get it without the flash. That is at the same time, it's just seconds later, it takes the second picture. So again, if you look at any of these pictures that we're going through here, you can't see the driver, you can't see the passenger, you can't see who's in it. You can't tell where they're going, you can't tell where they're, if anybody can tell me where this patrol car was for that 24 hours besides in these eight points in time, please help me out here. Next slide, please. Again, it goes by at night, in the dark. This one's at 2251, same thing. You got all that washout because of the iron on it. Next slide. Takes the next picture, clears the bell. Next slide, please. Again, we can't see who's in it. Can't see who's driving. This is during the day, good sunlight, 1021 in the morning. Again, I can't see who's in it. I can't tell you how many people are in there. I really can't tell you anything. I can see the tag number on the car. I can tell you it's a white Ford. Or a Dodge. Which is what it is. It's a Dodge, I guess. Right, that's what it is. Yeah. But you can see, how much of the road do we see? I mean, you see that lane and maybe the one next to it. Next slide, please. Again, it's taking pictures of the road. The camera doesn't move. The camera just sits in the same place. One spot in time. That's what it's doing. It's telling us where that vehicle is at that point in time. Next slide, please. Same thing, other lane, different time, total weight. Again, middle of the day, this one's even closer. You can't really tell how many people are in the car. You can't tell if there's somebody in the passenger seat or not. If it was a training unit that day or can't see what's in the back, I can't see if there's people in the back seat. Next slide, please. Again, same thing. Next slide. So we did open our transparency portal. You can find it on the city's website. It shows you information about the system, tells you how many vehicles are going through the city. I was kind of amazed at how many cars actually travel through the city of Hayesville in a day. And that's just coming in, that's not leaving. So when everybody goes to work, we don't count that one. We just count them coming back in. So there are quite a few cars that pass through the city. If you haven't seen that, please go online, go check it out, because it's interesting information. It tells you exactly what we do with the information, where it goes. where it comes from, that kind of stuff. It's all there in that transparency portal. It gives you an idea of what our policies say and things like that. Also, I have Bia from Flock over here. She's going to give us a short presentation. She can give us a little more overall information about Flock as a company and some of the things that they do. Some of our information is going to overlap because we're using their product. And then we can answer any questions that you might have about whatever.

Hi, everybody. My name is Dia Campo. I'm public affairs manager with Block Safety. Thank you all so much for having me here today. I feel like after the chief's presentation, I should probably just rest my case, but bear with me as I want to touch not only on some of the questions that we have been receiving across the country recently, but maybe also hopefully answer some of your guys' concerns. So Flock is a public safety company. We're a technology company. We have existed for 90 years now, so we're a relatively new company. And the way that we think about it is we are a breadcrumb, right? Flock is a tool in the toolbox of a police officer. If you think about what is it that the Flock brings to the table is this ability to construct and create efficiency in police work. We are saving them time and we are reducing biases because we are using data-driven analysis to ensure that these officers have that breadcrumb to go to the next step of their investigation. We do not substitute police judgment, nor should we ever. We want to be a tool that police officers and communities can use to feel safe. And I think that's where the paradigm is really important for us because we reject the idea that these two, public safety and privacy, are controversial ideas. We believe that we can and should be building together a system that brings both safety, but also respects the rights to privacy that all citizens have. So we're here today to answer some questions. There are some things that we've heard throughout the country that have raised very valid concerns, things that the company has made better over time because of that. And there's also a lot of misinformation. In this age and time, there's a, Everybody with a mouth can say whatever they want. So I think it behooves us to really bring back to the facts. So I really appreciated the chief's presentation when he showed exactly what it is that you can and you cannot see. So we hope that we can answer some of the questions that were raised today. Just to talk a little bit about the company at large. We are present in 49 states. We have over 12 5,000 clients, 5,000 of which are law enforcement agencies, over 1,500 businesses. We also serve HOAs, hospitals, universities, and whatnot. About 10% of all crime in America right now is solved using FLOC as the main tool to reach those conclusions. So it's not a, it's a If you think about it, 10% of the cases, that's quite a big number in terms of law enforcement efficiency and efficacy. That's about 2,800 cases a day. And to me personally, the number that I feel like I'm most proud of is in 2025 alone, we helped bring over 10,000 people home. People that were saved, they were missing, especially children and adults in vulnerable positions. If you think about the complaints that the American citizen has, it's usually housing, price, cost of living, public safety. We are at a time and place where about 40% of Americans don't feel safe leaving their homes. In addition to that, we're also seeing law enforcement agencies across the country have a hard time recruiting people. So 85% of the agencies are not in capacity. And while 96% of those same agencies collect different technologies over different data systems, It's still, according to the FBI this day, eight in 10 cases never get solved. So this is the nexus in which FLOC comes in. It's how we bridge this gap. And again, FLOC is but a crown, right? If you look, and I'm gonna come back to this slide in a second, these are just some of the investigative systems that the police uses and the law enforcement uses. LPR is the third one. top to bottom on your left. All of this combined are what gives police the tools that they need. If you think about 9-11 as the mark in which, under the federalism rules, municipalities had their own law enforcement. And at that point in time, those law enforcement agencies were not talking to each other. It has been two decades in which our law enforcement system as a whole has created the tools to communicate. And this is what these investigative systems are. They help communicate with each other, and again, LPR is nothing but a piece of this. This is all you all have. You have eight license plate readers. FLOC does have a suite of other technologies. To the chief's point, Hayesville only has eight license plate readers on the entrance of your town. This is what differentiates flocks from other LPR systems, is what we call the vehicle fingerprint, is the ability to match not only the plates, but also the body, the characteristics in the body of the vehicle, right? We can search through our system, and I'm gonna give you guys a sneak peek into the system in a second, but an important thing is here is, I'm not a police officer. I don't know if anybody other than the chief is. But I've heard that witnesses tend to not be necessarily very congruent with their facts, especially if they're in a point where there is tension, they've just suffered a crime. Endorphins are high, adrenaline is high. It is okay for a witness to miss a plate number, right? But sometimes giving them that bright prom that will allow them to follow that next step to get to the conclusion of the case. And this is where the power of flock is. In addition to that, we have, and I'm gonna go very fast through this because I think the chief did a fantastic job, which is the precision of the alerts. So, child is kidnapped in Nebraska. They are coming south from the interstate. Every four hours, and that's not just flock, any LPR system, receives an update on the alerts of the cars that have, for instance, a missing child inside of them. The moment this vehicle enters your city limit, your police officers will know that there is a child that has been abducted inside that vehicle. This is what I think is very interesting. I know it's a little small, so I hope you guys can see it. So this is a demo environment. which means it's a fake city in Ohio that we invented. And this is a fake homicide that I invented. So if you look, let's say there was a homicide, okay, in your town. And again, demo environment, very nice, right? This is just me creating this. The first thing that the officer is gonna have to do is let the system know which offense type. They then are gonna input the case number. Then they're gonna input the reason for this search. And then they're gonna do the actual search. So in my homicide case, the witness saw a black Acura, did not see the plate, but we had a timeframe, right? We worked with the coroners, we looked at other systems, we know when the homicide happened. So then you are going to input the timeline. You're gonna input the color and the model and the make of the car. And this is what's gonna pop up, right? Those four pictures over there. Mind you, because it's a demo, my homicide happened in the evening. I think I put 8 to 12 p.m. That was the time in which the victim was deceased. The system, because it's a demo, it created pictures of the day, right? That's why it's clear. Again, if it was the real system, you would have pulled up the evening pictures because the homicide happened in the evening. From there, the police officers would need to, again, do the investigative work. And I think this is where it's key here, right? The technology is supporting the officers. It's not replacing judgment. Not gonna bore you with this because the chief went over a lot of plates. This is what you can see in our system. You cannot, again, this is a fake demo system, but you cannot see who's in the car. You cannot see the passenger. You cannot even see who's the driver attached to that license plate. That's when those other breadcrumbs are gonna come into play, and that's where the police work actually happens. We have this chief. in Yakima where he publicly compared flock safety to DNA. I have been doing these presentations across the country and I will tell you time and time again, the chiefs will tell you the absolute revolutionary power of this technology as far as efficiency, efficacy, and transparency on their police work. Don't take it from us. What I think is really cool about our legislative system in general is that we can create the barriers and the safeguards that we want as a community. So there are multiple ways that communities across the country are doing this. The example I'm going to use is Nebraska. Just because it's your neighbor, Nebraska has one of the most restringent data protection laws across the nation. That community decided to create those safeguards and implement those safeguards. For instance, they require that the agencies that use LPRs, once a year, report to the state legislature on their audits and their searches. That's just an example. There are different tools and mechanisms, right? In a democracy, there are levers that you can pull to create a package that works for your community. Because that's what I think FLOC prides itself on, which is allowing different communities to have different answers to the same question. But in that sense, we also created our own internal policies that protect data privacy, right? The first one is that the data is owned by the customers and will never be sold. And in here, I'm gonna take a second because I actually wanna pull your contract. for those who, you know, see it, you believe it kind of people. It literally states in our contract that FLOC does not own nor shall sell the customer data. We do not own, we do not sell your data. We are forbidden by contractual obligations. So continue. Our private customers never have access to law enforcement data. So for instance, let's say there is a big hospital. The hospital has a flock system. The hospital is going to be able to share this data with the police department. The reverse is never true. The police department will never be able to share the data with the hospital. The way that you think about this is you're in a building. Each customer owns the key to their own apartment. You can open your window, you can let the other agencies take a sneak peek into your apartment, but they do not have a key to your apartment. And more importantly, depending on who that neighbor is, if that neighbor is a private entity, they will not even be able to take the peek into your window. They do not face your apartment building. We automatically delete all the data after 30 days. Again, this period, this is the default. Communities across the nation have chosen this retention period to be different. From New Jersey, who has a three-year retention period, to Oregon, who has a 21-day retention period. FLOCS default study days is the time that you all use currently. It's the time that the vast majority of the systems across the country use. That is, again, flexible upon the decision of that particular community based on the different aspects. New Jersey chose to retain the data for three years to allow for an abundance of caution on due process. Oregon retained that for 21 days. Virginia, I think it's 21 days as well. Washington State if I'm not mistaken. And then there are other states that have recently passed laws that maintain that 30-day. Again, that's a decision by the municipality, by the state, and FOC will adopt that retention period accordingly. I'm going to skip this one because I'm going to talk about it during the Fourth Amendment. But the last one I think is very important, which is the you choose who you share it with. I think the chief explained it very well. The default setting is you share it with no one. Every single authorization needs to be individual. It needs to be made at the point in time in which that authorization arrives. And it is revocable at any point in time. So let's say for whatever reason, California Bureau of Investigation has a human trafficking ring. They think that they are bringing people to strip clubs in Kansas. The chief decides at that point that he's gonna share the information with the California Bureau of Investigation. He can at any point in time revoke that sharing permission. And to begin the permission, he will need to authorize it affirmatively. And very important here is when we say authorize it, I think, and we say share, I think there is this misconception that a person in the California Bureau of Investigation will be able to look into your camera. That's not what happens. They have access to the metadata of the camera. In addition to all that, and I would love to, to the gentleman on the left because he brought up the auditing tool and the transparency. The chief said we put this into our new, one of our new processes that came from the questions that we were getting from the public. So now every city, every agency can create their own transparency portal. This portal is free, it comes with the, it's a service that comes with the contract. Different organizations can choose different information that they can put it in there. And I think what's really important here is there is the audit tool and then there's the audit network, right? Those are two different things. When the gentleman mentioned that Flock changed its parameters. I forget exactly what he said. I don't want to misquote him. But Flock actually increased its transparency recently because we created this external auditing tool where now not only all this information is available publicly through this website, but in addition to that, we created flags in the system. So for instance, Let's say there's an abnormal search. Officer John Smith searches about 100 plates a week. This week he searched 1,000. Abnormal search. That search is now going to be flagged to the administrator of that system, not because there's something wrong, but because there could be something wrong. So maybe let's look into it. Officer Carter, every day at 8 a.m., searches the same plate. Abnormal use. There might be a valid investigative reason for that, but the system will now flag it so that we can clear. And one thing I want to bring up is I don't think it's coincidental that throughout the whole entire nation, people keep bringing up these 15 to 20 cases, right? If you think about the breadth of FloxNetwork, there is actually a very small percentage of misuse of our system. Regardless, any and all misuse is not to be tolerated. And I would argue that as a matter of fact, a system that brings up misbehavior in people with positions of power is actually something to be celebrated, be it a gun, be it a technology system, a police officer that chooses to misuse a system, I think the Chief said it perfectly, is to be fired. And I actually like that our system is bringing out this misuse, that it's flagging this misuse proactively. Fourth Amendment, this one comes up a lot. So, over 14 states, almost 60 cases, unanimously, it is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The courts consider it so because it's a single moment in time and it's not continuous surveillance. There is some acknowledgement throughout some of these decisions about a theoretical world in which there are so many LPR cameras that it could be a point in time in which there is this surveillance, but if you read through the decisions, every single one of them will tell you that in that particular case, that is not to be so and that did not occur. Because the LPRs, they take a public picture, they take a public image in a public road of a public data. They do not share any personal information. That means that if Mary left her home at 8 a.m., dropped her kid at school, went to work, left work, went to the gym, came home, went to the grocery shop and picked up her kid, came home, the car, in your case, might be caught once because it's only on the entrance of the town. So therefore, it does not constitute surveillance because you would never know that Mary did all of those things in her day. I'm gonna skip this slide just because there's, I think I touched on all of this. This is just a little bit of more in-depth explanation of all the myths and facts that we see out there regarding the data privacy, access, Fourth Amendment, bias in policing. I'm gonna send these slides to Commander Kratz, and he can share with you all. And I just brought a couple examples of the power of this technology, right? Because I think one thing that always gets me, and we've been doing these a lot lately, is what scares me the most is the possibility that a potential future maybe scenario will hinder us from the very obvious results. of the kids that are being brought home, of the crimes that this has solved, of the people that are being held accountable with good police work. And on that sense, some stories from nearby that I found online last night, and I just wanted to share them for no other reason than this is really generating impact in communities sometimes. It's as simple as a 70 to 80% vehicle death rate resolve. Sometimes it's a kid that was abducted. And we really believe that public safety is a fundamental right and everybody should have access to it regardless of where they live. And this tool is bringing that possibility to a lot of communities across the country. And I was actually very impressed that no one quoted this, because I'll tell you, if I had a bingo, nine times out of 10. So I just want to finish with a consideration, because my father is a philosopher. So let me digress for a second. If not in America, where else could we have a system in which we have these debates here and we create the safeguards that are necessary to ensure that technology betters people's lives instead of hinders it? If not here in front of the elected body of officials with a public that disagrees with me, I'm sure, then where? When we think about the value of this tool and when we think about the community concerns, which many, many times are very valid. The idea that Flock wants to bring is we do not disagree that technology can be dangerous, that technology needs to be safeguarded, that technology deserves public debate. What we disagree with is the abandonment of the technology for the sake of it. And for that reason, one, I'll be here. So if anyone disagrees, always open to conversations. But other than that, I hope that we've answered some of the questions that you all may have. And we hope that we can continue to do so in partnership with them. Thank you.

And real quick, I'll just address one more thing that she did bring up was the the auditing on the system. We do have three administrators, so don't think that I'm the only one looking at it, because if they want to audit me, go ahead. That's fine. We have three different administrators on the system. We all three audit this thing at any given time. once a week, once every other week. Between the three of us, normally somebody hits it once a week. The tools that they've just come up with are pretty impressive. I am impressed because there's several different parameters. There's like six different things that it'll point at and say. It doesn't say somebody did something wrong, but it tells us, hey, you might go look at this because, yeah, they ran too many tags this time or they've run this tag under three different reasons or something else. I mean, that is huge for us. That saves so much time for us doing audits on these things. Whereas before, we're going down line by line looking to see what we've run. And now this thing, we're not only doing that, but now we can also run it through that tool. And it is extremely helpful and a time saver for us to be able to go back and look at this stuff. Again, we trust these officers with a lot of information, not just pictures of tags, but I'm talking about a lot of other information. There's a lot of information out there on every single one of us. that is being bought and sold every single day in different places by different companies, our cell phone companies, our credit card companies, all different places. They're buying and selling information all the time. The part of it that we as the police department have to be in charge of and that we're safeguarding, I'm going to do everything that I can to make sure that that's safeguarded and everybody's taken care of and nobody's exploited or nobody's stalked or nobody's gone after or mistreated or anything else because of that. Again, if I catch somebody doing that, that's not within, that's not within what we stand for as police officers. They shouldn't be police officers. I will make sure they're not a police officer here anymore. Um, and I'll do everything that I can to make sure they're not a police officer anywhere anymore. Kansas does have a, a group that is the, the, uh, the Kansas C post, the commission on, uh, standards and training. Um, Anytime we fire somebody, we report that to them, and they choose at that point whether or not they're going to do it. So if somebody gets caught, I saw comments online about somebody getting caught in a different jurisdiction, Sedgwick County, and said, oh, well, there won't be a cop there anymore, but they'll go somewhere else. Yeah, that's not going to happen because it's going to go to CPOS. CPOS is going to take care of it. If they don't, as a chief, I'm not doing my job. If we hire somebody and I haven't called CPOS and said, hey, send me everything you got on this person. I want to see why they left their last job. I want to see why they're not a cop there anymore. All those kind of things. It's all stuff that we do. I mean, we go through a very stringent, anybody that's ever been through the process of being a police officer, the background is very long and it's very exhaustive and it takes way too long. I wish we didn't have to take that long, but we don't need the wrong person in the wrong place with the wrong information. That's bad. And I'm not going to have it on my watch. It's not going to happen. So at this point, we can take any questions that you've got. If you've got any questions for me, feel free. That's what we're here for.

Chief, thank you for what you and your force does. I appreciate police work and you absolutely keep the city safe and I really do appreciate that. I wanted to have a couple questions about the audits. So with the audits, you say now there's no specific frequency or is there a specific frequency? Is it at least weekly or how often are the audits completed?

I personally try to look through it once every two to with them for two to three weeks. With the two lieutenants that we have working, and when we had a captain, the captain was also one of them, so there was actually four of us at that point. But they also have access to go through it at any time. There's no specific intervals, and we have not published any intervals of any kind because we don't want somebody thinking, oh, I can wait until this day, and then I can go the next day and do something. If they're going to do something, we just... There's no set time. Sometimes, like today, we end up with a call that takes all day long, and we're still working it right now, that We may not get it today. We may look at it tomorrow. We may look at it Thursday, but we, as a whole, we try to do it once. One of us tries to do it once a week.

Okay. And then, um, where's the transparency on that? Is that being reported up to will, is anybody seeing that the, that that has been completed? And that, and also if there are any findings, how does that get reported? Is it just internal or does it get reported up immediately if there's any findings in the audit?

So if we found anything that was abnormal in an audit, what we would do to answer that part first, what we would do is we would, I would have them open an internal investigation at that point. Um, obviously if it was something that they said that I did, I would have them get ahold of will. Um, but we would open up an internal investigation at that point. We would notify the officer that you're under an internal investigation, and this is the specific allegations of why you're under an investigation. And we would go in at that point, we would go in and try to, we would go start pulling the case numbers that are associated with that to find out, okay, what does this tag even associated with that case? If we find out that that tag was associated and they can, and it's explained why in reports that. Yeah, we saw this car because it drove by us 18 times while we were out investigating this burglary and oftentimes that's just criminal behaviors that go back by where they just committed a crime. But we won't get into that. But if we find out that there's issues like that, we'll look into it further and then sometimes, okay, yeah, we see why you had to run that tag through there and why you wanted to know that.

And to be clear, there haven't been any cases of abuse in our...

In Hayesville, no, there has not been any cases of abuse of not only that information, but the other information, the criminal justice information, as far as running tag numbers to actually get somebody's address or running their driver's license to see where they live or their driving history or any of that stuff. We've had no violations like that. Now, also, with that one, Those are all audited also. Anytime we run criminal histories, those are audited. Those are audited on a triennial basis, and that is through state statute that determines that.

Okay. And then can you walk me through? So on our transparency portal, it shows, for example, Fort Worth, Texas, and Oklahoma locations. It's saying that we're sharing network data with them. is that live and always or is that like you're saying where it's only by request no it's just historical it would just be historical data just like anybody else would have it's not they can't they can't pull up our camera no i'm sorry let me rephrase the question is that they can come in and read our data all of our data all 180 000 vehicle movements 86 000 vehicle movements um they can log in their system in houston

their computer and search in our they can query the data without so it's an open door for that basically is what i'm saying correct it does show up on our audit log though it does show up on your online we see that on our audit log and if there was an issue that we thought why are they running every tag that came through hayesville that day we're going to get a hold of them and we're going to have we're going to get their audit logs that show that this is why this officer is the one that ran all these tags or this officer's one that ran this specific tag all these times to find out where this car was

Up to 30 days.

Yes. Right. And how often does it happen? How often do we have out-of-state searches where a Houston officer searches Hazel?

Searching a single vehicle or doing a... Or just accessing our data, I should say. I mean, if they do a 50-state search, if they went through and they were looking for a vehicle in a 50-state search, that happens, I mean, daily, several times a day. It just depends. Again, if they're looking for leads in a case and they're trying to find this vehicle, a missing person case, for example, somebody disappears. As an adult, it's not against the law for me to disappear. I can leave. I can go. But I have a family member that's worried about me and wants to know, well, we haven't seen Chief in days. What the heck happened to him? Mm-hmm. They make a report and then we would go and we would query, we'd open it up and send it out all 50 states, every flock camera we could find and try to find my tag number and see where I went. So that probably happens on a daily basis. There's a lot of people out there that just walk away.

I think something like this, when it becomes really personal, that obviously a lot of people get very much involved in it. First of all, I want to say, Chief, thank you very, very much for an excellent briefing, tremendous information, a lot of things that I found out about it. The personal part, many of you know my son is a police officer of a very large city. And he's told me about where they are able to look at license plates as they drive by to check, is this criminal activity in this area? And that has really because one of the places where he does work, they're at about 60% manned, so they need that help. You said this was a force multiplier. I absolutely agree with you. You said this is a game changer. I think that is amazing that we can, for $20,000, initially it sounds like odd money, but I don't think you have any officers there. I don't need to get into that. I'm just saying that that money is being put to use in a very wise way. You said that there's strict enforcement of the usage of this. You said there's strong policy for misuse. You said that it's not a standalone, that it's a tool for enforcement. You said that it lightens the load for police officers and it solves crimes. Wow. And thank you Mia. Your presentation was also good. Bria, I'm sorry. But both of you did a wonderful presentation. Again, I know that it's a very emotional thing. You can tell it's emotional for me too. I want my be safe, and I think this is a strong tool to use that, and I appreciate what you guys are doing. Thank you very much. Thank you, we appreciate that. I'll pass it on.

I just want to interject here because so the people that came and voiced your opinion, I appreciate it. This is America. That's why we stand up for freedom. But I'm a retired sergeant from a police department in Butler County, and For 18 years, we used Flock while I was there at least two times. One was for a homicide that a guy killed his wife and left. We searched for a long time. We finally found him. He was in Missouri. Another time we found a child that had been abducted and was being trafficked. But we, with the luck of the flock camera, we found this young lady and the guy that did it, the perpetrator. We found them both before any harm became to the young lady. Now, I understand people say, well, you know, this is that, you know, they can read all. If you want it right here, people, you pick your phone up. This phone right here tells you everything you want to know. It tells the networking, it tells the Wi-Fi, it tells all the companies and everything. Right here it tells you everything they want to know about you is right there in that phone. And it's just, you know, I understand. I understand where your people are coming from, you know. But it's a bunch of baloney. It really is. Because as a law enforcement officer that's retired, let me tell you what, the flock camera was the best thing that ever happened to law enforcement. And I'm going to tell you what, I stand behind it 100%. What is it, you know, what's it to you? Okay, we spend $20,000 for cameras. What does it cost you to try to hunt down and find a child? What does it cost to try to find somebody that has murdered somebody, one of your family members? What's it worth to you then? Is it worth $20,000? To me, it would be. Somebody did harm to one of my granddaughters or one of my grandsons or my wife or my kids, I'm going to guarantee you $20,000 ain't squat if I'm going to be able to help whoever find whoever was responsible for what happened. And Chief, I appreciate you. You know that I'm a retired law enforcement officer. Uh, so, and I appreciate everything that you do. I appreciate everything that all the officers in Hayesville, I think we have probably one of the best departments. I still have a lot of friends that are on different departments around, not only just in Butler County, but I also have friends that are on law enforcement. Uh, my oldest son was in law enforcement for 15 years.

so i appreciate everything that you guys do and i think you guys are the best i appreciate that councilman brister is it web-based or is it application-based is it web-based like do they log into a website to pull up the information or how does that work yes it's a it's a platform okay so it doesn't track what Awesome, okay.

And there's also multi-factor authentication. Each officer has their own login. We know exactly who is logged into what machine where. and again if if somebody's in the building and we have a question as to who was logged into that machine did somebody steal their password and managed to get past the multi-factor authentication we've got cameras in there in the computer room that shows who was on that computer we can look at not flock cameras those are just regular dumb surveillance cameras i mean and i'm not saying dumb that's they're not smart cameras so but yeah we can look at those at any time and make sure if we had to that we can verify who was there

Okay, that's awesome. What about being able to hack into these cameras and stuff like that? I've seen a lot of stuff about that.

So there are a couple cases. So the Flux system has never been hacked. Okay. There's a YouTube video, which is probably the one that you're referencing. The way, the analogy that I like to make is it's like someone getting an iPhone 6 on... Craigslist, being able to hack that iPhone and saying that they have access to Apple iOS. So that would be the equivalent comparison. Our hardware, first of all, the information doesn't get stored there, right? It's like a one pathway. From the camera, it goes to the system. From the system, it doesn't go to the camera. So best hacker in the world. gets a letter, goes into your poll, connects his computer there, somehow is able to bypass all of our security standards. And I can talk a little bit about those because those are interesting. He would still only have access to about 20 to 100 images depending on how busy the road is. He would still not have access to the actual system and database. The way that we... First of all, we spend a lot of money in cybersecurity. We are certified by all the highest bodies. We have ISO, we have CGIS, we have the SOC 2. In addition to all of that, we also have a bounty where we literally pay people to try to hack us. And if you find a vulnerability in our system, we will pay you. to tell us where it is to make it sure that even the best hacker in the world would have a financial interest to actually tell us so we could close that gap instead of hacking our system. In addition to that, we also have a company called Bishop Fox. They are the scanners around the world. They do penetration tests reoccurringly in our system. So we have a whole entire team inside our company that is dedicated to nothing but trying to penetrate the system through hacking. So we have a very robust cybersecurity. There are a couple cases where I think the company didn't put its best foot forward. The case that I'm gonna talk about is the one that you all probably saw online too is the There are three, I think, that people mention frequently. The first one is this one with the comparison to the iPhone. It was an old camera. The guy accessed the camera hardware. He didn't access the system. The second one is there were 80 8.0 cameras that with our contract to Verizon, that was about two years ago, that shipped. to your point about the internet, the ship was incorrect. Those have all been fixed. That was a vulnerability that was found into the system. All of them have been updated, not connected to the external internet. Again, that was something that the company will be the first one to tell you. With that said, 80 cameras on a pool of 600,000. And then the third case, which people mention a lot, is the Danbury case, which is the the YMCA, I'm sure you might have heard it. I think that one, that one the company, I think we would be the first one to recognize. So we had a demo system. And it was an agreement with that town, which they were fully aware of. And the thought process there was they were seeing a rise in anti-Semitism. So they wanted to put some cameras close to areas where the Jewish community congregated. The company used the demo system, and that's the video that you can see of children online. That pilot has since been closed. We, as a matter of fact, for my presentation, we literally built a fake city to use as demo to avoid any of these happenings. such as that one from ever happening again. We're a nine year old company. We're learning as you all talk to us, as we hear concerns, we are continuously building upon the program. It is our very strong intention to make sure that people feel not only safe, protected, but also have their rights respected.

I do have one more. The data, where is it stored on? Amazon? Yes.

So, yeah, it's the AWS, which we can, we have a letter where they explain the deletion process, if you ever, so the metadata is deleted every 30 days or depending on the retention period. And then some of it is in the public, some of it is on the private, depending on whether it is criminal justice data. If it is criminal justice data by the FBI rules, it needs to be stored into the public interface of AWS.

And that's in the United States, right? Yes. Yes, yeah. Okay, I just wanted to point that out too. Yeah, perfect. Awesome. Great presentation, both of you guys. Thank you.

Thank you. The other council members want to have any questions? That's the most. Yeah, I have a little speech here.

So we had 12 people come out today. Thank you for voicing your concerns about flock. It's really important that we have the public coming out and speaking their mind, voicing their mind on the Internet. I appreciate your efforts. I also wanted to point out that. from the gentleman who pointed out that Mulvane does not have this. Also, Bel Air. Bel Air, which is a very similar city, comparable size to us, they do not have it. It's actually one of the discussions they're having. I went and talked to one of the councilwomen from Bel Air, and she is, from what it sounds like, opposed to it. So I understand that security cameras can be a critical asset when it comes to law enforcement protecting public land, infrastructure, and ultimately can be a benefit to public safety. However, I also don't want our tax dollars spent on mass surveillance on every member of its community with no way to opt out. If the council feels that ALPR is required, I urge you all to consider having the police department research options that are not shared on a national network and establish a more direct control of the data and its sharing. Additionally, we should have our own equipment outright. This contract went up with no bid when there absolutely are comparable AI ALPRs that should have been considered. Some competing companies include Leonardo, which is used by the Turnpike, Vigilant by Motorola, Genetech, and Vivotech. Many of them offer AI ALPR cameras for purchase ranging from $1,000 to $8,000 each with free or affordable annual software fees. I've spoken to a few sales reps, some have reached out to me and some I reached out to them. Both commented how Flock does a great job at marketing to the police, but they are absolutely all our other options. Without change, by the end of my term on council, Hayesville will have spent $160,000 total in taxpayer dollars on Flock. This is money that could easily have been spent elsewhere improving the city. I know if it was up to me, I wouldn't be paying a rental fee for a piece of equipment that I'm never gonna own. Additionally, on the Fourth Amendment, so realize the Supreme Court has not made any rulings on this. It hasn't made it to the Supreme Court. And they are the Supreme Court. We've seen many times that even Supreme Court rulings have been overturned. So the constitutionality of this is still on the table. There are valid concerns by our citizens and across the nation that this is violating their civil rights. I am on that side. I feel like my privacy is being violated by this. There was a recent ruling in regards to digital data chartering versus the United States. That could also imply that some of this technology might intrude on our Fourth Amendment, but we will see. What else? I think, yes. So I know I have heard an overwhelming majority of my constituents want at least more oversight and transparency of the system. This is the first time we've had transparency. Has this been on the agenda before this? Since 2022, has this been on the agenda at all? no no okay so it's good that we're having this discussion and it's a little bit overdue to be honest okay um so they since this has been approved there have been multiple news reports of abuse and all this other stuff so this shouldn't have been brought up well long ago um So, um, I know many want, uh, many of my constituents want a complete removal, removal of ALPRs in Hayesville. Uh, if you feel my opinion is wrong, I would move to getting an approval of flock or ALPRs placed in the next regular ballot and let the people decide. So that's all I have.

Councilman Brewster. Councilman Myers. I appreciate that. That's some good things to think about. First question I have is if we, so if someone damages, um, your guys' camera, right. to pay more?

There's a fee associated. It depends on what happens. It depends on the contract, too, because we have an insurance plan that some cities do. It depends what happens to the camera. If the camera malfunctions, then no. But if somebody the other day in Grand Junction, Colorado, this guy went on a he thought he was shooting three flock cameras. He shot one flock camera and two traffic cameras, which costed the city $52,000 because the two cameras that he shot were property of the town. And then in that particular case, for instance,

So the same thing would be said if we got our own system or whatever, but we would have to foot that bill either way. And I did look at deflock, by the way, and I don't know how accurate this is, but there are cameras in Mulvane, so I don't know how accurate it is, but But there is, because I've weighed in both sides. I've spent a lot of time researching this, but Mulvane does apparently, according to this, have cameras in Mulvane.

And I think sometimes, and I don't know because I don't know how their process is for putting those cameras up on there. We have looked at other cameras in certain areas within the city for surveillance, not necessarily for streets or anything else, but for parks because... In case you're unaware, you guys probably know that we have quite a few vandalism cases in parks because people like to go in for whatever reason and smash a toilet or smash a sink. So we have surveillance in certain parks that we can just watch and know who's in the park. We've looked at some cameras in there that they look identical to flock cameras. If I didn't know the difference, if I didn't know this was somebody else's camera, I would think it was a flock camera because it looks identical. It's the same little black oval. It's the same solar panel on it. It goes up on a pole just like that. If I didn't know any better, I'd think, why do they have a flock camera in the middle of the park? It's not a flock camera. It's a completely different one, and it does a heck of a lot more than a flock camera does. So, I mean... It's out there. Somebody may be mistaking that for a flock camera and reporting it to the flock. I don't know what their process is. I don't look at it because I drive by the same flock cameras everybody else does and it doesn't bother me.

And then also,

axon i guess i mean i don't know i originally i think when when the company started you can correct me if i'm wrong i think axon was actually partnered with flock at some point and then they parted ways in the very beginning i think so yes they are a competitor they do that um i think we're going to pay a lot more money for axon knowing knowing what i know about axon and motorola which both have products that do the same thing um it's they like their stuff it's expensive

And I would also disagree that I don't think this is mass surveillance. Um, I can go home from work, um, drive around pretty much all over Hazel and no one really knows what I'm doing. So I just want to point that out there. So thanks.

Yeah. Uh, as a response to the cutting thing, I just want to go on record that, you know, I'm opposed to this, but I do not by any means, uh, you know, want to encourage cutting down, shooting them with laser beams, shooting them with guns. That is not the democratic way of removing something from this city. We do it with voting. We do it with voicing our opinion. So just for the record. Additionally, that is not a problem here. So, I mean, we don't have them being shot down everywhere. So, I mean, if that was a thing where we're getting one shot down a week, yeah, we definitely don't want to buy them. We've had eight, and it's been four years.

No, eight years. since 22, so they've got put up six to eight months after that.

So I mean, you're looking at almost four years, four, roughly four years. We've had these, nobody's destroyed them, right? Where have we, no, we've not had any vandalism cases.

We've had very few problems with them. I think one of them for some reason had an issue with the focus or something that came right out and fixed it. Okay.

So, so as of today, we have $80,000 in hardware for eight to $10,000 each. So the high estimate that I got was 8,000 each for these. So, We already are past the point. If we are going to keep ALPRs, which seems to be the consensus in this council, that we want to keep ALPRs, that we should buy it or at least investigate buying them. And does FLOC have a purchase option or no? No. No, okay. So I wouldn't even entertain that. I mean, it's just if the council wants to keep FLOC or ALPRs, then at least be physically responsible and purchase them. Because it doesn't make sense to release them. We're not leasing our solar panels. We're buying them. It makes sense to buy them. And then you have more control on them, too. Additionally, I don't like sharing. So, Chief, if you could give me, what is the big, the huge advantage of sharing versus not sharing data? Like, how much hoops do you have to really run through if you had to And I'm sure these have little links that you can share, I'd imagine, or some way of sharing the data without having to be integrated into our systems. Would it be possible to, or feasible, I should say, to get our own system that we own and be on a separate network, not integrated with the nearby, not sharing data, and all of that? That's what I'm trying to propose here.

No, that would defeat the whole purpose of the networking, because if it's not networked to anybody, then we're looking at their own cameras. And that would be the same as any surveillance camera that you have on your house. a nest camera or whatever it is on your house i mean but doesn't your jurisdiction end in the city anyways i mean like why are we searching outside of the city i guess is the question because again the criminals don't stop at 63rd street south and go oh i don't want to go into hayesville that's not what happens they keep coming down here they just keep coming down here so the people that commit crimes in wichita are still cars in wichita they come down here and then they go and they break into houses over here break into cars over here and then now we have that information that oh well here's a stolen car let's go look for it and let's let's try to figure out what's going on the the criminals don't stop they keep going so if if we have this this standalone system we have a camera that takes a picture of a car that goes by and it's not connected to anything it's not connected to the national crime information center it's not connected to necmec we're not going to have any idea if there's a if that's a stolen car if that's a stolen tag if there's Potentially it's been associated with an ember alert unless somebody gives us an ember alert and sends it to us That's the issue with the standalone system. I completely understand where you're coming from with being hesitant and sharing things and again We're very frugal with who we share these things with especially anybody that's not not around I mean out of state people especially we're looking at it to see okay. Did we have a crime? We had a few years ago. We had a ATM stolen, but we traced it all the way back to Texas because of flock cameras. Because this thing gets stolen and then it takes off and we have no idea where it goes so we have to put the tag in there and then we can go back and trace it. Stand alone system, yeah we got pictures of that truck hauling the ATM out of the city and see you later, it's gone. We don't know where it went after that. And then we have to go back and ask other agencies, hey, can you share this information with us or can you check your cameras and those kind of things, which most of the time, and it's true with Flock too, that they can also do that if we have somebody that is not part of our network that we have not agreed to share with and they're working a case and they think, man, that may have gone to Hayesville, Kansas. They can call us up, talk to our record section and say, hey, can you check this for us under this case number? Same thing. They've got to tell us why they want to check it, what the crime is, and give us a case number. And then we can look and say, okay, have we had that here in the last... two hours, 24 hours, whatever, and then we can give that information. But again, that's like anything that goes in a dissemination log and we know how many times somebody's done that, which is not the norm.

So some of these computing companies do have networks like that that you can share. I mean, they are still, like the, what is it? LSag with, what's it called? The Turbike, and I'm trying to find the name of the company. Yeah. Leonardo, who also has LSAG, which is the one that I'm hecka against where they're...

I was going to say, there's a little more to that than just an LPR.

Okay. So what do you mean? Oh, you're saying the LSAC is?

Right. Yes, absolutely. They're doing a lot more than we're doing taking pictures of tags here.

Yeah, I'm completely opposed to those, absolutely. That's, yeah, it's doing a digital fingerprint of your phone and everything you have on you.

Yeah, that's not right. As the chief, I would never allow that or ask for that here. That's wrong. You don't do that. Okay. been around a long time and i've gotten a lot of search warrants for a lot of stuff and i know when something's just not right and that's yeah that kind of stuff that technology defense contractors use that stuff a lot and then they try to move it over to the commercial side and say hey this would be great for police well yeah not so much it's beyond beyond what we need to be doing here that's not where we're going that's not part of our values yeah so i guess my question is when when is the last time that

You looked into the competing companies. When's the last time that you sat down and really?

I actually called them and asked them about LPRs. We haven't really done that in a couple years at least. We'll be here two years probably.

Okay. Would it be possible to re-engage with some of them and just fish around and see what is available? That if you can get something that is to purchase and to where we're not paying $20,000 a year for for the next forever?

We could look at that. We could explore that. But again, it's going to go back into what does that give us for what they're going to charge us. Are we going to be able to network with other departments and know that that stolen car is coming out of Wichita down here? I mean, that's... There's a lot of details that go into that, but I mean, I'm not opposed to it. I don't want to spend any more money than we have to on anything. But yeah, that's always something that we can look at. At this point, we have flock. We've used flock for a few years. That's why we continue to use them. And our contract, I think, goes through next year, if I'm not mistaken.

I think that's all I have. Tell us from Brewster. Chief, and I don't know if you can talk about this, but there was an issue in our ward where flock was used. Is that correct? It's maybe an ongoing investigation.

It is. The parts that I can tell you about is through the use of flock, we were able to link the burglaries that happened over there in that ward. To give you some background, there were a bunch of car burglaries that occurred where people were getting into cars, they stole guns, they stole some money, whatever was loose in a car that they could get ahold of and carry with them, they'd take. They were driving a stolen car to Wichita and drove it down here. Then we find that we, in taking care of that, we found some property that belonged to somebody from some burglaries from two weeks before that. And we didn't have anything to go on for the burglars two weeks before that. But now we have these burglars with some property in their vehicle that, okay, this property came from these other burglaries. So then we went back to the same night two weeks ago that somebody committed all the burglaries on the other side of town. And we found that, well, lo and behold, there's that car on flock one time coming into the city two hours before the first burglar was reported. They also were involved in a burglary in a neighboring jurisdiction, a couple burglaries. Same thing, that department actually saw them and chased that car, but that car was also captured on Flock in that jurisdiction. All those cases were taken to the district attorney's office and charged. But it was because of Flock that we were able to link them back to burglaries from two weeks before that, on Father's Day, if anybody was involved in that one. But we did get some charges there because of that. Had it been anything else, I don't know that we would have been able to do that. But yes, that system, a system doesn't get that done.

And I know you won't talk about this one, but in Wichita, I remember Sunday, I believe it was, yeah, July 26th, I was at my son's soccer game. All of a sudden, Well, because of flock, they actually found that two-year-old girl, and I think that's worth $20,000. Now, to Councilman Meyer's point, if we get our own system, then are we going to have to hire another IT person that's going to cost us more to do the penetration test, to do the patch updates, all that stuff? What I would like to do is if we're going to do this, we truly compare apples to apples and not, yeah, I mean, yeah, so. And to my other point is that if you want any type of system, I thought you were against mass surveillance. So with that. Council's already established. Okay. So I just want to know what lane you're kind of jiving in. So I appreciate that. Thank you.

All right. Any other questions? Council Member Morrison.

So with that, I would like to make a motion. would like to make a motion that we live in a democracy right and ultimately the people should have the end decision we are a council of appointed officials right so we should represent the opinion of our people so I would make a motion that we place this on the next regular election ballot I believe we have missed the cutoff for the next election right for this ballot coming up or is there still a can we get anything on the ballot still okay so Hopefully, we can get it on the next ballot, but if not, it would be the following. And it would be a regular election. It would not be a special vote. I don't want to put any more undue burden on the city. Do I have a second? The motion is to place authorized ALPR systems on the next ballot. the decision for us.

All right, so you heard the motion. Is there a second?

I would second it. Just let people figure out what they want.

All right, so we have a motion and a second to... Do you want to restate those things?

Yeah, so the motion is to place authorizing ALPR systems on the next ballot. So it would be a yes vote to authorize it, and it would be a no vote that we do not want it.

Okay, any discussion? Councilman Walters?

I have a question on, you already asked the chief to look into other proposals. I think we should probably look at that first. And what's this going to cost to put this on the ballot? I know it's not without cost, so is there any expectation around that?

It's my understanding that if it's on a normal election and you're not doing a special election, can you chime in on this? Is there a cost of putting it up? We can research all that. Okay. So, yeah. If we're not doing a special election, it shouldn't add any extra cost, from what I understand. It's when you do a special election, like for our tax, right, and it was just an election, just not an election, but a vote just for that, that you have to open the ballots up, that costs money. But if the ballots, if the polls are already open, there should be no additional cost of adding another line onto the ballot.

What I heard was Will said they could research that, and I'd like to give them the opportunity.

Well, I mean, the election is in, like, what, two months? So, I mean, if we wait until next month, it's definitely not going to get on it. I stand with my motion.

Any further discussion? Any questions, please?

Brewster?

No.

Walters? No. Martin?

No.

Clothier? Yes. Martin?

No. Myers?

Yes to democracy.

I would like to see...

but could we find out about the cost of? Thank you, Will.

Okay, are we finished with this? I believe so, yeah. Item five. All right, I know we've been here about two hours and 20 minutes, but anybody would like a break?

Let's take an honored motion to take a break.

5 minutes. All right, we have a motion.

Is there a second? Second. We have a motion and a second to take a break for 5 minutes. Any discussion? Question, please. Booster. Yes. Walter. Yes.

Martin.

Yes.

Coleridge. Yes.

Martin. Yes. Myers. Yes. Second.

all right uh we are back from our five minute break so we will continue on with item six other business a consideration of uh cursory personal how do you say it personally thank you additional final platform

So, good evening again. This is a one-step final plat for the Carceloie addition, which is generally located at 7474 South Broadway. A conditional use for a self-service storage warehouse was approved for this property recently. The plat conforms to all requirements of our subdivision regulations with one modification, and that is that it doesn't dedicate a sidewalk. The subregs do require that commercial business and... industrial subdivisions have platted dedicated sidewalks when they're fronting on arterial streets. Even so, the Planning Commission did recommend approval of the plat as presented, and all comments in your staff report have been addressed and reflected on the final plat.

Anybody have any questions for Kayla? Gosselin-Matters?

I'll make a motion to approve the addition of the final plan for Kyrill's Way. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the additional or the final plan as presented. Any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Barton? Yes. Clover? Yes. Barton? Yes. Myers?

Yes. All right. Item B, consideration of approval of bid contracts for the CDBG home rehab program.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. I have Megan Unruh, our grant administrator, here with me as well. She is going to help answer any questions that I might not be able to answer. Our second bid tour for the Community Development Block Grant Rehabilitation Project has been completed. The grant assists qualified low to moderate income residents in the target areas. All bids were reviewed by the South Central Kansas Economic Development District, and all recommended contractors have previously worked with the SCED program before. In your memo, based on the bid review and contract eligibility, the recommended contract awards are 6533 South Quarry, Aramaru Construction for $23,780, 6446 South Mabel for Aramaru Construction for $20,170, and 6501 South Quarry for New Windows for America for $25,000. These awards do not include SCED's weatherization program. Contractor costs associated with the CDBG rehabilitation bids above will be paid from CDBG grant funds. Weatherization costs are funded separately through SCED. To date, SCED has contributed $47,538 in weatherization program funds towards the city's CDBG housing rebuilds program. Sorry, said that way too many times. I am seeking motion for approval of the recommended contractors for the second bid tour. I don't know if you have anything to add on to that. We can try to answer any questions you might have.

On this one, my comment is I understand that, you know, getting three bids can be hard sometimes. But I want to say this is like the second time that we're approving this where there's only two of the three bids. My only input would be, you know, strive for that third bid. And I understand that not everybody always gets back to us. But, yeah, that's my only input on that.

Bid tour number one did procure several contractors far above the three bid allowance. This bid, you are correct that there were two bidders here. The third returned ineligible bids for the project, which were denied.

Oh, so we did get a third contractor, but it wasn't good bids, basically.

They did not submit an eligible bid. The one bid that was received, it was a bid tabulation sheet, and the one bid... that was received, they did not include any allowances for, let's say, work practices, which is kind of a red flag that that project's been bid incorrectly. In addition to that, they also didn't return bids for two other projects. So when we run into cases like that, we do leave it up to the city that if they want to try to reach out to that contractor or cure those bids, they can certainly do that if they like through that process.

Are there any further questions? All the council has to do. Councilperson Parton.

I make a motion to approve the bid. CONTRACTS FOR THE CDBG HOME REHABILITATION. YEAH, THAT WORD. PROGRAM. SECOND IT. HABILITATION.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE BID CONTRACTS FOR THE CDBG HOME REHAB PROGRAM. ANY DISCUSSION? QUESTION, PLEASE. ROOSTER. YES. WALTER. YES. MARTIN. YES.

MODIER. YES. MARTIN. YES. MYERS.

YES. ALL RIGHT, NEXT WE HAVE ITEM C, CONSIDERATION OF ROBUST FORTH PAYMENT REGARDING HOUSING REHAB PROGRAM.

So this pay request is from the first bidder of a contractor that was approved that there have been issues. You will see in your packet there are several pictures, a timeline, everything that Megan has done a great job of documenting everything. Communicated with you from the homeowner. You also have a letter at your bench from the homeowner for complaints and that they would not be able to complete the project they were in agreement to transfer that work to another contractor that was approved through stead, correct and

Yes, that contractor was approved through the bid tour process and bid tour number one. They were the only eligible responsible bidder for award of that project, which actually turned out really well timeline-wise. But yes, that was already bid out and procured.

So work was transferred over to that contractor. Afterwards, the ABBA construction had turned in this pay request to us. of that pay request, only the $1,200 are eligible for the grant funds. My staff recommendation is that we pay the $1,200 for the work that was completed. That's the demolition of the canopy and removal of that for, I'm assuming, taking it to the trash. The other funds are not eligible through the grant and were not any work that was basically able to be paid from. I'll try to answer any of the questions you might have.

Justice Myers.

So was this lady footed with a bill? Does she have to pay anything out of her own pocket or no?

Per program guidelines, the contracts are all signed under the knowledge and expectation of no cost to the homeowner unless otherwise stated, and those funds are obtained at the price. So all costs in the program are typically grant-related expenditures or covered by SCAD, the Rare Weatherization Assistance Program. However, in this particular instance, since the contract was transferred under the mutual agreement that was executed for this project, we agreed that it was just and it was fair that if they conducted a project that passed inspection that was utilized in the final product that it could be paid for with the CDBG grant funds. However, they have ultimately submitted and voicing for reimbursement of several things that did not pass inspection and are not being included in the final grant project.

And city attorney has reviewed this whole process and has been involved with all this documentation.

So this is kind of just a loose end. Yes. Okay.

Ultimately, under the city's CDBG housing rehab plan, if there's any issues such as this that could not come to resolution through normal processes, they would go to council for final decision. Just noting that the only things that can be paid for on that invoice with grant funds are Is that roofing portion that was demolitioned? Everything else that the city found, you know, it was feasible to repay that contractor for. Just have the knowledge that those items can't be covered by grant funds. They'd have to be covered through city funds. Okay. Yeah.

Councilman Walters. Just looking at the pictures, it appears that they left it in a worse mess than dialogue. that's viable, I guess it's up to 1,200 you're saying, but should we take something off for this mess that they like?

That would be, I mean, ultimately up to council. I believe the intention is to determine today what was paid for, what do they do, what do they not do, what does the city want to move forward with, and then I believe at a later conversation, It's to be determined how to pursue the remaining items that were not taken care of yet is my understanding.

Is there any way to know how much, how many hours they actually put into this place?

I don't have any specific hours or logs or anything like that submitted from the contractor. They were provided with the opportunity to come and speak tonight, which they have not chosen to attend. However, I know that they were on site and working, you know, for... They started work in April and then the project paused for quite some time. So I know that they put a lot of hours into the work, but I am not sure, you know, what was actually accomplished during those hours based on the inspection results that we've seen and the photo evidence and things to that effect.

It does sound like maybe they were needing workers or something, that they were lacking support. Yeah. but the the pictures indicate it's a mess it's it almost seems to me that they're creating a greater mess than they actually added value to it is that a false assumption or false uh just i tried to keep my opinions on this as the grant administrator i would say that it has created substantial undue hardship for the property owner

From a neutral perspective, if we were just looking at what was done and what was not done, we can clearly see that the demolition of the porch area was done, and that's a feasible expense. However, there's several items on there that did not pass inspection is my thoughts on it.

And can you speak to why they refused to attend or why they didn't respond back on

I have no idea. I have heard no response to date regarding requesting them to come tonight to discuss this payout. The homeowner does submit their letter, kind of their experience, to go along with my, I think, 40-page packet.

Which was on the, you have at the bench.

So we already have a different contractor going to take up and try to complete the job.

Yes, the new contractor is already on site. Due to the project being previously procured, we were able to move very swiftly in getting the new contractor on board. They're almost done. so we're really happy about that this program is intended to you know assist low to moderate income residents make their homes safer more livable and to essentially extend housing stock for years to come as she was incredibly you know patient and gracious throughout this whole process i would say so i'm really glad we were able to get a new contractor in here fast for

I'm almost of the opinion to not pay at least until they come back to the table to explain themselves. That seems to be a lot more reasonable. I mean, they're not even coming to the table and explaining what's going on.

I would say regardless, there is a pay hold period that we're under right now. We can only submit a maximum of one pay request from the Kansas Department of Commerce a week, and we're already submitting one this week for some other projects. So we do have a little bit of time there. Additionally, I can only, we can only submit requests for over a $2,000 to $3,000 depending on the grant dollar threshold. So we wouldn't be able to submit a request to the Kansas Department of Commerce like just for that $1,200 if it is something that, you know, you wanted more clarification on that could be possible I would say. I do, I would say, The reason I felt there was kind of a little bit of a time crunch on this item is underneath the mutual agreement that was signed that's included in the council packet, there are stipulations in that agreement that state that issues remaining on the property would be remedied within 10 days of signature on that agreement. However, those items have yet to be remedied and we are far past that 10 day due deadline. I did reach out to the contractor asking them when they plan on remedying and when they plan on picking up their items that are still on site on that project. and they stated that they did not feel comfortable. They were wanting to get paid for those expenses to be used on the project, and they did not feel comfortable trucking things back and forth. So I believe it is their intention due to that response that they're going to leave those items on site at the resident's property until a decision is determined.

Are they aware that they've basically been fired from this?

Yes. Yeah. you'd think they'd come back for their things. But I would be under the agreeance that typically in our program processes and procedures, when we close out a program regularly and do the final inspections, since we have inspections on the administration side, So I'm overseeing all the compliance and things like that, right? So typically when we have an inspector do the final inspection and the final walkthrough, if there are items that still need to be remedied and buttoned up here or there or whatever, those items are required to be remedied and buttoned up before we pay that contractor. Otherwise, I think I'm getting what you're saying. Why else would they fix it? Why else would they do it? if they already have the money in hand and are gone, right? So I understand what you're saying and that would be a city decision of how you felt best to handle that or move that over.

Josh, you might want to weigh in on that a little bit because from the grant, from everything that we looked at in the documentation, I mean, they are eligible to be paid for that item. It is an eligible, I mean, it's been reviewed.

It is an eligible expense, yes.

Yes, I would be hesitant to not pay them for The the rest of the pay requests I agree with and they shouldn't be paid for that but that item it has been Reviewed by sked and said it is eligible. They did complete that work If anything would go further with this we have at least paid what they did work for and sked is reviewed I would be hesitant not to recommend payment for that Josh may have a different opinion on that.

No, I think when we looked at it, I mean you know, to repeat what you just said, they did do the work that they were supposed to know other parts of the project. Yes, they did not complete. There are issues with the work they've done. But they did complete this portion. And that's kind of where the recommendation came from, is that it's eligible to be paid from the grant money. They did complete this portion. So we thought it appropriate to pay them for the work that they did.

So I get weekly updates from Megan on each project. Great communication between her and I. So I will know if they don't come back and get those. And if there's something that the city needs to do to remedy that, I'll communicate with her and see what we can do. And go from there to make sure that homeowner is taken care of and see what we're eligible to do and what we can do for them since this one has been kind of a mess.

So to be clear, there is stuff on site right now from construction.

Incorrect windows were ordered twice.

Oh, it's new windows.

Yeah, there are.

You need some windows? So what I would propose to the council is that we approve the payment pending removal of whatever junk they have on site. Can we do that?

That would align with current closeout policies and procedures, depending on how you want it to.

Okay. Can you look at the recommended motion that's written in there? With that, I would make a motion to approve the payment of $1,200 to Abbott Construction for the completed demolition of the existing patio roof and disposal of associated materials and deny payment for the remaining requested labor and materials.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve. Wait, hold on.

Is there a part in there about removing the materials? Existing patio and disposal? Yeah, disposal of the associated materials. Okay, yeah, we're good.

We have a motion and a second to approve the payment of the $1,200 to have construction for the completed demonstration condition with the existing patio roof and disposal of associated materials and denied payment for the remaining requested labor and materials. Hang on one second.

Does this motion include removing the material? I don't see it.

It says the indisposable associated material.

Just making sure. Any discussion on Councilman Walters?

Yeah, I'd just like to amend that because the way you phrased it indicated that we'll pay them and then they have to remove it.

No, they have to do it first, right? Okay, that's what I meant.

I'm trying to... We will pay them upon removal of their materials.

How can we do that? Yeah, pending. It should be pending. It doesn't have a pending in there. So that motion should be that move to approve the payment of $1,200 to Africa Construction for the completed demolition of the existing patio, pending disposal of associated materials, and deny payment for the remaining requested labor and materials. So the pending part, we will not pay them until they remove the materials. So that's the substitute motion.

Second.

Okay.

I know you said patio, but it's the patio roof, right?

Patio roof, yes. Okay.

All right, everybody understand that? All right, so we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Question, please. Brewster? Yes. Walter? Yes. Yes.

Martin? Yes. Meyers?

Yes. All right, thank you. All right, next item D, consideration of design agreement for Wheatland Village, addition phase two.

good evening mayor and council this item is for approval of an engineering agreement with professional engineering consultants for the wheatland village phase 2 infrastructure improvements the agreement includes the design for paving and drainage sanitary sewer and water distribution improvements i've included maps in your packet showing the project area the eastern three cul-de-sacs are zoned for multi-family the rest is single family PEC anticipates completing the final plans in approximately 150 days. Therefore, we are seeking approval of the design agreement with PEC in the amount of $124,500. Same for any questions you may have. Councilman Myers.

Tony, what is the plan of that lake, that reserve? Is that going to be a park potentially, or is that going to be HOA maintained?

Which reserve are you talking about?

So there's a reserve in the back, the big lake. I think it's Reserve B. Hang on. The far west corner.

And it's plotted as a lake? It's a reserve. It's plotted as a reserve, but it is a lake. It's like a four-acre lake. So if it's a four-acre lake, it's for stormwater detention, so pre- and post-runoff. Okay. So it would be owned by the developer, and a lot of times they write their bylaws that it falls to the HOA, Homeowners Association, eventually once it's 80% full. That'd be owned and maintained by them for stormwater.

Okay, so it's not going to be a park. Okay. Or it's not going to be a public.

Any other questions for Tony?

Yeah, and also, if PEC is doing this job, who's going to review it? Who's going to be the third party reviewer on this? Is there going to be another engineer that reviews this for the city?

So the discussion we've had at past council meetings, PEC has a staff internally that audits it. It's quality control. Also on these utility designs, Public Works are utility supervisors. Myself and my assistant public works director review. It goes with the implanting process. There's a drainage report. Kaylin's previous... You may have seen comments in there from the Public Works Department on the design or engineering of the stormwater drainage plan. So it's a whole team full of people.

Any other questions for Tony? What would the council like to do? Councilperson Parton?

I make a motion we approve the agreement for Wheatland Village Addition Phase 2. Second.

I have a motion and a second to approve the design agreement for Wheatland Village Addition Phase 2 as presented. Any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster?

Yes. Walters? Yes.

Vernon?

Yes.

Hogan?

Yes. Martin? Yes. Myers? Yes.

All right, next we have item E, consideration of bids for cured and emplaced pipes.

We've obtained bids for the 2026 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation Project. The project will rehabilitate approximately 2,245 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe using a trenchless pipe lining method. This process allows us to rehab the existing sewer main without excavation and replaces the entire pipe, which reduces disruption and extends the service. We are seeking approval to best bid for mayor specialty services in the amount of $80,000 $326.10. This is a budgeted item that will be paid out of wastewater contractual funds. Any questions for Tony?

What would you like to do, Councilman Walters? Without any questions, I'll make the motion to approve the bid, accept the bid from Mayor's Specialty Services. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the bid for the cured in-place pipe as presented. Any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster?

Yes.

Walters? Yes. Martin? Yes. Clother? Yes. Martin? Yes. Myers? Yes.

Next we have item F, consideration of bids for a manhole rehab.

So we've also obtained bids for the 2026 manhole rehabilitation project. The project will rehab one 5 foot diameter forest main manhole that's located at the main lift station. The work includes cleaning and preparing the manhole, repairing the structure as needed, applying a protective epoxy coating, and installing a forest main bypass. This work will restore the manhole's structural integrity protect it from future corrosion staff contacted four contractors for the specialized work mayor specialty services with the only contractor to submit a proposal we are seeking approval the best bid for mayor specialty services in the amount of twenty six thousand eight hundred sixty five dollars this is a budgeted item and will be paid out of wastewater contractual funds as well are there any questions

There's other questions, and I assume, since we already have mayor especially working, let me ask a question. I'm sorry, first. Mayor's specialty does a reliable job for us. We're not concerned with that. Correct. We've used them several times. If there are no other questions, I make a motion we accept the bid for Mayor's specialty services for 26-865. I second.

The motion is second to approve the bids for the manhole rehab as presented. Any discussion? Question, please.

Walter? Yes. Robert? Yes. Woldier? Yes. Hartley? Yes. Myers?

Yes. Next, item G, consideration of rotary press channel.

We've obtained pricing for an additional 36-inch channel for the rotary press at the wastewater treatment plant. Rotary press removes water from wastewater solids, producing a drier material that is easier to handle and dispose of. Adding another channel will increase our solids processing capacity and help prepare the city for future growth rather than waiting until additional capacity becomes in need. The existing rotary press is a proprietary 48 equipment, so the additional channel must be supplied by 48 to ensure compatibility. Fluid equipment is 48 local and regional installer and will provide the installation labor. This is a budgeted item that we paid out of wastewater contractual funds. Therefore, we are seeking approval of the purchase and installation in the total amount of $63,990. And this was a budgeted item, as I said, not planned.

Councilman Myers. Tony, with us coming, I guess we're getting up on capacity. Is there, or has there been points where we're like overloaded or we're just getting to that point?

So in the last six months, we're using the rotary press about 72%, having a 40-hour work week.

Okay. And we want to keep it to where we're in the, what, below 60 or 70-ish? I would like it below 60.

Yeah. also like if right maintenance if we have a part of the channel go down down we do have backups we can haul to local agricultural land yeah that we own but our challenger is cold and decrepit yeah so that's not super reliable so we're prepared for this also in 2027 we have budgeted another channel to add to it if needed so yeah just add capacity we want to do it

preventively instead of reactively yeah and this is the bottleneck in the whole setup like this is and then um how many can we keep going like is it like you can just keep going with them and keep adding stacks so this one and will may remember if i don't remember correctly this will finish out the rotary press channel and then we can do that we have enough room in that building for a whole another skid oh okay to double it correct basically okay and then uh i know i'm still kind of on the topic but We've previously did the waste removal, and how is that working out?

So there's been new staff at KDHE. So the agreement that you guys approved a few months ago or several months ago, KDHE put a pause on those while the new staff reviews it. For Deepwell? For Volta Deep, the abandoned gas caverns up in the Hudson Center. So we're still hauling it the way we used to with waste connections to Plum Thicket hazardous landfill.

And what about reaching out to the local farmers? Did you make contact with any of them? Is that going to happen?

I've done that numerous times. I've spoken to a couple that said they'd be very interested in it. KHG has a lot of requirements on what they have to do with the biosolids once they receive it. One of the main ones that comes to mind is within 24 hours of receiving the biosolids, they have to spread it. And all the farmers that I've talked to, which we're talking at least three to five, said I can't commit to having it spread within 24 hours.

Yeah, okay. And then the other thing was... we've spoken about previously the feasibility has there have you done much more looking into disposing of them into fertilizer and making it a different class what was the end result of that so I guess kind of just for the whole council as a

is a class B biosolids. Yeah. So that's what the finished product once we treat it to get it to a point where we can either sell it or produce a product that is available to the public. It requires a class A biosolids. We would have to do some treatment process changes. Councilman Myers had suggestions to pelletize it into a fertilizer. That'd be a whole another addition to our wastewater treatment plant. It can be done. It'd be costly. The regulatory Oversight would require K2C Bureau of Water, K2C Bureau of Waste Management, EPA, KDA, and also air quality, depending on how you're going to make this pellet. But yes, it can be done, but I think it would be quite a large capital improvement.

I guess my question was, have you done any more specific research into that beyond our discussion? I think I just outlined that. Well, I mean, have you actually gotten any quotes or looked into it? actual specifics like in cost ballparks or anything like that or not no so we've gotten kind of just big picture uh yeah you know the improvements would probably require several hundred thousands if not millions of dollars yeah including additional staffing yeah okay all right future conversations all right thank you any other questions

Mr. Walters? I make motion we accept this proposal for 63-990. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the bid for the rotary press channel as presented. Any further discussion? Question, please.

Rooster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Vernon? Yes. Clother? Yes. Hartman? Yes. Myers?

Yes. All right, next item H, consideration of bids for a digester dome replacement.

We've also obtained quotes for replacement of the digester dome at the wastewater treatment plant. The dome was damaged during the June 2026 storm. The dome covers the digester as necessary for the proper operation of the wastewater solids treatment process. Because of the specialized design and installation requirements, staff was unable to locate additional qualified bidders. The city has also filed an insurance claim. And after your council packet was published, we did receive a response from the insurance company. So this claim has a $50,000 deductible. It has $50,224.05 of recoverable depreciation. Therefore, we should receive approximately $160,878 after final invoicing. We are seeking approval of the best quote from Tank Connection Apex Domes in the amount of $210,878. Are there any questions?

Do I have something to do?

I make a motion to accept the bid for a digester dome replacement for $210,878 with the insurance reimbursement part.

So we have a motion and a second to approve the bids for the digester dome replacement as presented. Any further questions? Further discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Harden? Yes. Fogler? Yes. Harden? Yes.

Myers? Yes. Next item, I. Consideration of bids for library roof replacement.

So we've also obtained bids for replacement of the Hayesville Community Library, which was similarly damaged during the June 2026 storm. The insurance adjuster inspected the roof and communicated that his report would indicate that the roof needs replaced due to wind and hail damage. The city is still awaiting the insurance company's final coverage and reimbursement determination, but since the roof must be replaced regardless of the final insurance determination, staff is recommending moving forward with continuing to pursue... Hold on, I didn't read that right. Staff is recommending to move forward with the best bid from Equity Builders R.C. Incorporated in the amount of $86,209.62. Staff will move forward with continuing to pursue reimbursement through the insurance claim. the insurance deductible will be $50,000.

Any questions for Tony? Councilman Walters. So deductible $50,000 is $80,000.

Is there also a prorated? We haven't got any documentation from them yet. There should be almost a 20-year-old building, so it'll probably have some depreciation. Whether or not that's...

paid recoverable until we have their documents i won't know that unless angie has an id and not responded so we may be on the hook for that okay no other questions i propose that we go ahead and prove this uh expenditure second we have motion on second to approve the bid for library replacement as presented any discussion question please

Mr. Yes. Walter. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Thank you. Next we have item J, consideration of agreement with Hunter Pollack. That's me.

Okay guys, a little history. Back in 2024, I acted as the city prosecutor because we were having trouble finding qualified folks who were willing to do the job. I enjoyed my time, but it just got too crazy and too busy on my schedule. So I found a younger attorney, Matt Borney, who acted as city prosecutor after that. He did a great job, but left the firm that he was working for, joined another firm earlier this year. So I've been filling in for him kind of the last few months back at prosecutor. Uh, my wife and I are blessed that our previous partner, Bob men are retired. over the summer and now we have another partner that's joining the office so with that new partner's assistance his name is dan kramer i'm going to have enough firepower to make sure that we've got somebody to handle the docket on tuesdays moving forward so in front of you is new contract with our office which changes that we've added in that prosecutor work back into the agreement number one And number two, budgeted increase in our pay. It hasn't changed in a few years, so talked with Will and made sure that was part of the budget. So happy to answer any questions otherwise. Any questions for Joshua?

with Mentor Pollack Law Firm.

Second. We have a motion and a second to approve the agreement with Mentor Pollack Law Firm. Any further discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Martin? Yes. Harding? Yes. Martin? Yes. Myers?

Yes.

All right, thank you. Thanks. Thanks for staying on board. Item seven, department reports. Administrative purposes. Thank you.

Hometown Market will be open this Saturday 8 to noon. We have three more Saturdays with this last Saturday being August 29th. Thank you.

Next we have Item B, City Clerk. She gets to talk about Labor Day.

What?

You get to talk about Labor Day. Yes, Labor Day. It will be closed September 7th. If you have a water or sewer emergency, please call 529-5912. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we have Lighterman C, please.

Good evening, the American Council. I just wanted to introduce our visiting officer tonight, Officer Will Nugent. He's out there. He is currently assigned to our third shift. He was kind enough to step in when we were short because everybody's been out working another call. So we appreciate that. So have him as you go by out there. And also just wanted to remind everybody that over Labor Day, since city offices will be closed, but we will not. The police department will be open. We'll have extra officers out on overtime through a grant through KDOT enforcing DUI laws. So make sure you designate a driver. Don't drink and drive. And they'll be out there on overtime, so you'll probably see a few extra police cars out there.

And school starts Wednesday.

what's that and school starts wednesday school does start wednesday so watch for the flashing yellow lights in the school zones and watch for the kids running across the street i'm glad you reminded me of that because it's been a day for you it has been a day thank you all right thank you uh next we have item d public works tony the recycling center will be open on august 22nd on saturday from 10 a.m to noon

and the 2026 Street program is tentatively scheduled to begin on August 24th. Once we confirm a hard start date, we will communicate via social media, and residents in the immediate area will receive door hangers 48 hours prior to the work commencing. Thank you.

Thanks, Tony. Next, we have Item E, Recreation and Drop. Your turn, Steve.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Youth soccer and volleyball registration deadlines is this Friday, August 14th. On Sunday, August 16th from 1 to 2.30, we'll have our annual Dog Days event at the pools. Bring your puppy out to swim for $5. August 22nd, we'll have our annual trivia event at Waldorf. Thank you.

Thanks, Rob. Next, we have Item 8, Appointments. Appointment of the League of Kansas Municipalities Voting Delegates. I'm sure I can answer those questions for you.

Councilman Walters. Motion to reappoint the LKM voting delegates, you and Will, and remind me. Justin. Oh, yes, of course. No, you're fine. You're fine.

I'll second that.

So a motion and a second for the appointment of the Lincoln-Kansas Municipalities voting delegates. Is there any discussion?

Yes. Walters? Yes. Martin? Yes. Whittier? Yes. Martin? Yes. Meyer?

Yes. All right, next, item nine, executive session. A executive session for preliminary discussions regarding acquisition of real property not to exceed 15 minutes. Councilman Walters.

Move recess to executive session under KSA 75-4319B6 for preliminary discussion of acquisition of real property to include city attorney, chief administrative officer, and public portion director. The meeting shall resume here in the council room at 1021 p.m. Second.

All right, so we have a motion to enter into executive Enter into executive session as presented. Is there any discussion? Yes. Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Harden? Yes. Cozier? Yes.

All right, welcome back. We are back from executive session. No binding action was taken. That's taken. Mr. Walters, would you like to make a motion?

Do we need a motion to return to make executive session? No. Okay. I move to amend an agenda to consider right away an easement agreement with Rick and Beth Kernis.

Second.

The motion and second to amend the agenda to consider a right of way easement agreement with Rick and Beth Curliss. Is there any discussion? Question please.

Brewster? Yes. Walters? Yes. Martin? Yes. Clother? Yes. Martin? Yes. Myers?

Yes.

Councilman Walters. Councilman, we approve the proposed right-of-way easement agreement with Rick and Beth Curliss as presented.

Second. We have a motion and a second to approve the proposed right-of-way easement agreement with Rick and Beth Curliss as presented. Any discussion? Question, please.

Yes. Yes. Pardon? Yes. Yes. Pardon? Yes. Yes.

All right, next we have item 10, review of expenditures, a summary of July expenditures. Councilperson Parton.

I make a motion we receive and file the July expenditures. Second.

We have a motion and a second to receive and file the July expenditures. Any discussion? Question, please.

Brewster? Yes. Walker? Yes. Martin? Yes. Clover? Yes. Martin? Yes. Myers?

Yes. Next item 11, consent agenda. We have none tonight. Item 12, council items. A, council concerns. The, uh, Councilman Myers, you have a couple on here.

Yeah, I have a couple things. Um, hang on one second. So for the social media guidelines, I took a class that was advertised at the last meeting. It was very handy. Basically, it established who can speak on behalf of the city, and then if you can speak on behalf of the city, so this is the mayor, will, city administrator, and the city attorney that deleting of comments and blocking of people is a violation of the first amendment violation that was the biggest thing that i got out of it generally speaking council members do not speak on behalf of the city but there could be some instances that you do but typically unless you're appointed to speak as we just did for that klm thing for example um lkm thing uh Otherwise we don't have the general authority to speak as the council. So therefore also on social media. deleting comments, blocking people. While I probably wouldn't recommend it, it is not explicitly gonna break your First Amendment, or their First Amendment, right? Additionally, something that I've seen, not necessarily in our council, but in other meetings that I've been to or seen, cell phones and passing notes. So you can't pass notes in council. And if you do, it becomes a record. So I just saw an article where there was a whole thing, and they were writing notes, and there was stuff on the back of it, and it was like personal notes, and it became record, and they were talking smack. Additionally, I've seen people on cell phones in meetings where they're like, hey, look at this, and talking about agenda items on cell phones. If you have anything to say, the button's there. I came a little off on that angle, but you know what I mean. It should be public. So if you have anything to say to another councilman or woman for that matter, cue in and say it out loud so everyone can hear. So let's just make sure that we're not doing that. We don't want to get caught up in a lawsuit or anything like that or just not looking like we're transparent. So that was it with the social media guidelines.

Do you have a question? If you don't. Yeah, I'm done with that. Councilman Brewster.

So what are we supposed to do when a councilperson because um we all use well not all some of us use our platform i've had a conversation with my wife i'm probably going to create one just separate because she's probably tired of me intermingling most i think it's just a smart thing to do but i do have a frustration when stuff is put out there that isn't factual and isn't accurate um that bothers me because then we all have to answer for it we get phone calls i mean i'll admit i don't even follow Councilman Myers anymore. People take screenshots. And for me, it's frustration because there's a lot of information that isn't accurate in some of his posts. So that's what I'm struggling with right now is... I mean, I guess just leave it be and we can address it at Council. I don't know. That's a big frustration of mine.

Any other discussion on Councilman Myers?

Yeah, I was expecting something like that. So... I figured that somebody would try to discredit me and attack me personally. Since coming on council, I've done nothing but voice my legitimate concerns, done extensive research to find solutions to help improve this community, and talk to the public for feedback. Currently, many citizens feel complaints are falling on deaf ears and the public's voice is not heard, such as our ongoing conflicts of interest with the PEC city engineer position. Tough topics should not be a result in attempts to discredit and personally attack members of this council. Any accusations should be specific and backed with evidence, facts, proofs, not just blanket statements of bad information. I've spoken multiple times here at times. I'm sorry. I've proven multiple times I'm here to improve this city, even if it means bringing up uncomfortable, contested topics. My goal on council is to improve Hayesville. So if you have a dispute with me and think that I'm saying something wrong, then just Point out the point and argue the point. You're more than invited to do that. But just attacking me personally and saying that I'm spreading misinformation and lies, you have to say what lie, back it up, where I'm lying, why I'm lying. You can't just say that I'm spreading misinformation and lies. So with that being said, that's all I got for that topic.

So you made a post about flock cameras that I commented on, and you said last week there was a Supreme Court ruling on geofencing, right? Do you see that? It wasn't last week. It was June 29th. So that's not factual. So at the bottom, you also say that, let me find it. That currently Kansas and Hazel have no specific laws or code of governments. That's not correct either. Kansas has some laws and then also we have policies in place. And then on top of that, I don't have the post because I asked you about the The DOT stuff, you're really onto the DOT stuff. And you said, well, when I asked you, hey, where'd you post that at? Because I wanted to see the feedback on the flock cameras with the DOT. You said, well, that's irrelevant because you found out later. that they are actually DOT approved. So that's my frustration. There's no ill will towards you. It's just I get frustrated when I see information that isn't accurate. And I think most people will be humble. I'll be the first to attest. If there's something I say is wrong, I'll correct it because I have no problem with that.

Any other things on the social media, I think?

Yeah, so in response to that, on the DOT thing, that was information that I was still seeking clarity from, and I did get clarification. It was a concern. It was a concern, and it was a valid concern. And I did get clarification on that. And since then, I've posted on that user's post saying, hey, here is the actual DOT approval for the flock cameras. And I think it's important that we have people double-checking that things are being done correctly. On the charter reverse United States, that was drafted for last month. So that's why it was like that. It was a typo on my mistake. I'm sorry that I cut and pasted something that I wrote a month ago and I missed that it was last week and now it's five weeks ago. So my mistake, I was wrong on that, but I hope you can see the... unmaliciousness of that, right? It was just a typo, not a typo, but just I didn't update my writing. And then I forget what else you attacked me on. So that's all I have.

I don't think I attacked them. Just one clarification on if we post stuff, let's be accurate. There's another post that someone else shared with me on a person wanting to run for state representative where you're talking about OxyChem and stuff. And granted, I will give you credit. You did it on your personal one. But you talk about how there's not 50 homes in that area. So I work with GIS a lot. I just looked at the GIS map someone actually already created. There's more than 50 homes. That's my frustration. That's all I'm trying to ask is, I think I can speak for myself, maybe some of the staff, is I think some of us are tired of the gotcha moments and stuff like that. So again, it's not a personal attack. I would just like all of us to do our due diligence in making sure the information is correctly. And if we're not getting it at a specific time let's just wait i'm not going to post anything unless i get confirmation from staff or somebody else i think that's a reasonable request

So on the solar, yes. Yes.

On the solar, you're talking about, we're talking about Mission Solar now. We're talking about people around Mission Solar Project, which I actually went to the commissioners and spoke to the, I spoke public comment to the commissioners last week on behalf of Mission Solar for the farmers that wanted to do that. And On that note, I should comment that they did ask me what the input of the council was, and I said I can't speak for the council, but basically we didn't put it on the agenda. But on that, there was 12 homes, 12 homes. That's the actual number that could protest. It was 12 homes, and they had like four or five of them protest. It was 40% of those 12, so yes. i stand corrected it was not 50 it was 12 homes okay so what matters is the protest area right and that's what they were going that's what we were talking about who lives over there so i'm not going to keep going on about this forever it's whatever any other comments on social media guidelines yeah i thought it was a good training so i you know i signed up and watched myself so there's a lot of good information

Next item, item two, Dark Sky City.

So Dark Sky City, this is something that I stumbled upon a while ago. I know a lot of council lives inside of city limits. I live on the border of city limits and one thing that I appreciate is the sky. We have good visibility here. And then moving forwards I realized that the Bergkamp farm is probably going to be developed eventually as well as the rest of the city We're gonna we're gonna sprawl out, right? What made this relevant for this meeting was at the last or I guess it was with July Planning Commission meeting there was a lot of complaint about the new 79th and Broadway development coming in and that it's a form now and they want to develop it. And a lot of the people around it were complaining, well, I got animals and I don't want lights shining into my property. And these, they're voicing legitimate concerns, right? We do have code right now that states that you can't shine into adjoining properties, right? But what the Dark Sky program, it's kind of similar to the Tree City USA in a way in that it's like a certification that we can get. What it does is we could potentially codify, especially when it comes to new developments, what kind of lighting they use on their houses, what kind of street lights we use, things like that. And the end goal is to preserve or reduce light pollution is the idea. So there's a couple of different, you can browse around that website and check it out. If there was any interest from the rest of the council, I would entertain having know city staff see what we could implement but uh you know i think it would be a cool thing if we can get certified as a dark sky city which is something we could work towards with our codes um and i'm wondering what the input of the council is let's go club any comments i think that's something i have to go through planning yeah yeah i think the planning could definitely work on it too, but I'm just trying to get the consensus. If this is something that we want to entertain the idea of doing, I know for me, I definitely would like to entertain it. I don't know what specific codes or regulations we would want to adopt, but there's a whole section in there for city staff to investigate and find what other cities have done to try to improve their night light and whatnot. So do we want to entertain this or is it just something that

I'll see you then. Councilman Wolters.

I'll make a comment. About 20, 30 miles west of us is a dormitory. It's great for looking at night sky and you go out beyond the city. Definitely get away from the sea lines. Generally speaking, I think part of my purpose on the council is to help limit government A lot of people make their own decisions, and this seems like it's an intrusion to me, so I think I would not initially be for that.

Okay.

Okay. No other comments, so if you'd like to move on to item three? Yeah. Which is Senate Bill 418, Buy Right Housing Development Act.

Yeah, SB 418, this is like the fifth time we've mentioned this bill. Councilman Brewster actually made me aware of this one that Goddard did some code updates kind of in response for it. I know personally I'm not a big fan of the aesthetic appeal of some of these new developments where they look like storage units almost. It's just garage fronts, garage fronts. I think it kind of breaks how Hayesville has looked historically. You know, we typically are, you know, modest homes that have some diversity in their construction, right? That not every single home is the same. So some of the things that they required was require like different designs where you have, you know, cookie cutter homes still, but on a rotation, right? Like five models. They also required a garage frontage requirement that the garage could not be more than a certain percentage. They also required public space for developments over a certain size to include one active amenity. So this is like a park or a pool or whatever. I don't know if we really want to do that one because then that basically installs HOA as well. And then also they had requiring two trees before getting issued a COA. Certificate of occupancy. And then requiring windows to be at least 10% of the front of the house and requiring that duplexes, I don't know if we already have this one, that duplexes built at grade without a basement that they have to have a storm shelter have that I don't know no we don't okay so I don't know if that's something that we want to entertain requiring for and I think that's just duplexes enough I don't think it's on a single family so and what I would say is do we want to have city staff you know basically look into this and report back with things that they think that we should adopt and this this is mostly because of the fact that the bio right Housing Development Act reduces the minimum lot sizes and we're gonna be more compressed. So if we're gonna have more compressed construction going on, we can at least shape how it looks. We can make it to where these houses are a little bit more appealing. It shouldn't put too much burden on the builders. They're still doing their cookie cutter houses that they love. This would just give it to where it's a little bit more variety in construction and more curb appeal and keep Hayesville looking the way it kind of historically has, not just garages.

Council, any comment? All right, would you like to move on to item four, to HR 6644?

No, I'll skip that one.

I know it's late, but I want to read something I've prepared. Over the last several months, I've spent a lot of time thinking about how we conduct ourselves as elected officials and how our actions affect public trust. I want to talk tonight about leadership and how we communicate with the public and the responsibility that comes with sitting in these chairs. I was born and raised right here in Hayesville. I grew up about two-tenths of a mile from City Hall. I spent a lot of my childhood playing along the Cowskin Creek and riding my bike all over town. This is home. My family is here, my kids are growing up here, and I am humbled that the community that raised me has trusted me to serve it. When I sit in this chair, I try to remember something. This chair does not belong to me. It belongs to the people of Hazel. One thing I continue to learn about leadership is it's not about having a title. It doesn't mean that we know all the answers. Good leadership means staying curious. It means asking questions. It means listening before reacting. It means recognizing patterns. And sometimes it means being willing to change our mind when the facts lead us to somewhere different. We are not always going to agree on counsel, and we shouldn't. We should ask tough questions, we should question spending, and we should challenge decisions. And we should hold government accountable. This is part of our job. But there's a difference between asking tough questions and creating gotcha moments. There's a difference between researching something because you generally want to understand it and only looking only for information that supports what we already believe. When we have concerns, I think the process should be pretty simple. Ask questions, talk to staff, talk to those who have elected us, look at the facts, listen to explanation, do our own research, then make our decision. What frustrates me is when the process doesn't happen, when questions aren't asked, when research isn't done, and then something is presented as public fact. Social media has become an important way elected officials communicate with the public. And I think that we can be a good thing. It allows us to communicate directly with residents, explain our decisions, and hear different perspectives. But that also comes with responsibility. If we use social media to discuss business, we should be willing to have what we say questioned. Someone may add additional information. Someone may provide context we left out. Someone may simply disagree with our interpretation. Providing additional facts or context should not be treated as malicious. And we should not shut down conversations simply because someone challenges what we said. If we put our city business into the public discussion, we should be willing to have that discussion challenged. When I believe misinformation is being shared with the public, I'm going to speak up. I will bring the facts. I will provide context. And I will not apologize for doing that. But the same standard applies to me. If I am wrong, correct me. If I leave important context out, point it out. And if someone brings me information that shows I misunderstood something, I need to own it and correct it. I have changed my mind before, and I'm sure I will change my mind again. I don't see that as weakness. I see that as listening, learning, and doing our job. I want to hold myself accountable. Last month, out of frustration, I called an action pathetic. Those were strong words. I was talking about the action, not the person. Could I have chosen different words? Probably. Managing our emotions is part of leadership too, and that is something I will continue to work on. But I also stand by the responsibility to speak up when I believe something is wrong. We can disagree, we can challenge each other's information, and we can vote differently. And we can get frustrated with each other, but we should still be able to work together and remember why we are here. Every decision we make should come back to one question. What is the best interest of the people we represent? Not what gets the most attention, not what proves we are right, Not what supports our own agenda, but what is best for Hazel. I'm not perfect. I have gotten frustrated. I've responded too quickly at times, and there are situations I could have handled better. I own it. My commitment is pretty simple. I'm going to keep asking the tough questions. I'm going to keep doing my homework. I'm going to listen to staff in our residence. I'm going to look at the facts, even when the facts don't support what I originally believed. And when I believe there's information is being shared, I'm going to speak up. But I'm also going to listen, I'm going to stay curious, and I'm going to look at the whole picture. And I'm going to remind myself that I don't have all the answers. Someday my time sitting here in this chair will end, and when it does, I hope that people can say I showed up, that I did my homework, that I listened, that I admitted when I was wrong, I spoke up when I needed to, and then I tried to do what was best for Hazel. Because at the end of the day, leadership isn't about the title we hold, it's about the people we serve. Thank you.

All right, any other council concerns? All right, with that, we will move on to council action update requests.

Got a few updates for you here. 1324 Cottonwood Lane, the property was abated. The case is considered closed. And then for 1100 East Grand, 1140 East Grand, and 1206 East Grand, the properties are now in compliance. The cases are considered closed. In 358 Moy, a site inspection was conducted. And while the vegetation around the front porch is overgrown, the front entrance remains accessible and can be used. Staff also reviewed city code and did not identify any code violations related to the vegetation. Therefore, the condition does not constitute a code violation at this time. The case is considered closed.

All right, that brings us up to item number 13, adjournment.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion. We adjourn. Second.

Second. We have a motion and a second to adjourn tonight's meeting and discussion.

Question, please.

Yes.

Walters. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes.