City Council - Regular Meeting

All right. Good evening. It is 7 o'clock in Arer, Kansas. Excuse me. Call me to order. Please rise and join me for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Good evening. Good evening. on this President's Day. Okay, we have no public hearings, um, no presentations, so we'll move to right to public comment. So, members of the public are welcome to make comments about city matters or items on the agenda that are not part of the public hearing. If you wish to come forward, please limit your comments to five minutes or less. There's a five-minute time clock to your left. That being said, come forward and state your name and address for the record. And the podium is now open. Seeing no one coming forward, we will move to committee recommendations.

Consent agenda. Consent agenda. Just exactly. Not a good way to start, is it? Okay. Would council like to remove an item off the consent agenda? Do I hear a motion to approve consent agenda? So moved. Second. Motion Deon. Second. McNair. We approve consent agenda. All in favor? I.

All opposed. Consent agenda passes. No planning and zoning consent. We'll move now to committee recommendations. Committee recommendation number one. Consider adopting an ordinance approving a resoning from RP2 plan to family residential district to RP4 plan mixed density residential district and associated preliminary development plan for 59 duplex compact lots on 17.9 acres located north of 167th Street and Popler Street. Welcome.

Thank you. The proposed Magnolia Farms develop, excuse me, Magnolia Fields development, I always want to call it farms. um is before you this evening for reszoning. They're reszoning from RP2 to RP4. The RP2 zoning that associated preliminary development plan has expired and they are coming back with a new plan and a different zoning classification. On the left side of the screen is a portion of the future land use map. You can see that the subject property is called out for lowdensity residential with some commercial at the intersection of Gardner Road and 167th. On the right side, I've outlined the subject property in general, and it it you can see the mixture of zoning districts that are around it. It's a little unique. You might notice the what I'll call the dog leg leading over from the bulk of the property to Gardner Road. And that is based on the previous but now expired development plan referred to as Auburn Hills. The applicants or the developer's intention is to dispose of that 25- ft strip by offering it to adjacent property owners. Originally that was where a road was going to lead from this property to Gardener Road. But the preliminary development plan before you this evening shows two points of access off of 167th as well as two stub streets to the north. The storm water detention is located in the lower left corner and they're proposing a walking trail on that parcel as well. The majority of the open space that would be usable is within the center of the development. It's a little over one acre and they are proposing two shade structures, a walking trail through that area as well as a um sport court.

The applicant does anticipate developing this as a single phase. At the planning commission meeting in January, there was one property owner who spoke at the public hearing and it was the property owner north along Gardener Road. He had some questions about access to this development as well as the provision of easements. The planning commission and staff are recommending approval of the resoning from RP2 to RP4 with the associated preliminary development plan and the applicant is present with this evening.

Thank you. Is there any public comment? Committee recommendation number one. Council, do you have any questions or comments? on the title 14 that um I may have to ask for a little bit of help here, but let me pull up the report. So the um the condition that you're referring to um number one related to the flood plane and storm water this is they're preliminary and we do have a preliminary storm water plan.

I didn't I just want to make sure this Yeah.

from a traffic perspective you know we're going to widen 167th. You've got the intersection on the west side that will go north south as well. And then on the east side of the property, there's already an intersection. Well, not an intersection, but access to the properties to the south. Now, we'll have one in the middle. Are we anticipating any issues in the future with additional traffic, particularly since we have the housing to the west that's going to be dumping on right there? Um, I'm not really anticipating any that's it's been accounted for within kind of the future plans for that section of 167th Street. If anything, um, we may need some turn lanes at some point, right turn lanes or or left turn lanes from eastbound traffic. So, we'll incorporate that.

And then with the 167th Street study that we're doing now, that'll incorporate, we already are looking at that right away for the Eastman to do those. Correct. Yeah. This this gets us the right of way that's necessary for our future plans. Perfect. Thanks.

Yes. Hey, just wanted to to find out your thoughts on the density. Only the left one is a collector. The right one is a local street. I'm talking about the roads parallel. Yeah, those are those are local roads. Density for driveways backing in and out.

I don't anticipate any concerns. Okay. I'm just going to note one item because of the question from Councilman Baldwin, too. You'll notice in the lower right hand corner there's a cross-hatch area there. That is to allow for future rightway potentially across from an existing street that would go up into the development into the property adjacent to this. Yeah, I just wanted to double check that because of the e the rightway we're hoiring along 167th. We're also having this dedicated for that purpose to go into the uh adjacent property. Perfect. Thank you.

I have a question because I'm still catching up on all of the new developments that are going in in that area. I'm assuming we have a plan and that if this will require more fire department resources, we have some plan for growing with the new houses that are going into freeways over there. FD1 looks at that. Okay. Themselves, but they're they're aware in their Yeah. The fire district is part of our review process. So, they sit on our staff technical review teams. They are given the plans during the review process and make comments to those effects and then they are aware of any new housing units that may be coming on and how to serve those. Great. Thank you.

Great questions. Any other questions or comments? Motion So move. Second. Motion Baldwin. Second. Deon. We adopt ordinance number 2864. An ordinance changing the zoning classification of certain lands located in the city of Garner, Kansas under the authority granted by title 17 of the municipal code of the city of Gartner, Kansas. City. Council member Johnson. Yes. Council member McNair. Yes. Council member Baldwin. Yes. Council member De. Yes. Council member W.

Yes. Ordinance 2864 passes. Meeting recommendation number two, consider adopting an ordinance approving a reszoning from C3 heavy commercial district to CP3 planned heavy commercial district and associated preliminary development plan for 128 room hotel on 3.2 acres located on the south side of New Trail Circle approximately 500 ft south of 175th Street.

Thank you. This application is for a staybridge and holiday inexpress dual brand hotel with 128 rooms. The applicant is requesting to reszone from C3 to CP3 in order to allow for deviations. The hotel will be accessed by new trail circle and will have parking on all four sides of the structure. Sidewalks will be installed along the road frontage as well as providing access from the building to the those public sidewalks and private sidewalks around the building itself. Storm water detention is located in the south side of the site. The yellow lines roughly outline a 66 foot wide gas pipeline easement and the blue arrow is pointing at a possible access easement between this property and that to the east in the future depending on what develops on the adjacent property. The building materials include a combination of brick and stone on the ground level with ephus on the upper levels broken up through the use of different colors and some variations in the wall planes. The top graphic is the front of the building which is actually the opposite side of the from the interstate. The graphic on the right side is what you would see from 175th Street. However, there is land between this building and 175th that we would expect additional development to occur. And then on the lower left is the other elevation on the side, the the rear facing the interstate was what I had on the title slide. A resident of the Prairie Trace development did speak at the public hearing. We actually had the public

hearing at our November planning commission meeting. the applicant wasn't present and the planning commission decided to continue the item until our January meeting because we had no applications for December. The item was brought back up at our January planning commission meeting. There was no additional public comment because there was no no one from the public there to speak. staff and the planning commission are recommending approval of the resoning as well as the associated preliminary development plan and the conditions that were referenced in the staff report. Thank you. And the applicant for this item is also present.

Is there any public comment on this council question? Do I hear a motion for many recommendation number two? So move. Second. Motion D and second. Wayne. We adopt ordinance number 2865, an ordinance changing the zoning classification of certain lands located in the city of Gardener, Kansas under the authority granted by title 17 of the municipal code of the city of Gardener, Kansas. Council member McNair. Yes. Council member Baldwin. Yes. Council member De. Yes. Council member W. Yes. Council member.

Yes. Ordinance 2865 passes. Committee recommendation number three, consider adopting an ordinance amending chapters 1 through three of title 17, the Gardener Municipal Code.

From time to time, it's necessary to review and modify sections of title 17, the land development code. Staff reviewed chapters one through three and lumped the proposed revisions together because these chapters are more administrative in nature. Chapter one is entitled general provisions and there are a few proposed modifications that I've outlined on this slide. In your packet you have both a clean copy of the proposed revisions that's part of the ordinance and then I also provided a redline copy so you could see exactly where those changes are being made. Chapter two is the definitions portion of our code and we are proposing to modify some of the existing definitions as well as adding several more. Usually the common definition of terms would be acceptable. So it's therefore only definitions or terms in this chapter that are specific to land use is for the city of gardener in particular. Chapter three is where we have the majority of the modifications. I would describe this chapter as sort of behind the scenes. It includes meeting between the applicant and staff leading up to the development application being submitted, public notice requirements, some of which originate from state statute, and time frames in which approvals expire. The proposed amendments were presented to the planning commission for discussion at their November meeting. We did not ask for any vote at that time, but it was at the January meeting that we held a public hearing. The proposed amendments were reviewed by the city attorney representing the planning commission and there was some discussion by the planning commission regarding the applicants being responsible for posting the signs and mailing the public notice

letters as well as the time frame in which approvals would expire. The planning commission ultimately took staff's recommendation and recommended approval of the amendments as written and presented in your ordinance. Any public comment? Committee recommendation number three council. Do you have questions? Dave, I know it won't stop it from coming up, but I did like that there's deviation and variance spelled out separately clearly.

Yeah, there was there were a couple of these things that through the conversations that have been had here with the governing body as well as that planning commission and then clarifying for the public those several of the definitions were just intended to do that so that people understood them from the ordinance and then that way when we're dealing with applicants and that that'll help us in the conversation. um that was mostly our concern with the definitions. Some of them weren't really clear as to what they meant. They were a little bit more um general in nature or gray at times. So we we made sure they kind of applied to our conversations.

No other questions. Is there a motion? Second. Motion Deon. Second Johnson. We adopt ordinance number 2871 approving amendments to chapters 17.01, 17.02, and 17.03 of the Gardener Municipal Code related to general provisions, definitions, and applications and procedures of the land development code. Council member, yes. Council member, yes. Council member W. Yes. Council member Johnson. Yes. Council member McNair. Yes.

Ordinance 2871 passes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, no old business. Move to new business. New business item number one. Consider adopting an ordinance regulating traffic on the streets, alleys, and highways of the city of Gartner, Kansas, incorporating my reference to standard traffic ordinance for Kansas City's edition of 2025 with additions and amendments as noted. Welcome.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I come before you this evening to ask for your consideration in adopting the annual ordinance incorporating the standard traffic ordinance for Kansas City's edition of 2025 with additions and amendments as noted. While the standard traffic ordinance for Kansas City's edition of 2025 includes few changes this year. I had previously presented the governing body in December of 2023 with the proposal to adopt the standard traffic ordinance for Kansas City's addition of 2023. Including in that addition was for a violation to be added that related to the non-compliance of updating a driver's license. That did not pass. We actually amended it and took that piece out. And so I am now reintroducing that as I received a lot of feedback from multiple officers um regarding the critical impact that updating a driver's license has in notifying families in the event of accidents. Um and so by having incorrect addresses, it can create delays potentially preventing loved ones from reaching a victim or discovering the incident through alternative means. also notifying the wrong family or the wrong person. Um, and so I did put that back in um to look for you to reconsider um making it a violation that our officers would be able to write a citation if you did not update your driver's license. The state statute requires 10 days to update your driver's license of an address change. I did go online to see how easy it was because I've heard that it's online. you. It's literally filling out a form. I feel like it was easier to fill out um than actually

finishing my Amazon Prime shopping. Um and so all you have to do is print out a receipt, put it with your driver's license, it makes you in compliance. And so I have added that back in for your reconsideration of that violation. And then furthermore, the proposed ordinance incorporates our routinely added provisions addressing careless driving, penalties for driving under the influence, including third offenses, vehicle idling, parking restrictions, the prohibition of compression release, engine braking systems, and the establishment of maximum speed limits for city streets and parks. The adoption of this ordinance also includes routine updates such as revising ally year references to 2025, repeilling prior ordinances, and ensuring statute numbers that align correctly with state statutes. So, I would ask that this council to please consider adopting the proposed ordinance incorporating the standard traffic ordinance for Kansas City's addition of 2025.

Thank you, Amy. Do you have any public comment? council, you have questions. I had a couple.

Um, so one, I appreciate officer feedback because sometimes we make decisions and don't understand how they can impact the day-to-day working of this any staff. So, that's really good to know. Um, I just want to confirm. So, it's a 10day thing and then a cit a citation can be issued, but it can still be at officer discretion. If it's at 11 days, oh my gosh, the power was out, a big snowstorm, you know, whatever. But we it will still be at officer discretion. They just are able to write the sitation. Correct. Correct. Okay.

Couple questions. U you saw being updated. Is there anything else in the statute on the driver's license? It needs to be updated.

Um, so it has to be renewed. It can't be expired. It can't be revoked or suspended. So there's a whole section that includes all of that. It's so the standard traffic ordinance weirdly does not include updating of a name change or your address change. State statute does, but our standard traffic ordinance doesn't include it. And so many cities have added it because our officers are stopping people in town and have routine traffic stops where they're checking that driver's license. So we see a lot of it, but we can't write a violation for it. If a state trooper stops that same person, they can write a violation for it, but the city of Gardner officers cannot. And so, but there is a whole section on driver's license and what you're required to do for that. This is just for the change of address that isn't included,

I guess. I just wanted to know uh are things like height and weight, all that kind of stuff uh considered updates on a driver's license? No. In fact, when you fill out the form, it doesn't ask you to update that information. That is only updated when you renew your license. So, that's not a violation. No. Someone weigh gains 30 pounds or loses 30 pounds, that doesn't that's not that I'm aware of. I mean, the DMV doesn't have scales there. They let you tell them what their weight is. So, I think we're I know this sounds of us on that. Somebody loses 50 or 60 pounds, they're going to look completely different than what they

did before. And uh that could change the appearance of which would be a change in their information. I just wanted to make sure that we were squared away. Yeah. And so, yeah. So that I have seen in the stat standard traffic ordinance or state statute that I have not seen anything that there would be a violation if they weighed you or even glasses. I mean they renew that or um hair change. I mean we all change our hair frequently. So I feel like based on when you renew your license you get your picture which I will say they just added that you can renew it online. Gosh.

So I just renew my driver's license online. They used the old picture. I got pulled over for a speeding ticket and you got asked to stand on a scale. I'd be mortified. No, we had the text. Slow down traffic, right? Wow. The point is I just wanted to make sure that we're just limiting this to addresses and that kind of stuff. It may change more often. I think you're good because the section literally just says any address or name change. Does it say anything else? So I I think the rest is out of the scope of this. Okay, good. I just had a few quick questions. What what's the what is the cost of the citation if they would actually get one?

Um so actually it isn't a set fine. So the judge or the prosecutors can offer a deal. I will tell you the goal is to make people become compliant, right? So, most generally if you would provide proof that you took care of it, it would be a dismissal. Um, and then if if maybe sometimes like if your driver's license expires and it's been within 3 days and you bring in an updated one, they'll dismiss that with no charge. If it's within 30 days, then it might be dismissed with court cost. So that's at our discretion of the prosecutors on working out a plea deal, but most generally it's to bring people into compliance. So once they do that, um then they don't specifically put a big fine on that or

Okay. Well, and I would assume that they would uh giving the citation or not explain to them they can go online and simply do it or where to go. I believe that they would. I mean, I look to them, but that I feel like most routine stops that they try to address people and even I know that when it's insurance or driver's license that they tell them like if you don't have your driver's license with you, just take it into the court presented um and so that they advise people on that matter. So, because some people may be thinking they have to go all the way through the whole process and go up and do all

and it might be something that we could add to our municipal court page. Um, also where you can go to pay a fine that they could go to this link to update their information. The other question, I know it's state statute 10 days, but I mean 30 days more reasonable people. I think if if it's officer discretion then might as well stay in compiance and this is just my personal might as well stay in compliance with state statute just make it and then let our officers have the discretion at the when if they want to do education or citation or whatever

and I know the last time we talked about it we talked about it more in the citation right the speeding tickets and things I never even considered the informing family members things and so that's not I realized would be an issue. So, I appreciate them voicing their concerns on that. Does the state charge a fee to change your address? So, no. It be And you don't get a new driver's license. So, you're just updating it. You print out the receipt. There was no fee associated to it. And if you wanted to update your driver's license with the address, then it would probably be like the $16 fee going to the DMV.

And you do have to go to the DMV if you want a new license. So, just to be clear, if you move within town and you don't want to pay the $16 fee to have a new card issued, you're going have to carry that receipt with with you forever more until you get your next driver's license hard copy. Correct. It's your choice though. I mean, that is your choice. I would it be on aisle somewhere? the the important tool is that when the driver's license is the system, we would get the updated address. So, it's

if they didn't have the receipt, that's still a violation. But the important important note here is that we would still be given the the updated information. Okay. All right. Does that sound good, everyone? Any other questions? So moved. I hear a motion. I heard one. So moved. Second.

Motion Deon. Second. Johnson. We adopt ordinance number 2866, an ordinance regulating traffic upon the streets, alleys, and highways in the city of Gartner, Kansas, incorporating by reference the standard traffic ordinance for Kansas City's edition of 2025 and all acts supplementary and amendatory thereto prepared and published in booklet form by the League of Kansas Municipalities. certain chapters of title 10 of the municipal code of city bar Kansas 2025 edition with certain deletions omissions changes and additions prescribing additional regulations and repealing ordinance number 2789 and the provisions of KSA 12-309 through 12-3012 and KSA 12-3301 and 12-3302 council member

yes council member yes council member Johnson yes council member McNair no council member Baldwin Yes. Ordinance number 2866 passes. New business item number two. Consider adopting an ordinance fixing certain standards of conduct for persons within the city of Gardener, Kansas, making violation of any such standards of public offense subject to penalty incorporating my reference the uniform public offense code for Kansas City's edition 2025. Additions, deletions, and amendments set forth therein.

Okay. So, the uniform public offense code um the most notable change made by the state this year is the inclusion of trespassing on a critical infrastructure facility. The amendment applies to facilities such as electric generation plants, substations, water supplies and diversion systems, production and treatment facilities, storage sites, wastewater treatment plants, pump stations, and comparable infrastructure. So, that was the biggest thing they've added. And in years past, we've seen them where they're adding more and more named facility types. Um, and so this was just kind of routine with their updates. And then um, the staff is requesting an addition for an unlawful camping ordinance that would read as follows. 6.7.3 unlawful camping. Camp means to use property for living accommodation purposes such as sleeping activities or making preparations to sleep or storing personal property or making any fire regularly regularly cooking meals using any tent or living in a parked vehicle. These activities constitute camping when it is reasonably appears in light of all circumstances that a person is using such property as a living accommodation. Public infrastructure means bus shelters, public parks, park trails, park benches, park shelters, bridges, or overpasses. It is unlawful and a public nuisance for any person to camp in the following areas unless otherwise allowed by Garner Municipal Code. Public infrastructure within 10 ft of any doorway, loading dock, stairway, or fire escape. within 50 ft of the center line of any trail or sidewalk within city limits to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city. This addition is intended to establish

clear guidelines for officers, ensuring consistent and respectable responses when addressing complaints. It creates a violation classified as a non-class misdemeanor which does not carry predetermined fines or penalties. Instead, it allows the courts once a violation would be written to look at the circumstances. Penalties may be set by ra a range of $0 to $500 max or a confinement and or a confinement of 0 to 30 days in the justice um in the jail or the residential center. And it also gives them the freedom to do things such as say diversions where um they would have to meet certain requirements and then fines could be dismissed or no confinement. So it would be at the discretion of the court. There are no state statutes that say that they would have to be penalized a certain amount or that they would have to spend 48 hours minimum in jail. it actually gives the court the freedom to address the situation. Um, other violations such as trespassing can include those fixed cost or fixed confinement or um, loadering, those kind of things. And so this is a lesser crime violation that gives the court more freedom to kind of address um any type of situation that would arise that an officer would write the violation. The overreach the overarching goal is to connect individuals with resources that promote stable housing while maintaining the safe and sanitary public spaces. Also, with the UPOC adoption, we

routinely incorporate provisions addressing criminal littering, riding or leading horses on the garden or golf course, disturbing the peace, unlawful juvenile activity, public urination or defecation, explosives, including storage and transportation of nitroglycerin, discharge and sell of fireworks, permit applications, requirements, inspections, violations, and penalties, burning bans related to firework. work stands, prohibition of sexually oriented businesses, coin operated devices showing explicit films in establishments featuring nude or similar entertainment. We also have added section 9.9.7 for the possession of marijuana penalties 9.9.7b use or possession of controlled substances, simulated controlled substances, and drug paraphernalia. those penalties and that includes that third offense that we didn't have penalties for. Consistent with past practice, also the city will emit buying sexual relations, unlawful use of communication facility. These offenses will actually continue to be prosecuted under the Johnson County District Court. And then additionally, section 10.13 was omitted which prohibits bobbedwire fences. So that would be deleted as well. So the adoption of this ordinance will update all references as well to the 2025 edition of the uniform public offense code and align statute numbers with the numbering system. The proposed ordinance incorporates these provisions, additions, deletions, and amendments. So, I'd ask the council please consider adopting the proposed ordinance incorporating the uniform public offense code for Kansas City's addition of 2025 with additions, deletions, and amendments as noted.

Okay. Any public comment for business item number two?

Council, I have several questions. Sure. Um this in particular when it comes to the unlawful camping is this proposed addition um is it complaint driven is it reactive proactive what's the impetus for this

so I feel like it is somewhat complaint driven as well as proactive we have seen a lot of other cities adopting um the unlawful camping or illegal camping um just to be on the front end of something instead of becoming reactive. as well as um in the event that you do have a situation where um you've you've tried to pass on the resources. that this gives an officer the means to actually write a violation that may move them closer to a resource such as um that you know based on a diversion that they may have to try to maintain a level of employment or reach out to some of our agencies in town that are very helpful. And so it it kind of helps push them to those resources and um in the event that something is might be more unruly that they have a lesser of a violation to write under. Can I add something? I I do want to make very clear this is not when we enforce this, we have to enforce it evenly, not so anybody who's camping illegally on city property, whether they're indigent or not, someone who just decides they want to go camp and they don't have a permit, we have to apply it legally or equally. If we don't, we can be subject to legal challenge. So now there is a provision in here that allows for people to properly secure permits and do it that way. Um, but there have been legal challenges to ordinances like this. So

we have to apply it uniformly. That was going to be one of my questions too. Um what are alternative do we have alternative legal places where people sleep if they need to?

Um so as we don't have a shelter we do have local agencies who um often will put individuals up in hotels who will also take in individuals um other cities who do have resources. Johnson County um mental health depending on the situation. It kind of varies for which which situations would be in front of I would say the courts on what they would recommend the individual do. Um it also would depend on any of their history as well on what they would ask of the individual. I um did some homework on this coming up into this week. Um and I spoke with the shelter in Lanexa who says they are overcrowded and they don't have room for more people. Um I spoke with um United Community Services of Johnson County um and also with the school district. We have here Justin Gardner 21 unhoused students. That doesn't even include like their families, just 21 students, which actually is almost 40% of the unhoused students across all of Johnson County. So we have a disproportionate number of students here. Um 60% of the unhoused people in Johnson County live in the shelter in Lanexa, but that's why they're full and they don't have space. Um I have very strong concerns about this, especially if you're telling people that they can't stay in their cars where these families are going to go since there's no room for them in the shelter. Um

especially when it comes to students and their families, anything that would shift them further away from gardener will make it harder for them to get to school if they can't be within walking distance, if they can't be where they can get to school. Um in which case you're taking what's already a problem and compounding it. If you have a an ordinance that has to be to meet challenges has to be applied evenly across the board. Take unhoused people who don't have finances and give them a citation or put them in jail. They don't have money to pay a citation. Putting them in jail is not going to do anything to help their efforts in getting a job. So, that's where, you know, a lot of my concern with this comes in is specifically with how it would impact unhoused people in Gardner. Um, have we considered any like narrower language that might address some of the concerns and the complaints but still provide for people to have a place where they can sleep in their car or pitch a tent if they need to when the weather's nicer. So I think that would come from the governing body on what um their um I guess goal is in um how how we handled the situation. Um and I'm going to turn to you to say I'm not really sure what that we have a large situation um that we're seeing in our part. We don't have a large situation, but when we did have an instance of someone um staying on the greenway, we were we received a lot of complaints and the only tool we had was to either to continue to ask them to move along, which we did because they did not want to get any type of help because of some mental health issues. Um or write them a

trespassing ticket, which as she explained is a minimum fine. So, we were trying to find a way to not give them a minimum fine, but to be able to compel them to get help. Um, so our concern was when we we um introduced this, which was a while ago, um that we he was we were going to go into the winter, we were going to have a problem because we couldn't get this individual to do to move from the greenway. And while I was getting calls from people wanting me to rent space to house him in New Century, which I didn't even know how to respond to that, um, so we couldn't, we were trying to help this individual, but we had no tool to compel them to get help. We had no tool to like this way we could use the court system to help us compel this person to stop living on the greenway to be able to get some mental health treatment because the root of the problem was a mental health problem. So that is kind of the history behind this. We didn't have a tool for that. Um, I don't know of any place that would be appropriate for people to pitch a tent in Gardener where we could manage that and manage um the the trash and and the problems that come with that, the safety hazards. Um, if you wanted to strike the language about living in a car, that would be the government the your your choice to do that um or to change that. But I do feel like this language gives us some tools to help people get some help.

So when I first read this, I kind of went down the path you did, Kelly. And I thought, well, we already have loading. We already have trespassing. What's the issue here? Disturbing the peace. So, if I'm understanding it right, this gives us another tool that's in between those two and not necessarily a fine, but walk me through it. You you pick me up or you you come to my tent and then you give me a notice to appear.

Well, typically what we do is we try to provide resources. We'll bring the CIT co-responder from Johnson County Mental Health. um will coordinate with the schools if I mean we've we've never ran into a juvenile um that would be a whole different scenario honestly um but we would connect as many resources as we can um that would be the very first step probably the second step I mean when we were nearing needing to find compliance we were probably at step 10 like 10 times of asking this individual please stop sleeping on this bench um So resources and education is is by far the goal. Making sure they're safe, making sure they're not freezing, you know, making sure they're in out of the weather. Th that's our goals. So we would introduce them to all the resources in the event that they said, "I don't need mental health. I don't need your resources. I don't want any of this help." Um because we're we're currently working with another person right now trying to get them which I think we've made some strides. Um the compliance issue piece is further down or I'm sorry the citation that would be like hey we've tried everything. We can't get them to to take any of our resources. So, now we're going to have a judge order them to take these resources.

Okay. Can I uh can I ask about the the parked cars? Do you have complaints or has that been an issue that you've noticed? People, you know, sleeping in their car. We've only had one complaint and that's been more recent since after we um submitted this for consideration. Um and we've been working with that individual um to try to get her some resources. I think we finally made some headway. Um, it's hard to It's hard to speak about. Yeah,

it chief, I had a one question for you. I know that at one time or I was I'm told that at one time there is a that the police department had a credit card that was funded by several of the local churches for cases of extreme temperatures. Is that still available to you? It used as a tool. Yes, it's a transient fund and it is funded um by many of the churches and we can use that and do use that for situations that arise. Um we typically um it's emergency and it's people that are moving through the area. Um we have a list of qualifications and then we do pay for them uh one to two nights in a hotel room and so we are lucky enough that we do have that resource available and and we do use it. Thank you. And

I'm not sure if I said that's funded by the religious organizations in our city. That was my understanding that several of the local churches have set that up uh as a emergency situation for people in in cases of dangerous weather would be extreme cold or extreme hot and that's at the police department's discretion. They have use that credit card as to use at their discretion as needed. That accurately stated? Yes.

All right. So, I looked at it from a different aspect and I completely understand where you're coming from and I think we've had the discussion about this individual from the council perspective in the past and I really appreciate the way that you're coming about this. I would really wish that we could codify the good intentions um better because part of me I I look at this and 50 feet from the center line of any trail. My backyard is 50 feet from the center line. I potentially I don't know why I didn't take a tape measure. So I looked at it more from a a nefarious standpoint maybe that you guys are going to be called into my backyard every time that I I light a fire, anytime that I decide that I want to put a tent in my backyard that just happens to be close enough to the trail. How do we how do we keep that from turning into

Well, private property would not fit under this um camping ordinance. Yeah, I I think I'm with you. I that was one of my follow-up questions. I don't think it's clear enough that it has to be public property. And I think we we pirated this language from other cities. I mean, I think most of it brings it up, but C2 and C3 don't say that it has to be on public property. And we can we can definitely clarify. I mean, that would that is definitely the spirit of the language. So we could definitely

because because certainly the the next motion that we have talks specifically about parks and public which if that's what we're trying to get at I'm also want to make sure you know we you know got into the situation with Aspen Place or ASP I never as place right not that it turned into this not that it could but I don't want I want to make sure We think about certain scenarios like that too that we don't get into a situation um of our own creation

and I don't have an answer to it. So I have a question along those lines. Are there any parts of the greenway that 50 feet from the center line is still public property and somebody does get out there with a tape measure? Because there's some big field areas in and then they get out with there with a tape measure and it's I'm 50 my tent is 51 feet, you know, because like the spirit of it is we don't want people camping on public. Why do we have to clarify that it's within 50 ft of the center line if we just say no public property?

Well, because they're talking about a sidewalk, which is not detected. I mean, there's an ement there, but it's on private property most of the time. So, I think it I do think if you clarify that if it's on private property, yeah, it's not being enforced, that would help a lot. So, one thing, so our parks already close at 10 p.m. So, if we find somebody currently, our option is to trespass them, which is a mandatory fine. This opens us up to not having to find people, right?

Well, and it Yes. And it clarifies trespassing on public property. It's just a it's a better fit to the violation. I had an unrelated to the camping part of this question. What is a simulated controlled substance? I hadn't heard that term. It's fake. Like someone that would sell something purported to be marijuana, but it's oregano. Okay. Okay.

And that does happen. I want to go back real quick to the parked cars. I mean, in general, I mean, if people I mean, if people are have down on their luck and they need a week or two in their car, I mean, I if it hasn't been a problem, I don't know. So, I think that the spirit of that language also is carbon monoxide poisoning. Um, it's dangerous to live in your car. Um, but I certainly understand if if you want to I just wonder maybe there's more there are that we just

I would vent your guess that there could be um or they're not seeing within the city. Um but I would guess that we have more people probably in parked cars than in tents. And the only reason I base that on is by knowing that you know we have at least the families of these 21 students. And when I drive around Gardener, I've never seen 21 tents pitched on the side of the road. So I'm assuming they're sleeping in a car or a minivan or something like that. A lot of the students couch surf. They end up in other homes, staying with a friend or whatever.

But that's still considered unhoused to our school district if it's not their home. If they're staying at a friend's house in a permanent or semi-permanent situation. So not all 21 are staying either in a tent or a car. Some of it is just with a friend,

but they would still have families who were staying somewhere. So, it it just feels to me like doing a whole unlawful camping ordinance could have a negative like it could negatively affect more unhoused people than it would help fix this issue that we're having with one gentleman who was sleeping on the bench. I it seems like overkill to fix that one issue. So I'm wondering if we can either narrow the language or

but I almost think it's fixing it in a more compassionate way by not forcing a fine. We can give them a Z citation because one of your issues was we're we are finding somebody who's already down on their luck. This gives our officers an option to not do a fine. Well, right now if they're sleeping in their car on public property that's not a park. It's not even trespassing. I mean, if there So, there wouldn't even be a trespassing fine. Well, unless like we've had we've had the apartment owners call and ask us to have the person move along. But there the apartment complex, wouldn't that be considered private property? And they can have them

and they can have them. But if they're on public property that's not a park that doesn't have hours that they close, then there's no trespass anyway,

right? But does this apply to the apartment complexes? So we wouldn't have to trespass them from there. We could do the unlawful parked car and not do the citation or is that only public property? So this um is actually considered for the public infrastructure and then um the one, two, and three in C. And so it would have to meet these requirements for them to um find that they would be in violation. So the public infrastructure within 10 ft of any doorway, loading, dock, stairway or fire escape and then the 50 ft of the trail or sidewalk within city limits. I have another question. Uh, is this written to help uh and provide our police department with additional tools to uh enhance or or enforce neighborhood security for homeowners? Uh, if you have somebody camping out in an area, does that provide better security for the neighborhood uh and homeowners in that area?

This was written in response to the complaints that we received. And yes, it would be to keep every not just the homeowners but also the people that are are camping or sleeping in parks or pedestrians or right everyone.

So to me it seems like we're having a little bit of conversation here. We either have to decide whether or not we think it has merit to provide the police with a tool and if we do then we need to define the scope of that tool whether or not it's in a car or not a car private only or sorry public only etc. So where are we at with doing it at all? because it sounds like you're you're thinking it's this is too much. Yes. For an isolated event.

Um I think Casey was trying to get at that it could be proactive and useful and I think that's what PD was getting at. So where are we at? So, so let me suggest I think for the language that's here, if we strike the line about living in a parked vehicle, because I I don't maybe I don't know the southside as well as I should, but you're going to be parked in a street, not necessarily like Celebration is the only place you can park more permanently and it's gated and I mean intents and everything else I I on public property. I mean I think I understand um

I don't know if we can Can I lay out a scenario that just go for it rolled through my head. Public parked cars. Let's say somebody is making me uncomfortable living in their parked car for three weeks straight in front of my home. Not in a park, not in a public parking lot, but in front of you can't ask. My neighbor can park in front of my house because it is you don't have to only park in front of your own house. So, if it's somebody that is parked directly in front of your home, your kids walk to school and that I mean that could create a problem in neighborhoods.

Casey, that was exactly my point for the question about enhancing neighborhood security. Uh because when when there's strange cars parked out in front, people living in them, uh it makes people nervous that that live that legitimately live in those areas, own the homes. Uh and they're worried about their safety in in and their kids walk their kids walking to school, playing outside. Uh this this really has some pretty

but this offers some compassion where they can then be offered without a fine to hey here's some resources or whatever but what what would the if I complained about a car in front of my house for two weeks but it moved you know for an hour a day or whatever it just came right back there's nothing that could be done right currently there's not right we because we've had that problem before with cars that just don't they get moved you know every 48 hours that far Right. Those are depriv.

If we did move forward with it, I would definitely like to see where in gardener people could park their cars or like concrete examples of places they could. Um because just like going over the gardener map in my mind, I'm like, okay, well that would be out that I can't picture any place where that would be okay. Um, I would also absolutely want to see like if those penalties could be codified into like this step one, step two, step three. So, there's a definite process that would be applied evenly across the board. Um, because it would have to be to not be challenged. Um, but I still I mean not being able to picture any place where people could sleep.

Do we have makes me really hesitant. We have a majority if we don't talk about cars for a second that this policy for public property is a good idea. Okay. So, we really just need to talk about our cars. I don't I the only the only thing I don't know is I don't know how many people are sleeping in tents. I figure most people are sleeping in cars, but I don't know. But I I think I mean this most likely be complaint driven with the cars. And if you haven't had complaints to this point, the worst you can do is go out there and say, "Hey, you can't stay here." Right.

We have one complaint now and we've been working with that individual um pretty consistently to try to get them resources and assistance and that it's there's just a lot of different things going on there.

What has been your experience with the resources? Like I know the shelter is over full. What are the other resources? Are they overt taxed also? Um it's really Johnson County Mental Health is what we rely on the most and and they do provide assistance and um you know there's emergency housing and uh different things like that. The the one individual that we're currently working with uh is employed and so there is some going to be some access there. Um but like the shelter was full before it opened, right?

Um we we have not used it um at all. Uh so we really just we try to point them to the warming centers during the day and then um help them just find resources through uh Johnson County mental health and the emergency housing at night. Have you ever had somebody that wanted assistance that you couldn't find assistance for? Yeah,

I just wanted to say too another resource that we have um that we've utilized through court and I also oversee utility billing is the Southwest Johnson County Multi-Service Center and then um they also work with churches and then um I feel like kind of you mentioned Aspen Place earlier we kind of saw our organizations come together like the Hope Market, Joyce Closet and so I feel like sometimes when somebody is forced to look for those resources, um they don't know where to start and that um I feel like we have a great staff on trying to help and educate in our customer service and to try to provide that information to them of where they could reach out such as the Southwest Johnson County Multi-Service Center and those other organizations that have always stepped up. And so, you know, even our smaller organizations locally

and when we were dealing with Aspen, we I learned I don't know if anybody else had already known this before, but when there is homeless youth, they the school will provide transportation wherever they get located. So, they can stay in Gardener and the Gardener school system will provide transportation. That means if some of them got placed in Lee Summit, we found a way to get them from Lee Summit back to the gardener schools so they could still attend school. And that's a I don't remember the law or rule or whatever it's called, but there was a name for it. I think it's a federal uh assistance program. They'll send buses or vans. They send vans to pick them up

because I know that was a concern of yours and that was something I learned in Aspen. I didn't know it ahead of time. So the the kids if if there are unhoused kids that we then find assistance for outside of Gardner, they don't automatically get removed from Gardener schools. They still get to go to school here. I think it I think the spirit of this is is to be compassionate to be positive and you know if we did move forward with this I think it's something that we could always come back to. We found that it wasn't it was good creating issues. Certainly put putting them in jail does not solve the problem. They just get out and then so that that is not our goal at all.

And then I had outside of this. Okay. So fire. We have barbecue grills that we provide out there. Is it open fire? Because I think it just said fire. Um, I just want to make sure that we can still use and then regularly cooking meals would not include if I was out there barbecuing at the park barbecues. Correct. And it it does start out with the means to use property for living accommodation purposes and then

I thought so I just when I saw all I thought about is like we provide barbecue grills at some of our parks and then I would need a fire to use that. So I just want to know open flames. So in general is there is there a general consensus to move forward concerns. So I mean unless there's more discussion we call for a motion. So move second.

Motion McNir. Second we adopt ordinance number 2867 an ordinance fixing certain standards of conduct for persons within the city of Gartner Kansas making violation of any such standards of public offense subject to penalty incorporating by reference the uniform public offense code for Kansas City's edition of 2025 and all acts supplementary supplementary and a mandatory there too prepared and published performed by the league of Kansas municipalities repealing all ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict here with under the provisions of KSA 12-30009 through 12-31 2 and KSA3 12-3301 and 12-332. Council member, yes. Council member Johnson, no. Council member McNair,

yes. Council member Baldwin, yes. Council member, yes.

Ordinance number 2867 passes. Business item number three, consider adopting an ordinance amending chapter 12 of the municipal code regarding park regulations. Okay. So, with the passing of the ordinance 2867 incorporating the uniform public offense code for Kansas City's addition of 2025 with additions, deletions, and amendments as noted. It is also necessary to adopt an ordinance regulating illegal camping in public parks in the park regulation chapter 12 section 2 of the municipal code. The addition to the park regulations would be as follows. 2-301. Overnight camping is hereby prohibited in or on city land except when posted or by special permit. Overnight camping on city park property shall be allowed only by special permit issued to organize sponsored groups and/or for designated city special events designated by the director of park and recreation. So, I would just ask that the council pass um an ordinance authorizing the general housekeeping to amend this section of chapter 12, section two of the Garner Municipal Code relating to park regulations.

Okay. Any public comments on this item? Council, any questions for that special permit? Jason, do we have a fee associated with that? We'd usually wave the permit fee if it's associated with one of our activities. Okay. But like I could understand there being a fee for you're camping overnight for a barbecue competition, right? But if you know a scout group wants to camp, doesn't it really make sense that we charge them?

Typically for those we don't we do we have um in the past years scout groups have camped out like behind the dam. Um, we just waved their shelter reservation. Thank you. A motion for new business item number three. Second. Motion McNair. Second. Eaton. We adopt ordinance 2868, an ordinance amending chapter 12.30 park regulations for the gardener municipal code. Council member Johnson. No. Council member McNair. Yes. Council member. Yes. Council member De. Yes. Council member. Yes. Ordinance 2868 passes.

This is item number four. Thank you, Amy. Consider adopting an ordinance amending chapter 6.05 animals.

Well, good evening. Our current current ordinance um for pet licensing um states that any pet 3 months or older must be licensed within the city. Um in order to be licensed, it requires a rabies vaccination. Um through this process, we've learned that most veterinarians won't do the um rabies vaccination until closer to 12 weeks and and and older. Um in doing research with other um agencies nearby, their ordinances, as well as speaking to our local veterinarians, the recommendation was to change the ordinance to read that it would be six months or older. And so any pet six months or older would be required to be licensed with the city. So our recommendation would just be to increase that from three months to six months.

Any public comment? Council, do you have any questions on that? Just in general, obviously the reason that we license the pets is one so that we can get them back when they're lost, but also to know if they have had their shots. Is there a reason that we need to have a fee for that license versus just saying show me proof like my change of address receipt that says yes I have my ribby's vaccination.

Our fees are fairly minimal and frankly cover our our costs for our our tags and so on. the cost of tags and the cost of our software that it's generally what it covers and I could do the math. It probably doesn't cover it.

The fees also very I have dogs. They vary depending on whether your dog has been spayed or neutered or microchipped. So, you're going to have a higher fee, but that also I think that tiered fee system probably encourages people to do to be responsible pet owners. We yes, we introduced the tiered system last year to incentivize microchipping um and to spay and neuter your animals so we don't have the stray problems.

Yeah, I agree with all that. I guess I'm just looking at it as you know there are several that will come up and say this is just another personal property tax and if I can prove that I have rabies vaccination, why do I need to get even get that license or have the tag Are we gaining a whole lot here by doing all of that or is it just the machines turning but nothing changed? We can do the math and let you know. I'd be curious. I we can we can discuss this separately but thank you. So for now we'll just vote on this. Yes. Is there a motion? So moved. Second.

Motion John Johnson. Second McNair. We adopt ordinance 2869 sections of chapter six of the garden municipal code. to animals. Council member McNair. Yes. Council member Baldwin. Yes. Council member D. Yes. Council member Lee. Yes. Council member Johnson. Yes. Ordinance 2869 passes. New business item number five. Consider adopting an ordinance amending section 8.20.030c of the garden municipal code relating to the party before which a hearing regarding order to abate requirements for violations of GMC 8.80 Ed agitation and health nuisances shall be held. Good evening. Party in there, but this does not sound like a party.

It is not. It is in fact just a housekeeping item for you.

So recently it was discovered that violations of GMC 8.80 80 vegetation and health nuisances have an appeal process regarding orders to abate that is inconsistent with the general order to abate appeal process for all other violations in GMC Title 8 property maintenance. While all other violations of GMC Title 8 allow for a hearing before the city administrator in order to determine if a violation has occurred, GMC 8.80 80 requires an alternative hearing procedure for orders to abate, requiring such hearings be held before the building code board of appeals. After research, it has been determined that the building code board of appeals is the inappropriate body for such hearings. The guidance provided within the municipal code states that the building code board of appeals exists to hear appeals relating to GMC Title 15 building codes. specifically the city's interpretation or application thereof or appeals relating to alternative quality construction methods not contemplated or covered by the codified building code. There is no mention of the codified property maintenance code GMC title 8 and no methodology or guidance for the nature and/or procedure of a hearing related to title 8 is provided. Given the inconsistency between the hearing procedures in GMC Title 8 and given the stated purpose and nature of appeals to the board of building code appeals, staff recommends amending GMC 8.20.03C1C both to allow hearings for GMC 8.8 80 to occur before the city administrator and to provide additional guidance relating to the nature of such hearings.

Thank you. Is there any public comment on this? Council, any questions? We know how it happened or how long it's been like that. Um, we don't know exactly how it happened, but looking back at the genesis of the ordinance, it looks like that was actually put into place before the build of bu board of building code appeals even existed. So, I think it was a case of let's copy some ordinances from another city 15, 20 years ago and it was put in place without the thought of what that board would actually do. So, this is just a cleanup of that. Okay. Thank you. Is there a motion?

Some Motion D and second McNair. We adopt ordinance 2870 an ordinance amending section 8.20.030 C1C of the Gardner Municipal Code relating to the party before which a hearing regarding orderance for violations of GMCA 8.80 vegetation and health nuisances shall be held. Council member Baldw. Yes. Council member D. Yes. Council member. Yes. Council member Johnson. Yes. Council member.

Yes. Ordinance 2870 passes. New business item number six. Consider a resolution of the city of Gardner, Kansas consenting to an assignment of the benefits arising under resolution 2147 of the city trails.

Good evening, Mayor Council. Back on July 15, 2024, the city council adopted resolution 2147 expressing the intent of the city to issue IRBs in the principal amount not to exceed 25 million to finance a portion of the cost of acquiring, constructing, equipping a rental town home project, including buildings, improvements, and equipment generally located at northeast corner of 167th Street and White Drive within the city. The purpose behind the request for IRBs by the developer is so they would be have a sales tax exemption on construction materials. The resolution before you tonight would provide consent to assign those benefits from Sally Development Incorporated to Flint Trails Investment LP. So really it's basically changing the name of the company associated with the project. Staff recommends adopting the proposed resolution. Okay. Any public comment? Council, do you have any questions? Comments?

Okay. Do I hear a motion? Some moved. Second. Motion to second. We adopt resolution 2188 resolution of the city of Gartner, Kansas, consenting to an assignment of the benefits arising under resolution number 2147 of the city trails. Council member D. Yes. Council member We Yes. Council member Johnson. Yes. Council member McNair. Yes. Council member Baldwin. Yes. Resolution 218 passes.

Thank you, Matt. You're still here. Resolution or new business item number seven. Consider adopting an ordinance amending ordinance number 2822 of the city of Garner, Kansas, authorizing the city to make certain electric system improvements and authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds of the city to pay the cost thereof. All pursuant to chapter charter ordinance number 28 of the city unit 2 gas turbine upgrade and repealing ordinance number 2855. On October 20th, 2025, city council approved ordinance number 28 um 555 that increased the total amount of um authorized amount to um 5.01 million. Tonight's pres uh ordinance would basically increase it again to 5.125 million to cover an anticipated increase in the cost of issuance. Um we're expecting the underwriters discount to go up in cost. And then we also when we first um amended it last year, we thought the project was done back in the fall and we based the cost based on that, but we had a couple more invoices come in in later months. So that helps explain the other reason for the increase. The staff's recommendation that you adopt the proposed ordinance. Thank you. Have a comment. Council, do you have any questions? Okay. Is there a motion?

Motion D. Second. McNair. We adopt ordinance number 2872, an ordinance amending ordinance number 2822 of the city of Garter, Kansas, authorizing the city to make certain electric system improvements and authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds to the city to pay the cost thereof. All pursuant to charter ordinance number 28 of the city unit 2 gas turbine upgrade and repealing ordinance number 2855. Council member W. Yes. Council member Johnson. Yes. Council member Mayer. Yes. Council member Baldwood. Yes. Council member D. Yes. Ordinance number 2872 passes.

All right. Everyone that concludes our new business. We will move to council updates. Chief Chief Waldo, I feel like I've already talked a lot. Um, this week we'll be promoting Officer Rouselo to sergeant and next week we have um two new officers starting. One is lateral and one is new. Where does that put us at staffing? We have one vacancy. Nice. That's great. Knock on wood. City clerk.

Financial report for you.

Nothing. David. No sir. Okay. Parks and rack. Nothing for me. Nothing for me. Nothing for me. There we go. So on February 5th, I was sworn in as a new member of the fire district one advisory board. So we will make recommendations to the BOCC similar to the previous representation. All right, member Johnson. Nothing.

I just had one question. Are we are we planning to have a budget retreat again this year? Uh, council member Johnson is new this year and probably benefit her as well as myself. We certainly could tip to the body. Yeah. Um, we could do like a maybe a would before meeting you think be enough six to seven or a little bit longer. I'd like to see a an event similar to what we had last year.

I mean, I'm okay. You have two new or one new. I mean, until we get into it, we don't know how many things are really new or different, so I can't really say if it's going to gain a whole lot or not. So, I'm open to it. But

when did we do that last year? What time of the year? the day after I think so fin and we're meeting with council Johnson Wednesday. So we could wait to see what her comfort level is after that meeting to see if it's something she wants to do. Yeah, maybe see how Yeah, that's a good point because you know throughout the meetings we'll see we'll receive budget and we don't

present time if we want to throw in a work session, you know, as we start getting into it. Yeah, let's let's uh keep that in the back pocket. Anything else? Nothing for me. Vice President, I have nothing. Nope. I don't think I have anything either. So I hear a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second motion. Second. We adjourn. All in favor? I