CC07082013x - City of Shawnee

wellofflimpetMobile - sans fil

14 déc. 2013 (il y a 3 années et 10 mois)

133 vue(s)

Page
1


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15095



CITY OF SHAWNEE

CITY
COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES

July 8
, 2013

7:3
0

P.M.


Jeff Meyers


Mayor


Councilmembers Present


Staff Present

Councilmember Pflumm


City Manager Gonzales

Councilmember Neighbor


Deputy City Manager Charlesworth

Councilmember Sawyer



City Attorney Rainey

Councilmember Kemmling


City Engineer Wesselschmidt

Councilmember Kuhn


Fire Chief Mattox

Councilmember Vaught


Police Chief

Larimore

Councilmember Sandifer


Public Works Director Freyermuth

Councilmember Distler


Planning Director Chaffee



Finance Director Rogers



Parks and Recreation Director Holman



Assistant City Manager Killen



City Clerk Campbell


(City
Council

Meeting Called to Order at 7:31

p.m.)


A.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE & MOMENT OF SILENCE


B.

ROLL CALL


MAYOR MEYERS:
Good evening and welcome to tonight’s meeting of the Shawnee
City Council. I would ask
that you please silence your electronic devices at this time. I
am Mayor Jeff Meyers and I will be chairing this meeting. I will do a roll call at this time.
Councilmember Neighbor?


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: Councilmember
Pflumm?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: Councilmember Kemmling?


COUNCILMEMBER KEMMLING: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: Councilmember Sawyer?


COUNCILMEMBER SAWYER: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: Councilmember Kuhn?


Page
2


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15094


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: Councilmember Vaught?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: Councilmember Sandifer?


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: And, Councilmember Distler?


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: Present.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Please join us for the Pledge of Allegiance followed by
a brief moment of silence. Thank you.


Before we being our agenda I’d like to explain our procedures for public to the audience.
At numerous time during the meeting, I w
ill offer the opportunity for public input. If you
would like to speak to the Council at any of those times, please come forward to the
microphone. I will ask you to state your name and address for the record, then you may
offer your comments. After you

are finished, please sign the form to the left of the
podium to ensure that we have an accurate record of your name and address.


C.

CONSENT AGENDA


MAYOR MEYERS:
At this time we’ll begin with the Consent Agenda.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Move for approval.


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded on the Consent Agenda.
Is there any further comments or questions from the Council? Seeing none, all in favor
signify by s
aying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no. Motion passes. (Motion passes 8
-
0)


D.

MAYOR’S ITEMS




1.

BUSINESS APPRECIATION DAY PROCLAMATION


MAYOR MEYERS: At this time we’ll go to Mayor’s Items, which is Item

D. I have two
proclamations that I’m going to read tonight. And so I’ll have some people from the
audience coming forward. The first proclamation is to name July 10
th

as our Business
Appreciation Day. If we could have Andrew Nave and Linda Leeper come

forward, I’d
like to read and present this proclamation to them. Andrew is our Economic
Development Director and Linda is our Chamber President.


Page
3


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15093



From the Office of the Mayor of Shawnee, Kansas.

Whereas, Shawnee businesses
play a pivotal role in strengthening our community by encouraging job creation,
innovation and employing
a diverse
work force to preserve the economic well
-
being of
all our citizens; and whereas, Shawnee is pleased to recogniz
e the accomplishments of
our entrepreneurs, especially our many small and existing businesses that contribute
greatly to the economic recovery; and whereas, it is appropriate to offer citizens a
unique opportunity to recognize Shawnee businesses for the es
sential role they play in
moving Shawnee forward; whereas, we celebrate Business Appreciation Day in
Shawnee and thank the many businesses of Shawnee for their generous contributions
to the quality of life we all enjoy. Now, therefore, I, Jeff Meyers, May
or of the City of
Shawnee
, Kansas,

do hereby proclaim July 10
th

as Business Appreciation Day in
Shawnee and urge all citizens to salute local businesses and their employees for their
outstanding contributions to our City and to join in this important obser
vance. Thank
you for accepting this proclamation. Thank you again.



2.

PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH PROCLAMATION.


MAYOR MEYERS:
The second proclamation is to proclaim the month of July as Parks
and Recreation Month. And I would like to have Neil Holman, our Parks and Recreation
Director, come forward to accept this proclamation. Hello, Mr. Holman. From the Office
of Mayor of Sha
wnee, Kansas. Whereas, public parks and recreation systems are
dedicated to enhancing the quality of life for residents and communities around the
country through recreation programming, leisure activities and conservation efforts.
Public works embody th
e American tradition of preserving public lands for the benefit of
all citizens; and whereas, parks and recreation and leisure experiences provide
opportunities for young people to live, grow and develop into contributing members of
society, create lifelin
es of continuous life experience for older members of the
community, generate opportunities for people to come together and experience a sense
of community and pay dividends to communities by attracting businesses, jobs and
increasing housing value; and wh
ereas, we recognize the important contribution of our
City’s Parks and Recreation staff, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the
many recreation
-
related civic groups and non
-
profit organizations in our community.
This dedicated core of citizens he
lp make our public parks clean, safe and attractive,
provide diverse recreation opportunities for residents and visitors to our community and
lend essential support to projects throughout the year; and whereas, we join the
National Recreation Parks Associa
tion to call upon all Parks and Recreation supporters
to join us in recognizing the importance of our local parks and to learn more about how
to support the green spaces that bring our community a higher quality of life, safer
places to play and healthy al
ternatives through recreational programming for citizens of
all ages. Therefore, I, Jeff Meyers, Mayor of the City of Shawnee, Kansas
,

do hereby
proclaim the month of July 2013 as Parks and Recreation Month in the City of
Shawnee, and encourage all citize
ns to enjoy what our community has to offer by
attending special events and visiting our parks and pools during the summer. Thank
you again for accepting this proclamation. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Holman.


E.

APPOINTMENTS



1.

Consider Ap
pointments t
o t
he Shawnee Downtown Partnership.




Appoint Becky Bieker to t
he Shawnee Downtown Partnership

with a

Term



Expiring July 8, 2016.


Page
4


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15092



MAYOR MEYERS: And now we’ll move to Item E, which is Appointments. Item
Number 1 is to Consider Appointments to the Shawnee Downtown Partnership. The
Downtown Partnership is recommending the appointments of Becky Bieker and Jeff
Vaught to the Shawnee Do
wntown Partnership with terms expiring on July 8
th
, 2016.
We need actions on each one of these. Item A would be to
appoint
Becky Bieker to the
Shawnee Downtown Partnership with a term expiring July 8, 2016.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER:

So moved.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded on this item. Any further
discussion from the Council? Is there anyone from the audience that would like to
speak to this item? Good evening.


MR. MORRIS:

Good evening. My name is David Morris. I live at (Address Omitted).


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you.


MR. MORRIS: I come before you to read a letter that I had sent to the Shawnee
Downtown Partnership in regards to this. It was not acknowledged, so I want
ed to read
it before the
--

into the public record. Before I start, I wanted to say that my concern is
not with who is potentially being appointed to the Shawnee Downtown Partnership, but
to the current makeup of the partnership at this point. So, I will

read my letter.
Paul
, I
wanted to share my concerns about the makeup of the current Shawnee Downtown
Partnership Board in light of the Shawnee Downtown Partnership voting and new
members. Sorry, I’m nervous. Harder to be on this side. The Shawnee Down
town
Partnership was formed and was always intended to be an equal partnership between
public officials, downtown business owners and property owners and neighborhood
residents. Might I add, it was always intended that the majority of the board’s makeup
a
lways be a majority of non
-
public officials. It was formed this way to get the widest
range of perspectives and input to solve downtown issues. My concern is that the
Shawnee Downtown Partnership is currently heavy with public officials and business
owne
rs and very little residential or neighborhood representation. Downtown residents
have a very different perspective on downtown issues than public officials and business
owners, and their input is crucial for true downtown progress to occur. I respectful
ly ask
that additional residents be appointed to the Shawnee Downtown Partnership from the
Trail Springs
neighborhood and surrounding neighborhoods prior to the appointment of
the current nominees. Thanks for your time and attention. Former Shawnee Downt
own
Partnership Chair and downtown resident, David Morris. So, my concern, I just wanted
to restate my concern is not with who is being appointed, but the current makeup is
overwhelmingly public officials and business owners with very few residents being
on
the Shawnee Downtown Partnership.


MAYOR MEYERS: Very good. Ms. Distler and then Mr. Pflumm.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: My only question. Did you say you e
-
mailed that?


MR. MORRIS: To the Shawnee Downtown Partnership.


Page
5


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15091



COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER:
Okay. So, we did not receive it?


MR. MORRIS: Correct.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify, because I
didn’t receive it.


MR. MORRIS: No.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Pflumm.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well,

and

I had some questions in reference to this,
because I myself had asked to be put on the Downtown Partnership during the makeup
,

and the mayor at that time actually he gave it to Councilmember Sawyer, and the
reason being just because it was Councilmember S
awyer’s ward. And I understood, not
that, you know, hey, that’s great. You know, he’s got to take a role in where he lives
and the people he represents and all that kind of stuff. And, you know,
and then
when I
saw this come up, I thought, you know, I t
hink it’s great that we’ve got people that want
to serve, want to help and all that kind of stuff. But I would like to do it myself. So, I
think it’s great, and I don’t think
--

I know they got some bylaws that say one
councilmember and the mayor. At le
ast what they told me when they originally made it
up. But I also think that they shouldn’t limit it to the number of people. Like if you had
20 residents that wanted to
--

I’m not, I’m just throwing a number, right. But if you had
more residents that w
anted to members, I think that that would be great also. So, I think
that, you know, agree a little bit with your concerns. But I also agree that, hey, the more
people that we get involved and try to help out downtown, then maybe the better off we
all ar
e.


MR. MORRIS: And I’m not here to limit that. I think there is possibly a limit, I don’t
remember the bylaws verbatim. But I’m not
--

I don’t think it’s
--


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I’m thinking from ten years ago
--

how long has it been,
ten years or
--


MR. MORRIS: More than that.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: The bylaws were updated in what, Paul?


MR. CHAFFEE: ‘03 was
--



CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Was when it was originally established, and then we
updated the bylaws to
--



MR. CHAFFEE: We changed
the bylaws in ‘10. And there’s no
--


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Right. But there’s no limit on the number of people.


MR. CHAFFEE: There’s limit on the number.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: There is on the standing council position. It is a Ward II

Page
6


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15090



Counc
il position that’s in the bylaws, so. But there’s no limit on the number of people.
And we had published it recently and these were the two letters we received. But the
partnership conversation last week was certainly love to see some more residents
int
erested and open to those
--

submit a letter
--



MAYOR MEYERS: And, Mr. Morris, your e
-
mail was discussed at the last meeting,
because I was in attendance and it was brought up about your e
-
mail
and
that situation.
And one of the points that I made, and

many times I get requests from people that want
to serve on these different boards. And I have not had any single residents, just
individual residents ask to be, you know, put on the board by any type of letter or
anything of that nature. So, I think, a
gain, I have
--

I’m all for residents being involved in
the Downtown Partnership. But I haven’t received any requests from any individuals.


MR. MORRIS: I’d like to sort of address that to a little bit. I have been on the Shawnee
Downtown Partnership a
nd I know
--

I understand that. And sometimes it can be
difficult to get residents to sort of participate. But you have Mark Mollentine who is a
former Shawnee Downtown Partnership Chair. You have Dr. Alan Martin who was
formerly on the Shawnee Downtown

Partnership. And you have myself which was
formerly on the Shawnee Downtown Partnership
,

all within the Trail Springs
neighborhood. And I have checked with them and nobody has contacted us to see if we
could recommend anybody or that we could let the ne
ighborhood know that there was a
need for someone to be on the Downtown Partnership. I know that you know the
Gandys which live in our neighborhood. I know Neal knows a lot of people within the
Trail Springs neighborhood. I’m just thinking if we really
want residents, and specifically
Trail Springs residents within the Shawnee Downtown Partnership, it would seem to me
a good policy to sort of reach out to people that used to serve on the Shawnee
Downtown Partnership that live in Trail Springs to request
at least some action on that.


MAYOR MEYERS: And I know that, again, you are a resident of that neighborhood and
I would say, Mr. Morris, if you find someone that’s wanting to be involved in that activity,
have them send me a letter of request and I can p
resent that. I’d be glad to present that
to the board.


MR. MORRIS: But this is the first time somebody has reached out to anybody in the
Trail Springs neighborhood to request that that be the case. And so it just feels like
--

feels like that sometime
s there’s not a desire to have residents on that, so.


MAYOR MEYERS: I don’t think that’s ever been the case since I’ve been on the board
or when you were on the board or when Mr. Mollentine or Mr. Martin or anybody else
had been on the board from the ti
me that I’ve served as part of it. I think everyone has
been more than welcoming of anybody serving on the Downtown Partnership board if
they showed interest of wanting to be on that and it was within the parameters of the
bylaws. I think that’s the way
it’s been run since I’ve been a part of it.


MR. MORRIS: I would just encourage,

you know, Julie Hurley is the Neighborhood
C
oordinator. You know, she would be a good person to reach out to the
neighborhoods, not just ours, but neighborhoods throughout

the downtown area to get
representation for that.


MAYOR MEYERS: And again, I would encourage you to have her contact anyone that

Page
7


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15089



would have an interest of serving on the board and have them send, you know, a letter
of request and they wou
ld
definitely be considered. Ms
. Kuhn.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Mayor, I’m going
--

it’s so easy to try to want to engage
David, because I’m so used to conversing with him. I’m going to try really hard to not do
that since we were trying to listen to comments

ago. My question I guess is directed to
you two, which is that the thought that’s brought up is that is there may be some interest
in being more proactive and adding some additional people to it. Before us today is two
people who are interested in it an
d have expressed it. And if the Council moves forward
and accepts them, is there anything that anyone knows within the bylaws that if in the
next month, now this being more
of a
public topic, they come forward and say I’m also
interested in it, that would

negate our ability to also appoint them if this moved forward
in a positive direction?


MAYOR MEYERS: No.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: No reason not to.


MAYOR MEYERS: And again, I would say that myself and the City Manager and Mr.
Sawyer, we’re just members

of the board and they have
--

there is a leadership of the
board. I guess we call them chairman or president. I don’t know what title we have
given. But there is a person that is, as Mr. Morris served as the chairman of the boar
d,
a
nd they are the lead
ership of that board and run the meetings and things of that
nature. Mr. Vaught.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: And I just want to clarify something, because obviously
some of the comments are about public officials as
--

would be directed towards my
appointmen
t. And, you know, when I got elected a few years ago I had an interested in
being on the Downtown Partnership. And, you know, obviously I couldn’t, because
Neal, which understandably so and it makes sense, would be the Council
representative. It’s his w
ard. You know, a couple of years ago I bought a building two
blocks away from City Hall. Not only is my business downtown but I own property
downtown. I have a vested interest in downtown. So, you know,

and

my letter to the
partnership was not that I w
ant to be there to represent the City or be there as a
Councilmember, it would be as a business owner and a property owner in downtown
Shawnee. You know, I have no interest in being the representative of the City in the
Downtown Partnership. But I do hav
e a vested interest. I do have an investment in
downtown. And the industry I’m in offers me a tremendous amount of insight into A,
what’s happening in downtown, what’s happening in real estate, what’s happening in
development, what the wants and needs ar
e. I see opportunities and it
--

I think it does
put me in a unique position. So, but I just think it’s important that I clarify that as I’m not
trying to be on the Partnership as an elected representative or as a City Councilman,
but as a business owner

and a property owner of Shawnee, of downtown Shawnee.


MR. MORRIS: I do have one last comment. If there aren’t adequate numbers of
residents that do come forward, it is still skewed heavy on the public officials and
business property owners. Still a c
oncern, because there’s not that representation for
neighborhood issues and neighborhood perspective on downtown issues. Thank you.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Mr. Sawyer.

Page
8


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15088



COUNCILMEMBER SAWYER: I believe I did read in the bylaws that there be, I don’
t
know whether there’s a set number, but maybe it states, and I didn’t bring it, but there’s
an ideal number of 16 to 18. And I think this puts
us
at 14 if I’m not wrong. My only
question is, a
nd I think I know the answer, b
ut I don
’t think we’ve ever

pu
t out in the
CityLine

that we are looking, you know, there’s possibly openings

on the Downtown
Partnership, i
f you’re interested, please apply. I don’t ever recall seeing us do that.
Maybe we did. I’m not saying we didn’t. I just don’t recall ever seei
ng anything like that
out there in the
CityLine
. But I do have concerns that it is becoming very top heavy in
public officials.


MAYOR MEYERS: Ms. Kuhn.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I can’t speak to whether or not it was in the
CityLine
,
because I don’t know i
t all. But I will say at least as far as general public knowing it, I
received a phone call, an e
-
mail actually from someone in Ward III who was interested
in serving on the Downtown Partnership and thought that it might have a different voice
as a reside
nt of another part of the town who saw the value in the downtown area and
the growth and asked me about how to go about becoming
one
of the folks that might
be looking at it. And then, because I was leaving town at the time, I know
I referred
them and
the
y had a long conversation with Carol, which I think at the time made the
decision that might not be the best fit for them. But obviously some way the City must
have had some information on it, because somebody came to me from Ward III
interested as a resi
dent and potentially finding out more information.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: We did just recently
--

we haven’t used the
CityLine
,
partly just because it’s only published three times a year. But we did just recently put
the notice about civil service opening, planning commission opening and the Downtown
Partnership in the
Dispatch

and on our web page. So, that must have been what
prompted them. And I do also j
ust want to comment. We’re having

the Check
-
Up
Meetings for our four neighborhoods on the eastern part of the community. And over
the next two weeks, we’ve got four meetings
scheduled
and that’s one of the items we
were goi
ng to make sure that those folks are aware of, that the Downtown Partnership
board exists and we would welcome membership from the neighborhoods, so.


MAYOR MEYERS: Very good. Any other questions or comments? Anyone from the
audience wanting to speak t
o this item? We’ve got one before you. Good evening. If
you’ll state your name and address for the record, please.


MR. BURKE: My name is David Burke. I live at (Address Omitted).

That’s Goddard
Heights.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you.


MR. BURKE: It’s the newest neighborhood in one of the oldest areas of Shawnee. I’m
a recent resident. I’ve had property here for all my life and I just recently moved to
town. I am definitely an urban Shawnee individual at this point. I agree complete
ly with
David, what he ha
s said about the makeup. We do need representation from the
residents. And I’m proud to be a property owner, a business owner and a resident of

downtown Shawnee. There are a lot of people in this town, in this part of town that

would serve. We need to have a little outreach in this direction. And I absolutely agree

Page
9


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15087



with David about this
--

it’s top heavy with City. Now, most of the stuff comes from the
City. The staff works hard, staff does a good job. Neal does a good jo
b. Everyone I’ve
ever seen on there does a good job. But with
all organizations as they age,
a little
burnout creeps in, a little complacency creeps in and some other things. I don’t want
this organization, which I have been more or less a part of for t
en years
,

to go downhill,
not repres
ent what it should represent, a
nd that is downtown. Yes, there are varying
points of views. Yes, there are new ideas that can come from anywhere. All of these
meetings are open meetings. Anyone can come. And as long

as they’re respectful,
would be heard. Ideas come from everywhere and that’s what we should keep in mind.
I would propose, and this is not the forum to propose it at, but we have a lot of standing
members on the SDP. In fact, they may outweigh the at
-
l
arge members. I’m not certain
of that. I did count them the other day, I think it’s six and seven. There are, according
to the way it was when I first came on the SDP, there were 18 members. There are
currently 14. In the last month I have been approa
ched by a banker, who is a resident
of Shawnee who wants to be on who says he’ll be at the next meeting. I’ve been
--

and
we had a banker, we no longer do. And this banker was speaking to me and said he
can do us some good especially in the buy
-
down loan
s and those interest rates and it
would save the City and the loan
--

the one taking the loan. Most of them good. And
I’m all in favor or saving money. The other individual is an attorney. In the past we
have had a local attorney on. Very good job. W
e could use both these positions. One
is a resident, the other lives in an adjacent city. But they’re both a very integral part of
the City. And I will try and get both of them there at the next meeting. That has really
nothing to do with what you’re v
oting on tonight, whether to accept these two
appointments. Mr. Vaught’s name was brought up and I think he’s well aware of my
position on that. There’s no point in going into that. I think we need to keep this thing
vital and I think we need to keep it

as individuals and without the slightest coloration of
professionalism over individual ideas. And that’s all I have to say.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. This way. Good evening. If you’ll state your name and
address for the record, please.


MR. SNELL:

Yeah. Greg
g

Snell, (Address Omitted).


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you.


MR. SNELL: Are there
current
restrictions in the bylaws that members need to own
business property in downtown?


MAYOR MEYERS: Not to my knowledge.


MR. SNELL: No. Okay. Are there a
ny restrictions in the bylaws for membership if you
serve on the City Council?


MAYOR MEYERS: If you serve on the Council
--



MR. SNELL: Yes.


MAYOR MEYERS:
--

being a part of it? No. Except that, again, one Councilmember is
part of the Downtown Par
tnership.


Page
10


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15086



MR. SNELL: But other than that there’s no restrictions. So, the entire City Council
could request to serve on the Downtown Partnership and they could and not violate the
bylaws.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: You have to own property.


MAYOR
MEYERS: No. They don’t have to own property.


MR. SNELL: You don’t have to own property. You just have to be a citizen and want to
participate, right?


MAYOR MEYERS: Pardon?


MR. SNELL: The restriction for the City Council representative is that’s th
e
representative.


MAYOR MEYERS: Yes.


MR. SNELL: Other than that
,

the entire City Council could also serve?


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Don’t you have to be in the downtown district or
something, don’t you?


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: The intent and purpos
e of the membership talks about
downtown property owners, people with a downtown interest and downtown residents.
It doesn’t
--

there’s nothing binding about that.


MR. SNELL: Okay. So, Dr. Kemmling as Ward II representative could. Not as the
Council
representative, but as a member in that area.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Legally there’s nothing that I know of, could read the
code and should read the code before I answer. But legally, there’s nothing I know of
that would preclude the possibility of eve
ry Councilmember
--

realistically that would
never be a possibility.


MAYOR MEYERS: Or any citizen within the community.


MR. SNELL: Right. Okay. From what I heard, what you said about the bylaws, the
restrictions of the City Council representation i
s that at face value, Mr. Vaught’s
recommendation or appointment should be rejected outright. I understand that he’s not
going to be the representative, but he’s not going to be able to separate and not bias
any of his opinions from what he’s doing on the

City Council with what he’s doing on the
Downtown Partnership. He’s also a commercial property
--

commercial realtor. As
such, I believe he has an inherent conflict of interest. And again, being on the City
Council, he can influence Council decisions t
hat
can personally benefit him. I
believe
there’s an inherent conflict of interest. I also think that he should be rejected, in that,
just last week
he
expressed his dislike of public scrutiny of oversight of his official City
business. And as such, I t
hink that would persist a suspicion of backroom deals
throughout his term. And for those reasons, I would urge you
--



Page
11


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15085



COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Could I get a clarification on what you’re talking about?


MR. SNELL: Excuse me?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Well,

you just made an accusation. Could you clarify
what you’re talking about?


MR. SNELL: If you want to hold your questions for the end, you’re interrupting.


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: Mr. Mayor, I object to this line of questioning.


MAYOR MEYERS: Yeah.

Yeah.


MR. SNELL: Now, I’m not questioning.


MAYOR MEYERS: But, Mr. Snell. Well, you’re making statements of something that
there is, you know, no basis for as far as
--



MR. SNELL: Would you like me to quote?


MAYOR MEYERS: I understand the quo
te you’re going to read. And again, that
--



MR. SNELL: So, then it does have basis?


MAYOR MEYERS: No, it doesn’t have basis. You’re reading a quote of an opinion of a
person. And
--



MR. SNELL: Mr. Vaught. I’m quoting Mr. Vaught from last week’s

Council Meeting. I
can quote him verbatim.


MAYOR MEYERS: That he does backroom deals.


MR. SNELL: That he himself said.


MAYOR MEYERS: Again, I don’t know what you’re
--



MR. SNELL: I mean, if you
--

just that doesn’t merit consideration here?


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: This is not a
--

we are here to debate this. We are
not here
--



MR. SNELL: Right.


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR:
--

for a personal drudging or finding of information.
And we’re not here for you to cross
-
examine the members of the
Committee and we’re
not going to get involved with Q&A, something that is


that you’re bringing up.


MR. SNELL: Great. Sorry, Jeff. I’d love to engage in Q&A. But back to my request
,

that you oppose his appointment, because he has e
xpressed those opin
ions public
ly.
And if you examine the audio record that you’ve recorded, you will see that that does

Page
12


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15084



have basis. And I think that’s an important consideration. He’s on the Council. You
have bylaws that restrict it to one Council representative. And

I think you’re splitting
hairs on trying to slip him in here.


MAYOR MEYERS: The bylaws don’t restrict to one Council representative. It says that
there can be
--

or one of the members will be a Council representative.


MR. SNELL: So, the rest of t
he entire Council could, theoretically?


MAYOR MEYERS: Theoretically, yes.


MR. SNELL: Great. Are we doing Q&A?


MAYOR MEYERS: No.


MR. SNELL: I’m happy to Q&A.


MAYOR MEYERS: No. But what I will say is, again, the Council will have the final vote
on these appointments.


MR. SNELL: No. I understand that.


MAYOR MEYERS: But the board
--



MR. SNELL: And you’re taking input from the public.


MAYOR MEYERS: The board had the opinion that they were in favor of both

these
individuals being put on
to the board of the Downtown Partnership.


MR. SNELL: I understand that. All right. Thanks.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Mayor, can I ask a question?


MAYOR MEYERS: Yes, Mr. Vaught.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: And you just brought

that up, so people understand this
process. Our names came before the board of the Downtown Partnership and you guys
took a vote. So, this is clear there on me, how many votes were there against me?


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Yeah. I honestly didn’t see.

It was a ballot and I
honestly didn’t see the final tally.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Okay.


MAYOR MEYERS: And I don’t see the final tally either.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Okay. But we know that I was obviously approved by
the board?

Page
13


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15083



CITY MANAGER GONZ
ALES: Yes.


MAYOR MEYERS: Both.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: The majority of the board, because that’s why I’m on
there.


MAYOR MEYERS: Yes. Both you and Ms. Leeper.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: And which the board is a mix of people that
--


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Is not made up of the City Council.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT:
--

that’s not the City Council. It’s business owners. It’s
whoever, so.


MAYOR MEYERS: Again, I don’t know how many were totaled present that night. I
think we, as Mr. Sa
wyer said, we have 14 total members, but I don’t think all 14 were in
attendance that night. But there were a good number.


MR. SNELL: And this is great, Mr. Neighbor, because we got opinion and opinion. It
wasn’t Q&A.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Burke made,

in fact, I think you said 7
-
6.


MR. BURKE: I’d like to make a clarification on that. Two people left before the vote on
Mr. Vaught was taken. And I questioned before the vote was taken whether we still had
a quorum at that point. It was a whole questi
on of procedure in my opinion. But that’s
my opinion. I would really like to see the Councilmembers at least table Mr. Vaught’s
appointment, at least
until
we
can
look into this a little further. And the last comment
that Mr. Vaught just made about his
approval is very questionable.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Chaffee.


MR. CHAFFEE: Yeah. At the Partnership meeting there were 12 members that were
present. There were two members that left prior to the item being on the agenda for the
appointments to the board.

There were 10 who voted. With the 13 members that we
have currently, 7 would be a quorum. So, there was a quorum and then there was a
majority of those
who
voted that recommended approval of the two individuals this
evening that have been brought forwa
rd to the governing body.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Ms. Distler and then Ms. Kuhn.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: I actually didn’t have any questions until we started
talking about the whole Council could be on the board. So, because it’s an open
meeting,
there wouldn’t then be any type of quorum issues or binding decisions made or
anything like that if we had a majority of Councilmembers on the committee? If all eight
of us and the Mayor were on this committee and discussions were had and decisions
were m
ade, would that be a problem or not?


Page
14


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15082



CITY MANAGER GONZALES: It would be a problem.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Yes.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: And that’s what I’m trying to clarify.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: And I don’t believe that any of you all



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Would be that.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES:
--

would let that even happen. That would not be a
reasonable thing. And I might just
--

in the packet on page 57, it specifically lines out
the criteria and the kinds of people that we’re lo
oking for. At
-
large positions shall
include individuals representing the following downtown interest, business owners,
commercial property owners, neighborhood groups, downtown churches. So, it’s fairly
clear on what kinds of interest. And I find it har
d to believe that the majority of Council
would want to serve on that. It would certainly change the whole nature of it.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: But we could have possibly Mr. Pflumm, Mr. Kemmling,
Mr. Sawyer, Mr. Vaught. Mickey throws me in there bec
ause of our family business.
So, we could. We could all
--

we all do have a, I mean, most of us have either a
business or residence in the area.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Well, I could argue every Councilmember has an
interest in downtown and cares about

downtown.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: Right. Well, I mean, I just
--

my only concern is
possibly that the Downtown Partnership should look at their bylaws so we don’t get a
majority of Council representation on, I mean, two members is not a majority. But
I’m
talking about in the future that that couldn’t happen, where binding decisions are being
made or decisions of agreement before they’re coming before the City.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Yeah. The bylaws could certainly state that. They
could state lot
s of things. You know, it’s hard to think of all the possible scenarios that
might happen and write bylaws that would preclude every one of them. So, I
--



COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: Well, I think it would be really clear if you’d say it had to
be no more

than two or no more than three Councilmembers, governing body members
or something.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: And would we want to say no more than thre
e Planning
commissioners. And
where do you draw the line?


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: Yeah. See, t
o me,
that
--

I don’t know. Just with past
experiences of things that have been put in the context, they’ve been put in
--

okay. I
just would not want to ride the slippery slope I guess is what I’m saying. I’m not making
any accusations whatsoever. I just se
e that there could be potential ugly situations.
And if I were on the Downtown Partnership, I would think I would want to look at the
bylaws to try to prevent anything like that from happening or assumptions being made


Page
15


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15081



or, you know, things being seen, whether true or not that, well, you know, you’ve got a
majority of you on there so this is how, you know, accusations and that’s all I’m saying.
I just
--

I’m just offering a suggestion to the Downtown Partnership. Person
ally I would
try to avoid the slippery
--

like I said, two Councilmembers isn’t an issue. But when you
all said we could all be on it, it just kind of bothered me. So, that’s
--



MAYOR MEYERS: Ms. Kuhn.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I just wanted a clarification from Mr. Chaffee. Mr. Vaught’s
vote was not done with a totally different number of people in the Downtown Partnership
than
--

I just blanked on her last name. I’m sorry. Becky
--



MS. BIEKER
: Bieker.



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Bieker. I’m so sorry, Ms. Bieker. I apologize. I just
blanked on here name. I’m so sorry.


MR. CHAFFEE: I can’t remember if Councilmember Sawyer had left between the votes
or before both of the votes were taken.


COUNCILMEMBER

KUHN: Okay. So, Mr. Sawyer was one who was absent at Mr.
Vaught’s?


MR. CHAFFEE:
Right.
And Ms. Copp had to leave the meeting early to attend a
Rotary function.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Okay.


MR. CHAFFEE: So, she wasn’t there for those.


COUNCILMEM
BER KUHN: So, on top of it, the City Councilmember was not there to
advocate or negate Mr. Vaught
’s

as well. So, it was made by non
-
Councilmember
members of the Downtown Partnership for the recommendations.


MR. CHAFFEE: And the members of the Partners
hip who voted on the
recommendation for Mr. Vaught did not include Councilmember Sawyer.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Did not include a councilmember. Okay.


MR. CHAFFEE: He had left prior to that.



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: That’s fine. And then I wasn’t even going to this one. But I
would just say to Ms. Distler’s thing. That when we have Downtown Partnerships or any
other thing that we have, they take letters in and it went to the Downtown Partnershi
p. I
would assume that the Downtown Partnership folks would see some of that slippery
slope and would not probably vote to recommend the third, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth,
the seventh and the eighth Councilmember to be members of their 18 person gro
up.
Common sense is sort of just one of those things. And, gee, if we could make it any
easier, Ms. Distler and I could probably say right now we won’t put our names in when
they ask for it while the other two are sitting there. And we’ve just solved th
e problem.

Page
16


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15080



So, maybe we don’t need to borrow quite that much trouble.


MAYOR MEYERS: The board had a definite discussion about the number and the
different types of membership of the board.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Exactly. And I think it is completely

true to say that A,
every person in this Council has somewhat of a vested interest in it. And B, in Shawnee
everyone is married to somebody, related to somebody and has a cousin who is
somebody that

we would all fit in it. My fi
ancé’s building is going
to fit within something
that would qualify as a Downtown Partnership. I hereby tell you I will not put my name
in submit at any point in time while sitting on the Council to be a Downtown Partnership
member while we have other sitting ones. It’s solved.

It’s kind of silly in some ways.


MAYOR MEYERS: Anybody else have a comment? Mr. Pflumm?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I’ve probably got a lot of lot of comments. But I think it’s
great that he’s wanting to be on there. I think the first thing we have is we

have a
motion and a second I believe for
Ms. Bieker
on here.


MAYOR MEYERS: That’s correct.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: So, we would just go
with her
for now.


MAYOR MEYERS: Okay. We’ll move forward with the appointments. We have a
motion and a second
to appoint Becky Bieker to the Shawnee Downtown Partnership
with a term expiring July 8
th
, 2016. All in favor signify by saying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no. Motion passes. (Motion passes 8
-
0).




Appoint Jeff Vaught to t
h
e
Shawnee Downtown Partnership with a

Term



Expiring July 8, 2016.


MAYOR MEYERS: Item B would be an Appointment to Jeff Vaught to Shawnee
Downtown Partnership with a term expiring July 8
th
, 2016.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Can I ask a real question? Well, go ahead.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Motion to approve.


MAYOR MEYERS: Yes, Mr. Vaught.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I’m quite comfortable with the Downtown Partnership’s
vetting on this and am comfortable with a second.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Vaught.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: And can I clarify. Carrie said there’s no conflict on me
voting.

Page
17


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15079



CITY MANA
GER GONZALES: That’s correct. I talked to Mr. Rainey prior to the
meeting.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Thank you.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: So, I do have a question. Are all the Downtown
Partnership meetings publicized for like news media or are they open t
o the public?


MAYOR MEYERS: They are open to the public.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Uh
-
huh.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: They are open to the public and they are
--

which
means the
Dispatch

or whoever can be there at any time?


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Sure.


MAYOR MEYERS: Sure.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Sure.


MAYOR MEYERS: Yeah. We have a motion and a second to approve Jeff Vaught to
the Shawnee Downtown Partnership with a term expiring on July 8
th
, 2016. All in favor
signify by saying aye.


MR. ERLICHMAN: No questions? No comments?



MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: No.


MAYOR MEYERS: Do what?


MR. ERLICHMAN: I thought you were taking each nominee, I’m sorry, each nominee
separately.


MR. ERLICHMAN: I do not want to
speak about Ms. Bieker’s application, but I do want
to speak about Mr. Vaught’s.


MAYOR MEYERS: Okay. We will
not
count the vote until
we have any other
comments on this item.


MR. ERLICHMAN: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.


MAYOR MEYERS
: Good evening. If
you’ll state your name and address for the record,
please.


MR. ERLICHMAN: Ray Erlichman, (Address Omitted). I had two comments, but I’m
going to have to hold off on one of them. I did not hear Ms. Gonzales’ reply as to
Vaught’s question about a confli
ct with him voting on this or what
--

I think he did ask a

Page
18


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15078



minute ago if there was a conflict. And what was the response?


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: I spoke to Mr. Rainey prior to the meeting. There is no
conflict of interest.


MR. ERLICHMAN: There is
no conflict. Okay. I didn’t hear it. And the old ears are
getting old. So, two comets are almost diametrically opposed. Number one, I agree
with Mr. Burke that the application of Mr. Vaught should be tabled, but for a different
reason. Even though th
ere’s no conflict, I just think, I don’t know, he should have
recused himself from this whole section of the meeting just out of courtesy. That’s
number one. Number two, it’s no secret that Mr. Vaught and I have been at ends or
loggerheads or butt
-
hittin
g
--

head
-
butting many times. And when I heard that he had
relocated his business from Kansas City, Kansas
,

I was kind of happy. I thought it was
very nice. I thought it was a good move. More businesses in downtown. And he kind
of reminded me a little

bit of Mr. Pflumm taking over the bank across the street. So, for
that I’d like to congratulate you. I think it was very nice, because we all talk about
economic development in downtown Shawnee and bringing businesses in brings people
in and brings addi
tional spending in, because employees will go out to lunch
and all
that, you know, I don’t

have to go through that. I’m preaching to the choir in that, and
that’s some of the comments you guys use when you talk about bringing new
businesses into town. So
, congratulations on opening up your business in downtown. I
was just curious though, how many employees are
--

will there be active in that
business, sir?


MAYOR MEYERS: Yeah. Again, Mr. Erlichman, this is not a question/answer time
period.


MR. ERLICHMAN: Oh, I see.


MAYOR MEYERS: It’s time for you to make comment. And so if you could just
--



MR. ERLICHMAN: I was just curious, because
when
we talk about
--

when Mr. Nave
comes up
,

he talks about businesses moving into town. He always
gives us an overture
--

or an overview of how many employees are in the business. And I just thought that
was an appropriate comment as far as how many
--



MAYOR MEYERS: And comment is fine. But your
--

question.


MR. ERLICHMAN: Well, question. I’ll

restate that. I thought it was an appropriate
question. How many employees are involved? That’s all. And we’re not going to get
an answer on that.


MAYOR MEYERS: No.


MR. ERLICHMAN: All right. Sounds good. You have a good evening.


MAYOR MEYERS
: Thank you. Is there anyone else from the audience that would like
to speak to this item? Please come forward.


MR. SNELL: Just a point of clarification
--


Page
19


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15077



MAYOR MEYERS: If you’ll state your name and address for the record, please.


MR. SNELL:
Greg
g

Snell, (Address Omitted). Haven’t moved. As a clarification, I want
to read the quote that was the basis of my comment previously. This is from Mr. Vaught
on July 2
nd

at the Committee Meeting. This is in the context of the discussion of
acquiring
, potentially requiring iPads for the Council. I would say just, I would like to,
and if we do something I would rather have an allowance than the City would provide
us, and that’s because, you know, when we say iPad, I’d rather say tablet, because I
woul
d rather have an Android device than an iPad. But, and then also because it’s
something that I would rather own myself and not be subject to requests that, you know,
give it up because someone else wants to see what’s on it, because it’s a City
-
owned
devi
ce. Direct quote and you’re welcome to check that against your own audio record.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Is there any other comments from the audience on this
item? Seeing none, we have a motion and second. Mr. Kemmling?


COUNCILMEMBER KEMMLING:
Can I make one comment?


COUNCILMEMBER KEMMLING: I think probably everyone up here has said
something at this point in time. I wasn’t around when we formed the Downtown
Partnership so I don’t know the original intent of why they specified one member from

the Council. Whether they meant to preclude others or not I really don’t know. We
heard a lot of input tonight as far as having the diversity of opinion on it. It sounds like
we might not have that as much. I think Mr. Vaught has a lot of the qualific
ations that
would make him a good appointment for this. I know Dan had expressed interest as
well. I think he also has qualifications. The question that just kept getting brought up
tonight was whether there was a conflict, because of their posi
tion her
e and whether
that mind
set could be separated from the other. And as far as that slippery slope goes,
it’s easy to say it won’t be an issue now. I don’t know going forward if it would be. I
personally feel it’s probably not the best precedent. So, I do
n’t think I would go to
support either Mr. Vaught or Mr. Pflumm if they were to put in their nominations as well.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Mr. Mayor.


MAYOR MEYERS: Yes, Mr. Mayor.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: And I don’t think th
e
conflicts he’s

referring to a
Councilmember. I believe the conflict is referring to me being a commercial real estate
broker. So, the question would be, does a commercial real estate broker have any
possibility of bringing anything of value to the Down
town Partnership, who one of his
missions is to attract business to downtown Shawnee, right?


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Any other comments from the Council? We have a
motion and a second to approve Mr. Vaught. I’ll take a roll call vote. Mr. Neighbor?


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Pflumm?

Page
20


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15076



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Kemmling?


COUNCILMEMBER KEMMLING: No.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Sawyer?


COUNCILMEMBER SAWYER: I’m going to abstain.


MAYOR MEYERS: Ms. Kuhn?


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Vaught?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Sandifer?


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Ms. Distler?


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: No.


MAYOR MEYERS: Motion passes 5
-
2 and one abstenti
on

(Councilmember Sawyer)
.
(Motion passes
6
-
2

it is common law and Kansas rule that the abstainer is counted with
the majority.

AG Opinion 91
-
73

et al.
)



F.

PUBLIC
ITEMS



1.

Establish Budget Limit and Set Public Hearing for t
he 2013 Amended



Budget
and t
he 2014 Budget.




A.

Approve the Notice of Public Hearing Amending the 2013 Budget for



July 22, 2013, at 7:30 P.M


MAYOR MEYERS: At this time we’ll move on to Public Items, which is Item F. Item
Number 1 is to Establish

a Budget Limit and Set a Public Hearing for the 2013
Amended Budget and the 2014 Budget. Kansas statutes require the City to set a public
hearing for the 2013 amended budget and the 2014 budget. Included are the notices
setting the time and date for the

public hearing for July 22
nd
, 2013, at 7:30 p.m. Item A
would be approving the Notice of a Public Hearing amending the 2013 budget for July
22
nd
, 2013, at 7:30 p.m.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So moved.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A mot
ion has been made and seconded on this item. Any further

Page
21


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15075



discussion from the Council? Is there anyone from the audience that would like to
speak to this item? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Op
pose
d

no. Motion passes. (Motion passes 8
-
0)






B.

Approve the Notice of Public Hearing for the 2014 Budget for July




22, 2013 at 7:30 P.M. Establishing the Tax Levy at $17,023,956 with




an Estimated Mill Levy of 24.914 for a Total Budget of $85
,596,049.



MAYOR MEYERS: Item B would be to Approve the Notice of a Public Hearing for the
2014 Budget for July 22
nd
, 2013, at 7:30 pm., Establishing the Tax Levy at $17,023,956
with an Estimated Mill Levy of 24.914 for a Total
Budget of $85,596,049.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Move for approval.


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded on this item. Any further
discussion from the Council? Mr. Pflumm?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I don’
t have a problem with setting the public hearing.
But I was asked at the last Council meeting to kind of put together some issues I myself
have and a drastic belief that we need to spend more money on roads than we currently
have over
--

since 2008 or sin
ce actually 2007. And so I can just read them off to you. I
know Carol sent out an e
-
mail with a limited number of items on there that
--

and with
the staff recommendation and looking for a recommendation. And I believe we all sent
that back to her. An
d in that we’ve got some
land

assessment software which is like
$
300,000. CIP tracking system
software
,

that

was
$
50,000. Vehicle replacement for
non
-
public safety, that was 100,000. Facility repairs,
$
300,000. City Hall generator and
the PIO. I don’t

know where they’re at in this whole budget, because I don’t know
exactly how that ended up. But I would recommend that we take that $890,000 right
there and apply that to roads and road repairs. I also have
--

I went through some of
the informatio
n that

Carol provided all of us and have come up
--

I’ve got some
concerns. I know that, and I brought this up several years in the past about the
transportation and reception and I like our police officers and firemen and all that kind of
stuff. But I kind of haven’t been to one of those receptions where
, you know, we either
have a retirement guy or something, and it’s not because I don’t like the guy or we get a
new guy. I think it’s great that we have people retiring, then we got new firefighters and
police officers. I just don’t want to go to the rec
eption, because the City is paying for
that kind of stuff. And so that’s in my own opinion, which I brought it up five years ago,
that doesn’t happen very often in the private sector. So, those are
--

and I just picked a
couple of them to reduce. And th
e Public Works and IT and Parks, that comes up with
about $39,900 worth

of funds just for transportation

and reception. Okay. And then if
you go to dues and subscriptions which is another item in the budget, and both of these
items seem to have been redu
ced largely. But then in
--

since 2012 to

13
,

to ‘13 to ‘14,
have seen, you know, drastic increases. And so, you know, I think if we were doing
okay in 2012 with those reduced numbers, because of the economy, I don’t know why
that we would increase thos
e at this time. And so
--


Page
22


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15074



MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Pflumm, do you know what those increases were? Do you
have that or
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Actually I do have that. So, in Public Works we went
from 44
--

well, actually if you want to go to Transportation and Reception
--



MAYOR MEYERS: I was talking about the dues and
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Okay.


MAYOR MEYERS:

--

it might have the other number.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: No problem. I’ll give you the dues and subscriptions.
Went from $4,477 to $5,800 just for Public Works. IT, $315 to $600. Parks went from
$16,127 to $20,900.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I’m sorry
. Can you repeat that, Dan?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: $20,900.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: What was it prior?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: $16,127.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So, it was $6,000 total between all of those less the
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, if you ad
d it up. Go ahead and add it up.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I did. The one was like $300 different. The one was like
$1,300 different. And I think that one was like $4,100. I mean, that’s ballpark.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I’m recommending really getting
rid of those.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So, we don’t do any dues or subscriptions? We don’t
--

they don’t belong to professional organizations?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I don’t know. I’m trying to figure out in Public Works
and IT’s and Parks why you would actually have to have those over our road
maintenance. So, that’s my opinion.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So, we should
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM:
And I still have more to do here.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So, like our engineer folks wouldn’t belong to CCIM?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Repair office furniture is another item. So, that Public
Works budget in 2012 was zero. And that’s $1,000 now. IT, and
I’m not sure what this
is, because I don’t have good, you know, call out into all these numbers. But $31,695,
and that number is fluctuated and it’s at $31,000 for 2014. Parks, cultural, you know,

Page
23


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15073



basically the Parks Department is $9,229 in 2012 and $5
2,000 in 2014. So, not quite
how
--

why we had such a drastic increase. And then really the only
--

I had asked for a
lot of information on land improvement, because that’s been a big item of question for
several, several years of, you know, what that is

and all that kind of stuff. And got a little
bit of the input from Carol. And basically what I would say on that one is reducing Parks
from $493,000 or reducing it the $93,800. So, the total savings of just those items there
is $961,000. So, and then
I went ahead and gone into the checkbook. You know,
we’ve got
--

we get checkbook items. So, I went ahead and just
--

I searched on a
couple things. I think when we first got the checkbook online, the very first thing that I
did was I searched Starbuck’
s. And I brought this up, I don’t know even know. How
many
--

six years ago, I’m not sure, but there was $1.89 or a dollar some
--

I could go
back in our minutes and find out. But basically I said at that time, that’s most likely
someone from the City g
oing into Starbuck’s and using either their purchasing card or
I’m not sure how they do that, but they went in there. They didn’t buy, you know, the
whole department, you know, Starbuck’s, but it looks as though the individual bought
themself Starbuck’s w
hich is really not
--

it’s frowned upon in the business world. So, I
did it again. And there’s
--

I searched on Starbuck’s. There’s some Starbuck’s charges
in there. I understand that’s not a big deal. But several of those were written against
Transp
o
rtation

and Reception which is understandable. That’s what they should be
coded as. But then there was three of them that were directly against Parks and Rec
equipment. So, I don’t know how
--

if that’s just an accounting issue or whatever it is. I
wou
ld think we’d want that to be accounted to the right department and all that kind of
stuff. So, those are just little things. And, you know, I’m just going to throw out another.
I’m not worried that we’re spending money on certain items. It’s, you know
, some of the
things when you go and look, it’s a little bit alarming when you get that. And another
thing, and I don’t know this is probably totally legitimate and all that kind of stuff. And
Cindy Swartz had a charge in there, not sure when it was, for

a Journalism class. And it
was under Parks and Rec. So, I don’t know if those type of things, training and all that
kind of stuff
comes
under Dues and Subscriptions. I don’t know how the Police
Department does it, but I know they have to go. But I don
’t believe that Parks and those
guys need to go to training and to be in, you know, a lot of engineering type of
associations and stuff like that. So anyway, and then the last one is
--

I was just
scrolling down through there and I saw the Cinderella Ball
. And, you know, I know that
we spent several thousand dollars on the Cinderella Ball. And I don’t really know
exactly what that is. So, if, you know, anybody wanted to explain that, that would be
great.


MAYOR MEYERS: I’ll let the City Manager. I ca
n explain it, but it’s the
Father/Daughter Dance that we have had for as long as I’ve been a Councilmember
that I can remember.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: We have to have two now, because they sell out.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Right. It sells out so much a
nd we had to have a second
night of it.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, how come if it’s selling out, how come we’re
spending
--

I don’t know. I didn’t even add it up, but it’s several thousand dollars.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: You see the expense side.
You didn’t see the revenue

Page
24


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15072



side.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Okay.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: There’s a fee
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I would like to see that.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES:
--

for that.


COUNCILMEMBER DISTLER: (Inaudible) tickets are

incredibly

costly. So, (inaudible).


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: And that’s why I’m not arguing that we’re spending
some of these things. I’m just saying I just don’t know, I’m talking about, you know, the
other side of it, so.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Pflumm,
I would say anytime you have questions of that nature,
all you have to do is ask staff and they’ll give you an answer. But especially that one
would have been easily
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: You guys had asked me to come up with some
specifics. Now, t
he Cinderella Ball

I didn’t even care about.



MAYOR MEYERS: Well, you say you guys, I didn’t do that.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: (Inaudible)


MAYOR MEYERS: Yeah. And so is there anything else that you wanted to add on
that?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, I

could go through a lot more detail. But I just
figured for tonight, I mean, just throwing out, I’m not saying down to pennies or
anything. I know that we’re just voting on a limit tonight and setting a public hearing.
So, other than that
--



MAYOR MEY
ERS: But it’s a good to have a discussion, that if you’re having a specific
proposal that you’re making to the Council, and then the Council can have a discussion
or rather they, you know
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I’m aware of that.


MAYOR MEYERS:
--

what they agree or disagree with or if they want to make any

changes so that staff is prepared to make those changes by

recommendation of the


Council,

I think that’s most appropriate. So, do you have a total amount that
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Just those (inaudible) items, those $961,000.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: And I want to be clear that
$
300,000 is not included in
the budget, the land assessment software.

Page
25


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15071



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: So, but I didn’t get a clear indication

of what was and
what wasn’t and so
--



CITY MANAGER GONZALES: The memo for the packet, for the Committee Meeting
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Okay.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES:
--

listed exactly all the items that were included. And in
fact, on the front
page of this memo I believe they are listed on page 63, the issues that
we’ve talked about at many of our committee meetings. The ones that are included in
the budget are listed on page 63 of the packet.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Great. And I just
--

I wa
nt to thank you for sending the
information out in detail on the, you know, on the items that I had asked you for. I’m still
going through that. So, you know, I appreciate it. I think it was great. I’m not sure
when you sent that out. Was it
--



MAYO
R MEYERS: So
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Was that Friday or was that Monday?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Well, let me ask a question real quick.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Vaught.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Oh, I’m sorry. When you started
--

you named off four
items

or five items right off the bat.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Yep. Those are right off of Carol’s sheet.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: I know. But can we get a clarification on those, that first
group of which ones are and aren’t in the budget, because you made it sound like they
were all in the budget.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, there was only one that she ind
icated that wasn’t
in the budget.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES:

You

might list them again. Capital Improvement
software was not in. I can’t remember what all you listed.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: But also there was $100,000 vehicle, new vehicle
--

or
non
-
eme
rgency vehicle replacement?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Not in public safety. Is that in there?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Not in public safety I mean.


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: The vehicle. Some amount is in there for vehicle
replacements.


Page
26


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15070



COUNCILMEMBER PF
LUMM: So, it was 100,000 in our spreadsheet.


MS. ROGERS: There was a reduction of 100,000 that was proposed.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: So, it’s not in there?


MS. ROGERS: It’s not in there. Right.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Okay.


MS. ROGERS: The
$
50,000 for e
-
ticket, or not e
-
ticketing, the Capital Improvement
Plan tracking system is not in there.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Yeah. It should mention that. So, facility repairs of
300,000 and City Hall generator and PIO, are those the only three items that are in
there? Well, excuse me. I didn’t say those are the only three. Those are the three on
my l
ist that I just mentioned.


MS. ROGERS: The
$
300,000 for facility, that’s also a reduction of 300,000. The
generator is in the budget in 2013
-
R. What was the
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: PIO.


MS. ROGERS: The PIO is in the budget.

COUNCILMEMBER PFLU
MM: So, on my list you’re telling me that there’s only two, the
PIO and the
--



COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: Generator.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM:
--

generator.


MS. ROGERS: Right.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: There’s no
--

hang on a second. There’s no facility

repairs?


MS. ROGERS: There are facility repairs. They’re not the
$
300,000.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: What are they?


MS. ROGERS: It’s
$
800,000. It was originally larger than that and it was reduced by
$
300,000. The
$
800,000 also includes equipment. I
t’s the total transfer to that fund.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: So, that’s a little confusing in our spreadsheet thing
there, because it said
$
300,000, you know, do you recommend
--

and it was under
“Staff Recommends” in our original spreadsheet from Carol.


MS. ROGERS: On the worksheet.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: The worksheet.

Page
27


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15069



CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Correct. In the budget packet memo for last Committee
Meeting, the numbers were
--


MS. ROGERS: The worksheet said staff recommended reduction, deferral, mill shift or
reserves. So, it was talking about reductions or deferrals.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: It didn’t have a negative
$
300,000 in that worksheet, is
that correct or not correct
?


MS. ROGERS: It’s not shown as negative.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: It’s positive, correct?


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: It’s in the reduction column.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Is it in the reduction column?


MS. ROGERS: It’s a number in the reduction column.



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Is there positives in that same column or is that
--



MS. ROGERS: They’re all positive in the column.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Okay. So, it’s
--

all of those in that column are
reductions?


MS. ROGERS: Yes.


COUNCILMEMBER PFL
UMM: I’ll just pull that up from my own personal knowledge.


MAYOR MEYERS: Ms. Kuhn.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: How do we get on here again?


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I think this is where we go every time. You know, I think
Dan said it before. He’s talked about some of these things for the last six years.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Eight years.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN:
And I got a look from him and
a rolled eye and kind of a
comment back when I said at the last meeting we were at that I didn’t want to just have
this come back again and be here. I didn’t want this to say there’s lots of places we can
save money, there’s things we don’t need, give us
specifics. And the answer I got back
from you is, that’s what I said I’m going to do, I’m going to give you specifics. But I’m
listening to the stuff again tonight, and I will, I think there’s a couple on them. That’s
what we should be as Councilmembers

voting yes or no. You gave us one specific.
Your recommendation is we do not pay any dues or subscriptions at all for the Planning
and Engineering Department. Is that what I’m getting from you currently? The budget
had $1,300 in it and you say we shou
ld pay zero.


Page
28


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15068



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Thirteen hundred.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I think that’s what your number was. I apologize, I don’t
have it right in front of me. You quoted it and I think it $1,300 for
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Dues and Subscripti
ons, there’s no 1,300. But I, yeah.
I think roads are more important, yes.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Okay. So, you’re saying we should
--

so with that, can you
tell me what that equates to? Because I’m assuming since that was the idea you
wanted to go, yo
u’ve talked to somebody on staff and said what is that that we’re
canceling. Because my first assumption would be that in Planning and Development,
that means that we are canceling membership to CCIM. It means we’re canceling
membership to professional o
rganizations. That means we’re canceling subscriptions
to
--

how to gain better information and peer group publications on things that we are
working on in the City. So, in essence, your suggestion is that our people belong to no
professional organizatio
ns and do not get any of the additional information that comes
from that, and then we take that $1,300 or $1,500 instead and put it, this year alone or
forever into potholes? I mean, do they never belong to them?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I’m just throwing
--

I’m throwing out some suggestions.
If you got to really
--



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Right. And I’m listening. So, right now as a Council
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: If you got a really good reason to be in a professional
organization
--

first of all, I
’m an engineer and I know that most engineers pay their own
dues and subscriptions.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: I belong to banking organizations and I don’t pay it
because I work for a company. So, everybody that works for you pays all of their own?
I mean,
do any of your folks, do you belong to professional organizations?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Absolutely.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So you do. And everybody that works for you pays their
own
? Because my brother
-
in
-
law is an engineer and he doesn’t pay his own, his
company pays them.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: The largest engineering firm in Kansas City, every
single guy there pays his own.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Th
e largest in Kansas City.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Okay. So, if our people can’t afford it or choose not

to
,
then the opinion that you’re telling us is that it is better for our people to choose not to
do it and we don’t value those things as a City, we don
’t feel like we should have that as
something they belong to? This is a yea or no. As a Council our answers are really

Page
29


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15067



simple. We don’t have a, is it good, should you belong, should you not. We have a yes
or a no to whether or not something goes in t
he budget. All we get is a
--

our staff
provided us with this is what we think is the best and most balanced way to meet the
very differing needs of our community and here is how we think it could be best. And
then it comes to the Council and our answers

either are, yes, we agree with that or no,
I’m not going to approve it. And if we say no, we’re not going to approve it, then as a
Council, our responsibility is then to say, I would approve this. I think we should cancel
all memberships for this and mo
ve that over. And then as a Council as a whole we
have to say, yes, I agree, none of our folks are going to have any of their professional
organizations paid at all and we will not have any subscriptions to any professional
publications for our Planning a
nd Development Department at all and then we will move
that $1,500 or $1,700 or whatever that number is into roads. And then we have to make
a decision, is our policy that they never belong to those, they never have a way to
participate in that funded by
the City or is that just a one
-
year thing. I’m good with it.
That’s what I’ve asked you for for all of these years. Tell me spec
ifically the ones that
we’re on
, then as a Council we can vote yes or no. Me personally, I think that as a
general rule, it
is responsible as an employer to have your people educated, informed
and continuing to learn. That to me is a priority as a city that we maintain a high
developed and educated workforce. If that isn’t as much of a priority for you as roads in
general are
, then you would vote no to this budget and you would vote yes to canceling
every educational and professional organization for our Planning and Development
Department and you would ask the rest of the Council to do the same. That’s all I’m
asking from yo
u. Specifically tell me what is involved in the dollar item and then ask me
to vote yes or no on it so we can make that educated decision. But all you’re telling me
is, we had $900,000 in this that we could put to roads. But in the two packets we’ve had

last week, and I wasn’t even here for and was able to read it, and tonight’s packet on
page 63, clearly it tells us what’s included in the budget. And most of what you just said
we could put easily money towards roads, wasn’t allocated in the budget in t
he first
place. So, $900,000 that we have we could have easily put towards, and I would
suggest we do, wasn’t even there. So, look at the budget that’s proposed, what is in
front of us, what we clearly received on multiple occasions as the proposed budge
t, tell
me what you
want to
cancel, what you want to stop funding, what you think is not as
important and then ask me to move it to roads. But I haven’t heard that from you once.
You said
--

I haven’t got an e
-
mail from you that when you said you were se
nding
specifics. We’ve got nothing.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, I probably wouldn’t send it directly to you. I
brought up these items here as a discussion
--


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: At the Council Meeting we were at last time you
specifically said you
would e
-
mail it to us, that we would have from you specific items
that we would be able to consider and programs to cancel.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, I didn’t e
-
mail them, I brought them here tonight.
Okay.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So, you’re telling m
e you didn’t make any decisions on any
of this or any ideas or recommendations?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, absolutely I did.

Page
30


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15066



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: So, you thought it was a better place to have this
discussion was to not go to any department heads, not
to go to the City Manager, not to
go to the Mayor and ask any clarification questions on this. You didn’t think that if the
Starbuck’s card was such a big deal that you needed clarification on why somebody
might have used once, twice or three times, you t
hought it was better
--

and you were
so concerned about it.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: That was not the thing that I brought up about the
Starbuck’s. You completely missed that.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: That was one of them.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: You completely missed that.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Okay. Then how about
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: It’s coded as Parks and Equipment, not as
Transportation and Reception.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Is there a reason for that? Was ther
e any reason?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I don’t know. I just think there was
--



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: And that’s my question for you. You didn’t
--



COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: If it was
--

it’s Transportation and Reception would
normally
--



COUNCILMEMBER K
UHN: That’s my point, Dan.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM:
--

fall under that category.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: It normally would. And you might be a hundred percent
right that that was coded wrong. But we would already know that in this Council
Meeting if you h
ad asked anybody
--

anybody in Finance or the City Manager or the
department head and said, this is something I noticed when I received this days ago
and I noticed this seems like it’s not coded right, can you tell me why that is. But
instead, you came to

a Council Meeting on the night we’re talking about the budget and
went, well, I don’t know why this is coded wrong. I can’t believe nobody has told us why
this coded wrong. You do that all the time. You often, just like you sat here and told us
we had
$900,000 in this budget that you think should have been allocated differently,
because it should have went to roads. But it wasn’t even presented in the budget as
something we were spending. We didn’t have that software in the budget. We didn’t
have tho
se programs in the budget. We had not allocated those dollars towards them
so we have no ability to remove those from the things that you didn’t support and put
them into roads, because they’re not on the budget. So, give us some stuff that is in the
bud
get, tell us what you want to cancel and maybe ask the questions before you get
here if you’re really interested in balancing it instead of interested in grandstanding.
Because for six years, I’m sick of grandstanding, Dan. I want a plan.


Page
31


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15065



COUNCILMEMBER

NEIGHBOR: Mr. Mayor, call the question.


MAYOR MEYERS: I guess I would like to make a comment that as Mayor I would hope
that some of the discussions of what the Council is wanting to do or make changes
within the budget as being presented by staff, th
at those discussions would take place
during the Committee Meetings on the budget. Not that there’s not going to be
discussion about the budget in a Council Meeting. But the meat of the discussions of
how the budget is going to transpire and be brought t
o the Council as a whole for
approval, I would think those discussions would take place, the majority of them, during
our scheduled budget meetings. And that would be a good time for suggestions. I don’t
mind anybody from the Council bringing forward a p
lan or a suggestion of change
before the Council if that’s something that they need to do or want to do. But I think,
again, if it is a plan, it would be helpful if it was stated as an item or a suggestion of what
to either delete or to add, specifically
instead of just throw out some numbers. And then
I think communication with staff is extremely important on getting the best information to
provide when discussing that opinion of plan by making sure that those items are
included or that we’re getting acc
urate information for the plan that’s being suggested
for the Council to consider.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Mr. Mayor.


MAYOR MEYERS: And there’s where I’m having a difficult time with your proposal
tonight, Mr. Pflumm, of understan
ding what is exactly
the plan.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Oh, I understand. And I just got some of the
information yesterday morning, you know, that is pertaining to, you know, what I’m
talking about, right? So, all that detail has not really been readily available to myself,
(inaudible) because I’ve asked.


MAYOR MEYERS: Well, I think again it’s always readily available to a Councilmember.
And especially when we begin budget discussions any of that information can be
provided or discussed with Councilmembers by staff. I thin
k the very best way of doing
it is by person, coming in and sitting down with staff. Here’s a question that I have or
something that I don’t understand, and sitting down with staff so that they can
personally explain it to where before you leave you’re sa
tisfied with the information that
you’re given. I know when I was a Councilmember I did that on many occasions. And I
always got the information and felt comfortable with understanding what I was doing
when it came to making budget decisions. Mr. Vaught
?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: You know, my voting on the budget is
--

I have to go
with
--

I just have to look at my election. I mean, I campaigned on economic
development. I campaigned on quality of life. I campaigned on quality parks and I

campaigned on
moving the City forward and I won by two
-
thirds of the vote, and I had a
worthy opponent who was endorsed by a lot of high profile people and I still beat him by
two
-
thirds of the vote which means the people in Ward III, I think they support the
agenda I p
ut out when I campaigned, and I have to go with that. You know, I think
roads are important. We’ve talked about it. We’re spending money on roads. But like I
said before, I don’t think you can sacrifice everything else in the City solely for capital
im
provements. You know, it’s like a company. You still
--

everything else in the
company still keeps happening. I would like to bring up something about dues. You

Page
32


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15064



know
, you said you paid your own dues. You know, in real estate we pay our own dues
on things, but we’re also contract labor. You know, do you personally pay your dues or
does DanCo Systems pay your dues?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Well, I’ll answer that one.
Yeah, I pay them, but I own
the company so that’s a little bit different.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Exactly.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: But the other guys don’t get that.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: So, but let’s talk about
--

hold on. Let’s look at
--

let’s
tal
k about GBA though. Let’s take something like GBA or who is the other big
--

who
am I thinking of? Who is a big giant engineering firm and
--



UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Black & Veatch.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Yeah. Black & Veatch. I could not think of t
he name.
You know, would they pay for, you know, a thousand people to be a member? No. But
I guarantee Black & Veatch writes a membership check to an organization and they’re
pr
obably
--

their head engineer
, the top guy is that named member of that orga
nization.
He’s not paying that himself. No different than the City. Are we, you know, and I guess
that’s a question I would have, and I don’t know the answer. Are we just paying
anybody membership to any organization they want to be in or does the City

pay
membership to ABC Engineering Association with Doug Wesselschmidt the named
contact person for that, because he’s the head engineer? Which would make sense,
because as a company, no different than any other company, you join those
organizations and y
ou name a person that
’s that

person for that organization, that
whether it’s the president of the company or the chief engineer, whoever it is. Now,
would GBA pay for a thousand memberships into an organization or a hundred of them
or, you know, however b
ig the company is, probably not. I don’t think it would be very
cost efficient for them to do this, especially a junior level or entry level engineer. So,
yeah. I could see where they wouldn’t do that. You know, we have how many
engineers?


UNIDENTIFIE
D SPEAKER: I think eight.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Yeah. Eight engineers. So, you know, do we
--

and I
don’t know. I don’t know if we pay for all eight of them. I don’t know if eight of them are
members. But do we, you know, we obviously as a city ar
e
--

I would think we as a city
would pay for the head engineer. And when we talk about not being important
to join

those things or to be a member, I think is very important. No different than, you know, if
I’m going to pay for an appraisal for a propert
y, I’m not going to
--

I would be less likely
to pay somebody who is not involved in that organization or has a proper designation.
Even Dawn brought up CCIM, and it’s a, you know, CCIM and SIOR are pretty
prominent tag lines after your name in the real e
state business, and people choose to
use those and have confidence in them because of that. So, I do think that matters.
You know, and I don’t want to go into th
e diatribe about what we said, I’ve

brought
it
up
with you before. I mean, and I woul
d love
to look at some of what you’re talking about.
I think just to drop bombs though is not the way to do it. There could possibly be

Page
33


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15063



savings in the budget. But I think sitting in a meeting where we’re voting like this and at
the final hour and say, well,
we could do this and this and this, I would think would be
things that we could bring up throughout the process and say, well, I think we should
spend less on this, because of this and I’ve looked into it. I mean, one of the things you
threw out immediate
ly was $100,000 I don’t think is in the budget. But you understood it
to be there. You know, you wanted to
--

or that we’re spending $100,000 on non
-
public
safety vehicles and that we shouldn’t do that. You know, I can tell you from experience
in the ca
r business, and my brother
is still in it, buys and they sell

vehicles, I mean,
Shawnee gets all the life out of their cars. If we’re buying a car in Shawnee or vehicle,
we pretty much need it, because I guarantee what they’re replacing, it’s run its cour
se.
Nobody
--

they beat them. Police cars, public works, you name it. We get the life out of
our vehicles. And that’s been that way for years. I used to, you know, go to Shawnee
when they did the sealed bids. I used to go bid stuff for Shawnee. And
I remember
looking at the vehicles going, wow, there’s nothing left to it. I mean, we get all the life
out it. So, I guess the question is, you know, what kind of city do we want to live in and
what kind of appearance do you want to have. You know, is i
t good for our residents to
drive down the road and, yeah, the road, I mean, we could have perfect roads. But if
we have beat up old cars smoking down the road with the, you know, tailpipe dragging
on the

ground
, what would look better? What’s better for

the image of Shawnee? Or,
you know, a guy is sitting on the side of the road four hours, because the car breaks
down, or for three hours and then he can’t go to work for the next couple days, because,
you know, something drastic happened to the car, it’s

got 250,000 miles on it. Is that
cost effective? You know, no different than why any other company replaces its fleet in
a timely manner, because down time costs money. So, little things like that. I think, you
know, to just sit and throw we could sav
e this, we could save this, could save this, I
think is like anything else. You would have to put out the details of what it is and say,
you know, this department spends this
--

here’s this expenditure. I think if we, you
know, I’ve looked at this and I
think if we take this away, we can still accomplish the
same thing if they do away with this, this and this. But anytime we take money away
from something, it’s going to alter the department. It’s going to alter how they do their
business. And so the qu
estion is, does it have a detrimental effect on the department
for doing their job. And so I think the assumption is with some is that all departments
are strewn with waste and that there’s always ten percent they can cut out of it, because
they’re just a
t least throwing ten percent of that budget down the drain on whatever or
five percent. And, you know, I don’t know. Could be true. I think if someone could
show me on paper and say, look, this is where I know it’s going. But I’m not seeing that.
And,

you know, what I’ve looked at and what I can tell and what I know about business,
I don’t see anything that this seems grossly out of line, so. But like I said before, I
mean, you know, even if you had something in writing for us and if you had had this
on
a nice
--

on paper with stuff spelled out. But, you know, Dawn was sitting here trying to
write numbers as fast as you could rattle them off just getting an idea of how many
dollars you were talking about, there’s nothing to look at. It’s, you know, i
f we’re going
to do this, and I’d welcome anybody to do it. I think anyone of us that has an issue with
the budget kind of put something together on paper. And just for an example, I know
Unified Government, and I know Neal loves when I bring them up. B
ut each one of
those commissioners, they’re assigned to a different department. And during the
budget, they’re the ones who go out and they put together a report on that department.
Each individual councilmember or commissioner kind of does a report some
what on that
department and gathers the information and presents it or looks for savings or whatever
it is on each individual department. And, you know, if that’s what we all want to do, then

Page
34


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15062



we

do that. But I think just sitting here from this high altitude say, let’s cut this million
dollars off the budget I don’t think is going to have an effect. You know, I can’t get
behind that, because I don’t know if it does or not. I would need to see t
hat in more of a
presentation on this is what we’re cutting and this would be the detrimental effect of the
department or this would be the effect or this is what they would have to do without. I
mean, but I welcome anybody. You know, I mean, I’m all for

it. If you find me half a
million, million dollars that we can free up that’s not going to negatively affect the
business we do in Shawnee and how we do things. But I just know in Ward III, the
feedback I get is, people are very happy with the way the C
ity is run. People are very
happy with how things look. I think honestly in Ward III, I think people would like to see
us probably increase our spending in various areas that are more visual and aesthetics,
just for an overall appearance. That’s in the
feedback I get is they want that. And they
want that quality of life and they want the quality parks and they want the activities and
that’s who votes for me and that’s who I’ve got to support.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Pflumm.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I just w
ant to throw out, I think I did comment on all of
the spreadsheet items that Carol had put out there, like the PIO, the generator, all of
those items in that list there. I know I’ve asked for land improvement information
several times. Got that yesterday
, which is great, okay. And, you know, she gave it to
everybody. And I think that’s, you know, any of that
detailed
information, those
spreadsheets were very small in retrospect. I think that even if there’s a hundred of
them (inaudible) you could, you
know, fire them off to all of us so we’d have all of that
detail. But anyway, I just think that I’ve brought up most of these things, especially like
dues and subscriptions in the past. And I think the debt, that is going up, and it, you
know, just in 20
12, you know, we’re seeing 25 percent increases and, you know, and
stuff like that. And I just
--

anyway, that’s my opinion. So, you asked me to give you
some detail so, and that’s what I did here. So, that’s what I did. I didn’t believe, and
even I to
ld you, I didn’t believe I should have to do that. Okay. That’s not normally the
way it works in the business world. Normally you go back to each department head.
He knows where his budgets are and what he’s got. Maybe
he’s got a little bit of extra
m
oney in this category or he doesn’t need to increase his dues and subscriptions by 25
percent or his transportation and reception. So, that’s what I originally said. We didn’t
get that. Okay. So, you asked me to give you some specifics and that’s exact
ly what I
did. I’m done. Thank you very much.


MAYOR MEYERS: And again, I would just think that if the Council had this discussion
and then they could vote on that item if it was brought up in a motion and a second to
make a change, then a change gets
made. But if one Councilmember says here is my
suggestion, you can’t get upset that staff is not going to do anything with it, because it’s
an opinion of one Councilmember rather than the governing body making a change.

And that is our purpose. That is

what we’re here for is to take a look at what’s being
delivered to us from staff and then making decisions on, is there anything in here that
we seem to think as a whole that we think should be changed or added, you know,
deleted or added from a budget pe
rspective. And that is our purpose as a council,
because we are the ones that are approving or not approving a budget that’s being
present
ed
. But it’s important that, I think, that if we are not going to vote for a budget
that there is reasoning behind t
hat. And I would hope that during the budget process
there would have been discussion of a change of plan. And again, I think it does need

Page
35


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15061



to be different than just throwing out some numbers, but actually having a plan that the
Council discusses and ma
kes an agreement or has a disagreement of whether they
want to add something or delete something from the budget process that we’re being
presented from staff.


COUNCILMEMBER SAWYER: Mr. Mayor.


MAYOR MEYERS: Yes, Mr. Sawyer.


COUNCILMEMBER SAWYER:
The only thing I would ask for by the time we have the
public hearing is I know each one of us turned in a decision, or I’m assuming we did. I
think seven or eight, I don’t know. The last I knew there was seven of us that turned it
in. But on the decisi
on packets, you know, I’d like to see how that really came out by
individual items. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with us seeing the number, you
know, if it’s 7 for

it
, if it’s 4 and 3 or 2 and 5, who cares, except I would just like to see it.
And

then the other thing I would like to see is, you know, we talk about street
maintenance and mill and overlay. I would like to see what we were spending in the
years ‘05, ‘06, ‘07, before the downturn, and then what it has gone back up to. Throw
out the
year 2013, because we’re borrowing money to make that happen. But those
--

and I don’t know what that number is. I know it’s a percent of the budget, probably a
small percent. It sounds like it’s a huge number. But it’s probably
--

it’s probably not te
n
percent. Probably never reaches ten percent of the budget, I assume. If I remember
correctly, the one that I did find was somewhere, it was in the seven percent range. But
I do believe that we have
--

that is the area of the budget that we decided in
2008 that
we were going to take the hit on and not spend the money. And, yeah, we’re putting
some money in some areas before that, and I somewhat struggle with that as, hey, you
know, let’s fix what we had and then we can add the glamour that we all belie
ve we
need to keep up with our neighbors.


MAYOR MEYERS: Any other discussion from the Council? Is there anyone from the
audience that wants to speak to this item? Good evening. If you’ll state your name and
address for the record, please.


MR. STRAUB
: Kevin Straub, (Address Omitted). To me, you know, I’ve been sitting
--

I
sat through quite a few of these while I was on the Council, and you basically seem to
be doing the same thing year after year after year. The department heads ask for what
they
want and you guys calculate it and then it goes to the Council. I don’t believe
anybody on the Council is an accountant. There are some business people so they
know business, they know their own thing. I think Mr. Pflumm is just trying to figure out,
he
y, where can we sharpen our pencil. Mr. Vaught said that, you know, he thinks that
we probably might be able to sharpen it five percent or ten percent, but he’d like to have
somebody to show him where to do that. And what I was thinking is, when I brough
t up,
I believe it was 2008, maybe it was ‘08 or ‘09 or ‘07, to have an efficiency review of the
City. To have an outside company, not your accountant that audits you every year that
tells you your bills are paid on time, somebody that’s not invested into

this City and to
actually
--

like a Dave Ramsey guy. Somebody that comes in here and says, okay, let
me look at all your departments. Let me look at all
--

where are you using one thing in
three different departments where you can say, you know what, if

we merge this
together, we can drop it down by a half or a third or ten percent or five percent. I
believe a company that I brought in, and we had a four to five vote, I can’t remember

Page
36


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15060



exactly what the night was. But they said that they would do it fo
r free on a percent
--

they would be charged, but it would be a percentage of the savings they found. And if
they found no savings or if you guys decided not to make any changes, they wouldn’t
get paid. They saved Sedgwick County millions of dollars. So
, they know what they’re
doing. And I’m not saying that we use that company. But just find a company that’s not
connected. I think that was addressed that night, that we get audited every year. That
we
--

and I go, well, that audit says you pay your bi
lls on time. It doesn’t tell you, well,
we recommend you do X, Y, Z. No. And maybe it was because it was my idea and I
heard a few people on the Council wasn’t excited about it when I bring up things. It’s
like those recycling bins in the park. We won
’t bring up that that was my idea. Anyway,
something like that. And it gets outside of, because the department heads
--

it’s like
saying they’re going to ask for everything they want. They’re going to ask for what’s
best for the City. Sure they are. B
ut can they
--

if you didn’t have the money, you had
the money to spend. But if you didn’t have the money, how would you
--

say you had
20 percent less than what you need, how would you figure out how to make the City
work without raising taxes. Is there

a way to do tha
t? There is. And you guys aren’t
set
for this. The staff is not set for that, because the staff was trying to make their
department the best they can. They’re trying to
--

and it’s not cut back on Police, it’s not
cut back on Fire, beca
use that’s what everybody says. It might be, see, we arrange the
schedules. That might be one. I don’t know. We need to
--

I think the City would be
benefitted if they looked at somebody that outside, unconnected and looked at it and
said, okay, these
are
my
recommendations. You know, I said that in 2008. I think it
was a pretty good argument. I think there were several people that were in favor of that.
But again, five years later down the road, you’re still
--

somebody is coming up with
ideas and
the other person is shooting them down. We have to
t
rust. Well, find
somebody that knows what they’re doing. Jeff, if you don’t know how to do those ten
percent down or cut five or ten percent, find somebody that can. I don’t think anybody
up here is a
n accountant. So, just a suggestion. I know you guys will continue doing
the same thing over and over again whether it’s the right thing or not. So, good luck.


MAYOR MEYERS: Is there anyone else from the audience that would like to speak to
this item
? Good evening. If you’ll state your name and address for the record, please.


MR. HOUCK: Rod Houck, (Address Omitted).


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you.


MR. HOUCK: I think this is probably my fourth year now of
coming to Council Meetings,
coming

to Council Committee Meetings or whatever the committees were called before
then, and watching the budget process. And it’s a phenomenal process. Staff does an
excellent job at working the numbers. I think

at least six weeks, it not
eight weeks ago
th
ere was a decision package for all of you to review. Mrs. Gonzales, because she and
I were talking about an entirely separate issue, offered for me to even comment on it,
which I did. And I tell you there’s a lot of items that I said if it doesn’t benefi
t the citizen,
don’t do it. But what’s really frustrating me tonight is, you know, going back
--

at least
three weeks ago I heard Ms. Kuhn say to Mr. Pflumm, if you have suggestions, bring
them forward. There’s been another Council Committee Meeting sinc
e then, Mr.
Pflumm. That would have been the time to bring them forward.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Didn’t have all the information at that time.

Page
37


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15059



MR. HOUCK: Okay. Huh? Well, I can’t believe that you could have the information
today that you couldn’t h
ave gotten three weeks ago. But the process I’ve seen for four
years is we’re start nitpicking at dues and subscriptions and transportation and
distribution at the eleventh and a half hours of the budget process. I wish you’d have
looked at that a month
ago. Not now. That’s what’s frustrating to me about this process
is that we seem to take this big picture and funnel it down and keep (inaudible) it down.
One night, Mrs. Gonzales, you presented out of those major
--

the decision package,
you presented
some against, some for. I agree with Mr. Sawyer, I’d like to see the
numbers too. I’d like to see the numbers of how many were for that item and how many
were against that item so we get that down. And it seems like Mr. Pflumm isn’t informed
that some o
f those items were already on the not for list. And so do your homework,
only sooner. Don’t wait till the eleventh hour. And in terms of efficiency, we have a City
Manager. This City is run by charter by a City Manager. She’s the efficiency expert. I
f
she needs to look at how departments are run, that’s her job, not an outside.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Is there anyone else from the audience that would like
to speak to this item?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Mr. Mayor.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Vaught.


COU
NCILMEMBER VAUGHT: I just want to clarify Mr. Straub’s comments. I did not
say I think there’s five to ten percent savings in the budget. I said if someone thinks
there is five to ten percent or five or ten percent savings, then please bring it forward
and show me where it’s at. Number two is I do remember those discussions, because I
was actually campaigning and sitting through Council Meetings when Mr. Straub and
other Councilmembers were proposing the efficiency audit. And I do find it interesting
t
hat, as you stated again, that
--

but don’t include public safety, which is over half the
budget, I believe. Yet, we’re going to do an efficiency study of less than half the budget.
And, you know, the assumption is that public safety runs a hundred perce
nt

efficient
,
everybody else doesn’t, so let’s not touch them, which to me that’s a political way of
saying I don’t want to pick on public safety so let’s just look at everybody else, because
that’s a political hot button. And if you’re going to do an eff
iciency study and you really
believe it, then public safety isn’t exempted, you do it. And the other question was I
think posed at the time, and I think I remember, if I’m not mistaken, it was Ms. Kuhn that
proposed that said are you saying that if we do
this efficiency audit and we do it on the
whole entire city that you’re willing to vote for every efficiency item that comes from the
audit including public safety. And that’s when everybody went, whoa, whoa, no, we’re
not going to support everything. So
, in other words, you want to do an efficiency audit.
And this was talked a
bout three years ago, you want

to do efficiency
--

and then you
want to pick and choose what items you really want to do, which then it just turns into a
political nightmare. So,
the only way you’re going to be able to do them is for everybody
to agree that they’re going to do it and we’re going to support a hundred percent of what
they come up with including public safety. Nobody is going to get on board with that.
An
d anybody w
ho thinks we’re going to get

on board with it and really starts thinking
about it, they’re not going to get on board with it. So, that’s what I don’t want. I’m just
going to put this out there too, Mr. Straub. And I’m not addressing you, so please don’t

get up and respond to this. But the fact that you do live in Overland Park, I’m just going
to wonder if you are here as a representative

of

Straub Construction or the Straub

Page
38


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15058



family
. I don’t understand how an Overland Park resident has that much interest in the
Shawnee budget. So, I’m just going to assume that you’re a representative of the
Straub family and Straub Construction. Oh, please. You’re not
--

this is not a debate.


M
R. STRAUB: The f
loor has not been closed though
, correct, for discussion?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: You have one opportunity to speak.



UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: Two opportunities.


MAYOR MEYERS: Two opportunities.


MR. STRAUB: I believe I have two oppor
tunities, correct?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: (Inaudible)


MAYOR MEYERS: Name and address for
--



MR. STRAUB: You can’t make a
--



MAYOR MEYERS: Name and address for the record, please.


MR. STRAUB: I’m sorry. Kevin Straub (Address Omitted)
.

Now, there might be
(inaudible). I’m not
--

was not trying to be combative with you, Mr. Vaught. So, let’s
--

I
suggested
--

I understand you don’t
--

that’s why I thought I repeated what you said.
You don’t know if nobody showed you to save the five
or ten percent, so I said have an
outside company show you. I didn’t say that there was. I said if there is, they can find
it. And what was the other thing? The part about all or nothing. That’s not
--

even the
efficiency people that came and talked a
bout it, they didn’t say you had to do all or
nothing. Okay. They said these
--

we’re going to show you where to save money, you
guys decide. And if you decide to do all, some or none, that’s great. They didn’t care.
So, I was in that meeting. The ne
xt thing about police and fire. I said we don’t have to
cut back if that’s a safety issue. I said if we have to change schedules. So, I did want
them also to be reviewed. They might be behind too many pencils at a higher price and
we can get pencils ch
eaper. I don’t know. So, I was all in favor of having all
departments be reviewed. So, I don’t have a problem with that. But the part when you
bring up my brother’s company, Straub Construction, I’m not part of that company. I
worked for him for nine
months as a laborer. I worked for him as a kid when I was
growing up for my father as a laborer. That’s all I’ve done from Straub. I only got
paychecks when I worked for them. So, I’m not a part of that company. Never have
been any type of ownership o
f that company. So, I don’t know why you
would
bring that
up. If you’re doing this for your father that’s on the council at Wyandotte County, I don’t
know. Do you want to

bring that up every night, too?

Whatever. That’s not a
--

as far
as I represent
myself and myself only. So, if you want to bring my family members into
it, I have no idea why. That’s just vindictive. You’re just trying to be hurtful and mean in
my opinion. You know, it’s like going to my father’s house and accusing him of
somethin
g and accusing me of something at my father’s house that another
Councilmember had done in the past.

So, okay. That was all that I was going to say
. I
think that’s it. But anyway, I do do business in the City of Shawnee. I still shop in the
City of Sh
awnee. I have sold a lot of homes in the subdivision called Town and Country

Page
39


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15057



Villas. I currently have one pending, one listed and nine lots listed over there. So, I
have an investment in the City of Shawnee, and I believe this Council Meeting is open
to anyone no matter where they live. Or is it just a Shawnee only club? Mr. Mayor, can
anyone speak at these meetings?


MAYOR MEYERS: I think you know the answer to that, Mr. Straub.


MR. STRAUB: I’d like it answered so Mr. Vaught will know.


MAYOR ME
YERS: I let you speak tonight and you are not a citizen of this city.


MR. STRAUB: Well, anybody
--



MAYOR MEYERS: Yes, sir.


MR. STRAUB: So, anybody in the City can speak. Okay. Anybody from anywhere, Mr.
Vaught. So, anyway.


MAYOR MEYERS: Tha
nk you.


MR. STRAUB: I would appreciate it if you would not throw allegations of my family
around. It’s hurtful.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Where we are at in this point of the meeting is on Item
B, to Approve the Notice of a Public Hearing for the 2
014 Budget for July 22
nd
, 2013, at
7:30 p.m., establishing a tax levy at $17,023,956, with an estimated mill levy of 24.914
for a total budget of $85,596,049. We have a motion and a second on the floor. Mr.
Pflumm.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: I just have
one. Sorry I didn’t ask this earlier. The
24.914, is that the exact same mill levy as 2013?


MAYOR MEYERS: Ms. Gonzales?


CITY MANAGER GONZALES: Ms. Rogers, do you want to address that?


MS. ROGERS: Maureen Rogers, Finance Director. I’ll just show yo
u on the notice.
The 2013 column, the total here toward the bottom is 24.914. And over under the ‘14
column, it’s also 24.914. There will
--

it may, and probably will adjust slightly, because
there’s another valuation that comes from the county in betwe
en now and then. But this
notice is set to be the same as last year in total. There’s shifts between the General
Debt Service and Public Safety Equipment, but the total is the same.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Okay. Thank you.


MAYOR MEYERS: Any other qu
estions or comments?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: I do real quick.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Vaught.

Page
40


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15056



COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: And I just think this, so everybody understands where
Dan was going with that, is you approve
--

we don’t approve the mill levy, we approve
the dollar amount. So, based on valuations we adjust the mill levy to meet that dollar
amount. If we approved a mill levy and the market crashed, we’d be in a world of hurt,
because all we’d be able to collect is the mill levy we approved regardless of w
hat the
valuations were. So, we need to prove a dollar amount and collect it and the mill levy
needs to adjust to make sure that we collect that dollar that we budgeted for.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. I’ll now ask for a vote. All in favor, signify by s
aying
aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no. Motion passes. (Motion passes 8
-
0).



2.

Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider Funding Application for t
he Fiscal



Year 2013 Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.




Conduct

a Public Hearing.



MAYOR MEYERS:
We’ll move to Public Items. I’m sorry. We’re in Public Items. Item
Number 2 is to Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider Funding Application for the Fiscal
Year 2013 Byrne Memorial Justice Assistan
t Grant Program. In May 2013, the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Assistance
announced funding available through the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistant
Grant (known as JAG) Program. Of the JAG funds allocated

to Johnson County, the
City’s portion is $12,051, which will be used for holsters. And we need to have a motion
to conduct a public hearing.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: So moved.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Second.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Second.


MAYOR MEYE
RS: A motion has been made and seconded to conduct a public
hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no.
(Motion passes 8
-
0)

We are in a public hearing.
(Motion passes 8
-
0). This is a formal public h
earing required by law. The hearing will
begin
with a presentation by Captain Doug Orbin. After Captain Orbin’s presentation, I
will ask Councilmembers if they have any questions specifically related to the
presentation. I will then ask if there are any

comments from the public. Following public
comments, I will ask for a motion to close the public hearing and no action is required.
If anyone
from the audience
would like to speak during the public hearing, please raise
your hand and I’ll recognize you
to come forward. As I stated earlier
,

in order to have
an accurate record of the meeting, when you come forward to speak, please state your
name and address. Following your comments, please sign the sheet to the left of the

Page
41


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15055



podium. In order to have an

orderly hearing, all comments must be made at the
microphone and are limited to five minutes. No person shall speak more than twice to
any one issue. Captain Orbin.


CAPTAIN ORBIN:
Good evening.
I am Doug Orbin, a Captain with the Police
Department.

And I am happy to talk to you tonight. We were very pleased to learn in
May and June of this year that we had available this $12,051 to us at the Police
Department through the Justice Assistant Grant Program for crime and prevention and
equipment. It c
ame at a good time for the Police Department and it’s going to fulfill an
immediate need for us for some equipment. So, I want to briefly tell you why we were
applying for that and specifically why we are wanting to use those funds to purchase
holsters.
First of all, we have three, basically three
-
plus holsters that officers carry. We
have the duty holster that you carry on your uniform. We have plainclothes holsters that
are like paddle holsters that they carry on their plainclothes. And we have the t
actical
holsters for our tactical team that are on the thigh. To start with, the duty holster, this
holster that we currently carry is ten
-
plus years old. We have found out that it is now
obsolete. These are retention holsters which means you just can’t

draw the weapon out
of the holster. It actually has retention, which you actually have to rock or do special
things to get it out so that guns are not taken away from us. But we can’t buy these
holsters anymore from the manufacturer. The last time we h
ad to replace or buy new
ones, they actually had to do a special order to get us by. So, we are faced with the fact
that we have to replace this holster. Secondly, we did have an incident in April of this
year at one of our qualification ranges. A
n

officer was qualifying with his weapon while
in a time stress event as part of the qualification. He went to draw his weapon out of his
plainclothes holster which has a finger release, index finger release. As he did so, he
didn’t get it out on the firs
t try. He went to do it again with more pressure on his
index
finger. As he came up, he discharged the weapon. Went through the holster and
through his leg. He did suffer injuries from that. Minor injuries thank goodness, a few
stitches, he’s still ca
rrying and he was back to work pretty quick. However, during the
investigation of that incident we found that that particular holster, that same problem of
accidental discharge had been occurring across the country between
--

with other
agencies, other of
ficers. And as a matter of fact we learned that the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, which trains a lot of the federal officer and is
a
D
epartment of Homeland Security division had actually done a study, because they had
four accidental charges th
e same way with that same type holster. Based on that, we
and the Department of Homeland Security in August of last year basically banned that
holster from any officers in their ranges from carrying that holster to qualify. And
basically, since we had al
ready had an incident and we learned about this, we have to
replace it. We can’t allow our officers to carry and qualify with this holster, because
frankly, it’s unsafe. And we were already in the process of looking for holsters to
replace that one when
we were notified about this money available to us to apply for.
So, what we are proposing is to use the funds to, and this $12,000 will actually replace
every duty holster, every paddle or plainclothes holster and every tactical holster for
every member o
f the Police Department. And those funds will cover every one of those.
The good thing about these holsters also is that currently we have different retention
and drawing methods for three
-
plus holsters. What we’re wanting to do is to get one
holster, o
ne type holster that has the same retention as we currently use and has the
same drawing motion. So, if you’re under time and duress, there is no thinking about
which holster do I have on today and I’m able to draw my weapon. So, that’s why we
were looki
ng to apply for these funds and what we would use it for.

Thank you.

Page
42


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15054



MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you, Captain. Are there any questions or comments from
the Council at this time? Mr. Vaught.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: If we buy these, you know, I know that
--

an
d I don’t
know how you guys are
on
buying equipment, if you go to state bids or we have to, you
know, I know Ms. Bieker
was just here
and is getting appointed to the Downtown
Partnership.
Will
you
be
able to utilize her business and order through her or h
ow does
that work? Do you go for competitive bid or do you match prices or what’s
--



CAPTAIN ORBIN: Well, it’s a
--

I’ll tell you, we are still researching the type of holster
that we are looking for. We have been in touch with different reps who have

provided
us holsters to test and that process is still going on. We are specifically looking again
for one holster that will have the same motion. That’s where we run into problems, that
they’ll give you a duty holster. But when you go to a different h
olster for like the tactical
team, they have a different drawing motion to it. So, it’s what we’re trying to get away
from. That’s what causes accidental discharges. As far as our downtown business, I
can’t tell you right now, Mr. Vaught, exactly what s
he sells or represents. It’s certainly
something we would look at as we go forward.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: And that’s awesome. If we have an opportunity to
utilize her, I think we should.


CAPTAIN ORBIN: Yeah. Absolutely.


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT:
Cool.



Conclude a Public Hearing
.


MAYOR MEYERS: Other questions or comments from the Council? Seeing none, is
there anyone from the audience that would like to speak to this item? Seeing none, I’d
accept
--



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN:

Move to
--


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Make a motion to conclude the public hearing.


COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded to conclude the public


hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS:

Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no.

(Motion passes 8
-
0).




Authorize the Mayor to Sign the Memorandum of Understanding Between





the Board o
f County Commiss
ioners of Johnson County, Kansas and the



Cities of Olathe, Overland Park, and Shawnee, Kansas, Involving the



Application and Expenditure of t
he 2013 Jag Funds.

Page
43


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15053



COUNCILMEMBER KUHN: Move to Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Memorandum of
Understanding Between the Board of County Commissioners of Johnson County,
Kansas and the Cities of Olathe, Overland Park, Shawnee, Kansas, Involving the
Application and Expenditures
of the 2013 JAG Funds.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Second.

MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded on this item. Any further
discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no. Mo
tion passes. (Motion passes 8
-
0).


G
.

BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR


MAYOR MEYERS: We’ll now move to Item G, which is Business from the Floor. Is
there anyone from the audience that would like to bring business from the floor tonight?
Seeing none, we’ll move to Item H, Staff Items.


H.

STAFF ITEMS



1.

C
onsider a Resolution Declaring the City's Intent to Improve the Streets



and Authorizing the Issuance of General Obligation Bonds for t
he 2013



Street Program.



MAYOR MEYERS: Item Number 1, Consider a Resolution Declaring the City’s Intent to
Improve the Streets and Authorizing the Issuance of General Obligations Bonds for the
2013 Street Program. The city has completed design of and plans for the 2013 street
pr
ogram to improve, re
-
improve, reconstruct and repair city streets, including pavement,
patching, surface repairs, crack sealing work, chip seal treatments, mill and overlay
improvements, bridge repairs and other preventive maintenance for various streets,
including some sidewalk and curb and gutter repair work. The estimated total cost of
the project is estimated at $4,650,000 to be financed through the issuance of general
obligation bonds.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Move for approval.


COUNCILMEMBER NEIG
HBOR: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded on this item. Any further


discussion from the Council? Mr. Pflumm?


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Yeah. I just
--

I’ve voiced my opposition to the funding
mechanism, not to the spending of
$
4.65 million on streets and curbs.


MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Kemmling?


COUNCILMEMBER KEMMLING: I was going to just ask a clarification that that was
indeed what we were voting on, but I think he clarified it.

Page
44


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15052



MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Any other questions or

comments from the Council? Is
there anyone from the audience that would like to speak to this item? Seeing none, all
in favor signify by saying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS NEIGHBOR, SAWYER, KUHN, VAUGHT, SANDIFER, DISTLER:
Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no.


COUNCILMEMBERS PFLUMM, KEMMLING: No.


MAYOR MEYERS: Motion passes. (Motion passes 6
-
2)
.


Having passed Resolution No. 1707 was assigned.


I.

MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS



1.

Ratify Semi
-
Monthly Claim f
or
July 8, 2013 in the Amount o
f $1,997,916.26
.



MAYOR MEYERS: We’ll move to Miscellaneous Items, which is Item I. Item Number 1
is to Ratify Semi
-
Monthly Claim for July 8
th
, 2013, in the Amount of $1,997,916.26.


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Move for approval.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded on this item. Any further
discussion from the Council? Is there anyone from the audience that would like to
speak to this item? Seeing none, all in favor signify by s
aying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no. Motion passes. (Motion passes 8
-
0).


2.

Miscellaneous Council Items
.



MAYOR MEYERS: Item Number 2 is Miscellaneous
Council Items. Do we have any
items tonight? Mr. Neighbor?


COUNCILMEMBER NEIGHBOR: I would just like to say kudos to staff. Whoever was
involved in getting 67
th

Street repaired and getting the contracts and supervising it. I
was by there about noon t
oday. It looks like it was about ready to reopen and just
maybe the blacktop and some sidewalk work. But it was a very good job, taken care of
very quickly and we need that road open and I think they got it done very promptly.
Thank you. 65
th

Street.
Sorry.


MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Mr. Vaught?


COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHT: Yeah. I’m going to bring this up again, because every
Fourth of July, I think I’ve said it before is, you know, in fact, we got a letter, I’m sure all

Page
45


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15051



of us got it about, you know, a

woman in Western Shawnee that
--

concerned about the
enforcement of fireworks regulations. You know, this is impossible for us to enforce this
citywide. So, we end up
--

certain people get ticketed while other people, you know,
have a heyday with their
fireworks. I think we could probably make money off it. You
don’t see many shake shingle roofs anymore, so I think the fire issue is becoming very
limited. But I don’t know. I mean, I know it’s a safety issue, but there’s
some
towns and
cities all acro
ss this country that approve fireworks and so we ban them yet I can sit on
my back porch and, you know, it was
--

it sound
ed

like a war zone in my neighborhood.
And it’s impossible to enforce to any extent. And I think it’s
--

unfortunately is the
people

that do get ticketed for it are pretty
--

feel pretty resentful that they’re looking
around watching stuff blow up as they’re getting a ticket going I don’t understand how
this works. So, I don’t know. I just
--

we just
--

I think we need to have this d
iscussion
sometime this year about it. And
if
it really makes that much sense or if there’s a way to
generate some revenue off it. If people are going to fire them off anyway, then let’s
figure something out or just figure a way to allow it.


MAYOR MEYE
RS: Thank you. Mr. Kemmling.


COUNCILMEMBER KEMMLING: Yeah. I’d love to have that discussion going forward.
Thank you.


MAYOR MEYERS: Very good. Any other Miscellaneous Council Items?


J
.

ADJOURNMENT




1.

Adjourn


COUNCILMEMBER PFLUMM: Motion to adjourn.


COUNCILMEMBER SANDIFER: Second.


MAYOR MEYERS: A motion has been made and seconded to adjourn. All in favor
signify by saying aye.


COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.


MAYOR MEYERS: Oppose
d

no. (Motion passes 8
-
0). W
e are adjourned. Thank you.


(City Council Meeting Adjourned at 9:35 p.m.)






Page
46


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

July 8, 2013

Journal Page #
15050





CERTIFICATE


I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the electronic sound
recording of the proceedings in
the above
-
entitled matter.


/das

July 17
, 2013

Deborah A. Sweeney, Recording Secretary


APPROVED BY:


_______________________

Keith D. Campbell, City Clerk