here. >> Julie Boyd, planning and zoning
administrator. >> Chad Russell, fire chief.
» Matt Kaine, director of finance. >> JT Klaus, city attorney.
» Dana Instrom, city clerk. >> Les Mangus, director of community
development. >> Jolene Graham, assistant city
administrator. Jennifer McCauslin, city administrator.
» All right. This time, Randy with Epic Church is going to lead us in
invocation. Please pray with me. Heavenly Father, we
thank you so much for your goodness and grace that we can turn to you anytime,
anywhere, and you hear us. And we pray for this meeting that you would grant a
spirit of camaraderie and goodwill. That you would bless each discussion that
you'd grant wisdom and guidance in those discussions and especially to those who
have to make decisions. We also pray that you'd be with our u
firefighters and police and emergency personnel and so many others who serve
the community out in the community that you'd keep them safe and get them give
them wisdom and guidance as they answer the calls and uh minister to people in
their own way. We thank you father we pray in Jesus name. Amen.
» Amen. >> Amen. If you would join us in the pledge
of allegiance
to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for
all.
» [clears throat] [snorts]
» All right, at this time I open up the floor for
public forum. If you'd like to address the council, feel free to do so. Uh,
keep it at three minutes.
Nobody.
Take your time. [snorts]
George Theo Harris, 519 Woodstone Place. Uh, I put on the paper that you guys
used to have my birth date up there, 1957. You took it down. Are you going to
put it back up there? But uh but anyhow um so I went and talked the other day
with the the the people that are going to be having the drug and alcohol uh
rehab place. Uh it's probably not the right name for it, but and I talked with
them for probably an hour and a half or so. Their noses did not grow at all. Did
not grow at all. So I I'm pretty sure they were telling me straight up the
truth. So I I appreciated that [snorts] we live around three football fields
from where they are from their door coming out with three football fields.
So 900 ft 300 yards. Um and if you go out to the street and down around it's
three and a three three football fields in a little bit. So my wife was
adamantly opposed to the idea. Um because I'm from Witchah and she kind of
likes it out here because there's nice nice out here compared to what I got
going on there. But I will say that um I I we we were there. We went and looked
at all over and quite honestly they have to be somewhere because if you if you
just Google um how many people in Andover have potentially have an alcohol
or drug diagnosed or undiagnosed problem it's around 20%. So with that being said
um just look around you do 20% is one in five. You can pretty much just go one,
two, three. Okay, but maybe not in this room. Maybe they're all somewhere else.
But they they need to be somewhere. The the people have to be somewhere. So
where? It's already established and and I think they've got a good plan. So we
can all be against it. My wife was, but now she's warming to it because they
need to be somewhere because it is on the rise. Alcohol and drug. And if
people want help, they're looking to help them. So, uh, that's all I have to
say about that. So, thank you. >> Thank you, sir.
» Thank you.
» Steve Church, 738 Westchester Place. Like to thank all the moms and dads that
are here tonight looking out for their kids. And also to all the moms. They put
these uh signs together. There's a few moms in the back who prepared this in
their own time. I'm going to say the same thing that I
did when I addressed the planning committee last Tuesday. I took a tour of
the facility Jason hosted. It is a pristine facility. It's very, very
nicely done. In fact, I felt like wanting to stay there myself. It's
beautiful. I'm also vice president of the board of
directors for the Union Rescue Mission in North Witchah.
And so there are a lot of similarities with the things that Jason is going to
be doing at that facility to what we do uh for the homeless. We're uh providing
a a way for them to transform, get back into society and live normal everyday
lives like we do. They come into us addicted.
The uh the drugs, the medication that are they have to be held in a in a way
that meets cancer statutes, but facilities do exactly the same. So,
I'm not concerned about that. I'm concerned a little bit about the
security. It didn't seem to match the level of security what we have at the
mission. We talked a little bit about about that entry doors, breakins, etc.
It it's not up to the same level of security that we have.
Even though the medication and the drugs are going to be held securely,
we know from admission it becomes a magnet. We have a homeless
uh little community tent city. Uh it's in a creek bed a little bit to the north
of the uh of the mission. We've had attempted breakins there. They're coming
in looking for drugs. It is a magnet. They don't understand that the drugs
medications are securely locked away and they can't get at them. It will become a
magnet. That's just a fact of every type of facility for this. So those are my
reservations about the uh the center in its location. Thank you.
Uh my name is Pastor Ben Griffith. I am the recovery pastor at Hope Community
Church here in Andover. I live at 2407 North Silverdale Street in Cornerstone.
Um I'm also a city chaplain. Volunteer my time to support our officers, our
firefighters, our EMS, and our city. Um, I've learned a lot over the couple
weeks. I do not live back door to this facility. Um, but I also think that
there might not be a lot that can change other than the perspective that we have
to love others and to care for the people who are in need. Um, I was
sitting with a man in tears who is an alcoholic. Didn't know what to do. Um,
this was about four days ago and trying to present him with options because he
wanted help. Um, I'm still new to this as a recovery pastor, but there are not
a lot of options and when we did call some options, they were full. I do
understand there are safety concerns. There are um definitely things to be
aware of and problems that will come with it. But I think as a city, our
responsibility, one of the greatest things that we can do is come alongside
those who need help and to support them. And whatever the results are, um, I
encourage you to ask yourself that question. How do you do that? What is
your role in that? Because if you come against this care center and make things
more challenging, they're going to have a harder time doing their job to keep
the people safe that you're trying to keep safe. Um we as a church, Hope
Community Church, are going to do our best to come alongside um to partner in
whatever way we can to support um this recovery center. Um we have AA meetings,
recovery meetings, um sexist, sex anonymous meetings, we have family of
addict meetings. Um and so if you need help, feel free to call Hope Community
Church. Um if you need some support in any of those areas, but it you will
understand it affects a lot of people and Andover as well. We lost a student a
couple years ago to an overdose of drugs in our community. And so it really does
affect us. Um but I also understand the hurt and the fear that comes with it.
And so ask yourself, what what do we do from here after this happens? How do you
support our officers? How do you support our EMS? How do you support our fire?
How do you support this um recovery treatment center um to make it a safer
place? It's my encouragement for us all and I'm going to ask myself the same
question. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, sir.
» Thank you.
» Hello, my name is Kelly Oxner. My address is 502 East Crescent Lakes
Drive, Andover. And first of all, I want to say I'm 100%
for a recovery program. I just feel that the location
probably could not be in a worse place. And my reasons for saying that is we
have all the schools across the street. We have three clinics
nearly within a stones throw. And we have Walgreens down the street.
All of that makes this very problematic. Um,
I know from raising two children in the Andover public schools, one at Sunflower
and both went to um, high school there in middle school that you see kids every
day, my kids included, walking to and from the schools. They go down to Dairy
Queen. they go down to McDonald's. This is something that my kids enjoyed and
they should enjoy and it's kind of their first taste of independence.
Um, if we have people coming and going and from my understanding is that there
is no promises that the door is going to be secured and locked.
I would say my girls would have been extremely impressionable and gullible as
to what can go on. We know these people are desperate.
I have heard I don't know if this is true. It could include sex offenders.
Um I think you can understand why I feel
strongly opposed to this location. Um
it's a very difficult issue. I can appreciate that.
However, we have many precious lives here to consider
and um for that reason I'm opposed to this location. Thank you.
» Thank you. [applause]
So, so sir, we heard you the other night, so we understand where you're at.
We're not going to relitigate all this through, well, it's been through here.
We sat for hours to listen to y'all the other night. We understand your
concerns. We listen to planning, zoning. I listen to the whole thing. So, unless
you have new information. >> All right. But, but we're not going to
listen to everybody say the same thing over and over and over.
» I understand. I do. Mayor Price, members of the council, Ben
Elliot, 609 Havenwood Court. Let's cut to the chase. 30 years in Andover. My
back fence is 200 feet from 224 East Central. I've stood here twice. I will
be brief because tonight isn't about how I feel. It's about what's in your record
and what isn't. This is a quasi judicial decision, not a vote on whether recovery
matters. It does, and I've never argued it
otherwise. It's a narrower question and a harder one. Has the applicant proven
its case or only asserted it? Under Kansas law, the burden is theirs,
not the neighbors, not your staffs, theirs. And measured against that
burden, this record has a hole in it. They've told you similar facilities
don't hurt property values, the communities come around, that patients
are supervised. Those are statements. Not one is backed by study tied to this
operator, this market, this parcel. Your own staff report says the property value
claims on both sides were unsourced. A recommendation is not evidence and
assurance is not proof. Look at what was never placed in your record. No traffic
study, nothing on shift changes, deliveries, admissions, discharges, or
ambulance runs. No operational study, no admission criteria, no staffing ratios,
no discharge protocol, no public safety analysis, no call data from comparable
facilities, no alopment history on the golden factors you're bound to weigh.
The analysis that should have come from the applicant was instead pulled
together from your commissioner's own questions. That's not the applicant
needing its burden. That's the record straining to carry them. And here's what
makes the gap matter. A special use permit runs with the land, not the
operator. And every assurance you've heard came in a letter to our HOA and in
testimony from the podium. None of it is enforceable. None of it binding on
whoever owns this building in 10 or 15 years. The promises don't survive a
sale. Conditions in a permit do. So I ask two things. Hold the applicant to
its burden. Require the evidence the law requires before you approve, not after.
And whatever you decide, make lawfully detailed findings. Explain
factor by factor how the evidence in this record supports it because a
decision unsupported by substantial competent evidence is vulnerable on
review and this record is being watched
carefully. You sent this back once. You knew
something was unfinished. Nothing since has filled it.
I'm not asking you to decide that dis that treatment doesn't matter. I'm
asking you to decide this the way the law demands on the evidence or the lack
of it. Thank you.
All right. At this time, I'm going to close the public form and we're going to
get back to the city's business.
» Acceptance of the agenda. >> Mr. Mayor.
» Yes, sir. >> I move to accept the agenda is
presented. >> Second.
» Any further questions or discussion?
All in favor say yes. >> Yes.
» All oppose. No. Motion carries 5. [clears throat]
Consent agenda 7172. >> Mr. Mayor.
» Yes, sir. >> I move to approve consent agenda items
7.1 through 7.2 is presented. >> Second.
» Any further questions or discussion? All in favor say I.
» Yes. >> I'm sorry. Yes. All oppose? No. Motion
carries. 50 81 final PUD Jaguar State Edition. and Julie is going to talk to
us about this. >> Yeah. Mayor and council, those of you
who were around in 2024 may recall the Jaguar Estates addition, the preliminary
PUD was approved a couple of years ago and effectuated the MXR multiple family
mixed residential district zoning on this parcel at the corner of Archer and
Concord Road. It's about 700 feet from the Heritage Development, 322 South
Archer Drive. The property owner intends to transform this from its current
status as a vacant lot of grass into a duplex development which would have 14
duplexes total of 28 dwelling units surrounding a central parking area.
There would be a reserve in the southeast corner of the property that
you can see there which is set aside for drainage and landscaping as required.
Uh water and sewer to the subject property are already in place and are
expected to be sufficient for those 28 dwelling units that that I mentioned.
Uh, of course internal improvements will be made onto the parcel so that it can
reach all of those individual buildings. Um, a portion of Concord Road to the
north and Macandless Drive to the east will be required to be paved for access
to this parcel. Like I said, planning commission
conditionally approved this final PL all the way back in 2024 after that
preliminary went through. That was in October of 2024. The applicant delayed
their final approval until this time. Um, but everything has been sorted out
and they are ready to proceed. And we do have an applicant here to answer any
additional questions. >> Council, have any questions?
» Mr. Mayor? >> Yes, sir.
» I move to accept the dedications of land for public purposes in the Jaguar
Estates's Edition final planned unit development.
» Second. >> Any further questions or discussion?
» Mr. Mayor, if I may, real quick, um is this typical for a plane unit
development to >> um have this u substantial of a delay
between and this could be for staff or or mayor in your experience that we wait
a couple of years between I'm seeing. >> Yes, this is very normal.
» Okay.
» Anyone else? [clears throat]
» All in favor say yes. >> Yes.
» All oppose? No. Motion carries 5-0. Um, Jaguar A2 is Jaguar Estates Edition
petition developers agreement resolution of advisability and Kevin is going to
speak to us on this matter. >> Good evening, mayor and council. Item
8.2 following the acceptance of the plat is for uh petitions, a developers
agreement, and a resolution of advisability for the Jaguar Estates
edition. The applicant has submitted petitions and letters of credit for uh
sanitary sewer, water, drainage, and paving improvements.
Uh per city policy, 100% of the cost of sanitary water and drainage will be paid
for by the benefit district. Per the same city policy, uh the paving project
on Archer and Concord will be split 5050 between the benefit district and city at
large. Uh that is a program that's eligible for any unimproved street in
Andover. Um a few weeks ago we heard from residents very near this area. This
is also the same procedure from Lake View Heights a few years ago where the
city participates in a portion of paved improvements for unimproved roads. Uh so
this project would include that 5050 split just for the paving.
Uh and with that I'll stand for any questions.
» Mr. Mayor. Yes, sir. >> Kevin, was there already is there a road
there now? >> Correct. They're gravel roads. Um Archer
to the south, basically the southwest corner of this property was improved um
as a part of the heritage development. Um so this will continue on that curb
and gutter street to the north on Archer. Uh and then Concord is also a
gravel street and that will be an asphalt mat road with ditches and
culverts on the side. So, this is not something one would say they're just
putting in a street to help with the funding. These are streets that they're
that we've already had in the queue or not the queue, but the our
we already own the road. Now, we're just going to be approving it. Right.
Correct. Improving it. >> Correct. Yeah. These would be considered
a required infrastructure improvement associated with the plaque.
» Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir. I move to adopt an ordinance
authorizing the construction of certain internal improvements related to Jaguar
State's addition. I >> I actually have more questions.
» Go ahead. That's three. Mr. Mayor, uh Kevin, I'm taking a look at the map
here. There are a couple residences that are close by as you know. It's one thing
I'm always going to harp on. I'm going to ask you face to face here. Drainage.
Uh are you confident I mean specifically you confident as the city's engineer
that the drainage uh from the proposed property that's to go in there uh will
not uh drastically affect the residents there specifically it looks like on this
map I'm looking at is to the south and the one resident to the east.
That's correct. That's something we look at through the plat process. Um, you
know, this originally came through up through planning commission a few years
ago, but during that process, um, they submit a drainage plan. There were
comments. There's back and forth on that. We do look at at how that's being
conveyed today versus how it's going to be conveyed out of a pond outfall here.
We look at um pre-developed foes, pre-developed runoff, and post-developed
runoff. Um, the site cannot exceed those runoff rates. So they have to go back to
as it was if it was grass um with the amount of storage they provide and that
was all provided by um the applicant and their engineer and reviewed during the
the platting process. >> I appreciate your diligence on that.
» And that's what reserve A is like a dry detention pond. Right.
» That's correct.
» Can I get a second, Mr. Mayor? >> Yes, sir. I believe we read 8.3's
motion and not 8.2's. >> I think Mr. Henry read 8.3's motion and
not 8.2s. I heard internal improvements related to Jaguar.
» You're right. I did read 8.3. I apologize.
» No worries. I'm not trying to call you. >> I'll resend that motion and move to
accept the petitions for sanitary sewer, water distribution system, drainage, and
paving improvements. approve the developers agreement and adopt a
resolution of advisability related to the Jaguar Estates edition.
» That I will second. [laughter]
» Any further questions or discussion? [clears throat]
» All in favor say yes. >> Yes.
» Yes. >> All oppose? No.
» Motion carries 50 83 Jaguar State Edition Work Ordinance. And Kevin again
will talk to us about this. >> Uh following the acceptance of the
petitions and the uh resolution of advisability, the next item is a work
ordinance that authorizes the construction of the improvements that
are listed in the petitions.
» Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir.
» I move to adopt an ordinance authorizing the construction of certain internal
improvements related to the Jaguar Estates edition.
» Second. >> Any further questions or discussion?
All in favor say yes. >> Yes.
» All oppose. No. >> Motion carries 5084 Jaguar Estates
Edition engineering agreement. And again, Kevin will talk to us about the
uh so this item is for the uh consultant services agreement with Garver who is
also the platting engineer. You see their their name on the title block
there on the plat. It is common practice for the city to uh hire the platting
engineer to do the design for the infrastructure improvements. They also
provide construction inspection, staking, materials testing. So, they are
a partner with the city um kind of from this point until it's built um and they
start building homes on it. We do have a a representative from Garver here with
any questions.
» No one, >> Mr. Mayor.
» Yes, sir. And uh Kevin, this isn't this isn't the first project Garver's done in
town. Correct. >> That's correct. Um actually the Southern
Hills development that's under construction right now was one of
Garver's. So that they are one of the consultants that we work with often.
» Thanks Go Mr. Mayor. >> Yes sir. I move to approve the agreement
with Garver LLC Witchto Kansas for engineering design and construction
phase services for the public improvements related to Jaguar Estate
Edition in the not to exceed amount of $196,120.
» Second.
Any further questions or discussion? All in favor say yes.
» Yes. >> All oppose no. Motion carries 50. All
right.
Case number Z-SU26-00002.
This is applica. This is an application requesting to allow for an intermediate
care facility in the MRX multiple family mixed residential use district on a
property generally located at 224 East Central Avenue and over Kansas. Before
we proceed with the hearing, I will ask council if any of them into dis intend
to disqualify themselves from participating in this case because they
have a conflict of interest. No.
» [snorts]
» I will now ask council [clears throat] if any of them have received any
expporte verbal or written communication prior to this agenda item which they
would like to share. >> Mr. Mayor.
» Yes, ma'am. >> I received a
um handd delivered letter from Mr. Gallagher um in June and then I have
received multiple emails for and against the center.
I I too have received multiple emails from
uh from the citizens both for and against. I have not seen the letter that
Mr. Gallagher sent out for obvious reasons. Um so yes. Anyone else?
» Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir.
» I also received the letter from Mr. Gallagher as well as many, many emails
um and notes about this [cough and clears throat] recovery
center both for and against. I must note for the record, the majority were
against.
» Anyone else, >> Mr. Mayor?
» Yes, sir. >> I have two received emails. Uh no
letters from me. [clears throat] I guess I wasn't that special. And um they're
all on record from Dana. And if I didn't see it from Dana, I sent it to Dana.
» Uh sorry, s city clerk. [snorts]
» And Mr. Mayor, I have created a letter that was submitted to the public in
order to get public uh response in reference to this issue. I have received
numerous emails uh for both uh for and against this issue including two emails
from you.
» Anyone else? >> And mayor, I have received the emails
that have been noted that our city clerk has also received.
» All right. [clears throat] Has the city clerk received any protest petition on
the case? >> Yes, sir. A protest petition signed by
eight or I'm sorry, no. A protest petition signed by eight residential
property owners was received in the city clerk's office on July 24th, 2026. For
the city attorney, the petition was not legally sufficient.
I now ask city council members if they have all received copies
of the approved and draft minutes for the planning commission notice hearing
on June 16th, the council meeting on Jo June July 14th and the plan commission
on July 21st which summarizes the hearing on the case.
» Yes. >> Yes. Yes.
I now call on the city zoning administrator to provide us with a
report on this case. >> Mayor and council, as you're all very
familiar at this point, we have an application for a special use to allow
for an intermediate care facility at 224 East Central. Not going to rehash
everything that's happened up to this point. Um, but I will let you know that
uh I have personally visited the site to investigate their landscaping and their
site plan and it was deemed to be in compliance both with the zoning
regulations and with the approved site plan that's been in place for many years
now. Uh I will add that at our planning commission meeting last week, the
planning commission adopted uh the revised findings of fact that you all
will see in your packet uh and voted by majority to recommend that you all
approve special use with no conditions.
Any question, councel?
» Mr. Mayor, uh Julie, the uh I was not present for either of the hearings. I
was out of country. But on 7:14, roughly 9:39 the evening,
uh council member Barry had asked uh in his motion for report on six specific
topics from the zoning committee. Uh, I made note of those six topics and wanted
to find out if during that meeting those six topics were addressed because I
tried to follow along and I think some of those things got dropped off as
people were talking over one another or cutting each other off.
» The motion that was returned to the planning commission asked for
reconsideration on items 10, 11, 12, and 14, which were the ones that were
revised and expanded that you can that you can see in your packet there. And
that's what the planning commission primarily discussed and then based their
recommendation on when they returned the matter to you.
» Okay. Uh for council then is that when he asked for the specific reports upon
those six points, is that something where they were not responsible for or
not necessary to do upon his request?
I'm not sure I understand the motion is a legal obligation to consider. It was
to consider factors 10, 11, 12, and 14 and I think the planning commission did
that. In fact, read them in detail into the record. If there were six other
questions that I am missing, which is possible, um, yeah, you could either ask
those questions now or or he could ask those questions. staff staff would try
to respond to them, I believe, but the motion did not include, to my knowledge,
six separate questions. >> I'm going to encourage staff to look at
uh 2 hours 39 minutes and 50 seconds uh into that recording. Uh I will encourage
everybody to take a look at that where he specifically states in his motion
that he was asking them to look at those and comma not period uh specifically had
six different points that he wanted addressed um in that and as such I
reviewed that not being here I am coming into this wounded and trying to put
myself into the position and those six points were not addressed or to my
knowledge were not specifically put out which he verbally
stated in his motion. It was not just I would like them to look over these uh
points and regardless on this issue or any
other issue if on council we are asked or asking because he everybody had asked
about circumstances and conditions and everything else as well but he had
specifically made that that point. If we're going to ask for a a a
committee to look at something, we would expect them to address those issues for
us. That way, it doesn't keep going back and forth like this.
» I I think though what JT is saying is if if you have six questions, let's go
ahead and ask those six questions or six issues to see if they're addressed. I do
not recall Tim making a motion. I remember the same numbers that are in
here that everyone 10 11 12 and 14 I believe. Um so ask your six questions to
Julie and let's see if staff can I guess answer them.
» The question is how many times has planning and zoning approved this site?
» It does not matter. Mr. >> Hey, I didn't ask you no questions. You
just literally >> I I I asked him I asked Julie I'm sorry
Julie the question how many times has this passed through planning zoning and
please don't interrupt me I don't interrupt you
» if you count the approval back in 2024 then four times a recommended approval
» and how many times is this governing body
uh passed this claiming zoning through this uh this uh case.
» How many times have they accepted that recommendation? Once.
» Once. [clears throat] And it's worth noting.
Well, we'll let it go for now. Any [clears throat] other questions for
Julie? >> Do you want to ask your the questions?
» It was meant for the zoning board to ask in order to get the correct information
for before the decision. That is why he had those questions.
That's why they are there part of the record.
» All right. Are there any questions to the applicant
from the council or city staff?
[clears throat] >> Mr.
» I have questions. >> Yes. All right. You interrupted me
again. That's twice. All right. Let me stop. Sir, could you come to the podium,
please?
So, um, so one of the things that they're
concerned about is the fencing in back. >> Can you handle that?
8 foot fence in back. >> We're happy to build whatever sort of
fence will satisfy you. >> Um, security. Are the people going to be
able to go to McDonald's and have a hamburger?
» No, sir. >> Are they going to be able to go walking
around the streets by theirel? >> No, sir.
What's what's going to keep that from happening? Uh
» whenever folks go outside, they are escorted by our staff. Uh we have
cameras uh throughout our facilities uh so we know where our folks are at all
times. We have uh recovery support advocates who do regular rounds and
checks to know where people are. Uh we have doors that are alarmed. We have uh
controlled access. Those all serve to mitigate people
leaving and [clears throat] wandering. Um I think it's important to note too if
I may that the the people we're we're serving are people who are there
voluntarily um and I'd shared uh during the planning commission for those of you
who saw that uh how much people are investing in order for the opportunity
to be there uh people who make that kind of investment uh and and meet the
demographic that we're serving which is the the demographic of of our esteemed
crowd here and the council and all of us who are here. Um they they aren't going
to uh wander into a neighborhood. They're not going to break into
someone's garage and swim in their pool. >> Okay, Mr. Gallagher. Um thank you, sir.
Uh first off, to both yourself, Mr. Leech, and all the parties with your
center, I would like uh to apologize for how things come across. Um, there are a
ton of questions that I have have in reference to this. Um, and I know that
it's a passionate thing for the whole community. You never get a second chance
to make a first impression and I think there were two things that came about
that started this off on the wrong foot. Um, unfortunately the temporary zoning
had expired. uh then with the media uh public publicity and everything else
that you guys were opening and some people automatically assumed that you
were already operating uh they felt slighted um and that is a mistake.
Everybody has has accepted that I hope and have moved on because you have not
opened up business yet. Additionally, our own city policies uh may have led to
some of the anger from the community, not to mention my own actions um being
taken as having a bias or prejudice. As such though, um one of the concerns
was, and I'm glad you brought that up, Mr. Mayor brought this up as well, uh
the barrier screening was was talked about during the zoning committee. Uh
Mr. Leech had stated that he was happy to meet uh with the affected neighbors
and would be willing uh to build a sufficient barrier uh to be a good
neighbor. Um I'm asking you here officially on record if uh that is what
you would intend to do. And if so, I would uh I really appreciate it if you
would not just with that, but talk with the neighborhood about
just ask or listen to them about their overall concerns one-on-one even. Um the
uh obviously it's a passionate thing. Regardless of how this goes, somebody's
not going to be happy. It's it's always going to be that way. But if you would
be able to address that um that I'm going to call the screening barrier as
uh as Mr. Leech had stated that would be greatly appreciated. Um I know that he
had said that it could be put into conditions in the zoning and for
whatever reason was not and that was my biggest concern to to start off with
because that seems something fairly reasonable for making happy neighbors.
that we will commit to building whatever sort of fence u is is reasonable. I
mean, >> right. And that's I'm just talking about
reason. I I'm not I'm not expecting and I hope the residents here if everything
goes through and you all sit down, I don't want anybody to be, you know,
suggesting there needs to be a, you know, great wall built, you know, 10
feet tall or anything. It does need to be reasonable. And I think the fact that
those residences sit lower, uh, they're concerned about being being able to get
out of their cars and just see into their backyards and their windows and so
forth. And but again, something that's respectable that represents your
business as well as the neighborhood behind it would be great.
» Absolutely. >> And I believe this we have an ordinance
on how high you can go and I believe it's 8 foot. Is that correct? No, we're
not having >> I believe it's six foot based on what
was said in the planning committee. But >> there you go.
» We're happy to build a six foot fence. So, I've I've drove back there many of
times because that's what I do. And they got six foot fence back there,
unfortunately, the way it sets compared to the parking lot, it's probably about
4 and 1/2 ft. But if you do a 6 in foot and and and and only three houses back
up to the facility itself. So, and I noticed you have the smoking area and
stuff on the west west side. Is that where
people will be staying or will they be able to mill around back there? What's
what's your stance on that? >> So, yes, that's where people will be
staying. No, people won't be able to mill around back there.
[clears throat and cough] >> Is the smoking area enclosed or or like
fenced in or anything like that? I'm just curious.
» It's under a canopy. >> Okay.
» Mr. Mayor, I have a question. >> Excuse me.
» I have a question. >> Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. Um, [clears throat]
I know that this has been stated before because I believe I might have been one
of the ones that asked it, but if you could please clarify.
Um, it I know has been brought up a couple more times since the last council
meeting, but there is a um background check an an extensive
background check that you go through. And if I'm understanding correctly,
there's nothing that is courtmandated or nothing um violent offenders or anyone
that has felonies, they will not be here. Correct.
» So, let me answer that in sections. So, yes, we will be screening for any
individuals who are on our offender registry. So if anyone's on an offender
reg a sexual offender registry, violent offender registry or drug offender
registry, they will not be uh permitted. Yes, we go through uh all of our
patients go through a screening process that assesses uh any behavioral
concerns, any criminal concerns, uh any mental health concerns, any medical
concerns uh that may interfere with their ability to participate in
treatment at our facility. Um no one will be mandated to attend
treatment at our facility. Um, now as to whether or not there will be people who
have been convicted of felonies there, um, no, we will not automatically screen
someone out because they have a felony. Now, we would evaluate what that felony
is and base our admissions decisions on the nature of that.
» Thank you. >> You're welcome.
» In [clears throat] regards to family coming and visiting or someone that may
carry stuff in their pockets, how do you handle that? So [clears throat]
first all of before people come to visit uh the patients submit to their primary
therapist who they would like to have come visit them while they're there.
They process through that discussing who's going to be someone who is going
to be a supportive and healthy person uh for them to come visit and who won't be.
And so you know that's kind of the first
screening process. Um, when people come to visit the facility, the facil the
visitations will be indoors and they'll be supervised by staff the entire time.
Okay. Anyone else? [clears throat]
Okay. [clears throat and cough]
The governing governing body has been provided with the approved
and draft minutes for the planning commission notice hearing on June 16,
2026, the council meeting on Jul July 14th,
and the planning commission meeting on July 21st, 2026. The videos of those
meetings have been made available and I've watched all of them [clears throat]
having had having had numerous public hearings. There will be no public
comments taken at this time. The following are options are available to
the city council regarding this case. >> Mayor, if I may, before you continue.
» Yes, ma'am. Um, I just wanted to put in the record
that I have received 60 written communications that have been
distributed to the governing body and made available to the public in the
packet tonight. I received one after the posting of the agenda this afternoon and
they've been provided to you at the bench and um will be included in the
packet. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. I want to ask one more
question. >> Yes, sir. Have you not have you not
invited many a myriad of people to come tour your facility?
» We have. We've had um first we had our our open house u before we learned that
the >> right special use permit hadn't had
expired. Then we've had three separate uh public events where we've invited uh
the public to come tour the facility and visit with us. Um we would we want to
continue that and continue that dialogue. Um, if things go uh in our
favor tonight, then we would be very receptive to doing that again tomorrow,
uh, per uh, Councilman Gallagher's suggestion that we we visit neighbors.
Uh, that's been our our hope and our goal all along is to to be a good
neighbor, to be a a good part of the community, and to be in dialogue with
folks. >> Thank you.
[clears throat] Again, the following options are available to the council
regarding this case. adopt the findings of facts
and recommendations of the planning zoning by four vote majority
and I'm I'm going to emphasize that adopt the finding and facts
and recommendations of the planning commission revise or amend the finding
of the fact or fact or add conditions to recommendations of the planning and
zoning commission by a four vote majority or override the recommendation
the planning commission by a four four vote majority. Assuming the council has
received all the information they need on this case,
[clears throat] you have received an outline of the choices provided under
the stat state statutes for council action KSA 12-757C.
Council, how do you wish to act, >> Mr. Mayor?
» Yes, sir. [clears throat] Um, you know, I want the city to know,
um, citizens, constituents, that, um, after last time making the motion and
falling flat, I did do some, um, reflection on the videos, Jason's
concerns, citizens concerns, um, watched the the planning and zoning. Is Doug
here tonight? >> No, Doug wasn't a little um,
[clears throat] so and and saw that. So, with that said, I move
to override and add conditions.
Sorry, I've never done this before, so I'm going to do it and and JT can tell
me if I'm outline. I've got six conditions here that I'd like to read.
Um I think the most pertinent public concerns covered below um while making
sure nothing violates the Fair Housing Act, ADA, equal protection, and due due
process concerns. I have proposed these conditions
which have related with the finding of fact addressed below as well. Um number
one the special use shall be limited to a
residential impatient intermediate care facility outpatient treatment services
walk-in services day treatment services medication dispensing services for
non-residents and similar ambulatory activities and services are prohibited.
The finding number 11, this directly addresses the public comment regarding
traffic, visitor activity, non-resident patient activity, and neighboring
impacts. Finding number 12, this more closely aligns with the medical campus
and institutional uses contemplated within the city center place type.
Number two, the facility shall operate solely as a volunteer residential
intermediate care facility consistent with representations made during the
public hearing process. Finding number 10, the planning commission and
councelor record repeatedly relied upon testimony that the facility is
voluntary. Finding number 11 supports the conclusion that the operational
impacts will be less intensive than correctional or custodial settings.
Condition number three, the facility shall not exceed a maximum resident
census of 65 residents at any time unless an amendment to the special use
is approved. Finding number 11 directly mitigates intensity of use concerns,
limits traffic, staffing demand, parking demand, deliveries, and public service
impacts. Finding number 14, it balances the public concerns while still allowing
the applicant to utilize the property. Condition number four, within six
months, the application the application applicant shall install additional
evergreen screening along the north property line sufficient to achieve
yearround visual screening. Uh finding number 10, it directly addresses the
neighborhood character. 11, it mitigates the visual impacts. And number 14, it
protects the neighboring per properties while permitting use of a vacant
building. Number five, prior to operation, the
operator shall file a security and access management plan to the director
of community development, providing controlled access, alarmed exit,
security cameras, visitor management procedures, and 24-hour staffing. This
finding 11 directly addresses public safety concerns and reduces potential
impacts on the neighboring properties. Finding number 14, it helps support a
finding that approval will not create a net detriment to the public welfare.
Finally, condition number six, that the operator shall maintain written
procedures governing all resident discharges. Transportation shall be
offered for all departures and that the operator shall maintain documentation
demonstrating compliance with this condition and so m and shall make such
documentation available to the city upon request in connection with a verified
complaint or a comp compliance review. This mit number 11 mitigates public
concerns regarding walkaways, proximity to schools, people entering the
neighborhood, entering nearby neighborhoods. And then also number 14
demonstrates safeguards intended to reduce off-site impacts while still
permitting the need of need service to be offered.
And that's what I have.
So, we're walking a fine line there. A lot of it I agree with, but how who are
we to who are we to tell a any business how to how to run their business in
their capacity? Uh that's not we're not going to tell a
liquor store how many how many 12-packs they can sell or how many coolers they
can have in their building or so. I think we're crossing the line telling a
business that's coming into town how to run their business. I think that's a I
think that's a slippery slope in regards to capacity. Uh
» I was trying to meet both parties. I'm involved with this. I put a lot of
thought into this. Um, and I feel that if if Jason and and Doug and and
Nick and those guys find this okay, then,
you know, we go this route, but I would still need a second. So, I
» I am not okay telling them how many patients they can help help. I wouldn't
tell the nursing home next door how many seats they can have or the nursing home
that my wife works in how many beds they can have. Uh, it's not a it's not a the
state of Kansas is able to tell physician-owned hospitals
how many beds they can have and it handcuffs them to where they can't
compete with with other ones that are that are So,
» this is the number they threw out. That's how I came up with it. I get what
you're saying. So, I was just trying to state for the record what Jason and Doug
and those guys had said. So that's why I put that in there.
» So we're licensed by the Kansas Department of Aging and Disability
Services and they regulate the number of beds that we're approved for. They've
approved us for 80 beds. We talked about 65 beds. We talked about
what what we anticipate will be a usual census. It may sometimes go above 65. Uh
it you from a business perspective, it would be wonderful to have 80 patients.
We would love to be able to provide services that many. It rarely rarely
happens that a substance use treatment program is at capacity or is a licensed
capacity. So sometimes it'll be 65 was kind of the number that was thrown out
as where we think we will probably be. Uh sometimes we may be below that.
Sometimes we may be above that. We'll never be above 80.
» Okay.
» I would amend my motion then for I believe it was number
» three. three [clears throat] to be the resident census of
80 >> Yes, sir.
» residents at any time unless an amendment to the special use is
approved.
» So, I have a a motion. Do I have a second?
» Mr. Mayor, would it be us to consult our attorney on the legality of this motion.
» Thank you for asking. [laughter] Um I uh
actually sort of apologized to the planning commission because they thought
they were in a difficult position with all the things that were going on. I
think it's a tough job uh until I had this one tonight. And so I feel a little
like stumped the band. But I'm going to go through these and I'm just going to
tell you what I think. Okay? and and uh legal minds can differ, but but I'm
going to I'm going to tell you what I what I think. Um
and if I get them out of order or I get them wrong, you can correct me. I'm
taking notes >> and and
» I believe I believe you're first. I I do want to apologize to you and maybe why
some of this looks like while I prepared this not necessarily prepared for
his actions because as we are in a quasi dule um role up here part of that too is
not giving feedback to emails, not partaking in that debate outside of
here. The bench is where this happens. So, I appreciate everyone asking their
questions up here um so that we can get that out in the public as well. Sorry,
JT. I didn't mean to cut you off. It's all right.
I'm going to summarize what I wrote down and you can correct me if that wasn't
the intent. >> Um number one was to restrict the
facility to to inpatient
residential treatment, not allow outpatient treatment.
Um, I don't know if that one is okay, but uh I think it doesn't matter. The
special use doesn't approve outpatient treatment. The special use approves
custodial treatment. So So the special use wouldn't wouldn't approve outpatient
treatment. So I'm confused whether or not that one should be a condition since
the special use doesn't approve it. Um, and and what I'm worried about is that
if it's allowed without a special use, and I I think it's probably not, but but
I would need more time to research that, quite frankly, but if it's allowed
without a special use, this would not be a forum in which you could now restrict
that because it would be it would be permitted zoning now. Um but
uh so so I'm gonna I'm going to just say as to number one which would be to
eliminate outpatient treatment. The special use doesn't approve outpatient
treatment. So I think it's kind of a nullity. That's just my opinion.
Uh number two that it be restricted to voluntary residents. So this is a very
difficult place we get to and I I think when you try to draw a distinction
between people with a disability including recovering addicts between
those who are diagnosed and and and want treatment and those who don't. I think I
think you probably can't do that. I think I think number two is probably not
okay. I'm just going to tell you that I think it's probably not okay. Doesn't
mean you can't do it. We'll find out in the courts if if it is or isn't. But I'm
going to tell you that I think it's probably not okay.
Um uh as I understood number three now it
is to restrict the occupancy to 80 residents.
Uh Councilman Henry I I think you did a a
pretty good job of making that non-punitive. You talked about density.
You talked about traffic. You talked about the legitimate zoning concerns. I
think limiting the density and use of a property uh to protect surrounding
properties is probably a reasonable zoning function. And as long as it
doesn't discriminate against uh persons who are disabled or or in this case the
guests themselves, it's probably an okay restriction and seems like a reasonable
accommodation for this use. So So going to step out there and say I think number
three is okay. Um,
number four was to require trees. Am I remembering it right?
» Yeah. >> Evergreen trees be planted. That, you
know, I guess what I'm thinking about here is that the leaves don't fall and
then everybody can see into the into the neighborhood.
» I'm going to give that an A+. Okay. That is an okay condition you can place on a
property. Uh, buffers and zones. That is that is a that is is is reasonable. And
it's worth noting there's a bunch of trees back there now,
» but but I I'm I'm I'm just I'm just trying to call these as I see them. Um
number five was to submit a security plan that the director of community
development would review. I'm I'm going to make sure that I my view of how I'd
understand that is uh you know, we wouldn't we wouldn't necessarily know
how to get in or get out. We just want to know what the plan is. Um, I will
tell you that your community development director uh told me that he feels a
little ill-skilled to evaluate a plan and doesn't really have a specialty in
that regard. Uh, nor neither do I. But I'll go one step further. To me, that
seems to be uh
that seems to me to be uh a restriction that is punitive and based upon the
uh nature of the guests. And here's here's what I mean by that. Um would
would you require a security and access plan for uh rehabilitation facility that
um that uh treated people who had had a hip replacement?
And if the answer to that is no, then I'm concerned about number five because
I I think it I think it discriminates against a a a particular class of people
who are disabled by addiction. So, I'm going to tell you number five bothers me
and I I I think it may not be legal. Um, and then um
and I'm going to summarize my opinion here at the end.
Uh your number six, as I recall it, was that when people leave
um they'd either be uh that they they they'd be offered transportation for all
departures is what I remember. Am I getting the gist of it?
» Yes. And if I may, before you summarize, five and six were things that Jason or
Doug Nick addressed. Um, so I didn't feel it was going to be a legality issue
since they kind of brought it up. I was just putting it in record um, for this.
So that's why I did that. As far as those two,
» I don't know if this is helpful, but I do based on some faces that I'm seeing.
I do want to be very clear when when Mr. Claus is saying this, we do not ask for
a security or operations plan for any other business that has gone through
zoning ever that I'm aware of. So that when he
says, "Would you do this for the two ERS you already have in town?" No, we did
not. Would you do this for a liquor store? No, we do not
» any of that. The answer is no, we do not.
» And that unfortunately, I think, is the answer for number six, too. We don't. We
do not. even though they've agreed they'll do it. Um we don't we don't have
a requirement for how uh people leaving the hospital are transported um or uh
that the transport and or discharge documentation is made available to the
city. I I do understand there will be state regulations in this regard that
have to be complied with and I'm also concerned that we would do something
that interferes with those state regulations because um this is clearly
an area in which the state has exercised its authority and so I I got a little
concerned we're playing around in that. So, in reviewing your uh
conditions, uh outpatient treatment, we're not
approving outpatient treatment. So, I don't understand that one. So, I'm going
to go with a no on that. Uh the voluntary the the distinction between
the nature of addiction between people who seek voluntary treatment and who
don't, I think is discriminatory, and I'm definitely going to go with a no on
that one. Uh the 80 residents, I I'm okay with that one. Uh the trees, I'm
okay with that one. Uh the security and access plan seems discriminatory since
we've never required anybody ever in a zoning case to have that before. And
same way with transportation. So on your conditions, and I realize it's just a
motion that hasn't been seconded yet. Um and we can discuss it more if it is
seconded. Um, I guess I' I guess I'd like to consider not including one just
because I don't think it matters. I don't think we're approving that. Um, no
on number two, okay on three, okay on four, and no, probably not okay on five
and six. And I'm sorry if any of that offends you. That's just as good as I
can do tonight, Council Member Henry. So, it seems like I've heard several
times that you're not going to hand them their suitcase and say, "Here, take a
walk." Is that not correct? It's correct that we are not going to do that. Uh the
city attorney is correct that the state does regulate how we have to go about
discharging as well. As it's been mentioned, we will be accredited through
uh joint commission who also has even higher standards.
» May I ask a question? >> Yes, sir.
» And it just relates to the trees. Um [snorts]
because we kind of went through this with our site plan. I just want to make
sure that uh we're in completely in compliance. Um does a site plan have to
change in order for us to be able to plant the trees?
» That would be a modification. I'm sorry. >> Pardon me. [snorts]
» I don't know. Maybe Julie's answer is better. Uh I think I think you can add
trees. I think you can't subtract any.
That would be a modification to the approved site plan which is in place
currently and they're complying with. So they would have to go to the site plan
review committee for the placement of those trees to be approved. Um you also
didn't really give a number of trees just some trees. So I suppose you can
leave it up to site plan to decide how many trees but
» we'll get back to you. But I think generally if you're putting in more than
the site plan required, I think you'll be fine.
» We're very happy to to plant trees, I think that would be a nice addition. I
do have some questions about how that might work with a fence. Um if we
we if you want us to do both a fence and trees or how that would work and if
there's enough room back there to do that.
» Well, it hasn't been mentioned, but let's discuss the issue of the fence and
um planning and zoning. I I learned
something from them at the planning commission meeting. So hopefully I'll
get this right. So um for this particular zone, a six-foot fence is the
is the limit because you know tall windbreaking fences are not normally
desired. Uh to create a higher fence um would require a seeking a variance. Um,
so, uh, I I don't think you can place a
condition on the property that would violate your own rules. Um,
I I think the best you could do is it related to a fence, if you wanted to
make that condition, is that it was conditioned upon uh the owner seeking a
variance to build a taller fence. um and and agreeing to do so if that
variance is granted. H however uh th that's going to be decided by
the board of zoning appeals will not be decided by you whether or not the fence
can be taller. So the most you could do is as a condition I think is you could
have them ask
May I mentioned something uh and I I think mayor you you brought this up. a
slope that goes down from where we are curbside. Uh I don't know. We as Nick
and I walked that we had this discussion a couple of days ago. Uh if we can put a
six-foot fence up near that curb, then I think it will take care of that issue.
We were curious how far back from the curb we would need to place a fence.
» The further you go back, the lower it's going to be.
I didn't know if there were any uh restrictions on how close a fence can be
to >> to my knowledge. We don't restrict uh
how close to a curb a fence ends up being. I don't think that's something
that you have to have to worry about. >> Okay.
Then we would be more than happy to put the sixoot fence right along the curb
side, which I think would probably address the issues with height. But
» but it is right against
But JT, that's not allowed to be part of the motions, correct? That you're saying
fence or anything like that? >> No. And I I I think a lawful a condition
for a lawful fence. So, so the the motion could include a condition that
they seek a a variance to build an 8ft fence and if and if a variance is not
granted that they build the six-foot fence up against the curb, I think we're
all in agreement that that that would be okay, Julie. There's no restriction on
where you put the fence. If it were up by the curb, it would be higher
visually. Um, honestly, I don't purport to know uh whether the property owners
would prefer that uh because it's not their property. So, so
you you end up with kind of a fenced corridor.
I'm not exactly sure. I'm just sharing my opinion now. I'm not exactly sure
that a fenced corridor is a good idea. you. I'm kind I'm kind of slow, sir, but
I'm pretty sure that you could attach that to the top of the curb and then
you'd be another eight inches higher. I got to be honest with y'all. I'm per I'm
perplexed. I'm absolutely perplexed.
Andover's inviting community.
I don't see the difference between somebody that has an addiction, a
disease is any different than somebody with cancer or or anything else. I don't
I don't see the difference and I don't see the negative impact on our
community. If anything, it's positive. And that's just the way I feel and I
always say what I mean. And we're elected to take care of 16,000 people.
We we've had to we've been down this road before. It's not our job to acquies
to a 20 people, 60 people or 100 people or 600 people. We went through the same
thing with the apartments in Green Valley. Our job is to
as a as a quasi jury to do what's best for the city of
Andover. And I'm I'm just perplexed. You know, I went around this town after the
tornado. People's houses were missing. And to a house, every one of them said
nobody died. You know, that's the kind of community
Andover is. And here we are to block ability to help people live a
better life. And how how so I I could not afford to go to this deal. It's a
patient pay, right? Right. >> Either either private pay or private
insurance. I'm sorry. >> Or insurance.
» Or insurance. >> Or insurance.
» So So So I could not afford to go to this thing. So So I'm just saying what
are we doing? You know, this is my this this is what I was elected for. And I
don't mind taking hits. I don't really don't care. But I It's disappointing
that we would not accept a facility to make people's lives better. It's just
and there ain't a person in this room that hadn't had an alcoholic in the
family. I had one. You know what I mean? Yeah. I I've seen them, hun. Thank you.
Thank you for sharing it with me. >> So So So that's So I This not time.
So that's where I stand. So council, let's do this again. Do I have a motion?
» Okay, to be clear, you do have a motion as I understand it. So procedurally, we
have a motion. It either needs to be withdrawn,
» right, >> or it needs to be seconded or it needs
to die for lack of a second
» if if we want to keep things in in reasonable order.
» So So if we're going to do 80, it needs to be withdrawn.
» Say that again. >> If we're going to say you said 60 beds,
if we're going to do 80, then you need to withdraw it.
» I I already amended >> and a handful of things that he said no
to. We So we have to withdraw the motion and redo it.
» Withdraw or can I just amend it? >> Yeah, you can amend it. It hasn't been
seconded yet. >> Thank you, JT. Thank you, Mayor. If I
may, I would like to amend my motion due to legalities
to include the the
include the conditions of Do I need to read them again or can I just say three
and four of my >> You want to include the limitation to 80
residents in the planting evergreen trees conditions three and four. Is that
what you're saying you want to keep in your motion?
» Correct. Yeah. So just for clarity, your motion is to adopt the finding and
factors of the planning commission and and and
approve the special use but subject to the additional conditions of limitation
to 80 residents in the planting uh evergreen trees along the buffer zone.
» Yes.
» All right. So I have a motion. Can I get a second?
I'll second. >> We have a second. Any further questions
or discussion?
» All in favor say yes. >> Yes.
» Yes. >> All opposed.
» No. >> No.
» Motion carries. >> Let me check
because I was following yeses and nos and I'm sorry. I know I've called a lot
of attention to people. I heard a no from Colin and Tim. Is that correct? And
I heard yeses from Mara, Jodie, and Homer. Is that correct?
» Yes. >> And so we need to know how the mayor
votes. >> The mayor votes yes.
» Then the special use is approved with the two overriding conditions.
» All right. One last report here. Persons agree by the final decision of the
council on this matter have 30 days after today's action within which to
appeal to the district court. >> Mr. Mayor.
» Yes, ma'am. >> Can I make a comment, please?
» Yes, ma'am. >> I want to be very clear. These last six
weeks have not been easy. I will only speak for myself when I tell you all I
have read every single email that came in. I have watched not only the council
meeting back, but I've also watched planning and zoning multiple times. I
have listened to every single person that had wanted to talk to me. Even
coming into my office and using that as the place to talk to me. I have wrestled
with this. This decision has kept me up. It has weighed on me. I have prayed for
guidance and wisdom over this. Ultimately, I've been consumed by this
more than any other decision that I have made in my time as a city council
member. As I sit here, I'm reminded
that I was elected to make decisions and those decisions are based on facts and I
have to look at so many different perspectives. I can't just look at one.
I have to look through this the lens of so many other factors.
This has not been an easy six weeks. And I can assure you for me, this
decision was one of the hardest and probably I'll ever have to make during
my city council time because I'm not running again. [laughter]
I'm done. Y'all did me in. Done. [snorts]
All right, we're ready for member items, right?
Go ahead, Homer. Start with you. >> Oh, uh,
thank you. Um,
I, you know, I commend Jody, um, you know, for saying that. I appreciate
that. I think I'd be remissed if I said we didn't all have those same emotions
when it came to um, this special use. So those six weeks, the proceedings before
have been hard for me as well. Um, but again, you know, we serve this city. So
I appreciate all of us up here. I appreciate the input from the citizens
for and against. Um, thank you.
Um to the residents and the stakeholders at business owners and so forth, I
appreciate every one of you regardless if you're for or against uh this
particular topic. Uh like um uh Jody stated, we read I read and most of I
guarantee you read every one of your emails, watched every minute of uh the
the sessions and nothing was taken flippantly.
As stakeholders, I do believe that you all have a voice. I do believe you have
all have a voice on every topic that your city council decides on because you
elected us to speak for you to the city and make decisions based that way. I am
sorry that the city failed in a part that we're going to talk about here in a
second um in my opinion and we'll I'll see if I can do something about that. I
encourage you all as citizens, business owners, and so forth to
continue to get involved with the city and pay attention to the agendas for
everything from zoning to council meetings. Reach out to your council
members and ask questions. You have our emails. We know that. Please use them.
We will respond or should respond. Um, we are here for you. And I mean this.
Please, regardless of what side of the fence you all reside on, be courteous to
one another. The last thing we need is more conflict in the world, more
division, or anything else. I ask the residents that live near the property to
please communicate with the property any concerns you may have, but do so
respectfully, please, and allow them to respond accordingly
to the city. And this is for administration to take consideration. We
did the bare minimum. Andover itself has [snorts] never done
the bare minimum. We have always been the best. It doesn't matter if it's our
street department, our water and sewer, our parks department, our police, our
fire, and so forth. We've always done better than the bare minimum. State
requires notifications at a minimum of 200 foot radius for the facility. I
personally would ask that you consider or look into at least change that. I
think 500T would be a great place to start if you want to consider 750 or
1,000 ft for any zoning concerns. I think that that would be appropriate.
When I looked at the map the first time when I was told that the the radius was
200 feet, I was shocked to see how small that is and
I took action. I wanted people to be aware.
Lastly, [clears throat] Mayor Price, um, as I started my career
in public service in the early 90s, my first real adult career boss told me
in my training class, God gave me two ears and one mouth. Do twice as much
listening and half as much talking. That changed things for me from that point
on. I sought out to listen to others. I listened to their opinions, their ideas,
and perspectives. And I learned by doing that, it made me a better person. I did
not have all the answers.
It also helped me from making rash decisions and doing or saying things I
could never take back. Again, like I mentioned to um the the clinic, you
never get a second chance to make a first impression. I made a promise to
the residents and businesses of Andover that I would listen to them. I would
solicit their opinions, not make decisions based strictly on one person,
one entity, or anything that anybody just told me. I am not a city. I am not
an institution. I am merely a voice for the people and not the government. Mr.
Mayor, at the last council meeting that I watched, uh you you failed to listen
and you failed to respect the public. Regardless of your views, people want to
be heard. At that last meeting, you admonished the
residents of bicesentennial edition because your personal experience or bias
that you had. You called them out not once but twice.
This would have been handled much better had you just allowed them to talk and
turn over to city administration their complaints and address it one-on-one
with them. You said you can't lie like that yet.
You do that two more times during the uh actual uh council meeting. The second
time is uh when you decided to admonish the
public for coming and talking. You also stated that
» I did not. You had stopped. You're not going to lie. I did not admonish the
public. >> I have the quote right here. says we
have never let people come in here sir and be redundant one after the other
after the other. I was not admonish other after the other after the other.
This was at uh if you would like to know exactly 9:46 and 56 I was there man.
» I was there you're you're also stated to you're lying
» as I'm reading directly from >> what I said. You're you're you're you're
taking what I said and and mis misleading the public. That is what I
said. >> Okay.
» And it is a true statement that during this during the peed, we never ever ever
let the public go redundant. Redundant redundant. And I did it because I
thought and I said it because I thought they deserve to have an ear. So while
you're off doing your thing, that's what I said. That's true. But that's not what
I that was not the intent of the message. It was the true fact that the
PUB we do not ever do it. And we you've been through a couple of them. I've been
through 50 of them. We do not let unless they have new information. Mr.
Gallagher, we do not let them all come. I let them
come because I thought they deserve to have a say.
» And if any unless you say it any other way, stop saying it. If any one of these
people have watched any of the council meetings where we have allowed people to
talk over and over and over. >> We have not, man. You're you're lying.
You're absolutely full of this. >> The fourth issue, of course, is when you
decided to admonish me, sir. >> Yes, sir.
» When you decided to say, "I broke the oath that I held my hand up for saying I
would protect all 16,000 citizens." >> Yes, you did.
» You stated, "I broke my oath numerous times." and you sat there and referred
the process that I denied the people the the abil ability to appeal in district
court. >> You broke your oath.
» As such, I believe that you, sir, are out of
line. You stated numerous times, he is not courageous. He is not courageous. He
is not courageous. Please don't. Hold on. Please don't. Hold on. Please.
» And I let him do that, which is not acceptable by the way.
» I stopped him as well. I you stated that I was not courageous and you were
correct sir. I was not courageous at all. What I was doing was my civic duty.
No, it was what I was elected for. >> No,
» you can sit here as much as you want and tell people over and over again your
personal views. When we had the gentleman that was uh on another zoning
uh issue, you told him that you would put a road through his house in a
council meeting. What the hell?
» Sir, you have got to get yourself under control and stop making the citizens
fear coming to the city or the city council. This is the reason why people
do not want to bring things to the city council.
» If they're going to be yelled at by you or any of us up here is irresponsible.
It is not just and is not the American way. That is all I have to say about
this topic,
» man. Anybody else have anything they like to say?
» Mr. Mayor, so yes, sir. Go ahead. >> Are we continuing with member items or
if you want to go first, that's fine. >> No, go ahead.
» Okay. Um, it saddens me uh the outcome. I respect the will of the council and um
the voting that took place tonight. Um ultimately I was not persuaded by the
facts of the cases. uh I was not persuaded that um property values would
not experience a detrimental impact ultimately because of a study that is
you can agree or disagree with the outcomes of
the 2014 Waller study but it does in fact conclude that properties within an
eighth of a mile do experience a decrease in property value you can you
can explain it away you can say it's a different type of patient population etc
But um for for that reason and as well the um increased intensity of use, I
disagreed with the staff finding on the land use. While the cement blocks or
bricks on the property do not compact the soil when it is being used for this
purpose, I acknowledge the reasonable understanding that a facility of this
type does differ from, for instance, its neighbor that is a a long-term care
skilled nursing facility. So for that reason is I know I'm not obligated to
explain but I feel that the um many many um residents that spoke up deserve to
understand some of the background of how decisions were made.
I would like to commend the large majority of the comments that
were made at the podium by the applicant, by residents, um with the
exception of the last few minutes here. Uh the council, as we've civily debated
this topic, it is wrought with emotion. It's wrought with
fears. It's wrought with facts. It's wrought with what could be.
And I would like to encourage us and admonish us to not adm encourage us to
remain civil in our discourse as we carry out the important duty of
local government. That's all.
» Um I just want to take a moment and explain my personal reasons for sending
it back to planning and zoning. Um, I had been a planning and zoning
administrator for seven year administrator, sorry, commissioner for
seven years. Um, and we had received so many emails and concerns and yet nobody
participated in planning and zoning. Um, I watched all the meetings. I was a
planning and zoning commissioner the first time this came through. So, it was
really important to me because planning and zoning is the place to talk about
land use and to talk about the concerns. And since nobody showed up to that, that
was my reason for sending it back. Um, I really want to thank planning and zoning
and the staff for walking through that process again and affirming their
original decision. I really do appreciate a commitment to the fair fair
and thorough and evidence-based process that we go through. So, just wanted to
make that comment. >> Joe, do you have anything?
So, first I'd like to say one thing. The city staff did everything they were
supposed to do. They did it absolutely correctly. One council member decided to
skip past all procedures.
All procedures. He did not let the city procedures play out. That's a fact. He
did not let procedures play out. And I'll say this, and I I don't have to
defend myself, nor will I, because everybody that's listening knows that
that was a buffoonery at its finest. But I will tell you, the city staff did
exactly what they were supposed to do. The process worked exactly the way it
was supposed to work. But one council member decided that he didn't need to
follow the process. That's fact. That is a fact. So, you can think what you want
and uh say what you want, but uh I will I will take my my six years of public
service and put it up against anyone's. Uh, I'm the most transparent mayor the
city's ever had. I go to the hardware store, I get stopped. I go to Dylan's, I
get stopped. And I that's the way I planned it. I've
been writing letters and putting them in utility bill for four years every month
engaging with the public following the process of our our city.
So, I don't I don't care what anybody thinks of me. It doesn't matter. All I
know is when I lay my head on my pillow at night, I sleep very well and I do
what the process of the city is. And when I make a mistake, I own it. One
council member put the city at risk. Put the city at risk. Put put a business
owner at risk. Put a business owner at risk. That's a
fact. not only the business owner, all their employees at risk. So if you want
to I'm I'm very I live by this code, man. Every morning I pray the Lord's
prayer. I say, "Lord,
forgive me of my sins as I forgive others." I live by that code.
And I'll stick to my guns and I'll stick to what I said the other night. And
tonight, the facts don't lie. We did. We We avoided the process that we hold our
hand up and promise to follow the period.
Can I get a motion to get out of here? >> Mr. Mayor, I move to adjourn.
» I second. >> All in favor?
» Yes.