City Council - Regular Meeting

good evening i will now call this governing body meeting of june 9th 2026 to order thank you everybody for being here the city manager will not be with us this evening he is out of town on city business so we will have braxton copley filling in for him this evening with that the invocation tonight is with council member mcgee please ask you to turn your attention to him and please stand if you are able

Thank you, Mayor. With us this evening, we have Reverend Amy Seifert. She serves as the pastor of Susanna Wesley United Methodist Church in Topeka. She's been in ministry for over 30 years, the last 15 as ordained deacon and elder in the United Methodist Church. Amy holds a bachelor's of music education degree from Baker University, a master's degree in Christian leadership from Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. She and her husband, Todd, have been married 32 years. They have two adult children and two grandchildren.

Good evening. I invite you to be in an attitude of prayer. Gracious and holy one, we gather today mindful of the responsibility entrusted to those who serve this community. We give thanks for the opportunity to work together for the common good and for the many people whose lives are touched by the decisions made in this place. Grant wisdom to these council members, city staff, and all who participate in this meeting. Help them to listen with respect, speak with integrity, and act with courage. May their deliberations be guided by a desire for justice, compassion, and the well-being of all residents. We recognize that we come from different faith traditions, beliefs, and life experiences, yet we share a common hope for the community where people are treated with dignity, where neighbors care for one another, and where every person has the opportunity to flourish. Bless this city and all who call it home. Give us hearts committed to service, minds open to understanding, and spirits dedicated to peace and cooperation. May the work done here today contribute to a stronger, safer, and more caring community for all. Amen.

and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right.

With that, I'm going to ask the clerk to take roll call, please.

Mayor Duncan?

Here.

Council members Hillard? Here. Valdivia-Ocala?

Here.

Ortiz? Here. Banks?

Here.

McHale?

Here.

Miller?

Here.

Bradbury. Here. McGee.

Here.

And Hofer. Here. All right. We have 10 yes.

All right. With that, we move on to appointments. City Clerk.

A is a board appointment recommending the appointment of Tamika Terry to the Topeka Metropolitan Transit Board for a term ending June 9, 2030. And B is a board appointment recommending the reappointment of Luke Benisman to the Topeka Human Relations Commission to fill a term ending June 30, 2028.

All right, I have a motion to approve from Council Member Valdiviacola and a second from Council Member Kell. If there are no questions or comments, I would ask the clerk to take the vote, please.

OK, we have nine yes. The motion carries.

All right, I don't see Luke here. If I'm wrong, stand up. I do see Tameka here. If you'd stand up, please, and recognize Tameka Terry. Thank you. Appreciate your service. And I'll tell the council and the community that there's still a couple openings on the Metro Board. So if you have people who are in that lane, so to speak, who would be a good fit, let us know. And thank you for doing it. It's kind of fun. Tameka and I have known each other since we were kids. So it's kind of fun when life comes full circle. So thank you for being here.

You're welcome. Thank you.

All right. With that, we will move on to item three, presentations. City Clerk.

It's 2026 Kansas Legislative Session Recap.

Deputy City Manager.

Thank you, Mayor. Cale Beam, Beam Consulting Group, who served as our very busy lobbyist this past session, will provide an update.

Welcome, Cale.

Thank you. Thank you Mayor Duncan and governing body members for the opportunity to appear before you today. Cale Beam, contract lobbyist for the city. It was my first year representing the city and as I'm sure Mayor Duncan can attest to it was there's no shortage of activity this session. So I'll just touch on kind of the most pertinent local government issues that were up this session and then stand for questions afterwards. I'll start with property taxes. This is probably the most contentious issue this session. I'd say there's widespread agreement, bipartisan agreement that the legislature should do something about property taxes. but widespread disagreement on what the best approach on that is. And that disagreement isn't just party line disagreement. It's also different approaches between the House and Senate. At the end of the day, while there were several bills that passed out of the legislature and several constitutional amendments that were proposed and passed one chamber, nothing made it to the finish line. Both the big overhaul bills were vetoed and none of the constitutional amendments passed those chambers. The two bills, they were both very similar, would have established a property tax revenue lid on local governments and taxing entities. It would have capped revenue growth at 3% or inflation, whichever was less. If a local entity passed a budget that exceeded that cap, it would have triggered a protest petition mechanism in which a small, very small number of voters within that jurisdiction could have signed on and essentially vetoed or overturned that proposed budget. So both of them were very similar. A few small differences. Both were vetoed by the governor. Neither were overridden. And then there were multiple constitutional amendments that were proposed. This is the route that the Senate has preferred. Most of these have come from the Senate, and they're kind of all over the map in terms of what they do, but essentially the one we've seen the most would be a valuation increase cap. We've seen a few different numbers, but 3% is probably the one we've seen the most. Would routinely pass the Senate, but not get enough votes in the House. So at the end of the day, even though this was probably the issue that dominated the conversation the most this session, we're still where we were last year in terms of property tax policy. Because of that, because it's such a hot topic, especially with elections this fall. We expect that this will be something the legislature definitely takes another crack at in 2027. There are also a number of housing bills this year. The biggest one was probably Senate Bill 418. This is a A bill that was authored out by Senator TJ Rose out of the Overland Park area. He said his goal with this legislation was to bring down the cost of single family home construction. He actually, to his credit, reached out to myself and city staff early on this session before his bill was introduced. and asked for the city's perspective on the legislation. We had a meeting with him, walked through the proposed draft of the bill. In the original version, there were some provisions in there that would have presented some planning challenges for cities. For example, one of the provisions would have allowed single family residential development in any type of land no matter how it was zoned. So it could have been commercial or industrial land. But thankfully I appreciate him willing to work with not only the city of Topeka but other municipalities. The League of Municipalities was heavily involved as well and work on some amendments that alleviated a lot of those concerns. The home-based business bill, this is something we've seen the last few sessions. It would really limit local government's ability to regulate businesses that operate out of residential areas. Really appreciate Dan Warner from city staff willing to come and testify on that bill and talk about some of the unintended consequences that it could have. It did pass the House last session, and it was carried over this year. Made it out of the Senate committee, but never ran on the floor. And then House Bill 2099, this was the bill that was actually introduced by the city of Topeka last session that, again, carried over this year, would have authorized the city to conduct periodic inspections of HUD subsidized units. This passed the House last year with 111 votes, I believe. Made it out of Senate committee, but was never taken up by the full Senate due to concerns from Senate leadership. I met with Senate leadership early on to try to talk through some of those concerns. At the end of the day, we were never able to alleviate them. They had some real problems with giving local governments more authority to conduct these inspections. I am encouraged, however, one of the interim committee requests that was made was a request to further study not only city inspection authority, but also code enforcement. So I'm hopeful that that can provide us an opportunity to continue to have these conversations and hopefully work towards a solution. We also saw a number of right-of-way issues coming from the telecom industry. Telecom companies have complained for a number of years about the relocation costs that they have to pay when they're forced to move their equipment out of the public right-of-way for a public works project. They brought forward a bill this year that would have established a state fund that would reimburse them for those costs. The bill got out of committee but didn't get much further than that, largely because of budget concerns from the state. There wasn't a whole lot of concern from a local government perspective with how that bill was drafted, but it's something we'll have to keep an eye on going forward to make sure that they don't try to shift those costs on the local governments and local taxpayers. There was also a, in that same kind of parallel bill, would have included So under current law, cable broadband providers pay franchise fees on their broadband revenue, but telecommunications broadband providers, it's kind of a minutiae in the statute, generally do not. So Cox Communications brought a bill this year that would create some parity between the two types of providers. Again, it didn't get very far, but something we can expect to see in the future. If it would become law, could it increase the local government franchise fees to help set some of the costs of maintaining the right-of-way? And then we also saw this kind of seems to be a consistent theme. We saw a few bills that limit local government authority this year. I'll just touch on a few quickly. 2593, this was brought forward by the Attorney General and several other organizations. It requires local governments to get approval from the Attorney General's office. before they enter into a contingency fee contract for legal services. And then Senate Bill 391, this is actually in response to an ordinance passed by the City of Lawrence, which would prohibit landlords from discriminating against potential tenants based off their income source, such as housing vouchers. The Realtors Association and the Landlords Association didn't like that ordinance very much so they brought it to the legislature and passed a law that basically prohibits local governments from enforcing these types of ordinances. And then 2481 is kind of the World Cup package. Two major provisions in that. One, it authorizes cities to allow 23-hour alcohol sales during the World Cup. It's not something that's mandatory. Cities have to opt into that. And then it also prohibits municipalities from limiting the number of short-term rental units and Airbnbs during that same World Cup period. A few other notable issues that I'll touch on, just because they were also on the city's legislative agenda this session. Increased penalties for child abuse. There were two bills that were signed into law that increased criminal penalties for child endangerment and sexual extortion involving a minor. Law enforcement age requirements. Last year the city introduced a bill that would lower the age requirement to enter the law enforcement academy from 21 to 20 as long as they were 21 by the time they graduated. Passed out of the house last session but stalled in the senate due to concerns from law enforcement organizations. I met early on with the Chiefs of Police Association and the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center about this bill. We were never able to work through their concerns. They were pretty staunchly opposed to lowering that age requirement even a little bit as proposed in this bill. And then another issue that I know was added to this year's legislative agenda, cannabis legalization. There were multiple bills dealing with both medical and recreational cannabis. Just with the nature of the legislature and there's a lot of staunch opposition, especially among Senate leadership, to any sort of cannabis legalization. There wasn't a real conversation on these issues. It seems like a few years ago there was a bill that passed the House but kind of stalled over in the Senate. It seems like a lot of that momentum has died down. Looking ahead, the next few months, actually in the next few weeks, we should have the interim committees announced for this summer and fall. Leadership will get together and decide which ones they want to commission. There's a few proposals out there. We'll see what they end up going with. but we could expect some more conversation on property taxes, further conversation on code enforcement and housing inspections, and then also there's a request to further examine local zoning authority, especially as it relates to the three-mile radius. And then there will be a lot of eyes on the November elections as well. Big year for Kansas, election-wise. All five statewide offices, including the governor. Governor Kelly is term limited, so there's a lot of candidates running to replace her. So I hope everyone's looking forward to a lot of commercials on TV this fall. And then all 125 House seats are also up for re-election. So depending on how elections shape out this fall, the political dynamics can look a lot different come January. So I'll kind of pause there and happy to stand for questions.

Council member, excuse me, I'm sorry, Valdivia Alcala.

Thank you, Mayor.

I do have a couple of questions for you, and then I have a question for the Mayor.

In reference to HB 2099, which staff and Representative Alcala, myself, and some other folks worked really, really hard on, went through, tried to get it through last year, obviously failed again this year. You're saying when you got in the room with them that at the Senate level they had concerns. And you mentioned briefly the concern about entrance into the homes. What else did they have?

I think the concern was just mainly ideological. They're very opposed to growing government, even if it is a government subsidized unit, and giving local government more authority to conduct those inspections. There was never a definite answer. If you change this, then we're happy to run the bill. I think it was more of a blanket opposition.

How much do you think they were being squeezed by lobbyists?

I couldn't say. I know there was some opposition to last year's legislation, to the legislation last session from the Realtors Association, although I think those concerns were worked out. But I know the Landlords Association still had some concerns.

So then my question moves over to the Mayor. You know more with working with the League, but I recall... It was not like a hearing that we went to last year, where we went and spoke in front of whatever committee listened to this. A year or two before, when the topic of homelessness was first really starting to enter the purview of the legislature, I remember that there were a whole bunch of folks from Lawrence There were people from the city of Topeka. I was there. And we all sat around this table. There probably in total was 25 of us. And we gave testimony. And they asked us questions, whatever this committee was. Is that something like what we did with much fewer people the year before last when Rhiannon talked and I talked and John talked and you talked? Was that something like it? Because it was such a larger room. There were larger topics. There was more time. There were more people. And the reason I'm asking that, is that comparable to what we were in that first year? And why can't we try to get something like that with other cities and show them what happens? Because HUD oftentimes, not all the time, but HUD is not inspecting. KHRC is not inspecting. And so the ideological you know, that they're bent on and the squeeze that they're probably getting from the lobbyists. What it's doing, and you know this, it's lessening trying to have a proactive stance toward dealing with some slumlords because we have a lot of good landlords here. But how do we move through this? Because I've asked for years now, why aren't we developing a coalition? Why can't we try to get that larger ability where questions are asked and we can provide them with more detailed information?

Yeah. Yes and no. So there were two issues. Well, there were two issues that didn't allow that to happen this year. So the bill, as Cale said, sailed through the House, went through the Senate committee, and then sat in the Senate on the Senate floor all year. Part of the problem was, it sounds really silly to say that the session that's 90 days every year can actually be sped up. This one was sped up to a degree that even when you talk to legislators who have been there for decades, I've been out in parts of Kansas talking to some of them last couple weeks, and even they're like, let's not do that again. It was so fast. There was no time for that this year. And some of that was purposeful on their part. But the point is, there wasn't time for what you're talking about. There's now time to do that, cutting the next session and the next session. The other problem was, this is the frustration of this process at times. There's two people who get to control the calendar in the Senate. and one of them was one of the people who said, I don't like this bill, and so I'm never going to put it on the calendar. And Kale went and talked to him, and I went and talked to him, and several others went and talked to him, and we just could not crack that nut. And so I think now that we know what the issues are, though, we can reconvene that conversation you're talking about, take that, and then go back and maybe do a better job as a collective helping him see some –

Well, thanks for that because in addition to the squeeze, which I'm sure they're getting, in addition to the ideological obsession that they have with not being able to give, it is increasingly concerning to me the way that at times there is a punitive nature that the legislature has towards municipal government. Instead of helping us more, and I'm not just saying throwing around money, you know, and not offering charity, but actually helping us as we move forward, it really seems more and more like municipalities are having to push back against the legislature, but doing so very cautiously because of the huge amount of power is to be had, and your stuff could be sunk in a minute. You know, it's just that big political game. But I think that it is... This is solid enough that we're trying to do because of the experiences that we've had with Timberley and others. To me, I hope this continues on our legislative agenda. And again, I'm telling you, however I can help or, you know, however we can utilize the Shawnee County delegation, then let's use whoever we need to use to make a stronger case for it. So thank you.

Any other comments or questions for Cahill? Council Member Bradbury.

Kind of piggybacking on this discussion, were there alternatives provided?

On the inspection bill?

Yeah.

No, there was just an informational hearing on housing inspections generally. There was a similar situation to the Timberley apartments that actually happened in Gardner, I believe. So there was a bill proposed by the senator who represents that area to allow for tenants who have been victimized by those certain situations to seek higher recourse from their landlords. Again, that kind of ran into similar roadblocks and similar opposition. But I really am encouraged that there does seem to be more conversation happening including that informational hearing. And I am hopeful that we can continue having those conversations and if an interim committee on that topic is approved.

So it sounds to me like the Senate leadership did have nothing to offer as far as an alternative. Is that what I'm? That was my question. If they had other alternatives, they were staunch against this. But did they have something else to present, or they just flat out no?

Yeah, there was no compromise offered or solution. There was no offer. If you change this language, then we'd be comfortable with the bill.

Council Member Hiller.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

A couple things.

There was another rental one that came forward, and that had to do with expunging. Mike.

There was another rental one that came through that had to do with expungement of eviction records. And so my question is, could you explain that a little bit? And also, within that, because I know it's your first year, that came into the session rather than before the session from prior years, as I understand it. you know, how do, what's our system for grabbing something that looks like it's related to the things we have put on the agenda? Because I don't recall us getting a report on it through the course of the session and then all of a sudden it passed.

Right. Yeah, that was brought forward by some legislators out of the Olathe area. It sets a process for getting your eviction records expunged. I'm happy to follow up with more of the details on that piece of legislation. Generally As bills go through the legislative process, there is an opportunity to add amendments or attach your language to it if it's deemed germane. A lot of times, if legislators have a a specific bill that they're trying to work through or pass and there's something similar but a little different and could invite more opposition or more scrutiny, they're hesitant to add that language onto their bill in the hopes or in the fear that it could end up tanking it. So that for that specific bill, I know because of the concerns with from Senate leadership, they didn't want to add anything on there that could potentially tank their bill.

Okay. Sometimes those things do come in later and just checking. For what it's worth on the issue of the inspections bill in 2099, through changing our culture of property maintenance, our housing staff has reached out to the departments that do those inspections. There are four, KHRC for HUD, THA for the Section 8 program, and I guess it's just three, our own housing department for the Section 8 vouchers that are out. And they have all agreed to be accountable for the commitments that they've made. They already are contractually responsible to do those inspections, but had not been held accountable, not just in Topeka, but elsewhere. And we have a report on how many that they did. in the past year to present. And the representatives of those three entities are going to be available at our June 30th Rental Housing Input Session for Public Health and Safety Committee. So another way to look for that accountability The advantage to those is that the tenants have already agreed in their leases to be inspected once a year. So the big problem that we've had with this 2099 is resolved as long as those inspections occur. So stay tuned for that and plug in for sure. Thank you.

Council Member Ortiz.

I would just like to have your presentation, if you can mail that to me. Email it to me. Sure. Along with your contact information. Absolutely. And thank you for that.

All right. Any other comments or questions for Cale? Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate it.

Thank you. Mayor, if I can add, Cale did an excellent job this year. So glad to have him on the team representing the city of Topeka. He brought a lot of enthusiasm. He busted his rear end. in terms of covering meetings. He was always responsive, helping us draft response. And I will tell you that it is a very, very busy position, and he kept Nick and I very busy as well. And we, just so you know, Cale and I had the conversation about starting our conversation in September, looking at our existing legislative agenda resolution, taking that to the Policy and Finance Committee meeting, getting in front of the governing body in October so that we are ahead of the power curve when it comes to December when Shawnee County delegation is starting their meeting with their local consulates. So with, of course, the Policy and Finance Committee Chair's consent, we'd like to start those conversations in September.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

With that, we will move on to item four, the consent agenda. City Clerk.

A is a resolution introduced by Councilmember Karen Hiller granting Arab Shrine an exception to the provisions of City of Topeka Code section 945-150 at seat concerning noise prohibitions. B is approval of a settlement in the amount of $175,000 to resolve a lawsuit with Pete Vaubach arising out of the or relating to any way from employment from the city on a full and final basis. See our minutes of the regular meeting of June 2, 2026. And there's a list of cereal and beverage license applications and staff is recommending approval.

All right. Please take that. We have a motion to approve. Anyone? Motion to approve from Council Member Bradbury. Second from Council Member Miller. With that, I would ask the clerk to take the vote.

Okay, we have 10 yes. The motion carries.

All right. We'll move on to action items. City Clerk.

A is an ordinance introduced by City Manager Dr. Robert Perez annexing land to the City of Topeka, Kansas in accordance with KSA 12-520 located at 5230 Northwest 17th Street.

Deputy City Manager.

Thank you, Dan Warner. Planning Director will handle this item.

Thank you, Braxton. Mayor, governing body, this annexation request is coming from Old Castle Infrastructure Incorporated. They wish to connect to the City of Topeka water system via a water main extension. Utility regulations require annexation if connecting to the City of Topeka water outside the city limits. So a key point here is that the property owner will extend that water main at their expense. The property is an existing business. They manufacture precast concrete products such as underground infrastructure, so stormwater pipes for instance. The corporation is in good standing with the Kansas Secretary of State. The property is contiguous to the city boundary and the owner has consented to annexation and governing body can approve annexations of this type by adopting an ordinance. Staff recommends approval of the amended ordinance that was distributed by the City Clerk. You should have a copy of that. With that, I'll be happy to try to answer any questions.

Any questions or comments for Dan or staff? If not, a motion is always in order. Motion to approve from Councilmember Kell. Second from Councilmember McGee. If there are no other comments or questions, I will ask the city clerk to take the vote, please.

Council Member Ortiz. All right, we have 10 yes, the motion carries.

We'll move on to Item B, City Clerk.

B is a resolution introduced by City Manager Dr. Robert Perez regarding a capital request for repairs to the York Chiller at Hotel Topeka.

Deputy City Manager.

Thank you, Mayor. I'll take this one. This is the request for the approval for funding to repair the existing York Chiller. The property has two chillers, one of which is not working. It is best practice in this climate to have two working chillers in the event that one of those chillers would go down for maintenance or repair. The request is in the amount of $16,289.25. This was conditionally approved by the TDC Board earlier this evening. Subject to approval of funding by the governing body, we would respectfully ask for approval of this resolution.

All right. I'm going to move to approve. We have a second from Deputy Mayor Hofer. There are no comments or questions at this time. I would ask the clerk to take the vote, please.

Okay, we have eight yes with council members Valdivia, Aqua, and Banks voting no. The motion carries.

With that, we move on to non-action items. Item A, city clerk.

A is discussion on the utility rates.

Deputy city manager.

Thank you, mayor. Utilities Director Sylvia Davis and Deputy Director Nicole Malott will continue our discussion of the utility rates. And again, this is a non-action item. No vote will be taken this evening.

Ready? Good evening. Okay, tonight, as Braxton said, we are just continuing the utilities rates discussion. After this presentation, we'll have lots of time for Q&A as much as you guys want to expand on the discussion, and then we'll come back next week for an additional discussion. First, we've had lots of discussion with several of you. I just want to thank all of the crews responding to last night, early this morning's rain events. We've been struggling with rain for a couple of weeks, as you know. So lots of work out there. And we just wanted to shout out to the team. We've had people from all over utilities and public works working in many different ways, responding to customer calls and needs out in the community. So with that being said, tonight, four rates. What we would like to discuss are a little bit more about comparisons. Again, I'm going to give you some highlights and then send you additional information in a separate memo that gives you more detailed feedback or at least data to look at and then if you have additional questions just ask and we'll continue to provide that. So we'll look at comparisons. We'll look at a little bit of information on revenue by class, delinquencies by class. We'll have a little bit more discussion on alternative payment options and then open it up for more question and answer. So before we get into where Topeka's rates compare, just want to take a minute to explain that when we do this comparison, we are looking at Cities that are like some of these cities are like size and characteristics to Topeka. We are also looking at some of our neighboring cities. So you can see there's different sizes here, different customer bases. But in general, those are the different communities that we are looking at. A total of, depending on if it's water, wastewater, 16 total communities that we're comparing Topeka to. We are going to start out with a wastewater comparison, and I'm saying that because wastewater, we've talked a lot about water leading up to tonight. We haven't talked as much about wastewater, and wastewater is quite simply just a little bit easier, simpler to discuss how rates impact those customers. Okay. Wastewater is based on winter quarter average. The average usage that our customers, our residential customers have in winter months where they're not watering their yards, they're not doing, they're not washing their cars outside, et cetera. So in theory, that's many, many communities are doing this. But in theory, the winter months are the least amount of usage that a customer may have. Again, this is residential customers we're referring to. So when we're looking at that winter quarter average, once that is set, it's set for the year, and the customer is going to pay that same amount every month. So on this chart, layer this with the next slide. So on this slide, we're showing you the average customer, which we are, again, comparing to 3,500 gallons of water usage. We'll look at that in the water rates as well. But that's our average customer on a five-eighths inch meter. This isn't a customer that's using a lot of water for recreational use or anything like that. This is just our average customer across our residential class throughout the city. So that being said, you can see Topeka is this bright yellow bar here in the middle, just under $40 a month. The black line that you see across that chart is the average 2026 rate for all of these communities combined. So you can see where Topeka lands. Again, this is not saying this is affordable for Topeka or anything like that. It's just showing you where Topeka lands in the average across all of these communities. The next slide is going to show you, if we refer back to last week's discussion, we threw out roughly, this is what some proposed increases might look like if we were to do an across-the-board increase, so that 6%, 4%, 4%. If we were to implement that rate increase, it would look something like this. So the yellow bar is, again, where we're at today. The blue bars that you see in the blue outlined bar is Topeka in 2027. That's the yellow bar with the blue outline. The blue bars are Wichita's 2027 rates, which are already established, and Independence, Missouri's already established rates. If we have those, we are putting them here to show you. The green is 2028. So you can see with those suggested or potential increases, you can see where Topeka starts moving. Again, this is wastewater from lower on that compared to that average We just are moving up closer to that average. But again, that bar is the 2026 average. So once we would get 27 numbers for all of these, then you would be able to have a better comparison. This is the best information we can provide when we're looking at comparisons. These are the things that we're considering. So this is residential. Again, 3,500 gallons a month customer. Then we move to a commercial user that is potentially using 10,000 gallons a month. For that average customer, those commercial rates, again, this is wastewater. So you can see, again, where Topeka lands according to the average. And then when we layer on those potential increases, You can see we're moving in 2028. We're really getting much closer to that 2026 average across all of those communities. But we are still in the center of the board. Now we're looking at, this next slide is the industrial user, 10 million gallons a month. I'm sorry, 10 million gallons a month. It's important to note when we're talking about commercial and industrial, those wastewater rates are based on actual usage each month. Where I told you residential is based on winter quarter average, for our commercial and residential, it is the actual usage. So if they're using 10 million gallons, they're being charged for 10 million gallons, unless they're taking the extra efforts to then get a meter and deduct that usage. So it's just a difference in how those things are applied to those classes. If I say something that I'm wrong, you just shout it out. I also need to note that our industrial users may also have excess strength charges added to their bills. We account for total suspended solids and BOD, biological oxygen demand. We have some industrial customers that are using or producing a higher strength waste that we then have to take extra steps to treat at our wastewater treatment facilities so that those added costs are not born on the backs of our residential customers or other commercial customers that are not creating that high strength waste, those excess charges, we call them excess strength charges or high strength waste charges, those are applied to those industrial customers that are creating those higher strength wastes. So those amounts are not reflected in this comparison. Anyway, you can see Topeka is really right in the middle of the pack when it comes to this comparison of 10 million gallons of wastewater a month. And then if we're layering on those proposed or potential increases, you can see where that pushes against that 2026 average. But we're still right in the middle of the pack when it comes to comparing to these communities. So with that being said, we'll dive into water. You might see, I know everybody is very keen on the information that we're providing. And we are trying to tailor information to what is requested. We're trying to adjust our approach as we've done more and more of these discussions to help make it a little bit more easy to read or understand, or are we comparing apples to apples? If we get additional information, we're updating that as we go. So if there are some discrepancies, we're happy to circle back to those and answer those questions that might come up. But when it comes to water comparisons, There's a lot of additional things that could be at play when we're looking at how we compare to other communities. We'll talk more as we go through this about different tiered rate structures across different communities. So not all, every single one of these communities you see listed here, an average customer using 3,500 gallons a month with a five-eighths inch meter they may pay different rates depending on the city that they're in and depending on the tiered structures that they have. So as we are trying to compare apples to apples, this is the best numerical comparison that we have for you as we're trying to fit maybe a grape in there or something of that nature. It's not all apples to apples. We have apples to oranges, apples to grapes, apples to bananas. You get the picture. But with that being said, that our average residential user here in Topeka across this set of averages is past that average mark. They're paying a higher average rate than other residential users of 3,500 gallons a month in these communities. When we look at additional rates, proposed rates, again, if we just took that proposed across the board number that we gave you last week, you can see where that pushes Topeka in 2027 and in 2028. And again, we have numbers established for Wichita and Columbia, Missouri. So you can see those additional changes and where that pushes us. I'll come back to some of this detail here in a minute, but let's move to commercial. A commercial customer currently at 10,000 gallons a month. You can see where Topeka falls across the board compared to the average, and then here you see where those potential increases might push our commercial customers. And then we'll look at large industrial customers of 10 million gallons a month. Um, again, Topeka is really in the middle of the pack here. Um, as we continue to move forward and look at potential increases again across the board, um, you can see how we start to just creep over the 2026 average, um, middle of the road here, but, um, we're still fairly, uh, middle ground compared to these other communities. What these charts aren't showing you are the changes that you would see if we were to chart the alternate number two option that we talked about last week, where if we did a different rate for residential customers versus commercial and industrial. We can show you that information. We will have that supplemental information. provided to you, but if you guys are getting a feeling of what you would like to see more of, again, that's what we're looking for. What direction do you guys want to go so that we can dive in and get you additional details? I'll share a little bit more before we dive into just open Q&A because, again, we're trying to answer lots of different questions or give you lots of different pieces of information as we continue to talk to different municipalities and what they're offering their customers. But when we look at revenue by class, this is the slide that you're looking at here. This is data from last month, the end of the month. This is a snapshot of where we landed in May. This is not a year-to-date number. This is just May's revenue by class. I should say by rate class. Single family is almost $4.7 million in You see multifamily, commercial, and industrial. And then you can see that total of $8.4 million in total revenue for the month of May that was billed out. 55.2% single family. I think it's important to know that our single family customers make up 89% of our total customer base. 89% of our customers are generating 55% of the revenue that you see here. That industrial group here, this is both industrial one and two classes. So that's combined in this classification here at just over a million dollars. That is a total of eight customers we're talking about. When we talk about that industrial rate, that is 0.1% of our customer base. So 0.1% is generating just over where we are billing out over a million dollars a month. So again, additional information that we think is important to provide. These numbers are not inclusive of that high strength waste that I told you about. If we were to add in the high strength waste for those industrial customers that are being charged that fee on top of their rate, that would add approximately $185,000 a month. So then you asked about delinquency rates. Again, more information to come, but we're just doing a snapshot here. Total today, or I should say at the end of the month, May 31st, June 4th, we've looked at these numbers both ways, but... We have $12.3 million outstanding to the utilities department. $12.3 million across all customer classes, but that could be somebody that was just billed out yesterday. The numbers that you see here, this $3.2 million, is reflective of our customers that would be eligible for shutoff. So these are active accounts that are... over 40 days past due, eligible for a shutoff, whereas that $12.3 million number is inclusive of people that could be recently billed that just simply haven't made their payment yet. You can see these numbers would change every day. We'd give you a number every single day. This, again, is a snapshot, but we wanted to show you what that looks like by rate classification. So again, that single family residential classification makes up almost 64% of the delinquency rate. We talked a little bit last week about level pay, also known as budget billing in some communities. We're just titling that alternative pay options or average payment plans. We've spent a lot of time over the last week reaching out to other communities to see how many of them are offering this, what that looks like, pros and cons. We will give you that feedback as well. Just to recap, average payment plans are very common in gas and electric utilities where you have wide swings, usage swings, depending on what time of year it is. So you're going to have really high electric bills in the summer compared to winter, and then usually gas is high in the winter compared to summer. Typically average payment plans will average the bill of a customer across 11 or 12 months They've done different ways depending where you're at and that just helps level that payout for customers And so that they're paying a more steady bill every month instead of having to come up with wide variances for municipal utility trends or water utilities wastewater utilities, things of that nature. What we have found is that the communities in Kansas that we reach out to that do offer level pay are usually utilities that are also providing electrical service. I'll give you a little bit more detail there in a minute. It may not be as prevalent because utility rates are usually more consistent. Water is the exception, but wastewater and stormwater rates are going to stay the same month to month. A lot of the folks that we've talked to say the biggest users of level pay are, of course, people on fixed incomes who want to have a more steady monthly bill. But a lot of irrigation customers or people using water for swimming pool use, etc. So those customers are also seeing a bigger swing in the summer months when they're using irrigation or filling a pool. So we again mentioned last week that one of the reasons why somebody might not want to use level pay for water anyway is it does hamper our ability to help customers detect leaks. If there's an increase in usage based on a leak in the house, a break in one of their internal lines, that is going to be very important for them to be looking at their usage continuously so that it is not just absorbed in that level pay option. It is, again, based on the communities that we spoke with. Those that are doing it have explained that it is a very manual process. We have looked at our internal systems and how we are transitioning over. to some of our new software and looking at what we might have to do to be able to implement that. So we are still looking into that. We'll have more information on that as we dive in and look at what that might entail. However, I will tell you that today if somebody wanted to call in and get their average monthly bill and ask us to help them set up a payment plan to chop that bill up into four equal payments or two equal payments every other week, something of that nature. We can do that today and we're happy to help customers if that is something that they would like to do rather than waiting for us to set up some sort of level pay option that they could click on Again, I'm not saying that's not in the works, but we'll continue to look at that. I just want to make sure everybody knows if they want help budgeting out those bills, we're happy to help them do that. We have spoken with 12 cities in Kansas, small cities up to some larger communities. Five of those cities that offer electric service are less than 8,500 meters. So for Topeka, just to compare, we're over 57,000 meters. So you can see there's a big size difference there. But they do, five of those communities with electric utilities offer the average payment plans. Two of those communities that we talked to, Lawrence and Manhattan, do offer a budget-based plan or, again, level pay, whatever they want to call it. Lawrence and Manhattan do offer that. They do not have electric service that they're providing. And then Olathe is testing that. They're not moving forward at this time because of the manual process and the fact that their bills aren't shifting as much as one might think as they've been testing this out. They're still testing, but they're not moving forward at this point in time with that option for their customers. The Junction City, Bonner Springs, Emporia, Johnson County, they currently do not offer that. I will give you that information in the memo as well. It's just more information for you guys to consider. But again, when it comes to City of Topeka current customers and what we want to make sure we stress this at every NIA meeting we go to, every time we talk to a customer, many of you have reached out to us to get more information on our assistance programs. The biggest point we can make is to stress for our customers to call us. If they're having a hard time paying that bill, we want to keep them in water. Keeping somebody in water helps prevent them from getting shut off, getting shut off charges. When someone gets their water shut off, they want water right now. They need it. It's very important. So if they want same-day service, that's an additional charge. if they have late payments on top of that leading up to a shutoff, additional charges. So if they can call us and work out some sort of a payment plan, we have lots of customers who are paying us $20 here, $30 there, just to be able to stay off that shutoff list, chunk that bill up, help pay that so that they're not... finding themselves shut off and incurring additional fees and charges, that's the best place for them to be at. So that's our goal. Again, additional information there. Okay, now. Last week I talked a lot. Tonight I wanted to keep it a little bit more short just because it is a lot of information and we want to make sure we have plenty of time for questions from you all. We do plan next week to provide information on debt service, what that looks like, where our capital investments have gone. We always get that question, where is the money spent? You told us in the last rate increase that you needed more money and where did that money go? We'll provide you more detail to that in future plans and, again, additional information as you all would like to have to help consider these options. So with that, I will stand for questions.

All right. We have two individuals signed up for public comment. First up, Mr. Joseph Ledbetter.

First off, I was not given time in the quorum that I made about a map that I could actually read showing the amount of breaks that we have. Is that right? And just . By statute, I have to get stuff that is readable and not in .2 font. Some of these maps that I asked for talk about breaks that they're claiming we need a lot of money to fix. Okay. I get that. Why did you sit on this money for years and years? And by the way, here's another question I want on the record. What are we getting paid... for dividends on those idle funds. Are we getting anything? Or is that going somewhere that I don't know about? Or maybe you don't know about. I'm sure you don't. There's a lot of things in utilities that the more I look, the murkier it gets. The meetings were not timely notified. I had to quorum when the actual announcements went out. May 6, and the first meeting was May 13, during graduation week, I made three of those four meetings because I wanted to try to figure out what the urgency was. Why was everybody's hair on fire about we have to do this right now? during graduation week and no notice. By the way, another question for the record is how many information officers does this city have? Because I'm seeing quite a few names. So maybe we can get an answer on that. But to have that many people not be able to get the information out timely, it goes up to the top management. Why are we not knowing as citizens when these meetings are and why are they so close together? And then the first one I attended at the library, was set up for 60 minutes and two of the council people were there. I'm sorry, it wasn't the library, it was one before that, it was Hillcrest. The meeting went on 40 minutes out of 60 before they stopped talking so we could start making comments and asking questions. The meetings were advertised as we get to talk, we get to ask questions and not only ask questions but raise our concerns. I don't have enough time in those meetings. And there's a lot of concerns that need to be brought out. Why are these breaks still breaking? One of them is, I finally could read it. I had to magnify it practically with my own eyes. It's over there on my sister's block. It continues to break. It's on this map. And the widow, the one that they want to run a sidewalk through the garden. And there's two blocks of it that continue to break. She says, Joe, these things break all the time. I said, why don't you just rip the whole section out and fix it? And I don't know why these methods are so difficult to understand. Just take the whole block or blocks and put it on a project and get it done. But you've got $230 million sitting in the bank in idle funds, evidently. That's what I call it. It's cash. What are we getting as a rate of return? What are we paying out on all the bonds? The debt service question is excellent. One of the council members brought that up last week. I didn't even think of that one. I want a real breakdown of where all this money is going. There's been a lot of talk about a forensic audit. God, you could do this even easier. Just start plowing into those bonds. Where has all that money gone all these years? Because I remember looking at the CIPs year after year, and we're supposed to replace, oh, we're going to replace six blocks, or I mean six miles. Since you had 50 minutes, could I have two more?

Any objection?

No.

Two.

Thank you very much. Did you see this note I sent you about the administrative transfers? We get about $10 million out of utilities every year that's transferred evidently to the general fund. That's a lot of money. Now, I'm not saying you shouldn't do it or can't do it, but it just surprises me how much money goes out of those utilities. And I'm not seeing these neighborhoods taken care of, where the majority of the breaks are at. The majority of the breaks are in those neighborhoods. Aren't they supposed to be 55% or 60% of your customer base? Don't they deserve to have their water lines break? Excuse me. Those breaks fixed in a timely fashion is where they don't break every year. Why can't you just replace the whole cluster like was just done at Knollwood? But I haven't seen that many of those kind of projects done over the years. I haven't seen that many at all. And yet that's where the majority of breaks occur. And if you can get a map that actually shows it to you where you can read it, you'll see the main clusters of breakage are from about McVicker West to beyond Gage in a north-south pattern from about 6th Street south to the part I can read. Looks like it goes down to 21st. If you just clean that mess up, you'd probably fix half the breaks. You could do this in large scales like was done years ago to fix the rusty water problem and get maybe as much as 20 miles a year done just based with the money you got sitting idle, doing nothing. And again, Someday, I would love to dig into those bonds. In fact, I asked Steve Wade if I could do that, and he said, no, we're not going to do that. Thank you for your time. There's so much more to talk about. There's no rush on this, in my opinion. There's no sky falling.

Your time is up, sir.

Thank you, sir.

Next up, we have Ms. Danielle Twimlow. I believe she's on Zoom.

Thank you. Can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

OK, thank you. I apologize. I have not seen the full presentation. And it does seem as if some of the things are going to be reiterated that I have to say already. I do want us to continue to consider some alternate things that have been brought up. We know the infrastructure problem is real and nobody's disputing that. But we absolutely need a clear picture, the public does, of what has already been done. We have no detailed budget of what the first revolving door loan from 2018 that I believe we're still paying on, what it was actually spent on considering the whole point of it stated that it was going to cover the infrastructure updates that we needed. And then the multitude of utility rate increases since 2018 has basically had a cut and paste response that stated if we don't increase utility rates then we're not going to have clean drinking water and we're not going to be able to replace our aging pipes. So we do know that the replacement has not met the amount stated every single time a rate increase has occurred. We do know that more and more money is being taken in loans and being taken from citizens who are barely making ends meet while providing wealthy contractors and large businesses tax breaks and lots of deals. I have even more questions regarding the plausibility of a dire need after seeing the $30 million in reserves in the budget, $12 million in stormwater, $31 million in wastewater. And this skepticism was further solidified after the water utility meetings, where it was asked that if our community actually moved forward with a data center being built, Would our water department be able to maintain that? And to my surprise, the response was that we had looked into that, whether our infrastructure would be able to sustain an increase and that it was stated that we could. There would be some, they would have to do their own infrastructure paying, but that our entire system would be able to handle that. So I want for reference to be clear that the EPA states that a medium-sized data center can consume up to roughly 110 million gallons of water per year for cooling purposes. That is equivalent to annual water usage of approximately 1,000 households. So how on earth could our infrastructure simultaneously be in dire straits and be able to increase the load on the system so drastically should a data center be put in? An audit must be done. A change in how we do business must be done. And I've emailed steps that are evidence-based coming directly from the EPA and Georgetown Climate Center's policy toolkit on how to create resilient municipal water programs. These include measures that remove flat rate billing and put tiered structures in place to reduce harm on LMI households. The median income in Topeka is roughly $57,000. The EPA standard for water affordability is 12% of median household income for water service alone. That threshold is then about $95 per month. The average residential bill at 5,000 gallons is already $106, pushing us way past the line for average earners. So I'm asking the council to consider some changes, but also not to rush into drastic changes until we have a clearer picture of what has been done and what still needs to happen. So this affordability layer that comes with some of these packages, regardless of whether other places in Kansas are doing this or not, these are evidence-based procedures that we need to be looking at because we know that our community is suffering right now. So I appreciate it, and I have emailed that to everybody. Thank you.

Thank you. All right, Councilmember Kell.

I appreciate the time you guys took to get the comparisons. I've always had a big issue with comparisons when we come to Topeka. A lot of these come down to town makeup. Is it mostly commercial, residential, industrial? Is it a college city? Does it have nearby municipalities right next to it? There's usage differential, infrastructure size, age of infrastructure, how the money is gathered. How is it funded? Is it funded through the bill or do they have money coming out of their general budget? What's the goal of the city staff, city government, and the citizens for their infrastructure, among other things? We need to do what's best for Topeka long term and for our citizens and for our infrastructure. you know, we continually get compared to Lawrence and Manhattan. To me, those are college towns. We're a town with a college in it. There was that big comparison. About the only towns I could see that were very similar to us, just kind of geographically, was Springfield, Illinois and Jefferson City, Missouri, because those were the ones that have that um, large, uh, rural areas right outside their city limits. So they're not, they're kind of more comparison to what we are, but you get that towns like Olathe, Overland Park, uh, Kansas, Kansas, Kansas, Missouri. Those are just one big lumped group. So it's kind of hard to compare all those because they have in situations like that, they had different goals. They may want to keep their water rate lower to keep the citizens from moving one town over. So, um, Those are all the, to me, the downfalls of comparing cities because we're trying to, in essence, keep up with maybe what those cities are doing rather than what's best for Topeka. I did have one question, though. Why is the multifamily delinquency so high compared to its actual, you know, there's like 7.7% and almost 21% on the delinquency aspect?

The easy answer is because they're not paying it. I want to clarify a few things that you had asked last week that maybe didn't get shared as clearly as they should have been. If an apartment unit is individually metered, it is not multifamily. It is single family. So these multifamily are your larger multiunit apartment complexes that have a single meter feeding it. So along with other concerns, I guess I would say with certain landlords in town, they take time paying the utility bills as well.

On that aspect, do we, on the large ones, what's our philosophy, let's say, on shutting that water off compared to maybe the ones that have, you know, it's a 20 unit with 20 meters capacity.

We take additional steps when those tenants don't have direct control of payment of their utility bill. There are multiple units. We do our standard delinquency process, but we also make additional contact with the landlord, work with them to make payment arrangements. If it does, it very infrequently gets to that point, but if it does get to that point, we make additional notifications. We post on all of the doors of the units. We make information available from our housing department. Is that the right term? The housing group here with the city to what resources are available to them. So there are additional steps taken for those that do not have direct control.

And I'm glad we do that because, again, like if you don't have control, you've been paying your rent, which might include your water, and now you're getting your water shut off and it's no fault of your own. So I'm glad that we take those extra steps. Thank you.

Any other comments or questions? I'll just say I do appreciate the comparisons. I actually think we're one of only nine cities in this state that have more than 50,000 people. We're one of only five that have over 100,000 people. It's absolutely imperative that we look at those comparisons, particularly as it relates to the industrial and the commercial properties. And, in fact, as I look at those comparisons, what I notice is three of those have rates either right at where we're at or the two of them are higher than where we're at on those commercial and industrial areas. AND ALL THREE OF THOSE IN A STATE THAT OVERALL HASN'T SEEN A TON OF GROWTH HAVE SEEN GROWTH. SO I WILL PUT OUT INTO THE UNIVERSE THAT WHILE I KNOW WE WANT TO FIND A BALANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT UPSETTING THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND WE WANT TO RECRUIT BUSINESSES, DOESN'T SEEM TO BE STOPPING THOSE OTHER COMMUNITIES. AND SO I THINK THAT SHOWS US THERE'S SOME WIGGLE ROOM THERE. AND I MAKE THAT POINT TO SAY AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF ACTUAL PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF US FOR US TO TALK ABOUT, WHICH I KNOW YOU'RE AWARE OF. If this helps, from my perspective, seeing these numbers, having these conversations the last two weeks, I very much lean into at least starting with a model on option two before we go back to anything that looks like option one. Because I think these numbers and comparisons show us that that is a path we can take that shouldn't create too much harm in the industrial and commercial spaces. But it will do a lot less harm to our residential customers. So I appreciate those numbers.

Thank you.

Council Member Hiller.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. This is excellent. I think this kind of information is really useful, so thank you. Two questions. One, kind of asking a different way than a comment that my colleague made. When you examined the, if you, assuming you examined the cities whose rates are lower than ours, how did they do that? What's the difference?

I would have to go city by city to dive into some of that. I think one note that he made that we really haven't done a lot of discussing about is the age. When you look at the age of some of these cities, Topeka is, we've told a lot of our the public as we've gone out to discuss with them. Topeka is an old community. It's an old city. It has very old infrastructure that we are trying our best to maintain. We still have 5% of our system that's combined. You won't find that in very many communities across the state because it is not a position that many people would like to be in. We would love to not be in there, but to... fix that, you're talking lots and lots of dollars and you can just look down the road at the unified government and see the position that they've been put into as they're forced to make some changes and the impact that that's had on their customers as they face some consent decrees to do some additional work there. So age has a lot to do with it, how their rates have fared consistently. So maybe Some communities have a consistent rate put in place so that it's anticipated, it's planned. If there's additional need, that rate may go up, but unless voted down, it's going to continue to increase incrementally year after year. When we look back at rates, I know 2018 was mentioned, when we look back at the initial proposals that happened last at those times, had some of those proposals been approved, we would be in a different situation today. So again, it's that ebb and flow and can we do smaller, longer rates that are more incremental as opposed to these flashy rates where we're trying to hit certain numbers, and we go high one year, a little bit lower the next. So there's lots of different things that go into what a community can afford. Again, what is their industrial makeup, commercial makeup, how much have they annexed in, and with annexation often comes newer infrastructure, which their rates may, that rate discussion for some of those communities may look very different in 30 years.

Okay. Thank you. And then my second question, and if you covered it and I missed it, sorry. Within these different rates, then, is the what we're now calling base charge where there is the service line but no active use still in there?

It is the revenue that came from base charges being applied to vacant properties is incorporated into the models that we have been showing you. So if there's a desire to change that, we would then need to provide additional support. scenarios, numbers for you to consider where would that dollar figure need to be made up elsewhere. Thank you for that.

And just to clarify, because we tend to talk about residential on that, is that base charge monthly applied also at the commercial industrial rates where there's a meter that's not actively used?

Yes. And again, when we're talking commercial and industrial, you're talking about much larger meters. So instead of maybe an $18 base charge, you're talking about a $230 base charge potentially. But yes, that is still assessed.

Thank you.

Council Member Ortiz.

Thank you. I think you've kind of hit on this, but what I want is a clear picture of what... People want to pay for what they use. And I want to see that both in residential and industrial. So that way, that's what I would like to see, Sylvia. And then I could look at, compare that to the other two that you've given us to compare to. But that's what my people keep telling me. We only want to pay for what we use. and they feel like they pay more, you know. And I do understand the industrial. I was on the council when that got changed, and so we had a business owner, and I do understand that. But, again, I don't think it should be on the backs of one or the other. I think I would like to see it fair across the board. And you can let me know if you have more questions for me.

Well, I just might add, I think you bring up a good point. Because we have had some different rate structures over the years. So I can't remember the year. You always are better at remembering those dates. But we did have a structure where we had minimums. So you had a rate that you were going to pay as a minimum, whether you used that minimum. Yep. And we did hear that same comment then. What if I don't use that much? So if it was a thousand gallons a month and I only use 300 gallons a month, it's not fair that I pay that, which is why today they're paying for usage. They still have a base, but that volume charge is then added on so that that's the component that they can control. That's why one of the proposals we talked about last week was trying to keep that base steady so that those that really aren't using additional water know that they can really control their rate better by looking at what they're consuming. When it comes to charging the same, and that's one thing I want to make sure that we're providing to you all, is I want to be aware of those unintended consequences. So if you all made the decision today that every customer starting tomorrow, whether they're residential, commercial, or industrial, pays the same rate per gallon, you would see massive amounts of feedback from our commercial and industrial groups because it was so different than what they're paying today. And we're looking at how, again, how do other communities then give someone the benefit of that volume? And that's where you'll see other communities. I think Ms. Twimlow is spot on. They're accommodating some of that based on the tiered usage. If you fall into this tier of usage, you may get charged this rate. But the more you use, you're going to charge a premium on that additional usage over that. So, again, lots of different options we have, but I hear you loud and clear. So we'll account for that.

Council Member McGee.

Thank you, Mayor. I understand that some of these other communities – also have different mechanisms in place to offset their utilities. I mean, where I've been, most of them have been full service communities. We have all utilities to where they could adjust a utility rate for one utility service and keep another one low and then adjust one. And gradually, each year, they would just make adjustments in the different rates for the various utilities. So that's how some communities can keep certain utility rates low. But I do need, I do believe with the different rates, we do need to work on a balance between commercial, industrial and residential so that we can keep those scales of balance. Question, do we have smart meters in the field? Yes, sir. Do we promote that to the customers? Because one of the things is knowledge is king. If you can go online and look at your live usage, you can then make adjustments if you notice your usage is getting high. You can skip watering the lawn or washing your car or whatever it might be. You can go out and control it. yourself if you use the technologies that is there through smart meters and the live meter information. And I think the more people know about that, the better so they can kind of control their own usage themselves.

Yep, and right now, I think several of you have heard this for probably too long, but we're still beta testing that. We do have several customers who have the ability to use that system that our vendor offers with those smart meters. We internally can do that, so if a customer calls and asks what their usage is today, we can show them what it has been and how it fluctuates. And as we've been pushing our system and try to get the most reliable information, we've made some improvements there because we did have some areas of town that weren't able to be picked up. And we were still having to drive by and pull readings there, but that system is working very well. And as we transition into some other software, that's the goal by the end of this year. But this year is quickly evaporating. We really want to be able to offer that to all of our customers. Currently, we just have some constraints with software. So again, we're in that testing phase.

So right now they can't go online themselves and look at it?

Not unless they have been signed up as a beta tester. That's correct.

Like I said.

They cannot. They can call in and ask, and I know that's inconvenient, but that's the goal is to get up to speed because so many communities around us have that availability and people want better service. We're also exploring other options for notification of outages. If your electricity goes out, you're going to get a text from Evergy saying, hey, we have an outage in the area and it's going to take approximately three hours to repair, something like that. You can go online and see a map. not only is our infrastructure old but our systems are also antiquated so that has been something where our billing system we're working on all of those things but they're not simple processes and we're trying to marry that old into the new well i think the more information the customer has and the more it's live or up to date as much as possible there are systems out there that you can look at it and it's as current as 15 minutes

You can control your usage. That's exactly how ours is, yep. And there's communities a lot smaller than us that are using that technology. Thank you.

All right, thank you. We will continue this conversation next week. Appreciate it. With that, we are going to move on to public comments. First up, we have Mr. Joseph Ledbetter.

I was looking at these maps, what I could read of these breakage areas that are in residential areas where the basic customers are, the mass of them. And I was trying to decipher where my sister's house was, the widow, on McAllister, because she tells me there's constant breaks over there. And I sent a picture of a driveway that was completely broken across the street from her. And she says that whole area, every year, has many breaks. And we're not solving the problems. So I was going to... Could we just fix the problems? I mean, you've got the money. Do you not have the staff that understands how to fix things? How many consultants will be hired from out of state to guide them? I think I'll follow Cora on that one next because I know we're spending massive amounts of money in different departments on out-of-state vendors to tell us how to do things, whether it's stormwater ordinances or any number of things that you would think could be done in-house or at least with local talent because people actually understand and know the city. I would like some kind of communication in writing from somebody that has authority with the city government to tell my sister, we're not going to build a sidewalk in front of your house. And I'll quit talking about it. I mean, that sounds like a deal. Because I can't have her passing out in the driveway and being picked up by an ambulance because she's having anxiety attacks. Now, I don't know if it was about her flowers. She's out there looking at them. I don't know what it was about. I'm not an expert in that. But I know she has just been off the charts with nervousness ever since she started seeing those survey flags in her yard. And Thankfully, we have a council person over there that has actually talked to her and helped her understand some of this and say she doesn't understand the need for a sidewalk either. Could we just put it in writing so we could give that widow a break? I don't know how much you know about my sister, but she lost her sister last year, which was my sister as well. She lost her husband a year and a half ago. She lost her son two years before that. Could we just give the lady a break? She's paying her taxes. She pays her utilities on time, and she's very good with money. She keeps her house well repaired. She keeps that garden well watered. I'm sure she's got a good water bill. You know, do we have to build sidewalks instead of opening up our main streets like Fairlawn and finally get Topeka Boulevard done and East 6th Street? I did have a lady today, a lot of people talk to me. They just want to talk to me, I guess. Anyway, she said, one thing I would like the city to do, and she runs a store that I go to, and she says, one thing I'd like the city to do is... Finish a street project before you start another. I said, I was going to say that. You know, what we taught as kids, at least some of us, I know I got to hear it, you're not playing with that until you finish the other one. You're not going to do this project until you do that project. And I've heard that many times from teachers. And it makes a lot of sense because you get two of these projects going and nothing's getting done.

nothing's getting finished i mean fair lawn shut down for 10 months that's a lot of sales tax hey thanks for your time appreciate it next up i have mr curtis pitts however i do not see curtis in the room so unless i'm wrong i'll move on next up we have veronica morris

First, I want to apologize because I didn't know how enough of these, I didn't make enough of these to go around. Someone can have mine if they want one. I'm here today to talk about how your zoning department, I don't think they understand what their code ordinance is. For my three minutes, I'm just going to basically read the letter that I was going to mail out to everyone. It was going to say, Dear Topeka City Council, I am writing a formal request, your assistance and intervention regarding an ongoing property zoning violation that severely impacts my property well-being and quality of life within the 66605 zip code area. In outdoor lighting located at the neighboring property, do you want me to put their address and name on there, adjacent to the south portion of my home is intentionally or improperly directed lights towards my home. This light is projecting intrusive high intensity glare directly into my private living spaces throughout the night. This installation stands in direct violation of Topeka's municipal code section 18260060D under the city development and site plan regulations. As established by this zoning ordinance, all outdoor lighting must be shielded, aimed downward, or oriented in a manner that confines illumination strictly to the owner's parcel. It explicitly prohibits artificial light from trespassing across property lines and creating an off-site nuisance. This is a light nuisance ordinance, and that's what I'm talking about. Okay. Despite multiple good faith efforts to resolve this issue through proper channels, the light trespass continues unabated. I am officially logged a complaint with the Topeka's code compliance service office and have provided them with my identification, location, details and comprehensive photographic evidence of the nighttime disruption. Because this zoning ordinance is currently not being actively enforced to correct this specific hazard, I am escalating this matter to the city council. I respectfully request that code compliance dispatch an inspector to the site of 1930 Southeast 37th Street to issue a formal notice of violation to the property owner, forcing them to correctly shield, lower, or direct the solar spotlight fixture to bring it into compliance with the TMC Title 18. This ordinance needs to upgrade to mandatory privacy fencing. And I say that only because when you have someone, I've showed a few photos, I don't know if everybody has the same photos, but this is their home lighting. That's on the one side. This is the other side. That's one house, both sides. Outside view of how that light is affecting. If they didn't have this fence here, it would be affecting that house, my house, the outside here, this house, and then that's how it goes into my home. This is the officer that came and came to talk to them about it. And I have left some police reports. I don't know. Someone may not have got one of these, but on the police reports they were asked the guy. Could you turn on your lights or shield him? He said he didn't want to. So I have talked to the zoning person. Earlier this year and nothing obviously has happened because to this day this is still going on. So. I just think that you guys need to upgrade your policies on zoning to make it so that people will fear the fact that they are violating the zoning laws and actually somebody will come and do something about the zoning laws. Because I don't think the city zoning people understand that it's under their code.

So, Ms. Morris, thank you for this information. And I see you even have a court order. So give me a little time, but my office will take a look at this and get back in touch with you.

I appreciate it. You want some better photos?

I think I got them. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Thank you.

Next up, Mr. Henry McClure.

I don't know what all this is. Henry McClure, Topeka, Kansas. Nice to see you. This was an interesting meeting tonight. The information is power kind of stuck with me because what we really need to do is take the water department and have its own set of financials. It should be its own company. and you underwrite it like a stock company. You see, you look at the debt, you look at the income, you look at the expenses. It should have its own separate financials. A fellow brought up a minute ago about the bonds. He wants to know about the GO bonds. Well, the other day, and I'll be able to turn this over to you, I core all the star bonds because recently I found out about a big deal going on in Reno County, an $83 million project. So then it made me really want to look at who's got these star bonds? How many do we got out there from a state of Kansas standpoint? And what's the overall indebtedness. And it really came to light when I was reading Capital Federal's financials. We got a guy, a lender or Capital Federal's has made like 87 million in bad loans to one guy in two amounts. And then you start thinking about You start thinking about how we do business and who we're doing business with. Because the house of cards can fall. I was real disappointed in the way some of the staff gets treated. I can't wait. to hear out of the Bobs, your consultants, how that comes out. And I told a friend of mine the other day, I'll bet you within 24 hours I can get that exposed website to write something dirty about me by speaking out. And what if these guys are just a bunch of phony balonies getting you to look over here and say all this while You're taking $10 million from... How's that going in the general fund? Is that legal? It's like Project Otis. And we're so lucky to have an experienced lobbyist today. That's kind of a change of tune. And whose father is the liquor lobbyist. That can help us get the money that the county is taking to... to support the drunks, the homeless, the abused. But why is the city taking that $10 million? Is it legal? You know, right now we've got $27 million that I think has been misused between the hotel and the rink. And soon as people that are concerned that can't pay their water bill start voting differently, my district is one. And I'm disappointed that my council person didn't vote for Maverick because it's so out of the way. We need that for the community. I've got more to say, but thank you. Good night.

That's everyone I have signed up for public comment, so with that. Oh, Mr. Pitts, come on down. Yep, you're the last one, please.

My apologies, the last parent picked up the kid a little later than I expected. First of all, my name is Curtis Pitts, and I'm truly excited to be here. One of the things I want to talk to you about is we've been talking about creating programs, opportunities in the East Topeka Corridor. And I want to say this because I want everybody to understand this. When I came to Topeka, I said, show me the black part of the city, where the black people live at. And they took me to East Topeka. And I stood there and I was going, this is beautiful.

It's not the black part of town, but it's the impoverished side of town, but everybody lives over there together.

Germans, Irish, Native Americans, Latinos, African-Americans. It's probably one of the most beautiful communities that you've ever seen. But the problem we have here as a community is that we spend all day telling kids what to say no to, but we don't provide them with any opportunities with something to say yes to. And I say this to you guys because the East Topeka Development Authority is something that I couldn't manage. something that I should manage. You got qualified people here in this community. But we're at a crossroads in our community. We have to stop telling our kids that they're doing something wrong. We should celebrate them from the eastern part of town because they have no options. The gentleman who heads Parks and Recreation, amazing guy, tries to create opportunities for us, not enough. But we walk around, every gym's closed at night. There's no movie theaters, there's no skating rinks. Gang members are saying, Curtis, we're not recruiting them, they're just walking around because they hear music happening from our house. I said, no, you're recruiting. But the issue we have is where do we stop telling our young folks to do better without us doing better? All my people that came and spoke, they got those famous phone calls. We're out of money. And I tell our young folks to believe in the system, to be patriotic, to love our nation. Because when they start talking about we hold these truths to be self-evident, all men are created equal, that does not mean that we do not provide them with opportunities at success. I make every one of my young people study Dr. Stephen Covey, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. And I enjoy the fact that I can talk like this because I make sure I put in more money than I ever ask anybody else from in the community. Ask my attorney, my banker. At some particular point, we have to hold each other accountable. And right now, our young people are dying, and we're playing games with each other. Who got who this week? The other day, I wanted to go hear Attorney Crump. I went to a graduation, had to call law enforcement. I want to thank the city manager, the assistant city managers, the chief, because we had to create a perimeter so our young folks wouldn't retaliate and hurt each other. We have a bloodbath. That's the world that we're living in right now, while we're all taking time and assuming that we have time. This isn't a black or white thing. It's about how we're going to save our nation. And guess what? We at Topeka have to set the standard. We're this Brown versus the Board of Education city. And yet, when we look around this room, because everybody's sitting at this council, I feel confident that you're all good people. How many times can I go tell young people that we got great people in our leadership? District Attorney, Greater Topeka Partnership, Fire Department, Sheriff Department. We have some amazing people in leadership. But when do we stop and say, for just one moment, Where are the children going? And I have to talk like this because a guy told me once, he said, Curtis, I'm very concerned about poor kids, but I shouldn't be as concerned as you are because my kids aren't poor. And I respected that. But you're in a position right now, if you look across this aisle, across at each other, some of the most amazing people that time is going to judge us. Because if a kid was down the street struggling, you'd put your car over to help them. But now that we have a chance to do some things where everybody in the community can put something back in East Topeka, like they promised they would in 2002 when they done the East Topeka survey revitalization plan, 2002 they started working on it in 1998. Yeah, my hair is blonde. I call it gray, but it's blonde. You're at a point right now that you can call everybody that you want, Mr. Mayor, because my kids like you a lot. And I tell them to go because you come from a good family, good people.

You're all at a point now where you can make a change. Thank you all very much. Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. Any objection?

Two minutes.

I could send you a letter right now where Dr. King's daughter wrote a letter and said, you guys were happy and lucky and blessed because I promised Mrs. King that I was coming to Topeka to get married, finish school, and come back to Atlanta. But when I got here, I found out that everything positive about our nation other than the Revolutionary War and the Liberty Bell came from Kansas. There would be no Montgomery boycott without the Brown versus the Board of Education. You're in the position where you have no other choice but this weight and this pressure is on you right now to make changes because the plan we gave you is not just a Topeka plan, it's revolutionary and you got a chance to do something that we need to do in this nation. Train our young people to work again. Train our people to use sweat equity when you don't have any money. Grow gardens, participate, clean up the neighborhood. You know that if you're in my program, you're going to work harder than you would if you had a minimum wage. You are the change makers that our society is looking for. There are no enemies in this thing. It's just our children looking for hope and opportunity with some great people who I would take anywhere and call them family. You are the ones who have to set the tone for this nation. No more tribalism. No more hatred. Teamwork. Feed the children where they're at so they won't have to feel bad and have to leave their neighborhood for everything that's positive. Thank you very much because remember, they moved from the east side to the south side to the central back to the east side because that's the home base and they're all renters. Thank you all again. Have a blessed evening.

Thank you. All right. With that, we will move on to announcements. City Clerk.

Okay, for the June 16th meeting, we have two proclamations, Topeka Day of Play and the 100th Anniversary of CRC. We have two board appointments for Downtown Business Improvement District. We have a board appointment for Citizens Advisory Council and another one for Topeka Sustainability Advisory Board. We have two presentations. The first one is Money Management International, MMI. The second is Homeless Encampment and Right-of-Way Cleanup. We have two noise exceptions. We have two ordinances on the consent agenda removing neighborhood revitalization program property, first from Dynamic Core, second from Capital City Townhomes TIF. We have an expenditure ordinance and we have one resolution authorizing initiation of lawsuit. For action items, we have one ordinance for Laird-Knoller PUD that's located at Southwest 21st Street and Topeka Boulevard. And then we have a resolution authorizing conditional use permit for short-term rental at 1171 Southwest Medford Avenue. Non-action items include discussion on affordable housing trust fund recommendations and continued discussion on utility rates.

All right. Thank you. Deputy City Manager.

Deputy Mayor.

Council Member McGee. Deputy Mayor Hofer.

Nothing tonight.

Council Member Hiller.

Nothing tonight, thank you.

Council Member Valdivia-Alcala.

Nothing.

Council Member Ortiz.

I have something. Thank you. Fight the Blight for Central Highland Park area and Quentin Heights deal is this Saturday. Drag it to the curb. Make sure it's there by 7 o'clock. No tires. No paint, no wood, no brush, but please take advantage of that, especially with the storms. Also, I wanted to say a big thanks to, I still call them code, property maintenance, who collected 900 plus tires this Saturday. And when I was going through the line with my little four, it was 942, and I know that there was more than that. I want to thank them for that. You know, Our property maintenance guys, they go out and they go to NIA meetings and they go through the neighborhoods and write up violations and they grab so many tires that are out there. But that's just a lot. And the next one will be July, Saturday, July the 11th. They're having two of them, but it was well-oiled and I do appreciate that. I also want to thank staff for responding to a lot of my calls today on the tree and the debris. And I just ask people just to please be patient as they're continuously picking it up. They were out there moving and grooving. So Jason, if you could pass that along, it's much appreciated. A lot of people was still without electricity. I can only imagine that. I was upset that something minor hit my porch, but it was nothing compared to when I drove out there and looked at some of that. That's all I have, Mr. Mayor. Thank you.

Council Member Banks. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to make a couple of comments on the utility presentation that we received tonight. It was pretty, very informative. I would like I think we're getting inundated with the information. I know once I started looking at those graphs, I was completely lost and for me, I would just like to see a solid proposal brought before the governing body and we go ahead and decide what we want to do with the rates. Secondly, I think we have heard a great deal of information from Mr. Pitts about a very valuable program that I think that we need to take a serious look at because all of those things that he talked about tonight are very clear and apparent to anybody that knows anything about this city. I think that he's to the point of pretty much begging us to make a decision on how we can help or at least get some directions to how we can either do the program or we can't do the program. Number three, I'd like to think Assistant city manager complete for all the help that he has given me and I know other of my colleagues He's been very responsive and I just want to say how much I appreciate that Braxton that I get immediate response and I know that most of this group gets the same attention for our director and utilities Really appreciate her response to all of the things that have happened in our city last night and today. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the time.

Council Member Kell.

A few things. Fireworks are going to go on sale here shortly, especially in the county, and then there's year-round and permanent places. But in the city of Topeka, it's only July 3rd and 4th that you can shoot those off, so please remember. Please don't make homemade fireworks. I've been hearing those go off around my neighborhood lately, people making either sparkler bombs or dry-ice bombs. It's not safe, and it's... It's a nuisance to the neighbors. Recently, you've seen in the news about a data center that has, as of right now, nothing to do with the city. As of right now, I am against a data center. So if you feel the same way, please direct as much as you can to the county commissioners. And they're the ones kind of fielding that right now. And so... Make sure, and I look at it this way, make it your own when you're writing those type of letters. Because sometimes when you get 20, 25 of the exact same one with a different name in the end, you're not getting anything new out there, new information. So try to make any emails, letters you send, make them your own so that it gets that information out there and it's not just some form letter. I'm proud to announce that I'm again going to be playing and coaching for the U.S. Military War Dogs. It's a baseball team consistent of active duty and veteran ball players. We'll be traveling Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, and Kansas. We had a game scheduled here in Topeka, but unfortunately that fell through, so we won't be playing Topeka this year. Later this month, a lot of the council will be in and out of town. So please, you know, my wife's a teacher, so summertime's my family time. And also doing the war dogs. Other council members will be attending the conference. So please go to topeka.gov slash government slash city council. Our emails, our phone numbers are there. Reach out to city council when it comes to issue potholes, things like that. See, click, fix. But I know we're all very responsive on those emails and those phone calls and so please use those because we may not be available right away, but it's one of those things that Even though we're gonna be out of town doesn't mean I'm not going to be answering phone calls and emails And again, thank you to all the city staff members that help take care of the issues we had this morning from that high winds hail rain and Please look out for your neighbors on that. I know we've had a lot of flooding. If certain areas require sump pumps and people may not know about their sump pump, reach out to someone that may know about it and help out your neighbor and go take a look at theirs, make sure it's working correctly, things like that, because without a working sump pump, you're going to get the flooding, and sometimes those situations, insurance won't cover a single thing because if you don't have a working sump pump. So please, if you do require to have a sump pump or do have one, make sure it's working properly. Thank you.

Councilmember Miller.

Thank you, Mayor. I would like to support the comments from Councilwoman Ortiz and Councilman Kell and give Jason Tryon and his team and the contractors that they connected with a big round of applause because I went to all sides of town today for different reasons, and there were limbs in different parts, but nothing that was keeping us from going down a certain street. And I don't know what the experience was for anybody else up here, but I was extremely happy and extremely pleased with the response, the very quick response that we got to be able to allow people to go through our public streets with minimal problems. There were a few big trees that came down were blocking streets, and they quickly got to those and got the street to a space to where at least cars could get through. They still have to go through and clean up a lot of the stuff afterwards, but it still was something to see. for our response to when a storm hits like that, which is, you know, it could have damaged a lot of people's homes. And I'm sure a lot of homes were damaged. And that stuff, when it happens, there's nothing that we can do to control that. But our response from our city staff, was something that people should understand as part of why we do what we do, part of why we pay our taxes, and they should commend our staff for what they did. So thank you very much, Jason.

Council Member Bradbury.

I, too, was going to tell city staff thank you for all the work that they did today after the storm. It's very much appreciated and does not go unrecognized. Um, the only other announcement I have to make was just a reminder that the fire department has, um, open house for station number nine, um, this Friday, the 12th and that station number nine is located at 2447 Southeast 29th street. I'm sorry. It's four to 7 p.m.

All right. I just have one thing. Obviously, we had a lot of people who were without power, and some of them are still without power. We, of course, don't control the electric company. That's Evergy, a private company. However, it's critical that we stay engaged with them and make sure they continue to understand the importance of getting Topeka back online. They had about 118,000 people who lost power in this area, in this region here. 25,000 of those were in Topeka. Before we met tonight at 6 o'clock, about 7,000 of those of our citizens still did not have power. Most of those are residential. About 60 or so of those are commercial. And in those conversations, Evergy notified me that a certain number of those, they still don't know which, will not likely have power until tomorrow evening at the earliest. But by then everybody should have power. I expressed some frustration with that delay, because for people that will be about 48 hours. But I'm also understanding of the fact that in this service area, being this corridor, they had about 500 broken poles. Some of those situations, it wasn't just one issue where they can go plug a wire back in. It created an issue where the wire broke, the transformer blew. created multiple issues, which takes time and hours, and they only have so many crews. What I can tell you is there are crews in Topeka. They are working 24-7, and I will continue to communicate with them and make sure that they are making Topeka a priority to get everyone back online. So if you continue to have issues, please reach out to Evergy. You can also reach out to me, but I can do what I can do, but I wanted everyone to know we as a city are on top of it. and trying to get you back with power. So with that, we have a need this evening for an executive session. So if the city attorney would state the motion, please.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The motion would be to recess into executive session not to exceed 60 minutes to discuss matters concerning the performance evaluation of non-elected personnel as allowed under KSA 75-4319B1. The open meeting will resume in this room, the City Council Chambers. The following staff will be necessary to assist the governing body in its deliberations. The Director of Human Resources, the City Attorney, and any other staff members or individuals as needed.

All right. I would move to approve. Do I have a second? Second from Councilmember Kell. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed say nay. One no. Councilmember Ortiz. With that we're going to take a five minute break. Let's be quick. Let's get back in here and get started on this executive session. So see you here in about five minutes. All right, we have come out of executive session back in the regular session. No action has been taken by the governing body at this time. This meeting is adjourned at 9.12 p.m.