Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. It is six o'clock. We'll go ahead and call this meeting to order. Roll call, please. Council member Saper here. Council member Bailey, here. Council member Mcronone is out tonight. Council member Kaine here. Council member Alvarez here. Council member Wells here. Council member Larson here. Council member Click here. Now we'll have the pledge of allegiance led by council member Saber of America and to the standyice for all.

All right. Now we'll have uh approval of the agenda. Do we have a motion on the agenda? So move. Second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? Motion passes. Uh comments from the public. If you are a member of the public wishing to speak this evening, please come up to the podium, state your name for the record, and please keep your comment to five minutes. Good evening, stranger. Evening. Is this on? Um Connor Fitzgerald. I I don't say the address now. I take it. It's up to you. Okay. Uh Fyet Street. How's that? Um, perfect.

But it's different being on this side of this. I'm sorry. But but this is the second meeting in a row where I've seen a private business requesting public money above the thresholds out outlined by the city's economic incentive development policy. Um, excuse me. This meeting looks like it's a car dealership project asking for a 75% property tax abatement for the first 10 years and 50% for the next five. There was an apartment building at the last meeting also requesting an amount above the thresholds. While the incentive does allow for exceptions, it says those should be for extraordinary circumstances. Um, back in 2024 when the city council revisited this policy, my takeaway was we wanted to ensure incentives were used to advance the city's long-term goals and benefit the residents. There's roughly two dozen focus areas in that policy. They're taken from the master development plan and the city council strategic plan. And to be fair, this project tonight does hit some of those areas. There's some storm water improvements and I think some road upgrades mentioned, but when I look at that full list of priorities and the incentive policy, I'm not sure that the benefit residents would get from the handful of infrastructure projects at the northwest corner of town um would rise to the extraordinary circumstances level needed to go above that threshold. And just with the overarching picture of the city budgets a pretty substantial deficit every year. I wonder is this sustainable. Thank you very much. Further public comments. Good evening. Good evening. I'm Rich Gross at North Kansas City Business Council and thank you for the opportunity to be here this

evening. I wanted to talk about two things. You got my slides up here yet? Okay. So, I wanted to talk about a couple of successful fundraisers we had recently that the business council had and I want to talk about businesses in each ward. So, we had one uh fundraiser for two uh nonprofit organizations that uh help with food insecurity. The YMCA and the North Kansas City Schools Foundation helps families that can't pay their their reduced lunch bill. And North Kansas City High School had a bill of about 7,000 that hadn't been paid, couldn't be paid. and with our fundraiser at the uh Oak uh Oakidge Family Social Club, which was a mini miniature golf fundament. [snorts] It was not a very serious tournament, but it was a lot of fun. And uh with that, we raised enough to to donate 3,000 to each of those two organizations. And so, we're real really pleased about that. And then we worked in cooperation with John Miller Jr. and Chief Freeman to do a lunchon at Eyeworks recently. And John Miller and the foundation or John Miller took care of the cost of the of the space and the food and we donated all the income that came in from registrations for the lunchons. I think it was about 14 or $1,500. So we're really pleased about that. And so if we could go to the next slide. So I guess I'm speaking mostly to the new city council people, but I think you probably already know what I'm talking

about, but I I'll just kind of remind you anyway. So people call people called residents elected you, but there's probably a silent majority that didn't necessarily elect you, but that you represent them, and that's the businesses of North Kansas City. And there are about 800 businesses. So if you divided that up, you've got 200 a piece. It's not really quite that way, but you've got a bunch. So if you go to the next slide, please. And the next one. And you probably can't read this. And so I'll give you some samples, but in each ward, there's a lot of businesses. And so for instance in ward one some examples are chapels first watch Hellsburg uh safe haven security sail away wine there there's a bunch and then in ward two things like Atlas tube chicken CNC produce chicken and pickle just lots of businesses that that are there ward three examples would be Kate's Auction Davis Paint one of the oldest businesses in town, First Federal Bank, Mega KC, Mid America Contractors, and the list goes on. And in ward four, the the two newest hotels, the element and element uh element loft and element hotels and the uh Diamond Conference Center, which many of you have gone to recently, Duke Reynolds, uh Acute, Old Chicago Pizza, the US Gypsum, even that that big building that we don't really know what's in that building, but anyway, there's a lot of businesses in North Kansas City and you all have some responsibility for those businesses as well as residents and so I'm sure you will and we we will try to give you opportunities to become

acquainted with them doing this kind of thing uh each time and u we're look we're working on a manufacturing tour that we hope that you can participate in. uh we we have some excellent examples. Uh we just need to get it lined up for them as well as a convenient time that you all can can do it too and with your various schedules that's difficult but but we're going to work towards that. So thank you for your time.

Thank you so much and again Rich always thank you for what you do. We appreciate the the letter you send up summarizing these meetings. We know you're watching sometimes we'll talk to you directly. Um but if you ever have a chance and Rich reaches out to go tour some of these places. It's amazing what goes on behind some of these old brick facades in town. So, take that opportunity if you can. Thank you. Further public comments. Good evening. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council. Glad you got your hat off. Uh

just in time second stanza. That's all right. Uh I want to talk about item 18, the How Street Pedestrian Plaza that you have on the agenda for discussion and bring up a few things just to point out. Uh after the Wilson company presented their report to the city council about safe streets, which this has been part of that, uh I got a card from the lady that sent it and I sent back a bunch of comments to her asking for her input from it. Never heard from them. I went to the presentation held at the YMCA, raised several questions there and again gave my card and questions to one of the gentlemen that was presenting. No comments back, no response. Uh, I know the mayor and one council member have talked with the school district, I guess, regarding this, but the public has heard nothing about it, which I feel is a mispoint. Uh, part of this is a discussion regarding the pedestrian bike excess or shared use. Uh that may or may not be what the pedestrian can't be bacted by advisory committee recommends for a route from 32nd to Armor. Uh, I don't know what if any impact is going to happen from the apartments being built on North Homes, but I know it's going to increase traffic on both 32nd Street and HAL and andor Iron depending upon where they travel. And I think that needs to be dealt with in detail.

[clears throat] And I also noticed that part of Wilson's plan for this area was what they called a peanut roundabout. And I see that's not in the plan for this, which makes sense because there's no way a fire truck or other vehicle, even the buses could maneuver around that and the way they travel. Uh, I hope this will be something that will be open and discussed with the public in general rather than just to the council before you start spending money on it. Thank you.

Thank you. And, uh, it absolutely will. It's going to be something that gets a lot of, uh, public back and forth. Part of what's on here, I believe you're talking about item 18 is, uh, about getting some stuff out to the public. That's the thrust of tonight, and we'll we'll talk about that in detail when we get there. Appreciate your your comments. Further public comments. going once. Seeing none, we will move on to the consent agenda. Do we have a motion on the consent agenda? So move. Second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? Motion passes.

Right. Regular items. Item nine,

presentation on PAS study by Burns and McDonald. Good evening, mayor and council. Um, POAS are a group of emerging contaminants that um are subject of a lot of evolving federal um drinking water regulations here recently in the news and over the last few years and uh so the city wanting to be proactive with that got um talking with Burns and McDonald who's here tonight to present their findings on the report about what that looks like in North Kansas City. So without further ado, I'll hand it over to Ryan with Burns and Mac. Uh, [clears throat] good evening. Thank you for having me. My name is Ryan Kirkland. It's an honor to be here on behalf of Burns and McDonald to speak with you about your water and specifically about POS uh and what the city has currently and already done uh to potentially address anything uh that's in the water. Um, so I'll walk you through what we've done, where things stand, path forward. Okay. Okay. Um, I've I've been fortunate to support the city for the past two years or so on this particular issue. I'm working on it nationwide for Burns and McDonald. Um, really want to emphasize that you're not alone. there's this there's some new regulations that have come out in the last two years and you really um we're seeing it just across the board across the country. Okay. Um, so I hope this is informative and and gives you an idea about what sort of decisions that you want to make and um, know that your your staff has been very proactive and they have really gotten a good jump on, you know, where things are right now.

So, what are POS? Um, Anthony mentioned it. Um, a whole bunch of man-made chemicals. There's really not a good definition that I can give you that everybody agrees on of what these are, but they're found in all sorts of different products and they've been around for a really long time, decades. And so, and really sometimes get mislabeled. Um, they're often called forever chemicals. They don't technically last forever, but they last for a very long time. They're persistent in the environment. They're ubiquitous, but not uniformly across the country. And what I mean by that is there are some places in the country that have been or have pretty heavily contaminated drinking water. Um that's not the case here. And so when we start looking at the the concentrations in the water, we're talking about things on the single parts per trillion level. To give you an idea about how much that is, uh the city has a design rating of the water treatment plant of seven and a half million gallons per day. That's equivalent to about 11 Olympic size swimming pools. The amount that we're talking about in the water is less than a drop. It's less than half a drop. Okay? So, it's a minuscule amount, very very small amount that we're talking about. The thing to really know though about it, we we've seen studies at high concentrations. We know that that can cause adverse human health effects. These low concentrations, there's still a lot of science being done. There's a lot of studies that are human health studies that are still being done uh to see what the the potential human health effects may be. The other main thing to to realize is conventional water treatment plants don't remove POS compounds. They don't really remove them to zero to non-detect. They may take out a little bit, but they're not going to take it all out. Okay? Even at the very low

concentrations, they won't they won't polish at all. So, here's what's been done so far. In 2024, uh EPA passed a federal regulation. Um it's it's called the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation or NPDWR. And and it is comes to us um through the Safe Drinking Water Act. And what it basically said was there's a handful of these compounds. We're going to regulate them with numerical limits. Your drinking water has to be in compliance with these limits by about this time in 2029. So, everybody got five years to be in compliance. Okay? You've got a few years, you've got to do some sampling. Um, if you've got POS in the water, you've got to notify the public. Well, you've already checked both those boxes because the staff has already done all the sampling that's required and gotten all the data collected. They've done their public notification. So, you're ahead of schedule on that on that front. And so, uh, compliance would be achieved by 2029. Of the compounds that are listed, you're currently, uh, in compliance with all of them. Um, there's one compound that is close. It's on the borderline, uh, but technically is is numerically in compliance as of today. So, this MPDWR, it changed the landscape for the entire industry. Everybody's having to look at and deal with it. Do the sampling, do the the things that you all have already done to figure out if they're going to need to change their treatment, install new treatment, look at a different technology or something like that. And so I just want to to emphasize you're in compliance and the team is on track. Okay? Federal regulations aren't done. All right? they are you get changing administrations and you get a different take on things. So the current

administration is reviewing uh the existing rule on the books. They're considering some modifications which could potentially affect what you end up having to do, what you're required to do. It may change your or or crystallize your decision- making process if things are to change, but then they could change again in the future. It's kind of a moving target right now and that's unfortunate that it's not just set in stone. Here it is. It's easy to do. You go and do this and everything's fine. You'll be in compliance. Um it's it's really shifting. Missouri so far has been following the federal standards. Okay. Um they've been monitoring for POS throughout the state for over a decade which I think has been pretty good. They have a pretty good uh viewer online if anybody wants to go and see it. And you can look throughout the state and see what the concentrations actually are that have been reported to them. And so really throughout both of these at the federal and the state level, North Kansas City is already aligned uh with with those. So that's it. I would be very happy to take any of your questions that you have about our study or the work that we've done or the path forward.

Thank you uh for the for the presentation. Um you mentioned one that was close to the the limit. What's that one and and should be be concerned at this point? Okay. So the the chemical in question is PFHXS and that is a sixcarbon chain POS compound. Um the rolling annual average is calculated at 9.5 right now out of 10 out and the limit is 10. Nice.

And um so you you you round one time during the calculation but basically there are there are four measurements throughout the year that that the city's already taken. And then you would average those and then when the next quarter comes up there would be another sample and then it would be the most recent four. And so if it's a little above or a little below that could swing that nine and a half above or below the compliance limit. All right. And uh if if we were to tip over that limit what are we talking as far as like cost to treat process to treat like what would we what would we be getting into at that point?

Right. So right now we've done a conceptual level study on which is basically desktop on what I would call the the most likely treatment technology. So that's using something like granular activated carbon. It's it's not the same carbon that you would find in your drinking water filter at home unless you have a specialized one, but it it's similar technology. Um or something like ion exchange or reverse osmosis. These are the type of technologies that you look at that EPA has labeled as best available technologies that are economically feasible. Okay. Um and so we have we have approached vendors for how much their equipment would cost and um I think in our report which I believe you all

have um the just the equipment cost alone is in the millions of dollar range. Right. Okay. So it would be in excess of that to get everything installed. Okay. And uh as far as federal regulations go, is there any allowance for the fact that we would be spending potentially millions of dollars to remove 0.01 part per trillion of a contaminant? Um across millions I'm not aware of. Okay. No exceptions for that. Okay. So if we tip over that Yes. Okay. Good to know. Council member Saber. Uh I had my environmental engineer review your study. Okay. and found it pretty solid. Thank you.

Except you don't discuss how you collected the samples. I guess they were grabb samples, but since PAS is so ubiquitous in the environment as you said, how did you account for that? Now, in some ways, it's a moot point because we came in under even if the samples were contaminated. Sure. But how do you account for that? How do you deal with that? So, let me address the sampling question first. So, this the the city participates in a program called the unregulated contaminant monitoring rule, UCMR.

And so, every five years, the federal government puts 30 compounds that are unregulated on the list. And um every quarter there's a a certain amount of of facilities across the country that will take their samples and send them to a lab, have them analyzed and then that that gets reported to the EPA through UCMR 5. And I think you maybe also have to report them to the state. You report them to the state as well. And so UCMR um has a prescription for how samples are to be collected. And so in this case they are collected on the finished water and they have a specific protocol that has to be followed in order to um measure for POS. The the site conducts their own sampling. Burns McDonald does not does not do the sampling. We have observed it but the site collects the sampling for those data and then they are analyzed by a third party lab to generate the actual

I but okay get into the weeds a bit. How does it how do you keep PAS out of the sampling? Well, you have to you have to you have to follow the uh the methods. It's it's not the easiest thing to do. I've I've done something very very similar um to it, but yeah, you you just you have to follow the method. So, there's certain things that you can't use. There's certain type of containers that you have to use um in order and you know, it's it's a pretty strict protocol. Okay. Thank the the analytical method is is very sensitive and so there there are other quality control measures that the lab will do to ensure that the data are within a band.

Um and and so that would that would be another sort of secondary step um to ensure that the data are accurate with with something so shedding in in the environment it can be hard to collect samples clean. I agree. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Is there anything we can do to mitigate additional PAS? I mean, are there steps that we could be taking to be proactive?

Um, so it's I mean it's the city is on groundwater wells and so it's it's just there in the groundwater. um it's at such a low level that I think that would be challenging to influence the groundwater enough um in order to make sure that you're all always below the compliance limit. Um I'm I've got your report open here. Uh so is the PFHXS one is the one we're teetering on the edge of? That is correct.

So I'm looking at the measurements over time 7.6 5.2 to 2.9 and then very quickly up to 13.1. It seems to jump around quite a bit and you're saying it's four in a row rolling average that we could get hit on. Um how long? I mean it it reading these results it looks like the numbers are going up as a trend line. Would that suggest that something is getting into our water supply or is that just the sampling potential as as council member say potential sampling? You just caught a bad sample. It could be variability, just variability in the water that the the other ones you caught too. There could be some seasonality to it. Um there there could there are a lot of things that influence the fate and transport of POS.

Goodness. Yeah. I'm I'm trying to like draw any parallels to seasonality. Nothing seems to very very difficult. Yeah, that's wild. And to have just to hit I if we get one more I we're going to lose a 9.2 that if that goes over 10, we're done. Like we're in in violation. Well, you're you're not in violation yet. Okay. It would not be it would not be active until 2029. Oh, all right. You would you just you have you have time. You have three years from about now. Got it. To uh to do that, figure it out. So, we we've recommended just to continue sampling. I think Anthony has has uh been in agreement with that. Sure. Just continue to look at it, monitor it. Council member Bailey,

just for my own knowledge and people who are hearing these numbers, if I took the exact same sample, you know, baselined it and ran it four times, how much variability am I going to get on the exact same sample? Um, from the analytical method alone, a lot of times I've heard plus or minus 30%. And that's just the the instruments that they use and how accurate they can be. Yeah, that's better than I expected. Council member Wells. Yeah. On this uh PFHXS again. Yes, sir. Um what are the known sources for that?

Um well, it originally it was used in many different things. Firefighting foam was one of the big ones. Um, but it's f it was found in a lot of different products. It's largely been phased out of production in the United States, but it could still enter our country uh through from other countries. Um, and that gets into a different set of laws. Um, as to what's allowed and what's not allowed under those laws for products that enter our country from overseas where the H FHSS could still be manufactured and used. Um, but I would say firefighting foam was probably the most prominent use of it in in our country.

And so that's not manufacting foam is not manufactured that way here in the US now. Not anymore. Okay. Not anymore. There could still be stockpiles of it, residuals that were used for other things, but um, and the same goes for some of the other compounds. The PFOA, PFOS has largely been phased out of production in the United States for quite some time and the data have shown that concentrations in human blood have been going down in those in those uh for those compounds as well. Thank you.

But it's still in the water forever chemicals quote unquote. Further questions? Seeing none. Thank you for your time. Appreciate. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. All right, moving on to item 10, economic development incentive request presentation for Oaks Auto Plaza redevelopment and expansion project. All right, who's got this one? Good evening, mayor and councel. I'd like to introduce Kurt Peterson and Dan Oaks. Good evening.

Good evening, Mayor. Hello, everybody. Nice to see you. My name is Kurt Peterson. I am here on behalf of uh to be official DO NKC LLC which is the entity that owns the properties we're going to be talking a little bit about tonight. And then the owner of the entity is Mr. Dan Oaks back in the back row there. I also on our project team that's helped us put this proposal together, this project together, we have our civil engineer David Ikeman with Olsson in the back and then also Scott Sagi, the owner of Soggy Architecture. So, and I do have some slides. Thank you for putting that up there. That's our team. I like to start when ultimately I'm going to describe a project for you and then also a proposed public private partnership. And I think you have to start in these instances with who who would you be entering into a partnership with because it's not fair otherwise just to dive into the project. So I want to spend just a minute talking a little bit about who is this Dan Oaks. Um, I'll start by saying that he used to be in energy trading as a as a young man and started getting into the car business and he started I found this pretty compelling about just over 15 years ago with a $50,000 line of credit and a oneman show. He was employee number one. And he moved, let's fast forward seven years, imagine there was a lot of hard work in there. And Dan's used car business, which is what he started in, was became dealer of the year in Kansas, which is a big deal after seven years of starting on humble beginning. And then a year later, he was one of the dealers of the year in the United States, recognized for his business. In 2018, he f purchased his first new car dealership. And late in 2018, he purchased Jackar Kia in North Kansas City, and he rebranded it to Oaks Kia. Since that time, Oaks has been uh recognized repeatedly, including by Ingrams uh and by Kia for its fast growth and for its quality. Kia named Dan uh recently in the last several

years to its national advisory council. It's for kind of auto dealership geeks. That's a really big deal. That's recognizing that he's one of the prominent dealers in the United States for that manufacturer. And again, why did I share all this with you quickly? I wanted you to know that you have an extremely hardworking man that's talented. He's self-made and he's dedicated to excellence for what he's been doing so far in North Kansas City and what he's proposing. Now, I also tagged onto this as just a baseline statement at the bottom of the slide on the screen, the annual tax payments that are paid right now to the taxing jurisdictions by Dan and these properties that he owns that we'll be talking about. And that's about $128,000. Again, as we talk, you'll see it's just kind of a a baseline I like to put out there.

Is that uh property tax or sales tax? That's property tax. I didn't say anything about sales tax. Yes, sir. Yes, mayor.

One more thing, me before we move into the projects, if you if you let me. I find this compelling. Some of you might as well. Not all businesses give back to the community. Dan, without anybody looking over his shoulder or being in some arrangement with the city where he has to do it, does a lot. I actually I asked one of his folks at the dealership. I said, "Can you just give me for this last year?" You know, what what what has Oaks Kia been doing? What has Dan been doing in the community? And I could pull it out here. It's it's uh three pages, actually goes onto a fourth page of an email in bullets, but I decided to give you the 30 second version, and you can ask me questions if you want. So, there's lots of support for Northland area schools. That's a big focus of Dan, ranging from, and I went through all of them and just lumped them together. There was a lot of sports, graduation ceremonies, student journalism, and then a lot of classroom GL grants for specific teachers to be able to use as they see fit for their students. Also, other causes this this past year that Oaks KIA and Dan Oaks has been involved with involving in the area here, animal shelter, foster care, food drives, veterans support, Ronald McDonald House, and heart disease. And those are just the ones I picked because I found thought they were especially compelling. So again, I'll move off that, but I hope we start with knowing this is the man that's proposing to double down and do more uh in North Kansas City. Now to the the project site. You all recognize Burlington running north south and curving to the west there uh eventually out of the city to the north. But I want you to focus on uh the the numbers one, two, and three. group. Those are all properties owned by DO, NKC, LLC, Dan Oaks, and it forms the basis for the pieces of the project we want to talk to about tonight. So, the current uses right now there's four buildings across those three parcels that you can see on the screen. Uh, parcel one is the one that has the two buildings. The other each have one building. Today, project area one, just to get your mind around, I know you drive by it a lot, but has the the

biggest building on there is the new main new car sales for Oaks Kia. And then you have a smaller building that's just u ancillary building helping with new car sales. Project area two as you look to the north is the used car building and project area three there in the back is just frankly underutilized. There's some different things they do in the back there but it's just an underutilized uh older building. Now the challenge is Dan Oaks wants to rebirth the aesthetics of the auto plaza that's here. all those properties. He wants it to look totally different to anybody that's passing by, but it's really financially challenging to do that. The economics and the return on investment are not super. He could do a lot better in the short term and medium term, probably on the NASDAQ or something. Seriously, with the amount of money he's talking about, plus if he's going to do it, um I've been working on this with him for what, maybe six months, looking at design and talking to city staff. How can we do this better? and he was convinced if he's able to do it, if this ultimately is something the city embraces, he's not going to do it without being excellent. And that includes doing some public improvements, dealing with storm water, which I'll talk about in a minute, and also doing upgrades to the public street that we'll zoom in on a minute that bisects these properties called Design Drive. That's a public city- owned street. But doing that takes something that is financially challenging and makes it even more even more difficult. Um, and there's really no return on direct return on investment when you put, you know, as you'll see, over a million dollars into those improvements. But it does help the city and helps the city at large. But I didn't come here just to talk about the challenges. You got to set the table. I wanted to talk about solutions. So the last uh piece that I'd like to present to you before we just answer any questions that you have would be to talk about the project itself and then the proposed public private partnership that would actually sort of make it come to life. So, first we'll start with the site plan. The overall project, as I alluded to a moment ago, is divided into three parts.

And you'll see them. You can see the labels in red. Project area 1, project area 2, project area 3. And because we really wanted it to pop off the page, what we're proposing to touch and improve and beautify. You can see wherever there's dark, almost black, dark gray, that's property we own and property that we're improving. But I'll zoom in for you, too. Just wanted you to have the big picture context. So, let's start. Let's go in order. Project area one. So, we zoom in. You can see it's highlighted in a yellow boundary. We would start by demolishing the two existing buildings that are there today. We would build a new state-of-the-art Kia new car dealership, which would be we're still playing around the exact square footage, but at least 53,000 square feet. Again, for those of you that know new car dealerships, that's really big. That's We have the expert back there, but that's like uh Mercedes and maybe just a couple other dealerships that go that big. Um it'll be beautiful. It'll have 20 foot tall glass front as you see it. Um for the showroom that faces Burlington, it'll have administrative offices for 20 plus employees on two levels with an elevator including training facilities. It'll have 30 bays of service operations. It'll have a new parking lot with new asphalt curves. It will have new gutters with landscape islands, irrigation, new lighting, enhanced landscaping, and then a net increase in pvious so water passes through uh surfaces to reduce water runoff, which I we all know is really important, especially in these parts. Uh new monument signage, underground detention, and this I'm going to pause on this one. So, I just said we made it. Do you ever do this? The double negative uh more pvious uh less impervious. That's right. Uh so in general as you've seen projects that means you don't in general not a stormwater expert but Mr. Ikeman is usually in projects that means you don't have to do anything new you don't have to do detention or anything

like that that's the same here but instead Dan has chosen to put an underground detention which as you all know is very expensive and not do a little bit but do a ton to help with the whole uh storm water drainage in the area. Nothing to do with this project. Couple quick ren rings before we move to two. That would be that uh new building as you can see that's you're you're standing on Burlington kind of looking back at the building. And now let's move on to project area two. Project area two as you can see is on the north side of the site. This would be a complete facelift and renovation of the existing just under 12,000 square foot building that is there today. It was that former Subaru dealership building. And this would be the home of the new pre-owned dealership for the Oaks campus. The exterior improvements to the building facade uh would be in the same color palette, so you really know that it's, you know, what's architecture word? Harmonious with the the new dealership building that we I just described to you. Also, we'd have a complete interior overhaul, including a new car wash, upgrade service bays, new administrative offices, and then a totally new newly renovated customer showroom. There'd be a mill overlay over that parking lot, new landscaping in the islands, irrigation, new lighting, and then some perimeter landscaping there. Also would have new monument signage. Let's take a quick look. An image there. So again, that's fa that we're looking to the south. That facade is facing Burlington to the north. Gives you a look at that. And then lastly, the third part of the project, as you can see on the screen, is kind of tucked in the back. You probably don't have a reason to be ever be back here, I'm imagining, unless you play tennis and come back there to that facility. So, this is renovating that existing building. It will be the intake center for all new car preparation and reconditioning of pre-owned cars that are taken in. It'll have an a complete faceelift. It'll be a renovation of the inside as well. It's about an 18 little

over 18,000 square foot building. And the exterior improvements will same thing, we'll make it harmonious. It'll look really nice with the rest of the campus. There will be a new uh photo bay for internet sales operations that will be put in installation of eight service and detail bays, administrative offices, break room, part storage. And then on the parking lot, like you've heard at the other two pieces, we'd have new asphalt, curbs, uh gutters, irrigation, new lighting, enhanced landscaping, again a total total redo. There would also be much like the big new building project area one there would be a storm water detention facility that would go above and beyond what city code requires. Now there's a little difference here. First of all it's smaller because that's a smaller footprint. Here we actually do have a little bit more impervious but then we go big. We go way bigger with underground detention to not only take care of that but to take care of some absorb some regional storm water as well. Lastly we will do a partial mill and overlay. You can see that that's at it's funny tennis court. Sounds funny, but the the the private drive that runs just to the the northern part of project area 3 is called tennis court. And you can see there's a little notch out if you're looking closely. The light gray. Yeah, got it. Mayor Mayor has it. Um and and that's because we've been reaching out to the owner of the green patch there um to the north of project area 3 and we just can't make contact. If this project gets supported by the city and it moves forward, we're hoping that people from the dis maybe even know anybody reach out because if we can get their support, we'll pay also to redo that light gray portion of tennis court. We just don't have the right to go on their property [clears throat] and do that. So, little commercial there. We'd like to do that if we can. Uh I render rings here. It's looking all new facade, parking lot, everything I described. And then the last before we move on from the project and talk about the public private partnership is to talk about design drive. You can see it highlighted

in yellow. It's really the spine for these properties. It is a public street so owned by North Kansas City. And we want to put a real significant amount of money into that to make that just as beautiful as the rest of the campus. So we will put sidewalks on both sides, street trees all along, and then a total refresh of the surface. And I have, I think, two images of that to give you a sense, kind of get your bearings here. You're looking northwest from Burlington and you can see beyond the new color car dealership. You can see Burlington. You kind of have to spin a little bit. See the sidewalks and the trees, all that. And then one more angle of the same thing. Looking back the other direction, looking southwest from Burlington Street. That's a little more zoomed in so you can see it better. and it runs the full extent from Burlington all the way back to the southern extent of the property that we control. Next, before I I I wasn't totally accurate before moving into the proposed public private partnership, I want to talk about timing because that's one of the number one questions people usually have. So again, if if if there's support and this was able to ultimately not tonight, this is a first step, but ultimately be supported through an entire process by the city. Later this year, we would want to start on project areas two and three. So, I'm saying numbers, you can see it again. Project areas two and three. The reason we start with that is we then have to finish those, move the new car sales so there's not an interruption. So, anybody thinks about going somewhere else, we move the new car sales back to those buildings. We work on the brand new dealership in front in project area one. And then we move everything back and everything's put in the right place. And that takes from the time we start around 18 months to 24 months to do everything. Now, um, project benefits because you you can't ask for a partnership unless the city and the city's your constituents, the city's residents are better off. And so, I have a few items I just wanted to highlight because if this

if this doesn't sound compelling, then you really we you know, you shouldn't support it. Honestly, that's what it comes down to. So, the first is I've mentioned it several times. You heard about the regional storm water improvements from putting in underground detention in project area one, project area three that have really nothing to do with other than a little bit of project area three, right? We're doing increased impervious, but the rest of it is all just to help the area and that's why I have my storm water engineer here. I am not exaggerating to say it has a truly truly significant impact on this area storm water and the overall plan by the city to uh deal with the area storm water. The second is the improvement of a public street a private cost. Again, design drive is absolutely not controlled by us. We'd have to get your permission. Um it's otherwise something the city maintains u like every other public street, but we'd like to put our private money into it and make it beautiful like the rest [snorts] of the campus. Those two items to give you context. I'm getting ahead of myself, but just so you'll remember this, the public private request when you take those dollars and today's dollars, half of that benefit that we're asking for would go to these two, I'll call it public things. That's how much Dan is doubling down about that and partnering with the city. And we can dig into the details when we put numbers up. Third is benefits to the city, beautifification. Beautification of this important gateway quarter. I don't need to sell you that this is an important uh you know entry point from the north and just an important area of the city and we want to make it beautiful. Um and the context is again from the very beginning when Dan and I started working on this he said I want to find a way to make this another you know generation or more I want to be here. I want to double down. If he doesn't do it here he has to do it somewhere and we don't want others coming here honestly that are used car dealers that aren't going to make it beautiful like this. So the point is we want to be the ones that beautify this and make it this way for the next generation plus. Next, the idea of attracting visitors to North Kansas

City. You all know that people come here to see Dan's dealership and when they come I I think and you you may know better than me, but I think a lot of people look around. They may not some of them may not otherwise be in North K City. And I'm just going to bet you they're going to like what they see. I think some people, it's not a stretch, certainly have lunch, right? Do some commerce, but some people may end up here. Some people may even end up living here because they come here um because of Dan's business. So, attracting visitors to patronize uh businesses here in the city. Um job creation, we're not only retaining about 112 is what we're at right now in terms of jobs in North Kansas City, but we estimate over the next two years 30 to 35 new jobs that would be able to come here to the campus if we're able to move forward. And then lastly, the idea of just growing the property tax base. It's true what I'm about to roll out is a request that does share the property tax base for a certain number of years, but the useful life of this campus will go well beyond the 15 years that you'll hear us talk about in just a second. And we hope it acts as a domino effect as we've seen in many places when you put a huge investment somewhere. It just it it can spread, right? It can give people the idea of more investment in the corridor. Okay, the public private partnership. This is the last piece up on the screen. There's a summary. There's two parts to it. The first is a request for a real property tax abatement. The term would be 15 years according to city policy. But then the amount the percentages would be 75% for the first 10 years, which means there'd be a 25% payment in lie of tax. And then in the last 5 years, years 11 through 15, it would be a 50% real property tax abatement, which would leave a 50% pilot to the taxing jurisdictions. That was one of two requests. The second request is from the same chapter 100 tool, but it's sales tax exemption on construction materials. It allows Dan to reduce construction costs by it ends up being something usually about like 3% or something like that because he doesn't pay state and local sales tax on lumber and metal and all the different

materials for construction. So, we would apply this structure if if approved by the city ultimately to each of the three project areas as we move through those uh phases. So we acknowledge it's actually was great that the gentleman he kind of stole my thunder that spoke earlier. He said well this is going over policy. Absolutely. And I want to emphasize that this while it fits the 15-year term that's within policy. The first 10 years policy is 50 up to 50% and we're asking for 75% abatement and then the last five years typically the policy the policy says would be 37.5 and we go over that to 50%. So, we hope we're not ashamed of that. And that's ultimately absolutely the city the city's decision on whether to support it. But our vision here is that we go above and beyond, you know, unabashedly. We didn't just come in and say, "Here's what we need to make our performer work. We came in with staff, as they'll say, and met several times, listen, definitely heard a lot about storm water, encouraged us to figure something out." Um, and then design drive taking that on. We said, "We want we want to go big." And like I said before, I'll only say it one more time, half of what we're asking for in today's dollars would actually go towards these storm water improvements and design drive. So given the substantial private invest investment by Mr. Oaks which is approximately $25 million the anticipated benefit to him of these requested incentives when you compare it to his investment is less than 10%. So it's meaningful it makes the project work. But I want to give the sense to you know people that might be listening this is not a you know corporate giveaway where you come in and say will you write me a check. There's actually no checks written and it's certainly not saying, "Hey, will you pay for half my project?" This is 10%, but it's a critical 10% for this project to move forward. Lastly, I just wanted to put up to be really specific. After you ask any questions you have of me or the team, um, our specific question tonight is not to, of course, approve a project. It's if this seems compelling for staff to dig in with us, we would ask you to

allow them to enter into a funding agreement with this so we can pay your professionals to evaluate the proposal. And then we'd like to go meet with the school district. professional staff if if you supported that. Thank you. I know that was long. We've been working on it six months. Thank you for listening and we mayor, we'd be happy to answer questions.

All right. Thank you for the presentation. Thank you for bringing this to us and uh thanks for the work you're doing on this. Thanks for all you're doing in the community too, Dan. Appreciate that. Seeing the the giving back the Ronald McDonald House, Casey Mo Angels, great pictures. Um okay, few questions to clarify numbers that I'm seeing in the report and some stuff that I saw in the application. Uh there's a question six that asks about the status of the property. says uh applicant has acquired all parcels, but in the budget for the project there's 6.8 million for acquisition cost. Is that already done and that's kind of a payback or how's that word? So it's a I'm glad you said it because there's only so much time and I didn't roll that out. So do you remember when I said about a $25 million investment? I didn't say whatever 32. The reason is because

when I'm when I'm talking about what Dan is going to do, it's estimated at 25 million. We always put in always put in project budgets like this what our acquisition cost was for all the property because it does provide context. But I'm I like to use the 25 million. Like when I said 10% I didn't say I didn't take the requested incentives against the 32. I took it against the 25. So they're both true. Just a different way of looking at it.

Awesome. Uh okay that dovtales into the other part I wanted to clarify. As you mentioned 10% of the private money that's about $2.5 million estimated value of the tax incentives over the 15 years. Mayor, just in case anybody ever got confused because we're all about transparency. If Dan outlays all this money, he gets over 15 years, he gets savings, right? Sales tax exemption up front. So, he puts out all the money. If you add all that money up, it's more than two and a half million. But from a financial sense with our bank and all that, you always discount it back. So, you heard me say a couple times today's dollars because I always want to be very specific. That's two and a half million in today's dollars.

Yep. That's present value cash flow um discounted. That's we'll dig into that with the financial advisor if we get to the point with the uh the request for tonight. Um also on here I see the estimated future tax payment of 421,000 annually post construction. That's the full amount. So the pilot would be 25% of that number. Is that what we're

Yeah, I'd have to get my actual spreadsheet out to say yes to exact numbers, but that's the concept that that's the way we model it and so that we can then say this is this is what a pilot would look like. So, I've got the estimated post construction assessed valuation 421,114 of the three parcels. Um, just to clarify for for the people watching as well, incentive requests like this um do include a a continued payment in lie of tax and currently as you noted the first slide, 128,000 being paid annually. 25% of that residual estimated value is 105,000. So even at that point, we're still pretty close to what you're paying now with the payoff down the road of if all this goes, there'll be more money coming into the coffers at the end.

Mayor, can I add before you go on from that? We actually, and I again there's so much to say and try not to go on and on, we actually held the base harmless. So when we figure out increment, that is what we're asking to be abated. It's it only starts over what's being paid today. Got it. Okay, very good. Which is really important. It's No. Yeah, that that makes a a difference as well.

Um, okay. So, the request on the table is to uh enter a funding agreement similar to what we approved last week for the park loss 2 to have them pay for our uh financial adviserss to look uh at the proposal and tell us how the numbers would stack out. Do we have other questions on the meat and potatoes of the project? Go ahead. Uh, hi Kurt and thank you. I appreciate um you coming to talk to council tonight. Um I just had a couple of quick questions. So uh there's two pieces, right, for public benefit, right? The uh uh storm water detention at least in terms of capital improvement, right? So storm water detention uh and design drive, correct?

Um so I was looking here at the individual costs. So detention that's around like what 1.1 million between sites one and three, correct? Yep. And I'm gonna add in there and a little piece of it. Uh if we're doing really round numbers right now, yeah, 150,000 or something of that is what we should should do to detain because we increased pavement on project area three and that other round numbers $950,000 is all for public benefit. I see. Gotcha. Um and then for design drive, $276,000 approximately. Yep. That's right. Um, and that's including sidewalks and then street surfacing and the lighting and the landscaping. Yes.

Gotcha. Okay. And north and south. I think everybody in this room knows I'm pro sidewalk on the record, but uh when it comes to uh segments north and south of the site, um there are no continuous sidewalks. Correct. Or no contiguous. professional staff's gonna be able to confirm, but I I do not believe it goes south and then north hits Burlington. So, right, I think you're correct. Okay. Just wanted to confirm that. Um, and then I also had a question on uh uh job creation. So, estimated between 30 to 35 uh new jobs created, correct?

Dan be conservative. He's he's more even more bullish, but yes, that's what I said because I that's we're gung-ho on that. Sure. Okay, perfect. and and what is that um kind of basis like what was the basis for that calculation? Yeah, Dan actually you can imagine it was methodical. I didn't write it all down for tonight but it's across it's across the it it it touched every all three pieces of the campus. Okay, perfect. Thank you. I appreciate it. I had a question about the visitors coming to to shop. Um obviously there's a a big web presence for the dealership also, but how many individual visitors come per day or per week? Um, do you have that statistic? Yeah, that's funny. I'll even look.

Um, if you average it throughout the year, per day would be about 100 people per day. And do you expect not employees, just the just visitors? And would you expect like do you have an estimate on how much that would increase uh with these improvements? Yeah, we did. We did. It's it's not necessarily immediate, but in the long term, yeah, over the long time, long term, 30 to 50%. Great. Thank you. Any further questions?

Um I'd be curious to hear from public works and what benefit this would have to them. like would it save significant money? Would it make any changes to the storm water plan? What I'll say what is nice is you know they are working with Olsen which is our who did our storm water master plan when we get into evaluating actual you know storm water calculations. We have to kind of work out who's doing what for what entity at that point. Um but I haven't seen numbers yet. I don't think I don't think we have any kind of understanding of the quantity. Those things are all quantifiable. Just we don't I don't think there's been math put to that that we've seen yet. So,

okay. I think that would that's my hesitation is I'm trying to balance okay what is sure it's beautiful it's going to look great but what is the public benefit of this especially like that part of the road it looks great but it's not a significantly used space. The sidewalks are kind of cut off. Um, so I'm not necessarily opposed to taking the next step, but I also don't want to waste your time and money either. Um, so I just want to be really cognizant of what the public benefit is here.

If it's appropriate on this on the stormwater front, um, design drive is like that's subjective, right? You just decide whether that's valuable or not. But on the stormwater front, I will say I've known David Iikman and Olson for a really long time and and and I I believe even well, you talk all the time, but on this kind of were kicking around ideas in the last week or so and I made absolutely sure for example I said he even has you have to do a whole storm water study you know that and they haven't done the complete study but since David knows this area like the back of his hand I said so this is significant and he I won't even say percentages right now but you'll you'll like it in terms of what it's doing just because I don't want to get ahead of the study but I said even I sat back here he'll smile I said significant right like the precision he's like absolutely Absolutely. I'm I'm positive it's taking care of, you know, a significant part of the storm water. So, that's our burden to show to you, but I understand the question and the point

and that would be borne out more in a feasibility type of study. And we when we did um the Bloom ENKC uh incentive request, we looked at similarly position. They're just across the road here and that is at the base of the North Oak Hill. So, it's coming off the levey. It's coming off the hillside. There's a lot of water running down into North Kansas City at this point. So detention is very important and I appreciate staff bringing that up as we started getting into this

and to be real so I didn't raise expectates like oversell I'm never overselling um there's a there's a this is coming from David right me asking there's a big issue right there's a big goal in terms of dealing with storm water this takes a deals with a lot of water that has nothing to do with our site just know I'm not gonna it doesn't it's not like it takes care of 50% of the whole area's water just for expectation, but it's significant. Really quick, Council Wells, yeah, you mentioned uh job creation on the benefits portion, and I'm wondering uh if you have the numbers for what the current staffing is and what you would anticipate you would level up to and get this through.

Yeah, the current I I I'm going to cheat again and look at the exact number um because we just checked to get it fresh. The estimate over the next two years in growth was that 30 to 35 that I said is conservative because I made it be conservative. But the um the existing today was as we go to the benefits page. I think I actually have it on the slide too so I can say see it. No, I didn't give that to you. It's 112 today. So retaining 112 30 to 35 over the next two years. Thank you. Yes, sir.

All right. Uh so we are at the point where uh if this is something that we would like to consider um we would open a funding request or approve a funding request for them to compensate our financial adviserss so that there is no out of pocket. To make it clear, it's going to be more than our financial advisor. It's any outside expert that we need to hire. For example, if we need to get an engineer to verify something, y or outside legal counsel, those things are also included. I didn't want there to be a misunderstanding.

I need to write that down. You caught me on the same thing last week. Uh so paying for all of it. Um and and to me, I think it's compelling enough to make that decision to have them tell us if is this a good deal for the city? What is the financial return? What does it look like? um based on these numbers which are estimates by the proposal uh by the developers proposal which to be taken with a grain of salt but our our adviser would get down into the nitty-gritty. So uh any thoughts on that from the city council? Am I seeing head nods or head shakes? Thumbs ups? Thumbs ups. Thumbs I see head nods. I see some some of this. Okay. Uh do we need to call a role on this one? If just a motion, if you if we could get a motion for us to bring back a funding agreement for for consideration at the next meeting.

Who wants to make that motion? I'll make the motion. Okay, we have a second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? Motion passes. we will have a funding agreement set up and see what the numbers look like. Thank you for your presentation. All right, moving on to item 11. Discussion of request to amend city code to allow iconic signs in manufacturing sign district.

All right, I will I'll take this one and then I will hand off to Shu for some clarification if we need to. Um, so this one arose because All right, hold on. All right, we're we're going on to 11. Uh, so this one came up because, uh, if many of you have noticed, we have a new bright blue water tower sitting on our skyline on top of Fabric Quilt. Um, it says in big bold letters, Fabric Quilt, established 1965. that constitutes a sign per our sign code and it is out of compliance with the way the code is written due to its size and I spoke to Shu after hearing from FA fabricquilt they were kind of surprised that this was a violation and it's true it is it was cited by codes it is an actual violation of the code um and so my thought is how we learn about places that the code may no longer be serving us in the way we hope it would is when something like this comes up similar to the water tanks that we talked about last time. And so this is more of a holistic look. Do we want to have things like iconic signs that can enhance our skyline? If so, we already have an allowance for iconic signs within the one north redevelopment area. And I believe we have a definition of Do you have that definition handy? I've got it in an email, I believe, of what an iconic sign is exactly, but those are allowed in one. I'll pull it up. Uh, those are allowed in one north. And this would be to make them allowed more broadly across our other districts, our manufacturing district. And, uh, this would not be something that is granted automatically. It's not if you just have something you consider to be an iconic sign, you get you get the approval. it is still a process that they would need to bring that sign to the codes department and get a permit get permission to put that on their building. Um so any questions on that or

is this something that the council is interested in making as a code change? Council member Alvarez.

Yeah. Um, I'd like to say that there's some history behind this. Um, because we actually um the when Connor Fitzgerald was uh in W three, uh he and I both got an email from that company asking um if they if we could consider allowing them to keep the water tower that was on top of their building because it started out that this tower was old, rusty, um it was about to fall apart. So, it was out of compliance just being even on top of the building. So, they were advised that it was going to have to come down and they'd have to do away with it. Um, however, I think after um some back and forth questions with the city, um, they were allowed to go ahead and refurbish, repaint, um, do whatever they needed to do to go ahead and and bring it up to codes in order to put it back up on top of their building. Um, at that time, um, they were I believe that they were advised, and I'm not positive, but I believe they acknowledged that they were advised that if they wanted to put it back on top of the building, um, it could not have any writings or signage or characters or anything painted on top of that tower. And then um just I think it was last week or week before um I think there was a news channel that uh filmed it and the tower was being placed back up on the building and it now has writing on it. Now is advertising that company. Um, if the code at the beginning does not allow that writing and I believe they knew that at the be at the time, I don't feel that we should change the code because they went ahead and did something

by painting on the tower and making a sign out of it after they were advised that that was not allowed. So I think it perhaps they you know did that without regard to the code even though they acknowledged the code was there. Um so now they're backtracking and wanting us to change the code. So for that reason I you know I I don't think that we should change a code because they didn't comply with the original code um that we gave them even though we had gone back and worked with them to allow them to have the tire the tower back on top of the building. So, from my part, I would I am not in favor of changing the code.

So, a couple points of clarification. Um, they did bring the tower down. I believe the cost is lower $3 million to refurbish, powder coat, and lift it back onto the the tower. When they submitted the original plan, it had simply a powder coating. It didn't have any lettering or any of that. And codes did ask, um, are you planning to put lettering or signage on it? And they said, no, we don't intend to do that. Um, and having met and discussed this with the owner of Fabric Quilt, the intention was to not do that at the time. And then they said, "Well, at this point, we see an opportunity." And I don't know that they were intentionally violating the code. I think they said, "This is going to be a very expensive project. This is something that is going to enhance the skyline." And then they put the lettering on it. They did not come back and ask. You're correct on that. um and then they received the notice of violation after it went up. So they reached out and said, "Well, what what should we do?" And there's an appeal process. Um they can reach back out and ask for um I guess a variance or something along those lines. But for my part, I think it would be better for us to change the code to allow for these sort of iconic signs in general. Not to make an accommodation for them per se, but if you think about Skyline of Kansas City, the Western Auto Building, um these are iconic signs that highlight and enhance their skyline. We could have things like that. So when somebody drives across the bridge into North Kansas City and they see the big blue water tower. To me, that's that's something that's really cool. And they spent three plus million dollars on this, I don't see the harm in having their name on it. Um so that's that's just where I'm at on that one. Further further clarification,

I I understand that they're out of code. Like getting a code violation totally makes sense. Um and I agree that having a one-time approval for this um business owner. Uh, I don't necessarily agree with that, but I do love the opportunity of having more iconic signs, beautifying North Kansas City, uh, advertising our local businesses. I'm sure Richard Groves would also support this. Um, but I I mean, when you think of like the North Kansas City sign, when you pull onto Armor, like it's beautiful. Uh, the Screenland Armor sign, like I think having more marquee advertising available for our businesses, I'm in support of that. Obviously, they still have to go through the codes department and be approved. Um, but I'm I'm pro updating the code for this.

And um, others have requested similar type of signs in the past, I understand. And they've because the code doesn't allow it have been denied. So, we could see more signs like this go up potentially if we open up an opportunity. Council member Saber. Uh, I find this particularly egregious that they knew it would it was denied at the beginning and they knew that they went ahead with the project anyway and in a sense uh they stuck a finger up to the city and said we're just going to put our our name on it anyway and put it back up there and now they want us to say oh good thank you. That doesn't sit well.

I would not interpret it that way. Um, I I wouldn't interpret anything that goes against the code as a as an act of aggression toward the city. I think they saw

a knowing a knowing and clearly they knew this, but they went ahead and did it anyway. I see it as a thumbs up or a thumbs to our nose that uh, you know, we don't care and that's a bad precedent for us to set for the city. Hey, zooming zooming out real quick from this. It the reason it's in our discussion tonight is because of this. This is what highlighted it. Now, zooming away from the business, we can be upset with them for having gone ahead and done a thing that didn't meet the code. But does it make it the city better to have iconic signs? Does opening up the code make this a place that will have more character, more of a sense of place, more distinctive signage than it is now? Think of the Allen I think it's Allen Chevrolet. I'm thinking of iconic signs. You mentioned Greenland. Those sorts of iconic signs could be on our city skyline, but they're not now because they're forbidden in the code. This is one of one because they did the thing without the code allowing it. Um

thumbming their nose at the city while they did it. One might say I did say further thoughts, council member Alvarez,

I understand what you're saying about zooming out, but I actually want to zoom back in because this is where it started. Um, so if we allow other companies or other businesses, and I'm not saying that they would, but to go ahead and do whatever they decide to do and then go back after they've done it and ask for us to amend the code. Um, I'm not fond of that practice at all. So, if this was about, hey, this came up, several businesses want to do signs or iconic signs along I35, that's a different discussion. But this one originated because a particular or specific business did that rather than having us come back and look at it before they painted it and and got an okay before they put it back up. Um, I just think was bad practice. And I'm not in favor of because it seems to me like we're kind of rewarding them um when they do that and I'm not in favor of that at all.

Were they fined? Was there a a fine associated with the code violation? You don't have to share figures. No, there's no fine as of right now. There's typically a due process for any code violation. You'll start with notifying people. you give them a amount of time for appeal or uh correct the action then they can be in compliance. What we're ultimately looking for is to be in compliance and I'm not um in favor of finding people if there is mechanism for bringing things into compliance.

So I I agree it's not an ideal situation. It almost never is when code comes up for updating. often times there is something that has triggered that and if we could find if we could get ahead of every potential idea that the code that we could find a place to admit this wouldn't even be in my consciousness to bring to city council had this not happened. However, I think it does highlight our skyline like you said if if businesses along I35 wanted to have more iconic that's not allowed. If they ask they get a no and they have apparently asked. This is our opportunity to say now if they ask there's at least a process to get it done. Go ahead.

My issue would be they didn't ask. Um when they painted it, they could have asked before they put it back up or asked before they painted it and we could maybe it would have been a discussion at that time and maybe amended at that time, but they didn't ask. You're correct. That's my issue. And that is that is on them. Council member Saber. Uh yeah, this then we come back to the word iconic. What does that mean? Does that mean that someone wants to put up a sign for a uh Bitcoin ATM? We'll get to that. Is that iconic?

Yeah. Um I've got an over. Okay. So, uh this is the email. I had didn't have it in front of me. Um under the North Kansas City current code, an iconic display sign is a quote freestanding or wall sign of greater than 1,000 square feet. Um the uh Norin city code of ordinances established quote iconic displays as a distinct sign type intended to enhance the city's visual identity and contribute to placemaking. These signs are generally larger, more expressive, and architect architecturally integrated than standard signage. They are reviewed on a case-bycase basis through the continual conditional use process. So it's not just a you get to do whatever big sign you want. It would go through a conditional use process before going up. Council member Click,

I that was kind of my question looking beyond this particular situation. Um like what amendments would we make? I guess what would we want that to look like was really my main question. And I don't because at first when I thought about it, I was like, "Oh, no. Well, I don't want like ugly signs everywhere." And I don't think that's what would happen because it's probably very expensive. Um mainly that's probably the reason it's very expensive. Um so I guess I'm yeah what next step of the discussion? What would those amendments look like? What would the changes look like? Do you have any recommendations based on the requests and the denials that you've seen? So this is a one single case request based on the size, location, and the type of signage where it is. I have not get into the research of what a potential code amendment is because it is not a staff um brought up sure

code amendment so to speak. This is coming from a business overall. And if we were to consider um that particular component for iconic or special unique skylines, I would just say the first thing I would always go back to is to go back to under the general guidance of the existing code. What is the purpose to have a sign code? And the signage can be very subjective. You can call it iconic and I I can call it eyesore. you

I'm not joking about it's just how it is it's very hard to define what is a sign what is not a sign and I don't want to end up in supreme court and talking about the first amendment

uh so that is the thing so when we go back to looking at a purpose our code already defined from A to G there is a list of items over there why we have the sign code I would say if we were to explore this option and a potential process for this type of unique signage at a minimum we should check with these proposals. I'm not going to read all of them word by word right now but a portion of them I want to share with you is that um right now we wanted the signs to um enhance the visual quality of the community and again trying to emphasize the priority of the buildings the open space and streetscape and landscape. We want to make sure that they ensure safety of pedestrians motorists. So overly crowded signs at certain locations can harm the safety. We all know that or if they're in the sight uh triangle then always an issue. We want to promote economic viability. So this one kind of correlates with uh a various type of signs. Do we want to allow unique signage? So I can see that that could have be a potential reason. And then we want to promote economic viability um as as we mentioned out there particularly for certain businesses or for a type of businesses or for businesses in a certain area. And I would say this is probably why currently in our code the iconic sign or display is allowed in the one north area and one north area only because at that time I assume the city have a goal that is to redevelop our formerly known Armor Road Redevelopment District. today one north and we have a clear goal and a picture of what we think might be a district signage over there that can be

have its own uniqueness promote what the city put a lot of efforts into. Um again that could have be explored for other areas and other businesses but I would definitely take more caution to that just so understand it's not going wild all over the city. Um and then the last part of it I just want to say that definitely we should consider other properties they could have adverse impact to neighboring properties if we allow one businesses what if another business a budding it or close to it one what if it becomes a competing work that oh you covered my sign now I'm going to go higher and bigger and taller so that I would just say there is a lot of work to really do a research and potentially consider what kind of amendment do we want for what certain degree area and what type of uh signage through what process and I cannot give you all the answer as of today because again this is not a code amendment proposed by me. I have not thought through the process yet. Um I bear and I appreciate all the understanding you all have. I think this is a great discussion. happy to answer our other questions.

And that's why this is a discussion item. It's not fully fleshed out. We're here to discuss whether it's something we want to ask staff to pursue.

Council member Bailey, I got I got Das bias it seems, but go ahead, Bailey. Um, so ignoring Fabric Quilt, I'm open to the city evaluating code changes in regards to iconic signage. Um, Fabric Quilt did a thing. Uh, they are running the gamble that they may or may not win on that and they would have to suffer the final financial repercussions of that decision. But I'm open to at least considering it, you know, for what we have going. If Fabric Quilt gets lucky, they get lucky. They don't they don't. But for me, I'm I'm open to the conversation.

Council member Wells. Yeah. My my thinking on this is very similar to Council Me Council Member Bailey's. Um but also I'm curious. I've heard a process alluded to here of uh when say one north there is an a application for a a an iconic sign. Um it's been indicated that there's an approval process. And how does that work right now as it stands? Who who makes those decisions?

So currently the iconic sign that is allowed in one north will go through a process that's called conditional use permit. It is an essentially an entitlement process meaning you are not allowed by right. Don't just go straight to permit. You have to go through a public hearing process and more detail. It goes to planning commission and staff will make a recommendation to the planning commission. planning commission reviews it and make a recommendation. They can take staff's recommendation no change or they can alter the staff's um recommendation with extra conditions or revise it or they can deny it. Um and so planning commission makes the recommendation to city council. Ultimately city council will have the final say um on the decision on conditional use permit. Uh the reason for it I would say generally comes with the conditions because these are thinking about a thousand square foot signage. That is a huge signage over there. They typically will require more frequent uh maintenance over up front and throughout the years and a condition of use permit. What it does is it can come with conditions to make sure those maintenance are in place. So the sign is not deteriorating causing any structural issue or appealing issue. So um down the road this is why for most of municipalities that is actually a very standard practice. A lot of municipalities will call that um oversized monument signs or oversizing roofing signs things like that. And again, I'm not sure iconic sign or display is the best name for it since this is a very subjective matter, but uh this process itself is actually a very mature process. Did I answer your question?

Yeah, thank you very much, Council Alvarez.

Yeah, I have another comment on this subject. Um the tower that we're talking about in question um was not this was not a sign previously. Um they made it into a sign. This was a tower um from what I understand served no purpose other than it was iconic on their business and they wanted to keep it. U so they were I believe they were supposed to have a purpose for this tower. Um, so they have I I'm assuming put water or something in this tower to make it have a purpose. So they were allowed to put it back u up on the building. I feel like there's been several concessions made for them to keep the tower because apparently it meant something to them and it was iconic on their business. Um, but in that process, the give and take and, uh, allowances that they were given back and forth, um, I feel like they are they knew and blatantly went ahead and wrote or made this into a sign, which it was never really a sign to begin with. It was a tower, a water tower. Um, but they were allowed to refurbish it, repaint it, put it back up, find a use for it. It's there. and then they went ahead and took the extra step even though they had worked back and forth to make it a sign um without getting the okay before they did it. And I think that's a blatant um disregard for um the codes that we have and against the city. So, and I don't want to see a precedence where we do that just because I'm going to go ahead and do it and then ask to amend it at another time. I'm not necessarily against iconic signs in general, but this has come up because of this particular situation and so I'm I'm not

so it is um just for the use piece. It is being used. Uh I understand they they put water in it and it washes solar panels I think was what the what the CEO told me. So they they can run the water down and use it for that. Um I guess asked a different way if this was not against the rule and we saw that tower, do we like that tower? Do we want more of that sort of thing in town? If so, let's explore how to amend the code. If not, we don't amend the code. Yes, sir. Whether we amend the code or not, uh they should be required indeed to keep the water tower as it is, but they have to cover the signage.

I understand your frustration with this. Um, it that would be a multi-million dollar endeavor. Well, that's their problem for violating and giving the finger to the city. Okay. Um, go ahead. I don't know the cost of, you know, they made a mistake, so I think they need to repaint it and cover up the lettering. I'm not saying they can't keep the tower or do whatever, but I think they need to follow the rules and I think they would need to repaint it. Um, I don't know that that would cost a lot of money if they just painted over the lettering. I don't know.

It would it would require removing the tower and powder coating it the exact same shade. Otherwise, it's a big block of something else. Um, that would be penalties for violations. All right, we're we're missing the point here. Um, do we want to discuss allowing iconic signs in the manufacturing district? Do we want to direct staff to bring back a code amendment? So, we need a motion. No, we're not. Do we need a motion for uh directing staff to bring back an amendment? No. Okay. So, it would be helpful in this case. Yeah, that would be helpful. Okay. Um if somebody would like to see an code amendment brought forth that we could also look at workshop and deny ultimately or approve,

we need a motion for that. I motion. I second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? No. No. No. Should we call the role on that or Okay, Tom's nodding. Let's call the role. Prepare for that. Council member Saber, no. Council member Bailey, yes. Council member Kaine, no. Council member Alvarez, no. Council member Wells, yes. Council member Larson, yes. Council member Click Stakes, yes. Okay.

Okay, it passes. Motion passes. Uh please explore how we can amend the code and uh we'll look at this at a future meeting. All right. Item 12. Max 169 screen rental rates.

Who's got this one? So I mean we can we'll we'll ask questions of you as we get there. Um we asked staff to bring back an estimated co estimated cost to rent the max 169 screen. This is the big screen that the city and the park split the cost of. It comes out on a trailer and can be popped up. The general intent is to use for parks programming and for world cup uh for the watch party. And um I have expressed an interest and I I know a few council members are interested in seeing that screen activated as much as we can uh understanding their staff time, staff cost, operating cost, all those things. And the amount of the rental rate proposed is $3,000 for the rental. Um, so I could if you want to discuss where you got that or what your thoughts are.

Well, sure. So, if I could back up for just a moment. So, our proposed cost was 4,500 for a nonprofit other city government and then 5,000 in general. Um, a couple reasons for that. Primarily, um, that is what like Insane Impact would charge for that type of rental. Um, the other part of it is there's just a lot of unknowns for us right now. We've had the screen for two weeks. We haven't had time to really take it out and about. We don't we don't really know all the things until we know the things. Um, just bringing it up and down from the P, it was like, oo, okay, this isn't a good street to go on because the trees hang too low and it's like dink dink dink dink. Um, so there's just a lot of things to figure out. So when we take it out to Carney, Gladston, things like that, um part of it will be okay, where is it that you want to place this screen? Looking at that, what's the best routes, those sorts of things. Um I too I I think this is a great opportunity for us to utilize this screen as much as we can. Um whether that's with other cities, local businesses, or the World Cup. Um, what I would like to suggest is that we keep what we have in place because we already have some agreements in place. Um but as an offside um you leave it to parks to decide if they want to do a a sponsorship, a partnership, a a something totally different than what we are doing with the other organizations where we are parks is benefiting from that sponsorship whether that's a a summer you know like they're the summer music sponsor or or whatever and we explore that separately but we keep what we have with the other local go north cities at this time.

So, walk me through we have the we have agreements with a few entities already at $5,000 per rental. Um 4500 4500 per rental. Uh so what would that look like as a sponsorship say name your local business wanted to engage with that. How would would they approach the parks department and ask permission?

Yeah. So they would they would probably start with me um like detailing like what it is that they want to do, how parks could fit into that like uh does it include banners? Does it because local is a lot different. I mean when we're going out to Carney, Gladstone, those kind of things, there's a lot of bigger unknowns. Um if we're doing something local, I I feel more confident, I guess you could say. And so like we're looking for sponsorships for Arts in the Park and our summer music program on and so so many other things. And so maybe we're also advertised at the business that we're doing a partnership with. This really isn't unlike other things that we do. Yeah.

It would just be what is it that you know what's your end objective and this is what we need as an objective. Right. And um just I I know this has come up because we've had requests from local businesses. Chicken and Pickle in particular has asked. We have these World Cup games that are not claimed on the screen. Um and I personally would like to see it involved out and about in the community as one to bring attention that it exists, which is phenomenal that we're going to be programming it in the park. So having some sort of advertisement is awesome.

U but also to have people in the community benefit from being able to watch the game on a giant screen. they can spend their money at the local businesses. They can um and that brings in tax dollars, that sort of thing. I just I would hope to see it activated understanding the real logistical concerns that especially right now I think it's just John that can run it. Um which that's a pinch point especially for him. Um and so I I would my general hope is to see it activated as possible.

Yes. And that's my hope too, like this is a one-time opportunity for us and it would also help launch, you know, a lot of the park programs that we could do with the screen long-term. We don't want to be in the rental business. That is not where we want to be. Um, some other critical points right now is we're also looking at uh River Forest. We take that over after June 18th. That's like right in the middle of all this. And now we're taking my prime park supervisor, probably a maintenance, you know, or myself, and

rearranging schedules. So, at the end of the day, if I'm if parks is doing this, our hope would not that we're just breaking even. We're not looking to break even. I mean, there's got to be an additional benefit to upset the whole apple cart and figure out how we can pile it back on. Okay. And is the So, in the memo, there was a $3,000 figure. Is that what you had in mind for like local business sponsorship a number or is that still just kind of a work in progress?

So, it's it's a little bit of a work in progress because again we wouldn't have to travel as far. Um, is this a multi-day thing? Is this more of a chicken and pickle example? Like if we were to do multi-game with them like is there other opportunity that we're not taking it back and forth? Is there additional security that they're providing? is there, you know, so somebody doesn't have to be with it the entire time because they're providing additional security for that space that we're comfortable with. So, it's your it is the parks asset. It's it's a rental. You're you're in the rental game anyway. You rent out structures and all all manner of things, right?

Um it makes sense to trust your you and your department to handle that um with the goal of having it activated, but uh sensibly. Uh thoughts from Council Member Larson. So, you said you don't want to be in the rental business. So, are you proposing like we get the max screen out there this summer and then after this summer just keep it as a parks asset?

Unless it makes sense to do something down the road. Um, right now it's hard to say that like activating it right now is just kind of at a critical time with bringing on Riverforce Park and the World Cup and stuff. So, if it made sense to do like another sponsorship partnership with somebody else next summer, maybe we would. Maybe Screenland would want to to do, you know, something with the Backyard Movies or something like that. But as an ongoing, I don't want to set a price and people are like, "Hey, I want to get your screen. Hey, I want to borrow your screen." Hey. Y. So, makes sense. Customer Saber. Uh, I'm a little confused. Are you saying that you've got rentals now at $4,500?

Correct. And you're saying that when you call it a base rental fee that would give you flexibility in are we talking about the $4,500? No, not the 45. But you're okay. Recommends a base rental fee of $3,000. This is this is what I would like when I was asked to put some hard cost to it. This is kind of because that seems like so if we did an average of like say an eight hour rental. Yeah. Okay. So my base cost just covering salaries would be just over $1,500. Uhhuh.

So again, not looking to rent this just to break even. So then I guess pain and suffering was another $1,500. [clears throat] Yeah. I I I'm having trouble seeing why you'd come up with a base rental fee of 3,000 instead of staying at 45. Well, I'd like to stay at 45 and that's what I'm actually proposing. Yeah. Oh, okay. That that didn't come across to me. That's my confusion. Council member Bailey. Okay. So, I'm just going to read from the memo and and we're going to correct. I think uh parks and rec recommends a base rental fee of $3,000. You're saying that should be parks and rec recommends 4500 that

Yes. I think some of the confusion came in because if we were just going to do a straight rental across the board and any any local business could also rent it like what would that look like? And 45 5,000s seem to be too steep. Yeah.

Too steep. That's that is what I've heard from any all and all interested businesses who would like to do something program the screen. It's my understanding that if if the rate is $4,500, which is it's your right to propose, um it'll sit in a storage uh unit and not get activated and that if that doesn't if the real costs aren't being covered, then it's kind of a waste to run it out. But there are other benefits as well. So that's why I'm saying we'll trust Victoria and her team to decide on a request by request basis on how they're going to administer the screen.

So if we could keep what we have planned for the go north and then we would enter into sponsorship partnerships joint joint events with that could then potentially reduce it from 4500 to something less. Right. Okay. That kind of flexibility. So you want that flexibility to do that, right? Okay. The contact point for opportunities is Victoria and the parks department and then it'll go from there. You lead the discussions. You decide yes or no. Yes. Is that acceptable to the council? I see a lot of head nods. Okay. All right. We'll point everybody your direction.

Have fun with it. Thank you. All right. Item 13, consideration of a resolution establishing a flag policy for city facilities. Resolution number 26-010.

All right. Uh, so I brought this one forward. Um, there's a few points to make as one, we don't have a flag policy. We haven't had a flag policy at the city and I think it is important that we do. So, this is an attempt to establish a policy governing our flags that fly at city facilities, city hall, fire department, uh, and any other city flags that are up on polls. Um, right now the the most polls we have at any city facility is three. And we have three flags that are currently flying that represent 100% of the people that live in North Kansas City by default. They are the city flag, the state flag, and the the United States flag. Any other flag that would go up on those polls represents by definition fewer than 100% of the population. Um, approving one-off flags can leave us exposed. Um, I spoke to our city councelor about this. Uh there was a Supreme Court case where Boston had flown other flags and then said no to a flag request and got themselves in some hot water. U went all the way to the Supreme Court and they were ruled against. Um and what's that? Yes, they were ruled against. Yes. And and so not having a policy to govern how we're going to uh receive requests and how we're going to handle our flag poles can leave us exposed. And um we can find other ways than flying flags to celebrate, to honor, to support other causes. We have proclamations, we have events, we can do things like that, and we can leave our flag polls for the three flags that represent 100% of the people. So, I'm open to uh questions or thoughts on what's on the page. Council member Saber,

uh has have there been requests for other signs? Uh we've had in recent years um for other flags to go at the poll. We had the pride flag go at the pole. Um, historically we've th flown, I believe, the prisoner of war, the PM MIA flag. Uh, I'm not certain if we've gotten I know I don't know if they've come through as formal requests, but requests for um like churches have had requests that hey, you know, this flag we have uh there are flags for different religions, but we we also proclaim various u you know different months. We could fly flags for those but we don't.

Yeah. Um, and what I really want to avoid is if we do get that request, what do we do with it? We get a request for something that we haven't flown before and that the city doesn't really want to engage with that. Could we write up just like Boston?

We could, Council Member Alvarez. Yeah, I I think we should u stick to the three flags, the city, state, and u the United States because we could, like you said, have requests for several different um I guess uh uh groups or or what, however you want to u identify it. Um, I think anything else that we want to include, we can um like on private property or other uh creative ways to uh show our support for different groups. But I think that we are uh exposing oursel to all kinds of different requests and how you say no to one and not the other. So I I would think that for the city government buildings, I think we should keep it to the the three the three flags that we have.

Further thoughts? We have Council Member Bailey, as we were researching this, is there, you know, clearly maybe not having a policy is not the best option. Um there's the proposed policy. Is there any other intermediary third steps that are commonly used?

Um, there are there's Supreme Court precedent. You you dug into this, I believe in the city of San Jose, that allows for ceremonial flags related to other countries, sister city sports um sports teams, things like that that would be allowable per the Supreme Court ruling. Um, but we also open ourselves up on a one-off basis if we're making exceptions. It's when you It's when you drop the first no that things get real dicey.

I can appreciate the legal concern. Um I don't know if we should always make all decisions in fear of legal consequences. Um doesn't mean we shouldn't do this one. Um, I'd be interested in knowing if there is some other category that we could consider such as nationally recognized flags or something like that where we could still prevent flags that are, you know, are clearly not in anybody's sense good choices. Um, but still leave ourselves open to some character or flavor. It's it's tricky when you say in anyone's sense a good choice because that's open very much to legal interpretation and that's where you land in some tricky spots.

Council member Kane.

Uh I would agree with Council Member Bailey. Um I I would at least uh if anything for my own information just to kind of understand what those intermediary steps could be uh if other cities have tried uh to sort of walk that line. Um but um yeah, I think there's I think there's a lot that's uniquely North Kansas City and uh inviting and uh there's a there's a space of inclusion. Um and I would at least like to see, you know, what what kinds of avenues that that uh cities have taken to just kind of get that understanding uh and and understand to the uh the legal challenges that uh come from those directions. Customer Wells.

Um, in my reading about the Supreme Court case, I learned that, you know, it's sort of an all or nothing sort of thing. So, you have to, if you say yes to one group, you have to be willing to say yes to everyone in your community. And that can be any group that, you know, anyone in here might not agree with or or uh want to see up on the city's flag pole. And um I believe that Boston has actually been challenged again where they've come back and continued to allow other groups to put flags up and then said no to another organization and they I believe that they are back in federal court again. So there are I don't think it's likely to happen in Northtown, but the the chances are certainly not zero that someone could come along and in a reactionary sense say, "Haha, here's the flag I want to have up on the flag pole." And we have to do it right. I'm in support of just three flags. Keep it simple and we can devote our energy to more uh more activities, proclamations, um allow the citizens to have more involvement rather than just a flag on a poll that leaves us open to potential lawsuits. Council.

Um, just I I would agree with Council Member Larson just for the simplicity, not because there are other flags that I wouldn't necessarily emphatically support. Um, but there are other ways I think to support and make people feel supported and loved and welcome in our community. Um, that might even be more powerful than a flag. I maybe not. I don't want to speak for anyone else, but um yeah, I think just keeping it straightforward, not making it too complicated, not putting future councils in potentially questionable positions. Um just to be forward thinking, I think keep it simple.

All right. Uh I think everybody's spoken on that one. Uh do we have a a motion on a resolution? I motion second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? Nay. Motion passes. Right. Moving on to item 14. Short-term conditional use permit for World Cup park and ride facility. Shoot. Did you want me to take this? Please.

Okay. Hi. [laughter] HI, EVERYONE. I'M ACTUALLY going to talk through 14, 15, and 16 if that's okay with everybody. In your packet, you had kind of a global map, and I'm going to be referring to this because again, all of these short-term continual short-term uh conditional use permits. Really, we look at them as the whole. So, I'm going to kind of refer to them. I'm going to step through them 14, 15, and 16. Um, I'm going to talk about the short-term conditional use for the park and ride for Casey 2026. Um, this right here, this park and ride is going to be activated for the 33 days that the games will be active here in Kansas City. Um, there are actually two different operations on this particular site. There is the game day or match day is what we're learning to call this. Um, so for those six days, it will operate very different than it does the rest of the time. So bear with me as I kind of try to explain this um, a little bit. So inside the packet for match days, it will also involve a road closure and a lot of that has to do with pedestrian safety in this area. We've kind of talked through this a little bit when we talked about the sidewalks in this area. Um, it will be fully staffed. There will be pedestrian crossing um people. So it will be it will be fully staffed during those match days. Um they will be checking IDs and not really IDs. They'll be checking for parking permits. That will be when it is operating as a stadium direct. It will be $15 per rider. It will be open three hours before the match and two hours after the match is kind of what we are learning about how this will operate. The rest of the time it will operate is what's

called a regional direct and that will be $5 pass per rider and that will be kind of like a bus service and they will have buses every 20 minutes picking up and dropping off from that particular location. Sunday through Thursday, it will operate from 10:00 a.m. to midnight and from Friday to Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 am. So again, on match days, both of those operations happen at the same time. So that will be a very active um location on match days. Uh that will operate from June 6th to July 12th. It's kind of when that uh particular operation will will happen. It is actually a license agreement with the private owner. What they are kind of coming to the city is to talk about that uh really specifically that road closure and bus stops.

Where did you say which road specifically segment would be closed? It is between Fyet and Howell on 18th Avenue. So that entire segment between Fyet and Howell. It's not the entire but it's a good chunk of it. Okay. Do we have that on any of the maps? I'm trying to look at the populace draft here. I didn't see that closure on their application. Hang on. I've got my attachments out of order. It is. It looks like this. It says draft on it. Yeah. I I couldn't tell where exactly the closure happens. It is in between. Are you looking at it? It's in between four and there's a little pedestrian route. There's very very fine little orange those little orange lines.

It is very fine.

Okay, perfect. Um, interesting. So, we we made sidewalks along there recently and now they're closing the road. They are closing the road, but please also remember it operates 33 days with 20 minute buses. And the hope would be that those patrons during that time walk down 18th Avenue to our downtown destination. So, even though the sidewalks are not there for those six match days, you still will be using those sidewalks to gain access to where the bus route. I don't know if you can see on that particular one, there is like a bus corral.

Yep. Over on the right side there. Yeah. To be clear, sidewalks are net good. it. But it was just now that I'm seeing the road being closed after building sidewalks on both sides or some sidewalks on both sides. A lot of that the road closure had a lot to do with the moment in time pedestrian surge and staff's and PD's concerns about being able to manage that pedestrian flow. Yeah, it makes a ton of sense. Okay, so that's kind of number 14. I I hope you won't mind. I'm going to kind of walk through them. So number 15 and JD Green,

do you want us to pause and like motion on 14 to be done with that one? You like that done, Crystal? Dude is one. Okay, it sounds like one to approve all three. Correct. Whoa. All right. I like it.

The second one. [laughter] So, we're going to pivot now to the to the yellow area of this kind of comprehensive map. Uh JD Green with Northland Festivals is here. And this is the conditional use permit or short-term conditional use permit for the actual watch party. Um this is where the screen that we have talked about before will be activated. Um, and that road closure, we have that closing on Friday at 700 p.m. It will be closed all Saturday. It will be activated. There is another map in your packet that kind of shows at least right now what our working layout is. It's the one that looks like this. Um, so on the south part of Swift, we'll have an area for inflatables. Uh there is food vendors, first aid, a footsaw tournament and picnic viewing area. Um and then you can see where the screen is as well. Behind that screen will have some storage and more utilitarian use. And that is what again if you have any more operational um questions, JD Green is much more versed at this than I am. Um but what is before you today is that short-term conditional use permit which is item number 15. Do we have any specifics yet on Town Square? Like what's planned for that weird little appendage

from what I do know that NKC Health has been working with the fire department and I do believe that that is where their preferred preferred location is. A lot of that has to do with it's one of the only areas that has shade in this particular area. They are anticipating because it is going to be July 11th, might be a little warm that a lot of the people that might need their services might might need to get out of the sun for a little bit and then be experiencing some heat.

Smart. Um, okay. And then there was a there's a render in one of these, might be the next one down that um has the beer the beer gardens label kind of on the north side of this footall turn. It looks like it kind of bends around the corner at Swift. Is that more what the vision is or

that is number 16. So that is actually for the parks and recreation. They are looking for a short-term conditional use permit and that is kind of a beer garden. It's actually going to be in those parking spaces. So kind of throw back to when we were doing parkletits. It's kind of that theory. Um, I will mention that we are also in conversations that there might that there is kind of a desire to possibly do another beer garden. Um, and that would be in between Swift and Eerie. So, to kind of carve off that particular block. There's a lot that we're working through with the applicant on that. Wasn't able to get that particular request on this agenda. um that applicant has secured their insurance quote, which I'll be honest is is the biggest lift of this particular request. Um there is some conversations that are being scheduled over the next week. So, we may actually come back and ask for an amendment to what you are considering tonight. We are in a little bit of a chicken and egg. I do know that JD Green needs this license as part of his insurance requirements to show that he has gotten kind of the thumbs up from the city to actually host this particular event. Um, so again, should that applicant uh who is looking at potentially doing kind of a kind of a beer garden slashevent kind of adjacent to ours, which would be again in between Swift and Eerie on Armor, um, be successful. will talk to all those interested businesses, kind of get together a plan that would be coming to you at your next council meeting.

Um, last question is, um, I assume we've had input from public safety on entry points into this, um, festival area. Now that our chief officer of public safety is having a side conversation, I would bring that up. Uh, [laughter] I didn't notice until I turned my head. Um, points of entry to the festival area. any logistical concerns from the police department?

Yes, always. Yeah, we're [clears throat] we're very concerned about the public safety aspect of it. And I don't want to be a sky is falling type of person ever, but we would as much as possible like to control entrance and exit out of this particular event. We know it's highly unlikely based on the city's capabilities and uh current infrastructure. So, we'll do the best we can with what we got, but in the best case scenario, we would be controlling entrance and exit, checking bags, making sure clear bag policies, no power technics or fireworks, all that kind of stuff. Can we pull that off? Likely not. It's definitely a concern. Be being present and visible is helpful. Correct.

Um I know that the northern end at least was workshopped a lot to make sure we didn't have like eight or nine more just by extending it by an intersection. So, appreciate that. Um, best efforts. Appreciate it. Any other thoughts, questions from the group. Otherwise, we'll take Oh, go ahead.

Just a quick question. Are the park and ride area, are they going to be monitoring that like 24 hours or I mean, I know that's a hard ask, but is someone going to try to monitor that area or have cameras in the area kind of thing? One of the things that we were working on with the applicant, which again is 2020 KC 2026, is those cameras and for dispatch to have access to them.

There's a lot of money splashing around for cameras if I understand correctly. So hopefully we can grab some of that on these on this one of just a few direct parking rides to Arrowhead. All right, any other thoughts or questions? If not, uh, we'll need a motion on the three proposed conditional use permits. Move to approve. I'd like to add one little thing here. Sorry, I'm on the wrong side.

Um, I just want to make sure you all see the recommendation over there is to approve with a condition that the applicant continuously work the details out with staff. So this way you will give the staff authority minor amendments and there are a lot of details that hasn't been hashed out yet. Just want to add that. So it would be a proper motion to approve with staff conditions for the park and ride only. Okay, we got that. Crystal, was that your motion council member Kane? Yes. Move to approve. Second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Yes. Any

opposed? Motions pass. Right. Moving all the way down to item 17, 2026 KC Showdown car show short-term conditional use permit. I have no comments as stated in the staff report. If you have question, I'll be happy to answer it. Questions or a motion? I move to approve. Second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? Motion passes. All right. Moving to item 18. Safe streets for all implementation grant demonstration.

All right. Before I kick it to Shu, I just want to make sure that we're clear that what we are looking at doing is discussing a grant. Are we interested in applying for a grant for this? Not necessarily workshopping all the different details of this particular proposal. Go ahead. Precisely what we are asking for direction from the council is whether we're interested in pursuing an demonstration grant. It is a very specific type of grant that's provided by uh the NOFO the notification of a funding opportunities released by the federal highway administration. So in this year's psych funding cycle, it is a five-year funding cycle and this is the last year for this particular project that was um passed by passed by Congress. Um over here there are three different type of applications um the city could consider. One is a supplemental planning. Uh we have applied for a planning gr grant a few years ago and we were awarded um with $240,000 at that time. Um come with a local contribution of 60,000 to do a comprehensive safety action plan. That's what you all heard the safe streets for all. Um we are at the very final stage of this plan right now. So now we're eligible to apply for funding for demonstration or implementation. We don't believe there is a need for supplemental planning funding that we needed at this point. Um but I want to distinguish the demonstration and implementation grants and why we are looking into demonstration at this point. Um, essentially the big difference is the dollar threshold for implementation dollars. They're usually much bigger projects. They have a

minimum threshold, I believe, starting with um three to five million dollars and go all the way up. And then for demonstration, they're uh tailored to much smaller projects and temporary um explorations, so to speak. They are generally going from a h 100,000 to uh $3 million. That's what we can um say for sure. And then for demonstration also there are requirements that no permanent asphalt can be involved such as sidewalk, ADA ramps, a shared use path, curbs and you know all of those cannot be demonstration. The purpose for demonstration to be distinguished from implementation is that this is a exploration of a temporary solution for changing of the traffic pattern. Basically test the water see if the idea work or not. So moving forward, the city um has been in discussion with the um our consulting firm Wilson company who was the one did our comprehensive safety action plan and there were a few projects that was recommended by them. One of them is the pedestrian plaza that is located on how um right next to the high school and the city has been meeting with the high school a few months ago and has been in a continuous conversation. There were some concerns um definitely pros cons. We all heard from different parties and our police department was also involved in this particular conversation. So that is a big component that that we're considering. And as part of the package that you saw today, what we're looking into is looking at potentially applying for a grant that can pay for um a few dozens. I counted and I could have

counted wrong because it's not quite up to scale. So I was counting the dots. How many are there? Each of the dot means a removable stainless ballard. And we particular want a stainless steel ballard instead of delineators for safety reasons. And of course there's aesthetic purpose for that as well. Um but imagine the ballard will be able to be removed during the functionality of the school's loading and offloading. So this way we allow the school buses and continuous operating over there while during other regular hours it will be closed for that portion of how um to allow pedestrians and um to enjoy that area becoming a pedestrian plaza. The school district is interested in exploring opportunities for potential community events and utilizing that space. So we think that will be a great um pioneer uh experience to see how that goes. And that one is where we actually started looking and then we extended it and looking at the rest of how we are wondering how people going to get to the pedestrian plaza since the house shared use path is not quite in place yet. um what we do for the rest of the community and we hear a lot of um concerns along 32nd Avenue and along how especially um during our final steering committee meeting which was also a public open house uh I remember this room was like almost packed with residents with a lot of concerns which was great it's good to hear that people has concerns and come out and talk about it um but in responding to that um we actually did pri prioritize 32nd Avenue into our final plan. So you can find that in the final draft over there. There are quite a few things that's been recommended

over there. Part of that is the speed table such as speed humps. Um and then the RRFBs, those are the beacon flash and beacon lights that you saw on Armor Road that they have the yellow rectangle. There is a full name for it. Don't quote me on this. I might not be able to explain what is RRF RFB. They're rectangle rapid rectangular flashing beams. Okay. All right. Gosh, you guys can take my job. It's a tongue twister.

Anyway, long story short, those beacon flashing lights, they're not they're not a cheap um and along with those maybe u delineators and markings that can help um redefine some of the bumpouts for crosswalks. So the point for that is imagine going from Swift along 32nd Avenue all the way to how and then turning south along House Street going from 32nd Avenue to Armor. all the existing crosswalks. We're looking into potentially improving them by adding temporary speed humps, adding the beacon flashing lights and redefining bumpout areas for all of them to increase the pedestrian um safety. So that's where we thought okay then we can package this together as one application. We believe we can make a strong case out of the prison uh demonstration. um grant. Anyway, I explained a little bit of more than um I probably needed to, but if you have any questions, I would be happy to take I will not defer that to Kim this time.

No, thank you for that. And uh it's it's like taking a test drive on what we're proposing. And one of the big lessons learned out of the Armor Road streetscape was people were uh at least they said they were shocked at what was built because it's hard to look at a rendering or a picture of top down and see what it's going to feel like. And anything we can do to allow people to feel it before it becomes the built environment and then it's much harder to reverse. I'm all for that. Um, and I like what you proposed, the speed humps, uh, along Howell, the bumpouts, um, getting a way to sort of conceptualize the pedestrian plaza, 30 second. These are all things that have been high priority items. Is there a way to do augmented reality for this, like where you could have it put on a headset and see what it could look like?

I would think that component, if we're looking for a grants, that would probably be under the supplemental planning. Uhhuh. They're not necessarily under the category or umbrella of demonstration, to speak. I'm wondering if we can shoehorn it in because it would be a way to demonstrate what it would be like. However, right, supplemental plan. Either way, that makes sense. But, um, getting people the ability to test it out in a meaningful way. Um, big fan thoughts. Council member Kaine.

Uh, yes. So, uh, thank you, Shu. I appreciate it and all the background. Um could you talk a little bit about the components of like a typical demonstration project? Like what does it look like when a resident goes out on the streetscape and there is a demonstration project that's ongoing? Absolutely. Remember those time when Armor Road has all the delineators and every morning when I stood by Mike's office and I watch the cars zoom by and I will say one out of 10 will just run over the delineator and I'll be like, "Oh my gosh." And so those are demonstration components really selling it here.

They are they are temporary but also on the other side the visualizing the changes and redirect the traffic pattern is the goal for them. However, they're not built to the engineering standard to be a permanent improvement or changes. That's and I I believe a lot of um you all probably have the experience with the um Midtown in Kansas City. They did a lot of road diet recently and most of the road diets they did or at the beginning of it they redefined bike lines. Um I'm not sure I I won't you know dive into the question whether or not we should choke the road and take a lane off. I know people have very complex feelings about it. But imagine all the delineators that they use to define the bike lines over there. Maybe some of them they use to close and even the type three barricades that they use to close some of the slip lines. They have a lot of those as well. Um and also those um composite like usually black and yellowish looking plastic looking speed humps. Not the best ones but they are there to kind of show um a particular demonstration. and as well as you can also put the uh speed readers um at places. Those are the more of a fitting to the demonstration tunnel.

And that actually got to my next piece too. So like ongoing data collection and you know uh what kinds of things would the city be doing during that time to kind of get an understanding of changes to traffic patterns um and anything ongoing there? I'm looking at Chief Freeman because he does such a good job for that. I know he had done quite a few studies um gathering the data and he I'm sure he'll be happy to share all that. [laughter]

I I don't know if that was a question. [laughter] Yes, we do have we have we have capabilities within our um equipment now to set up and run some very limited traffic studies over over roadways. They're not 100% accurate by any means. Um but they are a good deal for what's going on on a particular roadway at a given time. Okay. And these are just in line uh with the recent uh traffic study for 32nd Avenue. Correct. Okay. Yeah. So, we have the covert radar recorder, which is what we've talked about a lot recently. We also have the over overt ones, the signs, the flasher speed. Those are also recording that all the time, too.

And those are generally eligible for demonstration grants as well if the city decided to include those and I can have a conversation with where I can actually meet to Freeman and to see if there is any need for such equipment and we can probably even add it into this package. But keep in mind there is a 20% share from the local wise. So if you're going a million dollar you'll have to come up with 200,000. And so it's always appetizing to buy at an 80% discount though. So never mad about that. Um do you have further question on that one?

Uh yeah and just one additional question. So um so this is lowcost temporary infrastructure um I'm assuming easier to put in place to install to remove. So um when there's a lot of alternatives being weighed for 32nd and for how does that also open up the possibility for then to you know within a a a study period to be able to um you know alter or in any way um you know look at multiple options for a given street.

Absolutely. That is a really a spirit for demonstration that you're trying to test the water see what works what doesn't and I assume one of the things you find out is there are some mechanism that doesn't work and we can make an adjustment to it um I feel like as far as we make the case that we need x amount of speed homes we need this much money for purchasing that and we really do that and we can alternate the layouts and trying to figure out what works but does not work. Yeah. Perfect. Thank you. I appreciate it. Council member Wells.

Yeah. I apologize if I missed this somewhere along the lines, but uh do we know what the study period would be if this went through? Like how how the duration. Um I'm not quite sure which starter you're talking about. The demonstration period. Oh, the demonstration. Sorry.

Okay. The grant uh the application is due May the 26th. So, we are actually trying to gear up and put an application together here um in a couple of weeks. I am waiting for response from the school district. Um so we're trying to get them support us at this point and of course one of another thing I'm asking the council is um we can contingent the application based on the school district's feedback or we can move forward apply for it and if the school district is not on board worst case scenario we'll send the money back for that portion of it.

Um so if say we get the money awarded when would we implement it and how long would it run? Would it be like a six-month thing? Would it be a Oh, got it. So, u the demonstration project, as far as we're awarded with those, the items that we purchase with them, they'll just become ours. Okay.

And so, we can run them as long as we need it. But again, these um mechanisms are aim for temporary solutions. They're not built for to last. Otherwise, there will not be implementation dollars over there. Uh but there is discussion that the this grant this particular program can be renewed and so maybe the city will be able to looking into some implementation grant in the future. In your experience, what's a typical demonstration period to to change traffic habits?

It could be as short as one day if you get a lot of complaints and you cannot stand for [laughter] it. uh but I would not suggest because I would say yeah at least give it a full week running from all the weekdays and weekends to get a full understanding of what the issues are and then typically we see a lot of demonstration can go from like a three months to six months and even a year.

Yeah. Um as we're I'll call on you just a second. As we're exploring alternatives, one of the biggest question marks is the actual placement of the bike infrastructure. Um, are we able to add that as a thing we could test using delineators or whatever? We would need to mark off a space that's on the road and protected so that we could try to run the bikes uh along the west side of Howell, maybe on the east side, maybe around the plaza, maybe on the Do you see what I'm saying?

I know what you're talking about. We have um maybe this is for benefits for people who's watching this um meeting. We have been talking about modifying the original how shared use path going from Clark Ferguson all the way down to Armor to move that shared use path to the west side of how uh however they're no longer a shared use path in that portion. They're more of a traditional bike line. So there will be markings and a dedicated minimum 8 foot wide biking infrastructure over there. Um again that was part of the plan and as you can see it was included in the pedestrian plaza package over there. If you're looking at the north end of the tip of the plaza, the top of the triangle um I believe we can do some markings and delineators over there. That is no problem. However, I'm not sure if the grant can cover uh the reconfiguration of the yellow lines in the middle for House Street, but I would assume that is probably a low cost change um for reconfigure the the road itself

because a lot of the discussion has been around the theory of what could happen if we put the bike lane there. Like what does parking look like? What does traffic flow look like? And if we can demonstrate it, test it, and see if it's as good or as bad as people dream it might be. Oftentimes, it's somewhere in the middle. Um, I think that'd be extremely useful way to to look at this. Council member Saber, uh, question about some of the permanence. How do you do temporary speed bumps? Oh, they're the composite ones instead of asphalt ones. They're not the asphalt. Yeah, they're not the asphalt ones. They're the composite ones. They're more like a plastic looking ones. Think about the one Spire has been using the bridge overision that sort of thing.

A lot of them are used more for driveways or inside of a parking lot. However, there is more robust ones that you can purchase. They're more expensive of course and a wider they have uh more a little bit more space on the top of the flat area um for you know roadways. I'm just I my only concern is that these things really be removable and testable. uh otherwise we can open up huge many many cans of forms

and we we will need to be extremely clear on our communication as this rolls forward that like this isn't the thing we're building because people will see it and think oh my gosh what are they thinking um that this is a test this George hears it this is a test we're finding out what's what works what doesn't further thoughts from the council um so are we interested is that what we're looking for guidance on do we apply for the grant. Yes. Okay. 20% local match, 80% funded on the grant. I think I'm seeing thumbs up. All right. Universally thumbs up. Well done. Appreciate. Thank you. All right. What's that? I get a rebuttal. Absolutely not. We'll talk We'll talk to you afterwards.

All right. Uh item 19, consideration of an ordinance requiring regulation of virtual currency kiosks within the city limits of North Kansas City. Bill number 7981, ordinance number 9778. This Mr. Barzee,

the memo, as you'll notice, is relatively lengthy. I'm sure each of you have already read that, so I'm not going to go over unless you have a specific question. I would point uh out to you this was being brought back to you though at the request of the council mayor. Um as you look at the ordinance itself and the language that will be in the code uh [clears throat] first of all it we we are preempted by state law from doing a number of things. So there's some things we just can't do. Uh uh but based upon research that I did, one of the primary uh the FBI determined that nationally one of the big problems is people uh that are getting older, maybe over 60 years of old age, they're taken advantage of as well as those of some their words were I think some mental incapacity in some way that were using these and they were uh you know defrauded if you will. Um and so the way this is structured is it requires an annual registration. Okay. And the whopping fee of $1, okay, but it must be done annually. It co the date coincides in talking with Nick to when the the last day or whatever of our business licenses are due. uh there are restrictions as I said and so some things like there won't be a business license but there's a host entity and those host entities should all have business licenses. All right. U the other thing is it restricts on where they can be located. They have to be in a visible place. uh

they can't be located within 500 ft of the vulnerable adult facilities that are specifically uh defined what that is. Uh and then it it one of they have to have warning signs up with a description below the warning signs and giving them even a phone number of the police department as well as the attorney general's office if they feel like there's been a problem uh of any form. And then uh there is also uh we have other rights for inspection of records etc. But then the enforcement part is it's a there's a civil penalty of of at least $100 brought to court here if they're found guilty, but not more than what the maximum is that this city can provide per state law, which is $500. Be glad to answer any questions, but I tried to keep it fairly short.

Thank you very much for that. Um, couple questions. I appreciate that there's the vulnerable adult facility 500 feet or more away. It defines it as uh one primarily I a whole definition but any other facility primarily serving persons aged 60 years or older. And I think that's because above it it mentions it the the 142 million of the fraud was for people over 60, but most are 55 plus. So we're going to get into some weird legal argument that most of the people are over 55 and not 60. I mean

I don't think so. It seems like a wideopen hole that some lawyer is going to try to punch through if this ever be if it ever gets challenged. I don't know why we wouldn't line it up with 55 or is that just the rule that the state No, it's I don't think that it's rule. I'm trying to remember now where I came up with the number. I read so many things sometimes you get you get confused. Where did I read that? Or I'd give you the exact one if I remember. I'm sure you would. I my my preference would be because of the way real estate allows uh facilities to allow only 55 plus. That's the only like age discrimination you're ever allowed to have. It's 55 plus. I would I would just make that number 55 so that there's not this weird

if that's good with the you know it's fine with me unless there's some weird we would just amend this. It would be passed then if you pass it it would be uh passed as amended. Okay. And the amendment would be changing that to 65. 55. 55. I'm sorry. 55. Other question. It may be in here. I don't think I saw. Is there specific verbiage that has to go on the warning sign? Uh oh, you mean on the warning? Yes. Yes. And I is that see right if you look at uh if everyone it's uh page five of eight uh section 550.07. 070

fraud warning stop and it says the the warning uh fraud warning etc. And notice what the two pen the two paragraphs that are below that that's right also are required. Okay. So that's where you get the phone number for the police department uh etc. It's got to be a full page 8 and a half by 11 with 18 point bold sanif as it's described right. Um perfect. Don't put it in Times New Roman. Council member Saber. Uh, I think that if it can survive legal challenge, and it sounds like it could, I think it would be good step toward keeping it out. That's the purpose of it. Obviously,

it'd be too ownorous for them to do business. Well, the idea is to be uh accommodating to businesses that are doing business in North Kansas City, but not trying to harm our vulnerable population. And thank you for bringing this to the to the council's attention and thank you for all the all the work you've done on it. Well, yes, but uh Councilman Kane was very helpful. Yep. Very good. And it I mean the interplay of state and federal and all that. I've learned a lot reading these memos. So, thank you. Uh learning about police powers and preeemption and all that good stuff. Um this would be a a pass by order. So, how do we do if if the council wants to go to 55 rather than 60, would it be a first reading with an amendment? Yes.

Okay. F would be a motion for passage of first reading as amended. Do we have a motion? I move that bill number 7981 be placed on first reading as amended. Fair. Second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed?

Motion passes. An ordinance of the city of North Kansas City, Missouri, regulating virtual currency kiosks within the city limits to protect residents from fraud, establishing registration, zoning, signage, and enforcement requirements supplemental to section 361.100 RSMO, and providing for penalties, severability, and an effective date. I move that bill number 7981 be placed on second and final reading and passed as ordinance number 9778. Does that need to be as amended as well? As amended. Second. Call the role. It was me.

Council member Saper. Yes. Council member Bailey. Yes. Council member Kaine. Yes. Council member Alvarez. Yes. Council member Wales. Yes. Council member Larson. Yes. Council member Click. Yes. An ordinance of the city of North Kansas City, Missouri, regulating virtual currency kiosks within the city limits to protect residents from fraud, establishing registration, zoning, signage, and enforcement requirements supplemental to section 361.100 RSMO, and providing for penalty, severability, and an effective date. Item 20,

consideration of an ordinance approving a license agreement between the city and 18th and Swift LLC for installation of an awning above a sidewalk adjacent to MLAN's. Bill number 7982, ordinance number [clears throat] 9779. Who's got this one?

This one here, it's for the building that the city actually legally owns, but it's under a chapter 100. the Oxbow apartment building first floor uh east side of that building for MLA MLAN's uh 18th and Swift is the um well is the less sore right now under a lease with the city and they're the ones that have asked for this uh since they're going to encroach upon city rightway with both the awning and then the fence that'll go around uh they need to have a license agreement. I won't go over what that is, but it's simply stated it's it's just a right to be able to use it so long as the city says they can use it and we have the right to revoke it at any time. They have to provide insurance and indemnify the city uh should something, you know, negative happen. It allows them basic. We've done this a number of places in different places throughout the city. But I'll be glad to answer any questions. Uh it it just allows the business to expand a little bit, especially here in the summer months.

Yep. It uh allows for sidewalk dining and uh the sun not to beat down on your eyes when you're sitting on said sidewalk or in the windows of the cafe. Questions? Do we have a motion? Motion. Motion for a first reading. Second. Okay. Do we We need a motion for a first reading, right? Okay. Let's try that one more time. Second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Yes. Any opposed?

Motion passes. An ordinance adopting and approving a license agreement buy and between the city of North Kansas City, Missouri and 18th and Swift LLC regarding the use of certain city right of way by MLAN's Market generally located at 1720 Swift Street in North Kansas City, Missouri along the west side of Swift Street and south of 18th Avenue for erection of an awning above an offense upon the public sidewalk. I move that bill number 7982 be placed on second and final reading and passes ordinance number 9779. Second call the roll. Council member Saper. Yes. Council member Bailey. Yes. Council member Kaine. Yes. Council member Alvarez. Yes. Council member Wells.

Yes. Council member Larson. Yes. Council member Click. Yes. An ordinance adopting and approving a license agreement by and between the city of North Kansas City, Missouri, and 18th and Swift LLC, regarding the use of certain city rightway by MLAN's Market, generally located at 1720 Swift Street in North Kansas City, Missouri, along the west side of Swift Street and south of 18th Avenue for erection of an awning above and offensive on the public sidewalk. Item 21, consideration of an ordinance approving accounts due and payable by the city through May 1st, 2026. Bill number 7983, ordinance number 9780. Who wants to pay the bills? First reading. Second. All in favor?

Yes. Any opposed? Motion passes. An ordinance authorizing payment for certain accounts to impay by the city through May 1st, 2026. I move that bill number 7983 be placed on second and final reading and pass as ordinance number 9780. Second. Second. Call the role. Council member Sabers. Yes. Council member Bailey. Yes. Council member Kaine. Yes. Council member Alvarez. Yes. Council member Wells. Yes. Council member Larson. Yes. Council member Click. Yes. An ordinance authorizing payment for certain accounts due and payable by the city through May 1st, 2026.

All right. Staff comments. Uh only two tonight. There is an administrator approval report. Uh this was Bedford lift station generator. I believe uh this was the deduction that that we put in there. Another deduction. So we're on a roll. Other than that, uh Kim has a couple comments and then Anthony. Evening, mayor and council. Just a quick couple of events coming up. The Tim Cummit Foundation committee would love to invite you to Civic Canvas's art dedication and art walk. That is on Saturday, May 16th. So, not this Saturday, but next Saturday. Um the dedication will kick off at 10:00 a.m. And we will after comments be doing the facilitated walk um along Armor. And the first of those public art pieces is already installed. They did that this weekend and it is the utility box at Armor and Eerie. So if you'd like to get a sneak peek, it is already up. And then the heavily anticipated River Forest Park ribbon cutting event. We have a date. It is Thursday, June 18th, 400 pm. More details to come, but please mark your calendars.

Woohoo. Anthony, uh, just real quick, we had some event numbers from the community shred and recycle event we had last weekend. Um, actually two weekends ago, I think about it. Uh, so there was 262 cars that came through. Uh, over a ton of paper was collected and shredded and there was over 7,437 pounds of electronic recycling. Goodness, included. So, really good turnout. Um, I don't have the numbers from last year, but I know that all those numbers have increased is what we were talking about. And shout out to Sarah Shekels who coordinates that entire thing for us. And yeah, it's been a really successful event each year.

Awesome. And uh we talked about maybe next year exploring moving that to the weekend after the garage sale so that if people have things [clears throat] that don't sell, they can then donate them. So maybe we'll explore that next time. All right. Any further staff comments? Zach's phone, you got anything to say? I got to do it to you. Um All right. Perfect. Perfect. Uh, council member comments starting with council member Saper. Uh, no comments this evening. Council member Bailey.

I'd just uh like to shout out April from city hall for helping out for the dog vaccine clinic. If no one's, you know, heard about that, they do rabies vaccines every year uh for free for residents and you get to swing by, get your pet license, and feel like you've checked the box appropriately. So, highly recommend. Uh, thank you, April. Council member Kaine.

Uh yes. So, uh first off, it's a a bike walk and wheel week. So, uh the weather's mild, the weather's nice, except when it [clears throat] isn't. So, um be sure to go outside. And uh if you if there's a reason not to travel in your car, uh you know, now's a good time to take it. So, um I also want to thank uh Mike Nichols and city staff for letting park lofts come uh on our civic crawl uh that was on the 22nd of April. Um and uh letting residents kind of get a tour of of their city hall council chambers uh getting to ask questions for department. Yes. Sit up at the dis and and get the whole experience. Uh, I also want to thank uh, Zach Stone King with the fire uh, department for letting us go and and take a look at the fire station and and uh, get a tremendous view of North Kansas City. Uh, so I appreciate that. Um, I also just want to uh, as a kind of a general reminder uh, June 1st uh, fairs are returning for the KCATA. Um, and that's going to apply to fixed routes uh, and our flex bus the 298. Uh so just as a reminder for folks uh that's $2, uh for oneway fair. Um but they do have a fair capping policy at $4 per day uh if you use the same payment method. Uh so if you want more information on that uh just go check out Ride Casey's website uh under uh fairs, they will have more information. Thank you,

Council Member Alvarez. Yeah, I just want to thank um want to thank Connor Fitzgerald for coming tonight and reminding us um of our budget and trying to remember to keep that um at bay so that we don't keep overspending. Um that's very something that we really need to look at. Um keep it short. Just uh also besides the uh arts beautifification for the city on the 16th, it's also the citywide garage sale. So, um, I have a lot of people out and about that day. So, and other than that, that's it. Um, also today is Cinco de Mayo, so happy Cinco de Mayo to everyone. Olay. Okay.

Council member Wells.

Uh, yeah. I was uh tonight thinking about Rich's comments from the North Kansas City Business Council about building bridges between the uh industrial district here in in the businesses in North Kansas City and the residential population, which I think is uh great sentiment. Um, he talking about that got me thinking about uh the former mayor Elizabeth Short, who's over on the wall there, who in the 1970s, had a festival in town called the Hearts and Flowers Festival. It was a little uh a little uh hippie inspired. It was the early 70s after all and uh very much art and music focused, but at the same time um she uh facilitated tours of some of the industries here in Kansas City or North Kansas City for citizens. And um I just think that that's uh as I was sitting here looking at her tonight and thinking about that, I just think uh you know I was uh just enjoying the the sentiment of building those bridges. Um but other than that um I've just had a you know an amazing time getting to know people here at the city that are involved uh either elected officials or or city staff. Everyone's been really kind and I'm just uh uh really happy to be up here and learning more and more every day. And uh yeah, so that's it. So thank you. Thank you everyone.

Council member Larson. Um I'll keep it brief. I want to thank Connor Fitzgerald, George Slutter, and Rich Groves for coming out to speak. Um I want to remind everybody that if there's any message you want the city council to hear or uh your neighbors, please uh take advantage of our uh open comment section. That's all I got. Council member Click.

Um don't have a ton tonight either, I guess. Staff, thank you as always. Always on top of everything. Um, just per usual, encourage everybody to pay attention to what's going on at the state, at the federal level. Um, call your representatives. It really does affect all of us and our families pretty significantly. So, that's all.

All right. Brings it around to me. Uh, we've had some wild weather and so thank you to public works for all the storm cleanup. It is a very thankless job to be out there in the rain and and cleaning up the limbs so that we can all wake up and pretend it didn't happen. I got pictures from a number of people had full-size trees fall over their driveway and those were gone in the morning. Um, and I took full credit uh in the morning for that. Um, as Linda mentioned, garage sale third Saturday of the month. Uh, so sell all your wares and then donate what you don't. Um, I have had the opportunity to go on a couple of levy tours recently to talk with stakeholders from Kansas City and the levy district and even Port KC on some opportunities to perhaps clean up some of the underbrush down at the levy. Um, there's a lot of crime, a lot of vandalism going on down on the foreshore. uh fences are being cut, uh wires are being cut, steam lines are being punched into, and so trying to solve for some of those with the eventual goal to start programming that foreshore uh for public use. Um so we had some real good feedback from some top uh government officials in Kansas City. uh had the opportunity to visit the Oxbow this past week uh as as well as an upcoming visit to 23rd and Swift and having done Park Lofts, making the tours and each time somebody expresses interest in a block party. So, we're going to start seeing some applications come in. We've had the first come in for a block party from an apartment complex. Uh so, that's going to be a lot of fun. Uh I think that one's at 23rd in Swift. It'll be right there on 23rd, I believe, once approved. Uh so, it's block party season, everybody. Again, get those permits in. We have $400 for you to close down the block and party with your friends. Please take advantage of that. Had an opportunity to cut the ribbon at a new little library in the avenues at 23rd and Knox. Carlin, I'm going to mess up the Carlin Fiddler uh built with some of her neighbors, built a little library, and we brought out the big scissors and cut the ribbon. It was amazing to have a group of neighbors be

fully supportive of such a fun little project there. And then we are, as my hat would suggest, headed down the the trail of Northtown 20 240. We're leaning into a master plan and a strategic plan. So, I'm going to get the pleasure of sitting pretty soon in a room with all of our staff and all of our elected official friends and working on what's next, how we're going to work together for the goals. And so, if you are watching this and you have goals, please reach out to your council members so they can bring that to the meeting. And with that, that is all I have. Moving on to item 25.

Consideration of a request to hold in recess into an executive session as requested by the city administrator to be held on this date pursuant to Missouri revised statute 610.0212 real estate matters. Real estate. Real estate. Real estate. Do we have a motion? So move. Second. Call the role. Council member Saper. Yes. Yes. Council member Bailey, yes. Council member Kaine, yes. Council member Alvarez, yes. Council member Wells, yes. Council member Larson, yes. Council member Click, yes. At this time, the live stream and channel 2 will cut off. There will be no further votes or businesses this evening. Thank you for tuning