Published using Google Docs
Wichita City Council Meetings/Workshops - Wichita City Council Meeting 08/13/2024
Updated automatically every 5 minutes

 

Wichita City Council Meeting

Documenter name: Taliyah Win

Agency: Wichita City Council Meetings/Workshops

Date: Aug. 13, 2024

See more about this meeting at Documenters.org

 

 

Notes

The meeting begins at 9:03 a.m.

Public Agenda

Andrew Crane - New Navigation for the Blind Community, Disabled Community, and General Public

Andrew Crane spoke in support of a policy he learned about at a national convention that shared accommodation strategies that could benefit the blind community, disabled community, and general public. He says that implementing some of these strategies would improve public transportation. Crane mentioned Springfield, MO to the council as a city to look into.

Harold Schlechtweg - ICT Trees 

Harold Schlechtweg said that over the past 10 years, Wichita has lost 50,000 more trees than they have planted. He mentioned the impact of extreme heat and drought conditions have on cities, with most urban infrastructure made of materials that capture heat. He also said that increased tree canopies could lower utility rates and make high heat more comfortable for the population.

Consent Agenda Items 1 through 16 - Approved 7-0

3a (referring to the Pavement Preservation program) and 4 (referring to the Project Safe Neighborhoods grant) are pulled for further discussion, all others are approved.

Mayor Wu wanted more information about 3a and expenses. Gary Janzen with Public Works said that 2024 is under $9 million of the total budget for the streets project. The budget is expected to be utilized completely at the end of the year, but won’t go over.  

Mayor Wu wanted information on the Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN) in item number 4. Captain Erin Moses with the Police Department to give an overall crime picture in Wichita (stats were released later that day). Homicides were down 20% in 2023, 15 on a 5-year average. The big thing they are seeing is a decrease in fatal shootings. They are asking the council to approve the PSN funds, it is a 3-yr grant cycle, and funding will go through 2026. Thirty percent of the awarded funds are required to be used for gang violence and it is all federal money. That 30% has been used to deter gang activity through positive community activities and prevent crime in high-incidence areas, such as Nafzger Park.

Council Business

Boards of Bids and Contracts: Approved 7-0

Josh Laubert from the Department of Finance presented the bids and contracts. The airport parking garage electric vehicle infrastructure bid was rejected due to the cost being significantly higher than the estimation. The city estimated $2.3 million and the bids received were $3.8 million and $6.8 million, but they may have been inflated due to incorrect calculations.

Petitions for public improvements: Approved 7-0

New Business

1. Public Hearing and Request for a Modification of a Letter of Intent for Industrial Revenue Bonds Wesley Medical Center, LLC (District I): Approved 7-0

In 2018, the city approved a seven-year letter of intent to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRB) to the Wesley Medical Center. Wesley has now maxed that letter of intent out and has asked for an additional $100 million. IRBs are a mechanism for achieving a sales tax and or property tax exemption.

Wesley has committed to hiring at least 66 new employees with the investment. Job creation is an aspect of the funding.

Council member Johnson asked to clarify that the IRBs are not money coming from the city. It is their (Wesley’s) financing, but allows the sales tax elimination. No taxpayer dollars are at risk. Wesley still pays property taxes.

2a. Westlink, Alford, Angelou and Rockwell Library Renovations (Districts I, IV, V):

        Jaime Nicks - Wichita Public Library

In 2018, the City Council endorsed a comprehensive update to Wichita Public Library branch systems. Now, the Westlink project bids are much higher than the estimated pricing in 2018 because inflation has impacted the cost. Additionally, there were some factors that were not considered at that time like technology and security, parking lot renovations, furnishing and family engagement.

The other three libraries have no need for deferred maintenance funding and the city is looking into making a maintenance plan, to come out in 2025, so that deference is no longer an issue. Maintenance difference is an issue the council came back to frequently in the meeting and something they want to avoid in the future.

        If the funding isn’t improved, Rockwell won’t get its parking lot renovated, and that library's meeting room won’t increase as much in size.

Angelou would have to reduce furnishing or ask for outside funding. The funding they are asking for would come from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, which is not coming from the budget.

Mayor Wu asked for the priority to be deferred maintenance rather than renovation because the issue could grow larger if ignored.

        Public Comment: Attendee said that library attendance has decreased in the past decade nationally citing a statistic from the Institute of Museums and Libraries. He is worried about a budget deficit, but the public is later informed that the funding would come from ARPA, which can not go into the city budget.

Nicks responded that the libraries are only now returning to pre-COVID numbers and libraries that have been remodeled recently have had more foot traffic. In 2008, library numbers tripled due to the economic recession and she thinks that the current cost of living crisis and new library resources may increase the number of visitors as well.

Council member Hoheisal says that he appreciates the public commenter creating this dialogue, but he “supports the libraries wholeheartedly.”

        

2b. 2025 Annual Operating Budget and 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Program:

        The 2025 Budget and the 2025-34 Capital Improvement program have been covered extensively over the recent months and City Manager Robert Layton laid out some of the progress, specifically community engagement, that has been made.

The community identified four priorities for the budget:

  1. Prioritizing crime prevention
  2. increasing funding for pavement maintenance
  3. supporting economic development
  4. addressing housing insecurity.

        Starting in 2026, there will be significant challenges with a structural deficit. Contributing factors are wage growth, lower idle fund revenue, and sales tax.

The city’s plan to address general fund challenges includes:

  1. a centralization of financial services
  2. improving cost recovery
  3. evaluating fleet vehicles and maintenance approach
  4. staffing,
  5. employee compensation and benefits review
  6. service analysis and prioritization.

Capital Improvement Program (CIP): The mill levy rate will be 7.7 for the 2025 year and will return to the normal rate of 7 for 2026-27, but this may be changed later on. Follow-up issues include reevaluating golf courses, CIP Issues, options for increasing the mill levy, STAR bonds, sales tax implementation, street maintenance, and other options. The budget will be approved on August 20.

Parking and Multimodal Plan:

        This topic was added to the agenda on the day of the meeting and the public meeting about the parking plan that was scheduled for 9:30 am at The Pumphouse was canceled so that they could first discuss it at the council. This discussion was contentious and thorough. There were 9 public comments and this agenda item, which was really two of the biggest topics currently, took around five hours to discuss.

“Free parking is not free, someone is paying for parking” - Troy Anderson Assistant City Manager.         

Beginning January 1, 2025, all public parking in the downtown area will be converted to paid parking. Troy Anderson presented his information about the history of legislation that led to the parking plan and the strategies that they’ve taken on how much to charge. A quick read of their priorities is below.

How much to charge?

        The two biggest concerns about this topic are that if they do nothing, eventually the city will run out of money in the parking fund and if they start charging for parking, they worry about the consequences for businesses downtown and resident responses. Vice Mayor Ballard and  Council member Hoheisel expressed concern about the burden on employees to pay to park at their places of employment. Vice Mayor Ballard, as a previous small business owner, also worried about the impact it would have on small businesses.

        Overall, it was clear that, to the public, this came out of nowhere, and people were scared. The council seemed unsure of what point in the process they were at and at times seemed like they wanted to put a pause to it altogether. Anderson was open throughout the discussion and it was clear he put a great deal of work into these plans. He entertained the idea of free parking on the weekend and remained firm that the parking fund would run out of money if nothing was done. He argued that paid parking would even out the playing field for some businesses downtown that were paying into a parking fund that not all businesses were contributing to.

        On the topic of employees paying for parking, he said that either employers will pay parking for their employees or employees will have to figure it out themselves.

The revenue that's generated goes into the parking fund and the fund pays for management which includes the initial investment, maintenance and enforcement.

There are a little over 6,000 parking spots downtown. Handicap parking is free under state statute, but there are some technical issues in the classification of handicap parking to waive the fees associated with license plates and parking garages.

        Mayor Wu at one point identified a procedural error that was eventually thrown out, about an item that was not included in a packet from January. She called for the item to be reconsidered by the council. (At the same time she seemed frustrated that she was not able to be a part of the vote for this decision, which happened before she was in office.)

Council members Tuttle and Johnson spoke in opposition. Tuttle reminded those in attendance of the multiple instances up to this point where they had discussed this and that it would take over two council meetings to be revoked. Tuttle suggested action rather than inaction. Johnson agreed with Tuttle and said that this has been a priority of the council during his time.

A key question appeared about the parking fund:

Should the burden be on people parking downtown or the general fund(property taxes)?

For a while, the discussion went back and forth on what would happen if they

changed the paid parking ordinance.

A simple majority would be needed to pass a vote, but changing the ordinance would impact the enforcement capacity. Johnson warned the council that to go back and break the contract because of community worries would cause the council to move goalposts and discouraged changes to agreements.

Glasscock pushed back on passing it without more discussion saying that he wasn’t elected to “protect the status quo.”

        City manager Layton proposed that a hybrid between the general fund and user fees could be considered. Council member Johnston in the middle of this heated discussion reminded the council that “uncertainty is always better than bad news,” and proposed a delay to the pricing structure, specifically considering Delano and Old Town.

Layton later suggested a hybrid model with the CIP paying for maintenance and the public paying operational costs.

Delay Delano?

Council member Johnston repeatedly mentioned that himself, and potentially the public, have thought of this plan as the “Downtown Parking Plan” not something that would affect Delano and Old Town. Anderson said that there was a fear that implementing paid parking separately may cause business owners to choose different areas.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

The council took a 10-minute recess and resumed at 1:59

Before the recess, it was agreed upon by council members to begin editing the budget, with the upcoming vote on the 20th. This section consists of motions that may amend the budget.

Golf Courses: Passes 6-1 (Mayor Wu against)

        Vice Mayor Ballard makes a motion to move $1 million into the final CIP for golf irrigation. Johnston endorses but then offers a substitute motion to follow a 4-year plan to replace irrigation systems in golf courses. They are considering accelerating the fee increases to begin in 2025. The fee increases would be around $1 per round of golf. They would also offer golf for youth, 18 and under, free, Johnston said.

4 actions were approved including the authorization to: Forgive the golf course debt, shift the park GEO projects to irrigation or golf CIP, the amount of money identified and authorization to transfer money from the capital program by the amount designated.

This is subject to annual revenue increases of the golf board starting in 2025.

Dirt Street Program: Motion fails 3-4 (Ballard, Johnson, Hoheisel and Johnston vote against)

Council member Glasscock motioned to redirect the responsibility for the dirt street program to the street maintenance program and the city would only be responsible for roads around schools. Hoheisel stated that he was against Glasscock’s remarks. Ballard agreed with Hoheisel and believes that this motion would be a disservice to her district which has the most dirt roads in Wichita. Council member Johnson also disagrees due to his care for the government's commitment to the people, especially those in low-income areas. Glasscock argued that people of all social classes live on dirt roads and that his district has the second most after Ballard’s. Johnston offered a substitute motion to delay until next week. Substitute motion fails 3-4. (Wu, Ballard, Hoheisel and Johnson vote against)

Northwest Freeway: Passes 6-1 (Wu against)

        Council member Johnston motions to move $5,000 from the CIP budget for 2025 ES010 to fund the state acquisition of land for the Northwest freeway. He believes that this would relieve some of the burden on Maize Road, and that it would probably be a 20-year plan. The money would go to a joint fund contributed to by the county and city.

Implementing tiered cuts: Motion withdrawn

        Council member Glasscock motioned to initiate cost savings proposed in the budget tier one and tier two items 1-11 in addition to tier 3b both would amount to a cost savings of $3.5 million on the 2025 budget. Council members agreed that this is not an item for today and will be discussed next week.

3. Replace Council Policy 39 with the Ethics Ordinance:

The presenter left and there was a motion to defer this item until September 10, 2024. Deferment Passed 7-0.

4. Municipal Court Judicial Evaluations and Retention:

        Municipal Judges are appointed to 4-year terms and evaluated annually according to city council procedures. All five of the judges will be reviewed, even though one has already retired (Judge Abbot) and Judge Kehr will retire on September 13, 2024. The remaining terms of Judge Abbott and Judge Kehr will be completed by judges appointed by the council.

        Public comment - George TheoHarris says that judges are sometimes too lenient and review the judges before they reappoint them.

Motion to retain each Municipal Court Judge and authorize a merit increase passes 7-0.

5. Ordinance Amending Chapter 6.04 pertaining to Animal Services

Jan Jarman presented on behalf of the Animal Services. In 2023, the Animal Services Advisory Board created a subcommittee to recommend improvements to the animal code. Proposed changes to the ordinance include changes to dangerous dog rules.

Dangerous dogs may go to an animal behaviorist and change the pen requirements to reduce euthanizations and give more discretion on those pens. They also request that all dogs and cats over 5 months old be required to be microchipped. Penalty for this would include increasing to a misdemeanor with no jail time.

The second set of requests involved increasing the dog bite penalty to:

(the fine is per defendant, not pet dog)

They also suggest licensing amendments. People can have up to 3 dogs or cats without an animal licensing permit, excluding pit bulls (only 2).

Public comment:

Motion to accept passes 7-0.

6. (ITEM MOVED TO NEW BUSINESS VI-2 PER MAYOR WU) Library Renovations 

7. 2023 Annual Comprehensive Financial and 2023 Popular Annual Financial Report

Mark Manning with the Department of Finance and Nikki Babcock and Jaime Fay external auditor

        The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) is comprehensive and complex; it's used by bond rating agencies, bondholders, and citizens. The Popular Annual Financial Report PAFR is a condensed version of the ACFR that is more easily digestible at around 20 pages.

Fay recapped the audit highlighting their commitment to regulations, and the purpose of the audit to ensure that it has reasonable assurance for financial statements. The unmodified opinion was issued on June 27, 2024 which means they were free of material misstatement.

One finding identified about material adjusting journal entries. This happened after the cyber incident and was adjusted later.

The federal audit is over the city's federal expenditures, $3.71 million was spent last year. Three programs were tested: Equus Beds Division Aquifer Storage Recovery, COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds and the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act. This had no findings and also unmodified opinions. Passenger facility charge audit resulted in an unmodified opinion with no findings.

Wu asks for clarifications on the fraud found, and Mark elaborated. There was a municipal employee in the police department misusing funds. Layton explains that at the end of the month, there will be a report on cyber attacks.

Motion to approve: Passes 7-0

8. Applicant Appeal of HPC2024-00062 (District I)

Scott Wadle from the planning department.

        The applicant, Union Station, is appealing a denial of a sign permit by the Wichita Historic Preservation Board. On July 17, the board determined the sign would damage or destroy the historic building. The sign would be mounted into the mortar on the building for Simmons Bank (seen below).

        The historic preservation board’s review determined that it would damage or destroy the building and the sign was not compatible with the building's main facade design. The city council must hear comments from the applicant and the public and then may either deny the sign permit or approve the sign permit and associate actions.

        Mike Joury is representing Simmons Bank, a future tenant of Union Station, that will house a retail space and a regional headquarters for the bank. He argued that it is common to put signs on historic buildings and that if they don’t have businesses in them it's hard to justify them. He also said that they will use mortar instead of stone and that 8-10 holes will be drilled. The board made a subcommittee to discuss what designs would be acceptable. The goal was to find a way for a sign to be put up that was not at odds with their ideals. This discussion ended with a consensus that the design of the sign was adequate, but the red color was unacceptable. The subcommittee presented its findings to the full historic board, but the sign request was once again denied. There was a discussion about a pole sign, but the Wichita city code would not permit a pole sign at that location. To do a pole sign they would have to destroy some of the unique brickwork in the plaza out front. It is possible to change the code to allow a pole sign.

        

Public Comment:

        Jeff Flehr - President of Downtown Wichita

“I wish we had more historic buildings to bring back into active commerce,” Fleur said in support of the bank. “But we also need vital uses within the buildings.”         

        Tiffany Stokes - Occidental Management

She said she was on the subcommittee and examined all options, and says this is the only viable option for it to flourish for their business.

Mayor Wu motioned that there are no other feasible alternatives to the request and overrides the decision of the Wichita Historic Preservation Board; she will sign a letter to the Kansas State Historic Preservation Officer and approve the sign permit. Passes 5-2 (Hoheisel and Johnston vote against)

 

There is a 5-minute break…

9. Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Program Request for Proposal - Vendor Protest

        Alan Burke - CEO and Chairman of Kelly Compliance

        The case of the request was read to the council as if they did not receive the briefing packet because the packet was delivered at the incorrect time and place. The representative argued that he did not know about the deadline for the meeting. Burke expressed that he did not want to take the council’s time by summarizing the document, but was legally advised to do so in 20 minutes.

        Kelly Compliance provides drug and alcohol services across the Midwest. He said he was there to make the council aware of irregularities in RFP 240045. Burke and his company allegedly didn’t receive notice of a new RFP. He said that they did not receive anything on its email channels even though they had established historical relationships with multiple forms of city communication. The original due date for the RFP was March 8, 2024. On March 5, 2024, Kelly Compliance heard from two companies that called asking for pricing for “undescribed work in the city of Wichita.” Both calls came within 20 minutes.

        The company suspected that the companies were bidding on RFP 240045. The HR department claimed that the RFP was released and emailed on February 29, 2024 with a response deadline of March 24, 2024. Kelly Compliance was concerned that DSI Medical intended to use Kelly Compliance as their local collection site and incorrectly listed Kelly in the proposal as a subcontractor. The company chose to protest the decision. Kelly Compliance later reached out to DSI and confirmed that it was listed as a subcontractor on the RFP. Burke believed that because DSI did not have an office in Wichita, which is a requirement of the RFP. Burke recalled a similar incident in 2013.

Mark Manning with the Department of Finance.

Manning said the appeal was composed of two issues - notification of the issuance of the RFP and identification of potential subcontractors in a City Proposal response. He argued that Burke was notified through email. The RFP in discussion is about the Department of Transportation drug test. Kelly Compliance is still contracted for pre-employment drug testing for another year. The city posted an RFP for Drug Testing on February 9, 2024, and the Wichita Eagle published it on February 13.

The city argued that the email they had registered was one that they had used frequently with Kelly Compliance and that the company had submitted an RFP, but were not selected for the contract. The city extended the deadline so that they could apply. Staff recommended either rejecting the protest appeal or rejecting all the proposals and repeating the RFP process which may be “challenging and problematic.”

The council members requested the total scores that determined the recommendations with DSI at 698, Energiet Techs at 679 and Kelly Compliance at 638.

Public Comment: 

Burke highlighted his argument that DSI had no physical office, but it was clarified that that was not a requirement.

The City Council moved into an executive session to discuss this to receive legal counsel. The session began at 6:10 p.m. and returned at 6:25 p.m. Motion passed 7-0.

        After returning, Mayor Wu said there were no binding decisions made in the executive session. Councilmember Johnson motioned to reject the protester's appeal, it was seconded by Ballard.

Mayor Wu stated that at the end of every city council meeting, there will be a slide of all open RFPs with the contact information for each one.

Motion to reject the protester’s appeal passes 7-0.

Planning Agenda

1. CON2024-00035 – Amendment to CON2012-00044 to Permit Outdoor

Entertainment; Generally Located on the Northeast Corner of East Douglas Avenue

and North Oliver Avenue (4800 East Douglas Avenue). (District I)

Scott Wadle with the planning department.

        Wadle says that the applicant is asking for permits for outdoor entertainment as well as an expansion of the existing restaurant. The planning commission recommended approval, with a vote of 7-4-1. One member at the meeting expressed concern about noise levels and parking on side streets. The recommendation for approval has a stipulation that outdoor TV use must cease by 10 p.m.

        On July 1, the District Advisory Board recommended approval with a vote of 5-2-1. Their recommendation of approval would not allow outdoor televisions. It's recommended that the council approve it. This was decided because the televisions caused crowds to gather in the parking lot. Because this is a zoning case, there is no public comment. They are requesting to allow them to occupy a space that was previously a T-Mobile. It would not remove any parking.

Wadle says that the business previously had installed speakers, but with notice took them down. Ballard found this concerning.

Johnson motioned to approve the findings of the MAPC and the amendment. Tuttle seconded the motion. This allows speakers and TVs with a 10 p.m. shut off time. The motion failed 4-3. It required a 6-1 because it was protested.

Glasscock motioned to return the case to MAPC for additional consideration. Passes 7-0.

Council Agenda

1. Appointment of Two Municipal Court Judges

        Two judges are retiring this year. Wichita Municipal Court judges are appointed to a 4-year term and are responsible for carrying out the judicial functions of the WMC which adjudicates violations of the Wichita City code. There were 6 finalists and the council interviewed them and now must decide which two they will appoint. They will fulfill the remainder of the retiring judge's terms, which expire on April 17, 2025.

Mayor Wu motioned to approve Brady Berch and Michelle Michael.

Council Member Appointments and Comments

1. Board Appointments

Several appointments were listed by council members. They passed 7-0.

Glasscock ended with a motion to delay the purchasing of parking equipment until the meeting on September 3, after public meetings. This is seconded by Ballard. This consisted of feedback review and policy options. There will be evening meetings added to the schedule so that more people can go to them. Johnson asked to consider September 10, and Glasscock modified this motion. Motion passed 7-0.  

Meeting Adjourned: 8/13/2024 at 7:09 p.m.

Summary

Summarize the 3 most important outcomes or takeaways from your notes....

 

Follow-Up Questions

What are you left wondering? Ask up to 3 of your own follow-up questions...

 

 

If you believe anything in these notes is inaccurate, please email us at documenters@citybureau.org with "Correction Request" in the subject line.