City Council

MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF MISSION HILLS, KANSAS January 13, 2025 The City Council of the City of Mission Hills, Kansas held a meeting on January 13, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. PRESIDING: Mayor David Dickey PRESENT: Councilpersons Bill Bruning, Gregg Davidson, Barbara Nelson, Eden Thorne, Andy Weed ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Lee, City Administrator; Meghan Woolbright, Assistant to the City Administrator; Spencer Jones, Treasurer; Jill Clifton, City Planner; Jason Nickles, City Clerk; Anna Krstulic, City Attorney; Deputy Chief Major Eric McCullough, Prairie Village Police Department (PVPD); Captain Adam Taylor, Prairie Village Police Department (PVPD); Chief Chick; Fire; Judy Fang, Senior Financial Analyst; Aaron Thomas, Intern; VISITORS: Tim McQuaid, Mission Hills and Mike McQuaid, Fairway, KS; Tom Anderson, Church; TJ Homan; Stinson; Lauren Davis, Stinson; David Battey, Fairway, KS; Larry Washington, Extenet; Leslie Mark, Mission Hills, KS; Richard Weast, Mission Hills, KS CALL TO ORDER Mayor Dickey calls the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. and the pledge of allegiance was recited. GREETINGS AND INTRODUCTIONS Mayor Dickey greets visitors and notes that the meeting would be recorded for the purpose of meeting minutes. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETING – December 9, 2024 Councilperson Nelson moves to approve the minutes of the December 9, 2024 meeting. Councilperson Bruning seconds. Approved 5-0. PUBLIC SAFETY A. Police Report Captain McCullough greets the Council and expresses the department’s excitement in witnessing the swearing-in of Johnson County Sheriff Byron Roberson. He highlights the strong partnership between their department and the Sheriff’s Office. Captain McCullough begins his report by stating that December typically sees an uptick in activity around the holidays. Regarding the theft on 67th Street, Captain McCullough states a maroon truck stole a package, but when traffic cameras were reviewed, the lowered tailgate may have obstructed the license plate reader, and 1 the investigation remains ongoing. Regarding the next package theft in the report, Captain McCullough notes that there is a lead due to LPRs and cameras, and the investigation is ongoing. Captain McCullough emphasizes that traffic cameras continue to yield valuable information as they provided leads in an aggravated residential burglary on State Line Road, where suspects entered through an unlocked door to steal tools while the homeowners slept. Captain McCullough moves on to a case on High Drive involving an unlocked vehicle where with assistance from Missouri authorities, a suspect was arrested, and the team is now awaiting lab results to connect the suspect to the crimes. He notes that the suspect has already been arrested for other crimes and is currently in custody with the U.S. Marshals. Captain McCullough reports on Christmas Eve, Officer Poindexter noticed a suspicious vehicle and followed it at a distance. Captain McCullough commends Officer Poindexter for astute observations and coordination with other units. The officers deployed stop sticks, and after a brief pursuit, three suspects fled and with the help of the K-9 unit, the team was able to arrest all three suspects. Captain McCullough reports on a criminal damage case, stating that it appears someone was attempting to break into a car, but the alarm went off, and nothing was stolen. Captain McCullough notes that thefts of motor vehicles were notably high this month and discusses a case involving the 3800 block of Tomahawk Rd, clarifying that it was more of an LPR success story as a stolen car was tracked traveling through Mission Hills. He emphasizes that stolen cars continue to be an issue, particularly when vehicles are left unlocked or with the key fob nearby. Captain McCullough updates on several vehicle thefts, including one on December 7th where no leads have yet emerged and another on December17th, there was a theft from Drury Lane, and the team is working to track leads from video footage and witnesses. Another incident happened on December 17th on Wenonga Road and the car has not been found. Captain McCullough believes there is a chance these incidents are related. On December 29th there was another unlocked car theft, and Captain McCullough mentions that they are waiting for DNA results that may help identify the suspect. Regarding accidents, Captain McCullough shares that there were a couple of accidents this month, but no hit-and-runs. Referring to Captain McCullough’s report, Councilperson Weed asks why a suspect would cut wires under a car seat to which Captain McCullough suggests that the suspect may have been trying to disable a tracking system by tampering with wires under the back seat. Councilperson Davidson asks about the number of people caught and whether there is any way to determine if suspects were involved in previous robberies. Captain McCullough states that they will absolutely be comparing fingerprints and DNA of the suspects when they are charged with a felony acknowledging that there is certainly potential to connect them back to other cases, but this usually takes some time. Councilperson Bruning thanks Captain McCullough for their officer’s work on Christmas Eve. Captain McCullough notes that the monthly average calculation came out incorrect, dividing by one instead of dividing by twelve, although the annual percentage changes are correct. Captain McCullough provides a preview of the annual report, mentioning an uptick in assaults and batteries, clarifying that none of these incidents involved strangers and there is no outside violent crime. Captain McCullough previews the annual report stating that burglary of a residence is significantly down, which is positive but observes a slight increase in aggravated burglary, which he clarifies is when someone is in the home at the time of the incident. This is 2 considered an aggravated felony, even if the intruder does not enter the residence, adding that most cases involve this scenario. Captain McCullough mentions an uptick in thefts, mainly from stolen autos and the Department’s plan to continue raising awareness about locking cars including at the upcoming HOA meetings. Captain McCullough invites questions from the Council members. Councilperson Nelson inquiries about the procedure for stopping individuals related to drugs and alcohol. Captain McCullough explains that officers usually conduct tests to assess impairment when they suspect someone is under the influence of alcohol while operating a vehicle or speaking with them and notes that last year was particularly low in terms of incidents, so the comparison to the previous year may not be representative. Captain McCullough mentions that 27 DUIs and 60 drug arrests are more typical of the norm, as opposed to last year's lower numbers. Captain McCullough emphasizes the importance of safe driving, particularly at night, noting that officers routinely target impaired drivers during patrols and conduct further investigations if signs of impairment are observed, with drug arrests often occurring alongside DUI arrests or traffic stops when officers detect odors or find paraphernalia in vehicles. Councilperson Nelson asks whether the individuals being discussed are primarily younger people. Captain McCullough explains that drug-related incidents and DUIs can involve individuals of any age, citing arrests ranging from as young as 14 to as old as 91, noting that sometimes it is an honest mistake with individuals having a bit too much to drink, while other times it is a repeated offense involving a third, fourth, or fifth DUI. Captain McCullough explains that DUI penalties escalate over time, with the first two offenses being misdemeanors, but later offenses can become felonies, leading to harsher penalties. Captain McCullough updates on the LPR, stating they have been in contact with DTI, with new locations approved and awaiting availability to move forward. Captain McCullough emphasizes the importance of emergency preparedness stating the department trains regularly and has scalable plans for both manmade and natural disasters, coordinating with police, fire departments, paramedics, and cities within the county. Councilperson Bruning notes that light poles have become cluttered with equipment and suggest distributing LPRs further into the community instead of concentrating them in specific places, especially with the addition of new small cell towers. Captain McCullough states they have been working with the City to identify suitable spots and like most technology, equipment tends to get smaller over time. Captain Taylor emphasizes that keeping equipment in one location is cost-effective, as separate installations incur additional costs, adding, more locations would be preferred, but they need to explore if spreading equipment changes functionality. Councilperson Bruning notes the installations at the intersection of Belinder Avenue and 69th Street and opines that it is reaching saturation. Mayor Dickey notes that at some intersections, cameras in all four directions are needed. Councilperson Nelson adds that these structures become a distraction to drivers. Mayor Dickey thanks Captain McCullough for his report. B. Fire District Q4 Report Reflecting on 2024, Chief Chick reports a slight uptick in calls, though not cause for alarm as such changes are cyclical, with call volumes fluctuating, but overall, the District has seen a modest increase, handling just over 6,300 calls this year, up from approximately 4,800 calls ten years ago. Chief Chick observes that fire incidents remain steady noting that Chief Gibson 3 previously reported on the Mission Hills Country Club Fire and expressed gratitude for Chief Gibson’s representation in his absence. Chief Chick shares, while emergency medical service (EMS) calls show fluctuations, these variations occur across all areas of the District and despite this, response and turnout times remain satisfactory. Councilperson Andy Weed asks Chief Chick about the City’s and Northeast Johnson County’s preparedness for unexpected disasters given the current situations with the fires in Los Angeles. Chief Chick confirms that comprehensive plans are in place and emphasizes the importance of scalability in emergency response plans and recounts the Overland Park fire that involved 26 homes and required a 14-alarm response. These partnerships and existing plans enabled a swift and effective response to mitigate the situation. Chief Chick assures that emergency drills and tabletop exercises are conducted regularly to prepare for various scenarios, including tornadoes. Regarding wildfire risks, the Kansas Forestry Service provides annual reports on vegetation and spread risks, ensuring informed risk management. Chief Chick addresses concerns about water supply during emergencies, explaining that WaterOne oversees the maintenance and testing of hydrants and water flow rates and highlights scalable water management strategies, including the use of ponds and water shuttles to transport water when necessary. However, Chief Chick acknowledges that extreme scenarios can strain resources, making prevention critical. Chief Chick commends Mission Hills for its forward-thinking policies on tree management which contributes to reducing risk. Councilperson Nelson asks Chief Chick whether the increase in calls is due to a population increase. Chief Chick notes that there are increases in calls in the area partly due to population growth as the area is redeveloping, Additionally, the population is aging, which has led to a substantial rise in assist calls for people at home. Chief Chick shares that this is a significant issue, as people view their homes as an investment, and it becomes particularly challenging as they age and face mobility issues. Councilperson Nelson asks if training has changed to match these trends. Chief Chick confirms and states all EMS training related to medical calls is based the data gathered and shown un these reports. Chief Chick explains that they use this information to improve the handling of calls, and the medical director is involved in reviewing these calls, and there is a robust plan in place to address them. Chief Chick expresses confidence in the system but acknowledges that they continue to work daily to adapt, handling challenges they had not anticipated. Mayor Dickey notes the fire response time doubled to which Chief Chick states it is due to the nature of the calls; if a unit is on another call, it might delay response times. Chief Chick explains that when the first unit on the scene comes from another station, that is when response times can be affected. Since fires are rare, this becomes an issue. Chief Chick noted in the case of Mission Hills Country Club fire at the time of the alarm, Station 22 had both units on medical calls, and Station 23 was the first to respond to a fire. Mayor Dickey asks the Council if there are any remaining questions to which there are none and thanks Chief Chick. CONSENT AGENDA A. Claims Ordinance No. 1668 Councilperson Bruning moves to approve Claims Ordinance No. 1668. Councilperson Nelson seconds. Approved 5-0. B. 2025 Time & Material Contracts Councilperson Bruning moves to approve 2025 Time & Material Contracts. Councilperson Nelson seconds. Approved 5-0. 4  C. Resolution No. 2025 – A: Agreement with Johnson County for 2025 Belinder Avenue Stormwater Upgrades Councilperson Bruning moves to approve Resolution No. 2025 – A: Agreement with Johnson County for Reimbursement of 2024 Indian Lane Stormwater Improvements. Councilperson Nelson seconds. Approved 5-0. D. Resolution No. 2025 – B: Agreement with Johnson County for a Stormwater System 2025 Inspection Report Councilperson Bruning moves to approve Resolution No. 2025 – B: Agreement with Johnson County for a Stormwater System 2025 Inspection Report. Councilperson Nelson seconds. Approved 5-0. FINANCIAL REPORT A. December Financial Report Ms. Lee mentions that Ms. Fang prepared the December report and notable items in the revenue and expense report were identified. Ms. Lee offers to answer any questions about these items to which there are none. B. 2024 Preliminary Year-End Outlook Ms. Lee discusses the year-end outlook, mentioning that in previous financial reports, it appeared revenues would meet expenses, and the City would end the year even. Ms. Lee notes that about $750,000 would be set aside through encumbrances for items identified by the Council. This includes $400,000 for the Eisenhower Pond project, which did not reach the construction phase this year, and the group is working with the engineer on evaluations with recommendations expected later this year. Other items include the 63rd Street sidewalk mentioned in Ms. Woolbright’s crime prevention and safety update, potential safety improvements, and funds for park and fountains maintenance. Councilperson Weed notes that potential encumbrances do not mean they are merely reserving funds; rather, they are extremely cautious and planning to which Ms. Lee agrees. Councilperson Weed expresses surprise at the $400,000 figure for the Eisenhower project and seeks confirmation on whether they agreed to spend that amount. Ms. Lee clarifies that the $400,000 was set aside based on estimated costs from other projects and the initial estimate was closer to $300,000, but they accounted for additional potential expenses related to the project. Ms. Lee mentions that there might be other recommendations resulting from the engineering review and the committee's evaluation of all options, so additional funds were encumbered , specifically in case dredging is pursued. Councilperson Weed expresses that $400,000 is a significant amount of money and acknowledges that the issue needs to be addressed and that they managed through the previous year remarkably well. Councilperson Weed suggests that if they are going to proceed with this, it should be part of a master plan. Ms. Lee agreed and noted the Eisenhower Pond project includes a master plan for the watershed and the consultant is reviewing all the stormwater infrastructure that feeds into the pond and considering improvements like catch basins or filtering systems to prevent sediment buildup. Ms. Lee adds the intent of the encumbrance is not to assume a multimillion-dollar project but to cover the most essential projects. Councilperson Bruning reminds the Council that any land use 5 changes related to the pond will be subject to review and may revert the property back to the surrounding property owners. Ms. Lee shares good news that current Maintenance Worker, Mr. Reuscher, passed the building inspector tests and is now certified, and the City plans to go into over-hire at the end of the first quarter so the new person can assume the Maintenance Worker role and Mr. Reuscher will move into the Building Inspector role, and the Chief Building Inspector will retire in about a year. OLD BUSINESS A. Repeat Nuisance Properties Mayor Dickey addresses the issue of a repeat nuisance property on 68th Street, expressing disappointment that a stop work order had to be issued despite the resident's previous commitments to follow all the rules. Mayor Dickey notes that the resident has not adhered to the rules on multiple occasions over the past two-plus years and proposes giving staff more guidance on handling nuisance properties. He suggests that nuisance properties with an active building permit should be checked at least once a week and recommends properties without an active permit, like the one on Indian Lane, should be checked twice a month. Ms. Lee clarifies to the Council that the 68th Street nuisance property owner was issued a permit, but then a stop order was placed. She explained that the owner had an approved pool project by the Architecture Review Board but chose to split it into two parts: one permit to remove the circle driveway to meet impervious surface requirements for the pool and the second permit for the pool itself. However, the driveway removal permit was not purchased, and work began without it, although the pool permit was obtained. Councilperson Bruning addresses the question of process and refers to a similar issue they dealt with 12 years ago and believes they had only allowed two permits for one residence. Ms. Lee clarifies that they did not limit the number of permits, instead, they committed to permit durations based on the scope of the project and the extension fees required if the allotted time is exceeded. Ms. Lee notes that the extension fees are significant but confirms there is no limit on the number of permits at one time. Mayor Dickey explains that limiting the number of permits was determined not appropriate because unforeseen permits might be needed to fix issues that arise unexpectedly. Mayor Dickey notes that there is an ordinance in place where contractors performing work without a permit are penalized sequentially with the highest fine being $2,000 and the potential loss of their occupational license. Mayor Dickey discusses the approach towards contractors who perform work without a permit suggesting that while the first offense might result in a fine, subsequent offenses should carry harsher penalties. Mayor Dickey proposes considering these penalties at the address level, mentioning that some property owners have not fulfilled their commitments to be good citizens. Mayor Dickey suggests that if a property address has three projects where work is done without a permit within a rolling 12-month period, there should be significant fines. Mayor Dickey acknowledges that homeowners might unknowingly hire contractors who do not pull permits but emphasizes that repeat offenders should face consequences. Councilperson Nelson notes a similar issue addressed by the BZA, where someone was doing work without proper permits and raises the complexity of delineating between hiring someone and doing the work oneself. Ms. Krstulic states that the same permit requirements apply to self-contracting. Mayor Dickey 6 suggests having a comprehensive document, either an ordinance or guidelines, to inform staff on when to act and notes that most contractors who miss a permit requirement do so unintentionally. Mayor Dickey believes that having clear guidelines would help address issues with property owners who repeatedly violate rules and notes that contractors who repeatedly fail to obtain permits can lose their occupational license. Mr. McQuaid asks if the homeowner is notified when a contractor loses their license, to which Ms. Lee states yes. Councilperson Bruning mentions that their fines did not prevent the 68th Street home and questions whether the City is recovering all the City’s costs and if they should consider punitive fines. Ms. Lee mentions that for the violations issued in 2024, the resident has requested a trial, and those proceedings are scheduled for the end of this month. Councilperson Bruning inquires if they win the case, will they be able to recover their legal fees as well to which Ms. Lee responds affirmatively, stating that they will request legal fees because the individual has not paid all the fines. Mission Hills resident, Ms. Mark suggests that the City should improve how they communicate in their documents, especially online, to ensure clarity for residents and emphasizes the importance of making information accessible and guiding people to the right places to ask questions. Ms. Mark shares an example of a young man who was terrified of the permitting process and another individual who had worked in the City for years but was unfamiliar with the permit requirements. B. Crime Prevention & Safety Committee Update – 63rd Street Sidewalk Ms. Woolbright states that the report responds to the items that the City Council submitted to the Crime Prevention and Safety Committee (CPSC) for review. She noted the first item the CPSC reviewed the proposed sidewalk along 63rd Street, from Wenonga Road to Aberdeen Road. She noted after robust discussion the CPSC recommended that this proposed sidewalk would improve safety. The second item reviewed was the general safety of the 63rd Street, Indian Lane, and Wenonga Road intersection. In attendance were Captain McCullough and Sergeant Gray who presented a report on traffic study data at that intersection. The study concluded that no changes were needed for this intersection and calculated the actual speed at 85% less than the posted speed limit. Ms. Woolbright mentions that the last item reviewed was the streetlight proposal, brought about by a resident near the 65th Street undergrounding project's street lighting. The CPSC supported adding the streetlights identified by the previous task force and will explore other potential locations for City lighting. Councilperson Thorne adds that the police also recommended sidewalks for safety. Ms. Woolbright notes there was a robust conversation about previous sidewalk proposals, and shares Captain McCullough’s strong support for the proposal, emphasizing the police department’s goal to encourage as many people off the street as possible. Councilperson Weed mentions that one of the initiatives discussed at the Council meeting was the deployment of wildlife cameras to monitor the number of people walking. Ms. Lee shares with Council that they engaged a traffic engineer to monitor pedestrian activity during a relatively nice weekend in November recalling that in just two days, they counted around a dozen people one day and nine or ten the next day, totaling about twenty people walking along 63rd Street in either direction. Councilperson Nelson expresses that the data reinforced their intentions, praising the CPSC and their own efforts. Ms. Lee mentions that a resident at the corner of Aberdeen Road and 63rd Street wanted a commitment from the City regarding snow and ice control due to the north-facing concern and liability. Ms. Lee observes 7 that everyone seemed to be okay with the City handling that responsibility. Councilperson Bruning mentions an existing structure by the driveway at an angle on 63rd Street, which he states could cause a line-of-sight issue. Ms. Lee states that during the preliminary assessment, the engineer and the team worked on the site together and the engineer did not express concern about the existing structure, adding that locates will be done to address any visibility concerns. Ms. Lee acknowledges that the expense of installing the sidewalk has already been approved and mentions the need to schedule the installation and communicate back to the homeowners. NEW BUSINESS A. 2024 List of City Accomplishments Mayor Dickey publicly thanks the staff, Council, boards, and all the volunteers for their contributions in helping to achieve the City’s goals. B. Ordinance No. 1669: Amending Height Standards for Communication Facilities Mayor Dickey addresses the requirements around building heights, mentioning that the City has specific requirements for communications facilities and suggests that they should have height requirements similarly to homes which are allowed to be 35 feet high. Mayor Dickey questions the language of the ordinance as to why there is a 10% or 10-foot allowance even though this requirement does not exist for homes and asks for clarification on this point. Ms. Krstulic explains that the definition of substantial change requires approval for significant changes to existing facilities, and the same standard is applied here noting that some utility poles currently at issue are taller than 35 feet. Ms. Krstulic recalls that one utility pole is around 38 feet in height. Mayor Dickey states that, similar to homeowners, if someone can demonstrate a very clear need, they can go to the BZA for a variance and adds that he believes the utility pole in question likely pertains to the one at the low water crossing at Belinder Avenue and State Park Road. Mayor Dickey explains that the taller pole is in a flood zone, requiring substantial footings. Mayor Dickey supports the idea of allowing structures to be 35 feet high and believes the BZA should work with both infrastructure providers and homeowners to evaluate variances. He argues that allowing infrastructure to exceed the height of houses, which are capped at 35 feet, does not make sense and suggests a Citywide standard. Mayor Dickey highlights the importance of clarity and consistency in these regulations. Councilperson Thorne asks if this would apply to the current small cell pending application to which Ms. Krstulic states it would not apply. Councilperson Bruning asks if this would apply to the cell tower in the church to which Ms. Krstulic states it would not apply, only to future applications, and the cell tower in the church is in preexisting conditions. Ms. Krstulic states that if everyone is amenable to the change suggested by the Mayor, which involves removing the last sentence of the redlining, they could still proceed with the ordinance tonight. Councilperson Weed asks who authored the amendment to which Ms. Krstulic states it was authored by her. Ms. Krstulic mentions that the current regulations are based on Overland Park regulations from 2016 noting that they are considering other changes that will be brought to the Council for consideration. Mayor Dickey explains that they often use their neighbors as guides, and vice versa. Councilperson Nelson moves to approve Ordinance No. 1669: Amending Height Standards for Communication Facilities with changes discussed. Councilperson Bruning seconds. Approved 5-0. 8  C. Resolution No. 2025 – C: Region L Hazard Mitigation Plan Ms. Lee, referring to Councilperson Weed’s questions to the public safety officials, explains that the City participates in the County’s planning process for a regional hazard mitigation plan. She adds the plan has been recently adopted by the State and notes that to be eligible for future hazard mitigation programs or funding, the City must officially adopt the plan. Ms. Lee adds, the plan is several hundred pages long, lists potential hazards such as floods and wildfires for each participating jurisdiction and outlines strategies to mitigate them. This plan serves as a repository for the concerted efforts and planning mentioned by the Police and Fire Chiefs. Ms. Lee emphasizes that adopting the plan will make the City eligible for future funding and programs. Mayor Dickey notes a previous plan was adopted 5 years ago. Councilperson Weed inquires whether there are any compliance issues that differ from the current plan, and if there would be any additional costs associated with that compliance to which Ms. Lee states no. Councilperson Nelson moves to approve Resolution No. 2025 – C: Region L Hazard Mitigation Plan. Councilperson Thorne seconds. Approved 5-0. D. Resolution No. 2025 – D: Master License Agreement with Extenet Ms. Krstulic explains that the Council packet includes a cover sheet addressing the main points and rationale behind the agreement noting that although the City cannot require franchise agreements for wireless service providers due to State law changes, they can require a license agreement that includes similar terms to a small cell deployment agreement. She noted the agreement can address requirements such as obtaining right of way permits, handling abandoned facilities, insurance, and indemnification. Ms. Krstulic emphasizes that this agreement does not grant the right to proceed with installation since separate supplements are required for permits. She notes, for example an application through the Architecture Review Board is required and if approved, a supplement would be required for each site, including site plans and specific project details. Ms. Krstulic acknowledges that it is a lengthy agreement and is open to any questions to which Councilperson Bruning asks that any damage to City or private property would be the responsibility of those causing it, and they would be liable for restoring it to which Ms. Krstulic states yes. Ms. Krstulic states that this agreement pertains to the right of way and reiterates that Extenet Solutions would need to get approval for any specific actions. Councilperson Bruning asks if they are allowed to install infrastructure, how will the City be informed about the infrastructure. Ms. Krstulic clarifies that the City is informed during the ARB application process. She noted that some of the infrastructure requirements are set by the FCC. Councilperson Bruning raises a concern about what happens if the company goes out of business, to which Ms. Krstulic explains that occurs Extenet would be required to remove their installations and provide notice to the City. Ms. Krstulic mentions if the company does not comply with the period of time allowed for abandonment, the Master Licensing Agreement (MLA), would provide the City with self-help. Councilperson Bruning states that they have self- help rights with no reimbursement for it and asks if the City is named insured under the company's coverage. Ms. Krstulic explains that, as with any other franchisee, they require indemnification and with the City names as an insured party with a policy of up to $500,000 so as to not inadvertently waive the Kansas Tort Claims Act on liability, which is set at $500,000. Ms. Krstulic mentions that if the City had coverage in excess of that from an outside provider, it would be a different scenario. Councilperson Bruning notes from the agreement language references the City's aesthetic guidelines for City facilities and asks what specifically constitutes aesthetics. Ms. Krstulic explains that the MLA requires stealth technology, meaning that the equipment needs to blend in as much as possible with its surroundings. Councilperson Nelson 9 asks who decides where to locate these facilities to which Ms. Krstulic explains that the applicant identifies safe locations for the equipment and brings them to the City for discussion noting that in the current planning application, the applicant has been open to discussing alternative locations when the City identified potential issues. Councilperson Nelson asks what the timeline for this project is to which Ms. Krstulic mentions that they have a representative available to answer questions and noted the ARB application has been continued until the end of January. Ms. Krstulic highlights that having the MLA in place first would authorize the issuance of site permits. Ms. Krstulic explains that the responsibility for installations falls on the company, whether on Extenet poles or City poles, and mentions that some installations are on utility poles. Ms. Krstulic adds that there are attachment fees for attaching to City poles. Ms. Lee explains that the company is proposing seven locations, with two on Evergy poles and the other five on streetlight poles that Extenet would replace. Councilperson Weed asks openly, if the City is satisfied with the discussion at the ARB to which Ms. Lee states yes and acknowledges the concern about approving the agreement prior to the ARB approval, explaining that the agreement needs to be in place for the seven proposed locations. She clarified that the agreement does not authorize any specific locations but establishes the process, including the ARB and staff reviews to approve individual locations. Councilperson Bruning inquires whether there will be other similar services in the City, and if the current company has an advantage. Councilperson Bruning also asks whether new companies will go through the same process and if they can displace existing ones and asks how the companies will interface and whether the City will have to manage conflicts. Ms. Lee states that State law requires all companies to be treated the same, regardless of timing. Ms. Lee adds that any new provider would still need to obtain an agreement like the current one. For instance, if a different provider came in and wanted nine locations, they would follow the same process. Ms. Lee explains that the current applicant, Extenet, can co-locate with another company at the approved locations, so companies may collaborate on these sites. Ms. Lee explains that any new provider would still have to go through the approval process adding that the current applicant has invested in replacing poles and calculating where the small cells need to be. Councilperson Bruning asks if Company B would sublet from Company A when they come in. Ms. Krstulic clarifies that the City owns the poles, so Company B would need a similar agreement to install anything in the right of way. Ms. Krstulic mentions that for City-owned poles, there are requirements in the communications facilities for structural review and radio frequency capacity. Ms. Krstulic confirms that there are physical constraints on the number of facilities per pole as well. Ms. Lee mentions that the current provider would likely have a maximum of two installations at one location but there is no limit for facilities in the City. Mayor Dickey asks whether the City will own the new pole to Ms. Krstulic confirms that the City will still own the pole, but the company will be responsible for maintaining their equipment. Mayor Dickey questions whether the City can buy all the poles and asks what level of approval authority the City has and expresses concern about ensuring that the poles installed are of good quality. Ms. Krstulic explains that, like other applicants, they must submit all necessary specifications to the ARB, including detailed specification sheets and any alternative designs, especially those that look more historic. Mayor Dickey reflects on a past unfavorable agreement with a wired infrastructure provider, noting that they placed their wires in various places instead of the suggested locations and questions whether the current agreement must last ten years. Ms. Krstulic confirms that State law requires a minimum duration of ten years for the agreement. Councilperson Thorne notes that after ten years, there are two additional and consecutive five-year agreements totaling twenty years. Ms. Krstulic confirms that this is 10 consistent with other franchise agreements. Mayor Dickey asks whether it is possible to include any language that will allow for termination of the agreement if the provider fails to perform adequately. Ms. Krstulic explains that there are default provisions in the license agreement where the company would be given notice of default and have a specific amount of time, typically 60 days, to correct the issue, unless more time is necessary for the specific problem and if the issue is not corrected within that time, the City has the right to pursue self-help. Mayor Dickey expresses concern about a scenario where a provider could continually make life difficult by fixing issues within the 59-day period, repeatedly and worries about the implications and the effectiveness of such provisions, considering it a significant potential problem. Councilperson Bruning expresses concern about the unknown physical and staff costs associated with the installations and questions whether the City can receive compensation if the situation turns sour. He asks if the City’s fee schedules cover the anticipated expenses for the City and staff, and whether they can make changes if needed. Ms. Krstulic mentions that they have discussed potential changes to the fee schedule but have not addressed them yet. Ms. Lee adds that some of the fees are set by federal regulations by case law. Larry Washington introduces himself as the senior counsel for regulatory affairs for Extenet and confirms that if the City can substantiate the increased cost of maintaining the facility, it requires substantial evidence, related exclusively to the maintenance of the wireless facility in the right of way. Mr. Washington explains that the FCC has set a safe harbor rate, which has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Councilperson Bruning questions how the U.S. Supreme Court's established fees relate to their supplemental application fees. Ms. Krstulic mentions that they have already accommodated the decision made in the fee resolution for small cells, which was passed in May 2023. Ms. Lee confirms that their fees are reflective of what the federal guidelines consider reasonable. Councilperson Bruning asks if the fees reflect two years’ worth of inflation and other experiences and suggests that they should also review the fees, to which Ms. Krstulic states she will investigate this. Councilperson Bruning expresses concern that they have essentially lost control over the aesthetic aspects and feels that they have no rights in this regard. Ms. Krstulic reassures the Council that they do have control, which is why they require ARB approval, adding that the ARB asked for alternatives and that the applicant has been amenable to these requests. Mayor Dickey mentions that during their legislative session, he raised this issue with several legislators and notes that it is not just a partisan issue; home rule has been taken away. Councilperson Bruning asks what basis they would have for not approving the proposal today, expressing concerns about the maintenance costs for the City and its staff, noting that this is a new challenge they will need to address tonight. Mayor Dickey acknowledges that residents are very concerned about potential health-related risks, which is a valid point of debate and discussion. Ms. Krstulic states that State law prohibits addressing the issue based on radio frequency (RF) emissions. Mayor Dickey raises a concern about an experience with an entity ten years ago that promised to be responsive but ended up causing significant issues, such as orange fencing in front yards and wires crossing driveways and expresses reluctance to repeat the same mistakes and questions the current proposal’s legitimacy based on past experiences. Mayor Dickey emphasizes that while he hopes Extent will be a great partner, past experiences necessitate caution. Councilperson Nelson asks what the original intent of this technology is to which Ms. Krstulic explains that the lobbyists for the telecom industry have been lobbying State legislatures to pass regulations aimed at facilitating and expediting the deployment of 5G infrastructure. Councilperson Bruning asks what would be gained by delaying the decision and whether any further discussion or changes are expected. Ms. Krstulic states that she has reviewed the agreement and feels it is very 11 protective of the City, noting that there are many provisions allowing for notice of any issues post-operation and expresses her comfort with that. However, Ms. Krstulic acknowledges that if there is a desire to delay the decision for a month to review it more and ask additional questions, that option is available. Mayor Dickey questions whether the agreement enhances their ability to defend the City and seeks confirmation that the advisor is comfortable with the agreement and draws a parallel to his day job, where legal advisors identify criminal actions and assess business risks associated with contract terminology. Mayor Dickey inquires if there are provisions not included in the agreement that could better protect residents and anticipate the rapidly changing environment emphasizing the importance of reflecting potential changes within six months rather than waiting ten years. Mayor Dickey asks Ms. Krstulic if there are provisions not included in the agreement that could better protect residents. Ms. Krstulic emphasizes that if Extent is complying with requirements and that specific sites are approved, State law would prohibit the City from stopping their actions. Mayor Dickey states that the City needs to work with Senator Ethan Corson and Representative Rui Xu, our local representatives in Topeka, and expresses interest in delaying the decision for a month to allow for further investigation by the team to identify any terms not included in the agreement. Mr. McQuaid inquires if other cities facing similar situations have implemented more advantageous terms for their communities. Ms. Krstulic states that she reviewed sample agreements from other cities and considered multiple forms before selecting this one and feels confident that it is comprehensive and covers a wide range of situations. Mayor Dickey clarifies that the question is not criticism of the work but rather an inquiry about whether any provisions from other communities might be included and questions if there are any provisions that should be added, even if they complicate the process. Councilperson Bruning points to Section 17 in the agreement, highlighting the penalty for unauthorized access. Mayor Dickey discusses Section 17, stating that while the current party may not be the concern, future parties could be and questions why any unauthorized access would be permitted, even if a fee is paid to have it removed. Ms. Krstulic mentions that State law caps fees at three times the annual right of way access and attachment fee per occurrence and notes that there are multiple instances in the agreement addressing the requirement for a properly executed supplement. Ms. Krstulic emphasizes that the default provisions review provides various ways to enforce this, not just limited to Section 17. Mayor Dickey comments on the complexity of the agreement and how much residents care about it suggesting the City take another month for everyone to read through the agreement and for the team to review other documents to identify any provisions that might make sense to include. Mayor Dickey emphasizes the importance of insulating themselves as best as possible while complying with state and federal laws. Councilperson Bruning highlights that other municipalities have had several years of experience with similar situations and suggests learning from their experiences. Mayor Dickey acknowledges that there are few municipalities like theirs, with no commercial land use, and the City’s attention to aesthetics. Councilperson Burning raises concerns about the operational aspects and potential issues such as lightning strikes. Mayor Dickey proposes tabling the decision to February for additional work on the agreement. Councilperson Bruning urges everyone to read the document thoroughly and to consider past experiences with infrastructure implementation. Councilperson Nelson moves to table Resolution No. 2025 – D: Master License Agreement with Extenet. Councilperson Bruning seconds. Approved 5-0. A. Non-Binding Letter of Intent: Purchase of 6400 State Line Road Ms. Krstulic reports on the terms and the non-binding Letter of Intent is in the Council packet for the potential purchase of a church property immediately next door to City Hall. Ms. Krstulic 12 notes that Mr. Homan is assisting, and Councilperson Davidson has been involved in discussions along with Ms. Krstulic and City Administrator Ms. Lee. Ms. Krstulic expresses readiness to answer any questions and confirms that the Church Council has approved this form of the Letter of Intent (LOI). Mayor Dickey states that he would entertain a motion and notes the City Council has been discussing this matter under proper authority in executive session for some time and the expediency is not due to a lack of discussion but rather a function of the case. Tom Anderson, a long-time member of the church, asks what the City plans to do with the church property to which Mayor Dickey clarifies that they have only had very brief conversations and are planning to undergo an extensive assessment and discussion with the residents of the City to understand potential opportunities. Mayor Dickey emphasizes that there is currently no plan, but like how Prairie Village has redeveloped churches and the Meadowbrook development, adding there is currently a limited opportunity for something new, such as a community center or other public space. Mayor Dickey mentions that having the flexibility to consider new options is valuable, especially given the landlocked nature of the area, adding that opportunities like this, particularly right next door to City Hall, are rare. Councilperson Bruning asks a question on insurance regarding coverage during the 18-month period the Church would lease the facilities from the City. Mr. Homan states that it is a triple-net lease so everything will be covered by the Church’s insurance, and there will not be any additional costs. Mr. Homan confirms that the lease should be negotiated in the Purchase Sale Agreement (PSA) and will cover the full term, and adds that early termination is not an option, with the Church's intention to ensure they operate through June 2026. Mr. Homan explains that the cell tower leases and any church actions violating those agreements will not affect them, as they are indemnified and the leases will be assigned to the City, making the City the landlord under those terms but the proceeds from the leases will remain with the Church, helping ensure the City’s bond financing. Councilperson Weed asks if there is anything about the cell towers that would ameliorate the current situation by using small cell towers to which Ms. Lee responds that this came up at the ARB meeting and the answer was no. Mission Hills resident Mr. T. McQuaid asks is the public will be able to vote on the purchase of the Church property to which Mayor Dickey states no, mentioning that they are planning to do some debt financing with a bond issuance to finance the purchase. Mr. McQuaid asks if the congregation has declined to which Mr. Anderson states that the congregation has diminished, and it is hard to see the Church he was baptized ending. Mayor Dickey reiterates that the City does not have a plan but feels that acquiring a piece of property of this size next to City Hall is the right thing to do and ultimately, they will come up with a plan through public input and process. Ms. Krstulic clarifies that entering the LOI does not obligate any party, instead it triggers a process of entering into the purchase agreement, which will be brought back for further discussion. Councilperson Weed mentions that there is a preschool center in the building and asks if the City is not obligated to continue offering space for its continuation. Mr. Anderson explains that the preschool center is part of the Church's mission and is looking for another location. Mr. Homan outlines the timeline, expressing hope of having a draft ready by the end of the week and aims to have everything finalized and presented to the Church Council within the next week. Councilperson Bruning suggests that if financing is involved, it might warrant a special meeting to expedite the process. Ms. Lee mentions that they talked with the financial advisor about the timeline issue and the Church needs to adhere to a 30- day notice period for calling an all-congregation meeting to review the PSA. Ms. Lee notes this timeline may not align with the February meeting, as it is less than 30 days away and notes the possibility of needing a special meeting sooner than the March meeting. Councilperson Nelson notes the timing is advantageous because they are wrapping up former bonds and the City has a 13 triple-A bond rating. Ms. Lee reassures that there are no concerns about the City’s bond rating and not including this purchase, the City will be debt free in 2026. Councilperson Nelson moves to approve the Non-Binding Letter of Intent: Purchase of 6400 State Line Road. Councilperson Weed Seconds. Approved 5-0. REPORTS OF CITY STAFF A. City Clerk Mr. Nickles shares that there is an updated Construction Report in the Council Packet and shares the positive resident feedback about road conditions after the recent snowstorm. Councilperson Weed expresses the desire for formal recognition, noting that the City has experienced investment of $56 million dollars in new construction and achieved an $18 million or nearly 50% higher investment than the next highest annual number. Councilperson Weed acknowledges the substantial effort required from City staff, including permitting, supervision, and other related tasks. Councilperson Weed suggests that this number should be shared at the upcoming HOA meeting to which Ms. Woolbright shares that it will be in the presentation. Councilperson Nelson asks Ms. Lee what the total City expenses are for recent snow removal to which Ms. Lee states she would estimate at around $80,000. B. City Administrator Ms. Lee mentions that after meeting with the Evergy in mid-December, the City received valuable information and plans to include an article in the next newsletter, highlighting that over the next three years, all circuits in the City will have been pruned. Additionally, the article will encourage residents to allow Evergy to maintain their standard of ten feet tree clearance from the lines. Councilperson Bruning shares his interest in easement clearing began during the last outage when he spoke with residents on 65th Street who noted the out-of-town crews remarked on the overgrown state of backyards and rights-of-way, identifying it as an outage problem. Councilperson Bruning mentions that it took three days to resolve the situation on 65th Street and suggests that they may need to take a firm stance, emphasizing the need to communicate to residents that maintaining their easements is crucial to keeping the power on. Councilperson Thorne provides feedback that the map could be improved. Ms. Lee shared this sentiment and provided feedback to Evergy. Councilperson Bruning shares that he sent a letter to Evergy regarding outages but acknowledges that no power was lost during the recent heavy snowstorm. Ms. Lee adds that City will be taking down the 75th anniversary banners. Mayor Dickey congratulated Ms. Lee and Ms. Clifton on their recent 20-year anniversary working for the City. Ms. Lee shares that Ms. Woolbright has been promoted to Assistant City Administrator. Ms. Lee and the Council agreed on Wednesday, May 7th for the annual budgeting meeting. C. Assistant to City Administrator Ms. Woolbright informs the Council of the Eisenhower Pond ad hoc Committee progress which was discussed previously tonight at Council. Ms. Woolbright shares that insurance renewals will be in the packet next month and their broker is expecting an increase. 14  D. City Planner Ms. Lee shares, on Ms. Cliftons’ behalf, a plug to recruit individuals to join the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee. E. City Arborist Ms. Lee notes, on behalf of Mr. Carmack, that his quarterly report has been included in the packet for Council’s review. MAYORS REPORT Mayor Dickey discusses a suggested policy for fans included in the silver packet, noting that it is not on the agenda for tonight's meeting as it was not previously distributed. He notes the Council has not had a chance to read it for discussion, acknowledging that this topic has been discussed extensively in the past. Mayor Dickey mentions that Councilperson Nelson met with a Fairway resident on this topic and asks the Council to review the proposed policy and suggests adding it to the February agenda for further discussion. Mayor Dickey notes that the policy may require additional committees to review it as a couple of committees have already approved some fan plans with specific criteria. Councilperson Davidson inquires whether there are any schematics or diagrams used for this project that show the locations of A, B, and C, along with the different footage. After reviewing the proposed policy, he found it detailed and thoughtful, but schematics could provide better clarity. Ms. Lee states that they can create a diagram for the proposed policy. Mayor Dickey mentions that he will be calling Councilmembers over the next two weeks to confirm what was discussed last year as they shift liaisons, ensuring they still want to proceed with the previously agreed plans and avoiding any confusion. Mayor Dickey notes that they will soon complete the City Administrator’s review. COUNCIL LIASION REPORTS Councilperson Davidson shares that the Planning Commission did not meet as they did not meet quorum. Mayor Dickey adds that he will be appointing someone to the Commission very soon. Councilperson Bruning asks Mayor Dickey what topics will be addressed in the upcoming meeting as he prefers not to duplicate any of the information that will be covered. Mayor Dickey states he can send over his draft presentation. Councilperson Weed states that there was no action taken and notes he needs to get with Ms. Lee to plan for community engagement Councilperson Nelson notes that the BZA did meet but the appealing party did not attend so they will meet again later this month. Councilperson Thorne mentions that the Architecture Review Board met on December 17th and notes the new house proposal at 6419 Sagamore Road. The builder transitioned the project from a white structure to a red brick one, which seemed more appealing to the ARB. She added the ARB requested the builder to add two windows on the north elevation and adjust the timbers to 15 six inches to match authentic Tudors. Councilperson Thorne mentions that the next ARB meeting is tomorrow and that the builder has complied with all the requests. Councilperson Thorne hopes that the neighborhood will respond positively. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:51 p.m. /s/ Jason Nickles 16