[1:42] And everybody, it is 7 o'clock. Welcome to our August 25th regular commission

[1:46] meeting. Before we get things started, if you would please join me in the

[1:49] pledge of >> allegiance

[1:54] to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it

[1:59] stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice

[2:04] for all.

[2:08] » All righty. First item this evening is to consider the minutes of the August

[2:12] 11th, 2026 meeting. I move we approve the regular minutes.

[2:17] » I second. >> We have a motion in a couple of seconds.

[2:20] Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I.

[2:25] » I. Any opposed? Same sign. >> The motion carries. Next item this

[2:30] evening is to receive the 2025 financial audit report. And we're going to have

[2:33] Stacy Ham with SJHHL come up and give it that to us.

[2:38] » Good evening everyone. I'm Stacy Hammond. I'm a partner with the audit

[2:41] firm SJHHL and also the partner on the city's annual financial statement audit.

[2:46] It's a pleasure to be here this evening to present the results of that financial

[2:50] statement audit. I believe all of you have received two documents from us. Uh

[2:54] one of them was the copy of the audited financial statements and the other was a

[2:58] report that was addressed to the mayor and members of the city commission. Uh a

[3:03] lot of my presentation this evening is also summarized in that report to the

[3:08] mayor and city commission. That report really puts into writing everything that

[3:12] our audit standards require us to present summarizing the results of the

[3:16] financial statement audit. Uh the first thing that I need to visit with you

[3:20] about this evening is our responsibilities in performing the

[3:23] city's audit. Uh we did perform the city's audit in accordance with

[3:27] generally accepted auditing standards at government auditing standards issued by

[3:31] the comproller general of the United States. uh the provisions of the single

[3:35] audit act uniform guidance the office of management and budget compliance

[3:40] supplement and requirements set forth in the Kansas municipal audit and

[3:44] accounting guide. Uh all of those standards require us to perform

[3:48] procedures in order to obtain reasonable assurance that the city's financial

[3:52] statements are free from material misstatement.

[3:56] As far as the procedures that we performed, we did examine on a test

[4:00] basis evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial

[4:03] statements. Uh we also reviewed the accounting principles that the city uses

[4:08] significant estimates made by the city's management as well as evaluating the

[4:12] overall financial statement presentation. Uh probably the most

[4:16] important thing that I'll be telling you this evening is that as a result of

[4:20] performing those procedures, uh we did determine that the city's financial

[4:24] statements are presented fairly in all material respects in accordance with

[4:29] generally accepted accounting principles. Therefore, we issued what we

[4:33] call an unmodified audit opinion, which is the best kind of opinion that the

[4:37] city can receive. Uh I need to visit with you about any

[4:42] accounting policies or practices. uh significant or unusual transactions, uh

[4:47] newly adopted accounting standards or significant estimates as part of what

[4:52] we're required to report. Nothing in any of those areas this year that we need to

[4:56] talk about except the city does have several significant accounting

[5:00] estimates. Uh those are the city's net pension liability that results from its

[5:04] participation in capers, the fair value of investments, total other

[5:09] post-employment benefit liabilities, uh the right to use assets and lease

[5:13] obligations payable, uh leases receivable, and their associated

[5:18] deferred inflows. Uh our job as auditors is to make sure that the city has a

[5:22] reasonable process in place to measure and record each of those accounting

[5:26] estimates. And after our test work, we were able to conclude that the city does

[5:31] have a reasonable process in place to measure and record each of its

[5:35] significant accounting estimates. We did make several audit adjustments to

[5:41] the original trial balance that was presented to us to begin our audit. A

[5:45] number of those adjustments were management prepared entries that just

[5:49] came in a little bit later after the trial balance was presented to us.

[5:52] Others were reclassing items or entries that relate to activity like debt and

[5:57] capital assets that the city doesn't record on its trial balance for

[6:01] governmental activities, but that are needed for the entitywide financial

[6:05] statements that are presented on a GAP basis to be in accordance with standards

[6:10] set forth by the governmental accounting standards board. The final item that I'd

[6:15] like to visit with you about related to the financial statement audit is our

[6:19] observations about the audit process. A and here we would inform you if anything

[6:23] bad had happened during the audit, if we'd had any significant difficulties,

[6:28] disagreements with management, anything in those areas. I I'm happy to report

[6:33] that nothing like that happened. Management of the city was extremely

[6:37] cooperative throughout the entire audit process and they were very transparent

[6:41] in answering the numerous questions that we had. Uh before I open it up for

[6:46] questions, I would like to mention that outside of the financial statement

[6:49] audit, we also performed a single audit of the city's expenditures of federal

[6:53] awards. Uh we're required to perform such an audit when the city expends more

[6:57] than a million dollars of federal awards. As part of that audit, we did

[7:02] test a major program this year, which was the city's airport improvement

[7:06] program. uh we have no findings that we're required to report as part of that

[7:11] test work and as part of that single audit of federal expenditures. We did

[7:15] issue an unmodified audit opinion on compliance for the major program which

[7:20] is also the best kind of opinion that you can receive on the single audit. Uh

[7:26] I would open it up for questions now. Before I do that, I would like to very

[7:30] much thank Lisa Marshall and her staff in the finance department. uh they they

[7:34] were getting ready for the audit kind of without a financial director in place

[7:38] this year. So, a lot of work that her and that department went to to get ready

[7:42] for that. I think in order for the city to receive an excellent result on its

[7:46] audit, you really have to have good policies and procedures in place year

[7:50] round, not just in the several weeks where they're getting ready for us to

[7:54] come in and do that audit. And I think our audit result shows that the city

[7:58] really does have those processes and procedures in place year round in order

[8:02] to achieve that result. So with that, I would open it up for any questions that

[8:06] any of you might have this evening. >> Thank you, Stacy.

[8:11] » Anything? >> Excellent.

[8:14] » Awesome. >> Great report. Thank you.

[8:17] » Thank you. >> Okay, we need to have a motion.

[8:21] » We need a motion to accept the caffer. I I move that we accept the report.

[8:27] » I second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any

[8:29] further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I.

[8:34] » I. >> Any opposed? Same sign. That motion

[8:36] carries. Next [clears throat] item this evening

[8:39] is our 2027 budget hearing. Um I'm going to go ahead and ask Ben Hart with Baker

[8:45] Tilly to kick us off on that and then we'll kick it over to Rebecca.

[8:51] » Thank you, Mayor. Um, I want to just first say that I had the absolute

[8:56] pleasure to work with the same staff, Lisa Marshall, when she wasn't doing

[9:00] audit, she was helping us. Uh, that was that was fantastic. I was able to work

[9:05] with Rebecca and obviously Daniela when we uh started putting the budget

[9:10] together within the state of Kansas. budgets start really early, usually in

[9:16] the spring, and they usually start with a revenue forecast way ahead of the end

[9:20] of the year, which is really unfair from a finance standpoint, but it's always

[9:24] been that way. Your budget's no different. The revenue forecast and the

[9:29] operating budget for that matter was put together back in March and discussions

[9:34] throughout April happen. Eventually, it gets to this the commission. I know um

[9:39] at this this summer you guys spent uh at least three budget workshops uh going

[9:46] through the budget that was presented by the city administrator. Um everything

[9:52] culminates really tonight in two different budget uh public hearings to

[9:56] get uh citizen input. uh the first being the public hearing on revenue neutral

[10:02] for 2027 a statutory requirement and then the second obviously the budget

[10:08] itself >> uh for and then followed by that

[10:11] followed by that would be the adoption of the budget. Uh this budget $66.8

[10:16] million was spread over several several

[10:20] operating funds. Uh and within the budget itself, uh there are several

[10:25] pages, one of which shows the public the publication of that that number and then

[10:31] all the funds that go with it. Um with that, is there any any additional I

[10:36] think information that Rebecca has. >> Thank you. Um I'll just be going over um

[10:42] what's in your packet on the memos before we enter into those hearings.

[10:47] just to give a little bit um going back to what we're going to have for the

[10:51] revenue neutral rate. As you might remember, your revenue neutral rate is

[10:54] the tax rate in mills that generates the same property tax revenue in dollars as

[10:59] levied the previous years using the current evaluation. In June, we were

[11:03] notified by the Harvey County Clerk that our revenue neutral rate would be um a

[11:08] mill of 69.408 across all funds. The current mill levy

[11:13] is 72.353. That's a difference of 2.945 mills or

[11:19] $555,599

[11:22] in valuation increase. At the July 19th meeting, the commission approved notice

[11:27] of intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate and to inform the county clerk. At

[11:31] the fourth budget workshop, the city commission decided to reduce the mill

[11:34] levy rate from 72.353 to 70.942.

[11:40] The difference from revenue neutral rate would be utilized to fund the airport

[11:43] bond and interest and special liability funds. The library board has notified

[11:46] the city that they are keeping their mil levy flat and assuming the increase in

[11:50] valuation. Before we move on to that hearing, I

[11:54] might just give you a quick summary of the budget as well since they're going

[11:59] to be moving pretty quickly. Um, as um, Ben mentioned, the proposed budgets um,

[12:07] across all funds reflects that mill levy rate. Um, while no new positions were

[12:13] added and included in the budget, it does maintain the commitment to the

[12:16] salary study. Um, which is one of the largest line items um, in increase. Um,

[12:22] there's no direct transfers from utilities to support the general fund.

[12:25] In previous years, that was approximately $1.2 million. So again, a

[12:29] commitment to reduce that burden on the utilities. The airport mill levy was set

[12:36] to have incre additional funding to meet the needs of the growing airport

[12:39] operations and the expansions in that area. The external funding requests were

[12:44] funded and it's spending down um in a deficit on the general fund and current

[12:50] cash. So with that, I do have those numbers on slides.

[12:56] They're all things you've seen before as those breakdowns. We can reference them

[13:00] if needed. But this is your proposed mill levy. So, but unless there's other

[13:06] questions, probably ready to start then. >> Okay. At this time, I'll go ahead and

[13:12] open the public hearing. I'd invite individuals to step forward who uh wish

[13:16] to speak on this. If you would please state your name and address and your com

[13:20] comments regarding this item. >> And this needs to be for the RNR

[13:24] hearing. >> Correct.

[13:26] More clarification.

[13:47] » Anyone? >> Okay. Well, I declare the public.

[13:52] » What? You'll need to take a roll call vote now on your res.

[13:56] » No, I got to close the meeting, don't I? >> It's okay. We got it. Make a motion and

[14:01] a second on the resolution and then we'll do a roll call vote.

[14:05] » Okay. You got me home. >> All right. [laughter]

[14:10] » I call for a sec. A motion. >> I so move.

[14:13] » Do I have a second? >> I second.

[14:16] » Yes, we do. >> All righty. All those in favor say I. I.

[14:19] » I. >> Now, you're going to have to have the

[14:21] roll call vote. Sorry. So, I will start with at this end and

[14:25] I'll go through and you need to say yes or no to the roll call. So, Commissioner

[14:29] Kaine, >> yes.

[14:32] » Vice Mayor Watson, >> yes.

[14:34] » Mayor, >> it commissioner Valentine,

[14:37] » yes. >> And Commissioner Miller,

[14:39] » yes. >> Thank you.

[14:42] » Okay. All right. So, now we are going to open

[14:46] the public hearing for the 2027 budget. Again, anybody wishing to speak on this

[14:53] matter, please uh come forward, state your name and address and and your

[14:57] comments. And that would be you, sir.

[15:08] » Hello. I'm Daniel Sanders. Um I live at 1111 South Pine Street here in Newton.

[15:15] I moved here a year and a half ago. Um how much time do I have?

[15:21] We don't limit it, but out of courtesy, we train everybody out at three minutes

[15:25] long. >> Yeah.

[15:26] » Um, I moved here a year and a half ago from Sterling, Colorado because my

[15:30] mother-in-law is the last living parent we have and she has dementia. So, my

[15:35] wife wanted to move back and help take care of her. Um, so I quit my career out

[15:40] there and I moved here. We moved here and our house was paid for out there.

[15:46] So, we paid cash for our house here. Um, my house out there was worth more than

[15:51] the house I have here. And my property taxes were $750 a year in Colorado. And

[15:59] I mean, we lived in the house for a number of years. And I was shocked when

[16:05] the property taxes went up $25 a year. I thought this is crazy. It's out of

[16:09] control. So then we get here and my property

[16:13] taxes are 3500, 3600, 3,700. Um they started out at 3,200. Um and I

[16:22] did know that coming here that my property taxes are

[16:27] going to be high, but I didn't know they were going to go higher as high as they

[16:32] do every year. Um this will be my third property taxes I'll have to pay. And um

[16:40] you guys appraised my house for more than what I could sell it for. Um I had

[16:46] an appraiser come by two weeks ago because I'm having a new roof put on my

[16:51] house and he appraised it for less than what the city did. And I don't know how

[16:58] all that works. Um and I don't know how all this works. This is my first time

[17:03] here. Um, and it's just because I'm a concerned citizen

[17:08] » and I mean I'm 60 years old and I'm going to have to work till I'm dead

[17:14] at this rate. I mean I do have a good retirement. Um,

[17:21] but I don't if if the property taxes keep going up like they are, I won't be

[17:26] able to afford to live here. Um, and I see how the elderly get taxed out of

[17:33] their homes. I really do now. >> Um, because the property taxes are just

[17:38] so high here. And I understand that the property taxes

[17:42] are there for a reason because, you know, the schools and the roads and I

[17:47] mean, I don't know where it all goes. Um,

[17:50] but man, that's a lot of money. If you're taxing everybody as much as you

[17:54] tax me, that's a lot of money for the city. Um,

[18:02] so like I said, I'm just a concerned citizen. Um,

[18:07] and I think I will come to more of these meetings. Um, so I understand them

[18:12] better. Um, and I'm not trying to start an argument. I just I just

[18:19] I'm at a loss because you think my house is worth more

[18:23] than what it is and my taxes keep going up and it's crazy.

[18:29] I don't know that with my retirement um if I do get to retire

[18:34] um with my homeowners insurance, the water

[18:39] bill that's crazy high now, um my property taxes, um I mean that's

[18:47] That's more money than I'll have. I know that for sure. But that's all I got.

[18:53] Thanks for letting me speak. >> Oh, thank you for coming up and

[18:56] speaking. It means a lot. >> Thank you.

[18:58] » Thank you.

[19:06] » Anybody else?

[19:09] » All right. At this time, I'll declare the public hearing closed and bring the

[19:14] discussion back to the bench. Commissioners,

[19:18] anything? >> I

[19:22] I think it would be worth some time to maybe clarify

[19:28] with regard to how those appraisals occur.

[19:34] Um, >> the ownership, you know, appraisals are

[19:36] are >> by the county. They're they're not by

[19:39] the city. >> The city does not appraise your

[19:42] property. >> There was a push by the legislature on

[19:45] the counties of Kansas to increase the assessed values

[19:50] um because the legislature felt that the assessed values were uh lower than than

[19:56] market. So, um that led to the last few years of our assessed value increases

[20:03] here in Harvey County. Um it is unfortunate, you know, that often times

[20:08] the the city bears the the fault or the blame for the entirety of the property

[20:13] taxes. Yes, we do levy property taxes for the city, but that bill that you get

[20:19] is a combination of all the the taxing bodies, the school district,

[20:24] » um any special districts, >> state,

[20:27] » state, county, >> and and the city as well. Um I too

[20:32] understand and and can see how somebody can be priced out of their home and it

[20:36] is concerning. >> Um

[20:39] until there's uh wide tax reform at the state level. Um sir coming from Colorado

[20:45] Taber is a totally different thing over there. The way that the state revenue is

[20:49] and and the way that the cities and municipalities are funded from that

[20:53] state income tax is totally different than here in the state of Kansas. And

[20:57] it's the opposite. you get taxed heavier on your income than you do on your

[21:02] properties. So, um, government, no matter whether you're in Colorado or

[21:07] you're in Kansas or you're anywhere, it takes a lot to run a municipality, um,

[21:12] and the roads and public safety and everything. So, we hear you. We as a

[21:16] body have really pushed on our city staff and our departments to maintain

[21:21] costs this year. And that's why we are bringing forward a budget this year that

[21:25] does not take into account all of the um assessed value increases that uh were

[21:31] available uh for this body. We said no to that. We said no to positions. We

[21:37] said no to um items. We pushed costs that the city used to incur on behalf of

[21:43] the citizens back on those citizens, i.e. credit card fees and everything.

[21:49] Um, we we didn't believe that the rest of the community should be um paying

[21:54] those credit card fees for everybody else, whether it was somebody pulling a

[21:58] permit or somebody um paying paying a bill. So, we we hear you. We we just

[22:04] have to be very surgical in um the efforts that we take because we don't

[22:10] want uh amenities or services to be negatively impacted too much if we get

[22:15] too heavy-handed in our >> our items. Um anything else?

[22:20] » I think it's worth noting that from I'm I'm new on the commission, but what I

[22:24] understand as a long-term strategy is well the reason the housing values are

[22:30] increasing is because we don't have enough housing. there's a housing

[22:32] shortage. So, we'll have a housing report coming up next. Um, Newton has

[22:37] really been pushing for adding more houses, which will bring in all of those

[22:41] new houses will bring in property taxes, which will then spread the burden, as

[22:45] well as the industrial development like GAF, uh, Shield, AI,

[22:50] once those come onto the books, uh, as property taxes, that will increase the

[22:55] revenue and allow us to to be able to stabilize some of the property taxes.

[23:00] um trying to spread the burden rather than raising it on add more people, add

[23:05] more properties. I think that's that's how I understand the long term.

[23:07] » One one of the focuses that we've been trying to do here for three or four

[23:11] years, five years, is really put a a focus on bringing in new industrial and

[23:18] commercial industry because they pay the property tax rate at double of what the

[23:23] citizens do in our in our homes. >> Yeah. And so that's where we're really

[23:27] going to increase and take the pressure off off of all of us homeowners. The

[23:32] more that businesses here can expand or bring in new businesses, then that will

[23:39] that doesn't mean that all of a sudden our property taxes are going to go down,

[23:42] but the pressure is going to be lessened as time goes on and those revenues come

[23:46] on to the tax roles. So we all feel exactly how you feel when we get our tax

[23:53] bill. We're all homeowners. We all know what that is. We don't like it. And uh

[23:59] just like the mayor said, we have taken specific steps here to, you know, lessen

[24:04] the mill levy, to use some of our ending cash, you know, down to an acceptable

[24:09] level and uh and not hire some of the the the personnel that has been

[24:15] requested. >> So, we're we we hear you loud and clear.

[24:20] It's not like we're just tonedeaf up here and we all just ignore it. We

[24:24] don't. So, thank you for expressing that though.

[24:28] » And I would encourage if you have that tax statement, um it's divided by all of

[24:33] the taxing entities. It might be good. Um if I'm sure I'm going to volunteer

[24:38] somebody from the city. Um if you want to bring that up to the city and the

[24:42] city manager is glad to help you break that down to see exactly where the

[24:46] city's portion of that whole tax bill is versus the county, the state, uh the rec

[24:51] center, >> the school board,

[24:53] » all of that. the school board and the school bond issue. I mean, we're dealing

[24:58] only with the city portion of that whole tax bill. And so, I would encourage you

[25:05] uh to bring that up and have somebody just go through that with you so that

[25:09] it's much clearer because I have had to have people go through

[25:14] that with me, too. I know what we deal with here at the city level, but when I

[25:17] get that big statement, I have to remind myself and sometimes ask for a little

[25:22] bit of extra direction to understand what all of that means in total. So, I

[25:27] would encourage you to do that >> and come to more meetings. I love when

[25:32] people attend meetings. Thank you. >> I I I [clears throat] I think I mean I

[25:37] agree everybody on here what they've said is all true. Um but I think we've

[25:43] left something out and that is that those returns on those investments from

[25:50] Jif and Shield IIA are going to take years before we get see those and that

[25:56] doesn't help us right now and these citizens need help right now and um so I

[26:05] I know that we have put um we have put pressure on our staff to to um you know,

[26:12] try to figure this out and and I know they work hard and I got to say the

[26:18] staff's amazing. They they do they work hard and trying to get us the

[26:22] information that we need to make an informed decision and it just takes time

[26:26] to do that. But um we like we said, we do hear what you're saying and we

[26:33] if we could solve this problem right now, we would do that. But we're trying

[26:39] to figure out how we can do that, give some relief now, you know, sooner

[26:46] than later type of thing. Um, so if we can just kind of bear with us a little

[26:52] bit on that, um, that would be great. But

[26:56] » that's all I wanted to say. >> All righty. At this point, I would call

[27:02] for a motion.

[27:07] Are we adopting the budget? >> I move that we adopt the 2027 budget.

[27:11] » I second. >> We got a motion in a couple seconds.

[27:14] » Couple seconds. >> All righty. Any further discussion?

[27:18] » Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? Same sign.

[27:23] Motion carries. You going to pull the roll call on this, Denise?

[27:26] » No. >> Nope. Okay.

[27:27] » Very good. All righty. All right. Next item this evening is to

[27:33] receive the annual housing update. Zack. Good evening. [clears throat] Excuse me.

[27:39] Uh, this evening I'm going to provide our annual update on housing activity in

[27:43] Newton. Rather than simply walking through Rather than simply walk through

[27:47] a list of projects, is it just going to be one click?

[27:53] Oh, gotcha. Thank you. Rather than simply walking through a

[27:58] list of projects, I want to frame this year's report around three questions.

[28:02] Where were we? Where are we today? And where are we going? I think the

[28:06] framework does a better job of showing the progress we've made while also

[28:10] putting into perspective the work that is still ahead of us.

[28:17] Where were we? So, where were we? Over the last several years, our housing

[28:21] conversations have consistently centered around the same challenge. We simply

[28:25] need more housing. Our available inventory has remained constrained.

[28:29] Demand throughout the region has remained strong and infrastructure costs

[28:33] continue to make new residential development difficult. At the same time,

[28:37] we were beginning to build a much stronger pipeline. Fox Ridge was driving

[28:40] a significant amount of the new residential construction. We had

[28:44] additional projects beginning to emerge around Sand Creek Station and we were

[28:47] having more conversations with developers about what it would take to

[28:51] make the projects financially feasible. A lot of work has was focused on

[28:55] recruitment, planning, identifying development opportunities, and finding

[28:59] the right tools to help projects move move forward. There was very very little

[29:04] change between the annual report I presented in August of 2025 and the end

[29:08] of that calendar year leading into the spring. And that brings us to where we

[29:12] are today.

[29:17] That's touchy. Today, I think the housing picture looks

[29:21] considerably different. We aren't just talking about potential projects

[29:24] anymore. We have construction underway. We have dirt moving. We have

[29:28] infrastructure being planned. We have projects moving through the RHID

[29:31] process. And we have another generation of housing developments beginning to

[29:35] form behind the projects already under construction. Fox phase one is near

[29:40] nearing full buildout. Harvest Point phase 2 is under construction. Artistic

[29:45] builders has started site preparation. The fairways is moving through the

[29:48] development process. and we have additional h add additional projects

[29:51] involving Fox Ridge and the Southeast 14th Street connector moving through the

[29:56] pipeline. That doesn't mean our housing challenges solved, but it does mean

[29:59] we're beginning to see tangible movement in areas we've been working on for

[30:03] several years. Two projects really demonstrate where we

[30:08] are today. Harvest Point 2 is currently under construction and will add 28 new

[30:13] housing units specifically for residents aed 55 and older. The project consists

[30:18] of seven residential buildings and represents approximately 5.5 million in

[30:22] new housing investment. The builds this builds upon Harvest Point phase 1 and

[30:27] continues to expand our senior housing inventory. Fox Ridge phase 1 is also

[30:31] approaching the finish line. That that development includes 19 single family

[30:35] homes, 38 duplexes, and 11 triplexes. All permits for the subdivision have now

[30:40] been issued and we anticipate the subdivision sub subdivision being fully

[30:44] completely uh being completely built out. Fox Ridge has been an important

[30:48] project for Newton because it demonstrated that there is demand for

[30:51] new housing and for different types of housing products within our community.

[30:55] The developer is now looking to capitalize on the success which I'll

[30:58] discuss in a moment.

[31:04] The next wave of de development is beginning to take shape around the

[31:07] around San Creek Station Golf Course. Artistic Builders is moving forward with

[31:11] 71 residential development uh uh a lot residential development at 24th Street

[31:17] in Anderson. The development is expected to focus primarily on duplexes in the

[31:21] 380 to $400,000 range. The infrastructure petitions have been

[31:25] approved and dirt work has begun to uh has begun to prepare the site

[31:30] immediately south of San Creek Station clubhouse. The fairways is planned as as

[31:35] approximately six 60 single family residential lots. Those homes are

[31:39] anticipated to range from approximately 400 to 600,000. The developer is

[31:43] pursuing a reinvestment housing improvement uh incentive district or

[31:47] RHID to help offset the the special assessments associated with installing

[31:52] infrastructure. Between those two projects alone, we're talking about

[31:55] approximately 131 new residential lots around San Creek Station. That's a

[32:00] significant addition to Newton's future housing inventory.

[32:04] Growing the pipeline is just as important as these projects moving

[32:07] forward. Just as important as the projects moving today is what is

[32:11] beginning to develop behind them. Following the success of Fox Ridge phase

[32:14] one and the developers looking at opening Fox Ridge phase 2, they intend

[32:18] to pursue an RHID to help offset infrastructure costs associated with the

[32:22] next phase. Separately, the developer is also evaluating the Fox Ridge Apartments

[32:26] project that is a separate development from both phase one and phase two and is

[32:31] also expected to uh is expected to pursue our HID assistance. We also have

[32:36] the No Morpher development near the Southeast 14th Street connector. The

[32:40] that project involves approximately 20 acres and is anticipated to include a

[32:44] combination of single family and multifamily housing. The RHID resolution

[32:49] for that project has been approved by the Kansas Department of Commerce and we

[32:53] are currently in the pre-planning and development agreement stages. These

[32:56] projects are important because they give us a pipeline beyond the housing already

[33:00] under construction.

[33:04] Even with all that activity, the market continues to tell us that additional

[33:07] housing is needed. The Witchaw area median sale median sale price is

[33:11] approximately 267,000 while Newton's median sale price remains

[33:16] around 195,000. Home values continue to appreciate and inventory remains

[33:21] particularly constrained for home prices below 300,000. Mortgage rates also

[33:26] continue to create affordability challenges particularly for firsttime

[33:29] home buyers. At the regional level, the estimated housing deficit has grown to

[33:34] approximately 20,000 single new family homes or new single family homes. Newton

[33:39] doesn't operate or Newton doesn't operate in isolation from the regional

[33:43] market. We compete for employees, residents, businesses, and investment

[33:47] throughout South Central Kansas. Housing availability directly affects our

[33:51] ability to recruit workforce and support economic growth. So, even though we're

[33:55] seeing significant progress, the underlying demand that drove this work

[33:58] has not gone away.

[34:04] I want to also emphasize that our housing efforts aren't limited to

[34:07] building new subdivisions. The Newton Land Bank continues to focus on infill

[34:11] development and returning underutilized properties to productive use. We are

[34:16] hopeful that the sale of 324 East 11 Street will create another opportunity

[34:20] for residential investment with an establish within an established

[34:23] neighborhood. We're also exploring the potential acquisition of approximately

[34:27] 3.8 8 acres of city-owned property that could eventually be redeveloped in a

[34:31] partnership with Habitat for Humanity or the Housing Alliance. Beyond physical

[34:35] development, we continue working with the Housing Alliance and other community

[34:39] partners on housing stability. Those conversations include transitional and

[34:43] supportive housing, renter and landlord resources, home repair assistance, and

[34:47] the need the needs of residents experiencing housing insecurity or

[34:51] homelessness. We also continue to offer programs such as the neighborhood

[34:55] revitalization program and rehabilitation rebate program to

[34:58] encourage reinvestment in our existing housing stock. So when we talk about

[35:03] housing, we're really talking about the entire spectrum. New construction,

[35:06] infill, reinvestment, housing stability, and helping people remain successfully

[35:11] housed. So where are we going? [snorts]

[35:16] That's the final question. I would describe our next phase as moving from

[35:19] pipeline to production. We spent a considerable amount of time building

[35:23] relationships, identifying sites, working through financing options,

[35:27] establishing RHIDs, and recruiting developers. Now, we need to convert

[35:30] those opportunities into housing. That means getting infrastructure into the

[35:34] ground. It means completing development agreements and moving RHID projects

[35:38] forward. It means continuing to work with developers when barriers arise. It

[35:43] means identifying additional development ready ready property. And it means

[35:46] continuing to recruit builders and developers so we aren't dependent upon

[35:49] only a handful of projects. We also need to continue diversifying the types of

[35:54] housing available in Newton. There isn't one project or one housing type that is

[35:58] going to solve our housing needs. We need single family housing, duplexes,

[36:02] multifamily housing, senior housing, infill development, and housing at

[36:05] different price points. The goal is to create enough diversity and consistent

[36:09] production that housing availability supports rather than constrains Newton's

[36:13] future growth. and what success looks like. It's more

[36:18] it's more homes being built. It's more residential lots becoming development

[36:21] ready. It's more housing choices available to current and future

[36:24] residents. It's additional private investment coming into Newton. It's v

[36:29] vacant and underutilized properties being returned to productive use. And

[36:33] most importantly, it's establishing a sustainable housing pipeline where we

[36:37] weren't starting over every year looking for the next project. When I look back

[36:41] at where we were and compare it to where we are today, I think we've made

[36:45] meaningful progress. A year ago, many of these projects were conversations,

[36:49] concepts, or financial discussions. Today, we are seeing construction, dirt

[36:53] work, infrastructure planning, RHID approvals, and developers preparing

[36:57] their next phases. Our job now is to capitalize on that momentum and turn the

[37:01] pipeline we've created into sustainable housing production. And with that, I

[37:06] conclude my housing update, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. 32411.

[37:11] That's the old greenhouse by Dylan, isn't it?

[37:14] » Uh, no. That's it's actually the street. >> You [clears throat] sure? It's the one

[37:19] across from the >> behind 12th Street. Uh, what's the the

[37:23] units? Um, it's kind of Don't want to give away.

[37:28] » No, I got Google. I'll figure it out. >> Okay. 324. You still haven't.

[37:32] » It's across the street from the greenhouse.

[37:35] » And I'd like to see that green, >> but it is not that house.

[37:39] Darn it. All righty. Thank you, Zach. >> Thank you.

[37:45] » Do you need us to actually receive that report or

[37:50] Okay, very good. Next item this evening is to consider an ordinance update fees

[37:56] for sanitation collection. Ed. >> Yeah, thank you, Commission. I'll start.

[38:01] Chris may want to jump in here at the end, but um this is just a a correction

[38:07] to an ordinance that you [clears throat] this body approved last November when we

[38:12] updated our uh s our solid waste collection ordinance. We inadvertently

[38:18] um missed putting in the fees that would be charged for um a request for a pickup

[38:25] on a day that wouldn't normally be your trash day. And so this ordinance or this

[38:30] uh amendment change uh fixes that. We've attached a red line for you um to look

[38:35] at that. If if you want to approve that tonight, that'd be fine. If you'd rather

[38:39] us come back after you have some time to look at it, we can do that also. But but

[38:44] ultimately, we're just trying to fix a an error that we missed in the first

[38:48] goound. So if Chris, if you have anything else to add, I

[38:51] » think I'd covered it. Stand for any questions.

[38:55] » How did you become aware of this issue? >> [laughter]

[39:02] [cough] [clears throat]

[39:03] » I'll let the city manager explain that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Would you like to explain

[39:06] that one, city manager? [laughter] >> So, there's an extra fee if you if they

[39:13] pick up on a day that they're not. >> Yeah. So, if you inadvertently forget to

[39:17] set your trash out on your trash day, say your trash day is Monday,

[39:21] » and you call and say, "Hey, I can't wait till the following Monday. Can you come

[39:26] pick it up?" Then we charge it a fee because it's off route. So we have to

[39:30] » right >> kind of recover some costs there.

[39:32] » Yeah. At the time. >> Yeah.

[39:36] » And for a homeowner that's 1433. But the ordinance also makes sure that that

[39:42] we're made whole for somebody who is >> type two.

[39:45] » Type two or whatever at a different rate appropriate to their type of service.

[39:50] » Yeah. Based on the size of their dumpster.

[39:54] » Seems kind of logical. [laughter] Right. Any further discussion?

[39:58] » Do you have an ordinance number, Denise? >> Yes. It would be 5205-26.

[40:06] » I move we approve 5205-26. >> I second.

[40:11] » We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?

[40:15] Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I.

[40:17] » Any opposed? Same sign. >> That motion carries.

[40:22] » Thank you, Ed. Thank you. Next item this evening is to consider

[40:26] reacquiring 10 acres of real estate from 21 Aber LLC. That's the northwest corner

[40:32] of Oliver and First Street out by the airport.

[40:35] » And this is a short item. This involves a city real estate sale back in April of

[40:40] 2022. As you recall, you did sell those 10 acres that were adjacent to the

[40:45] airport. Um often in our PSAs, our purchase and sale agreements, we do have

[40:50] clawback languages with uh requirements to develop. Uh this did not meet that

[40:57] threshold. It was extended. Offer was extended. Um city staff now recommends

[41:03] pursuing a purchase back. We wanted to put it um kind of on your radar. Um this

[41:09] is property that's adjacent to the airport that can be developed. It didn't

[41:13] meet the original schedule. The original reversionary uh interest called for a

[41:18] 40,000 square foot building to be built before May one of 2025. No permits have

[41:25] been pulled. Um we're open to develop with that entity and any other entity,

[41:29] but to keep these on the market. City staff would recommend pursuing it.

[41:35] » You have given extensions. um they understand they would rather extend but

[41:41] they they understand there was a reversionary interest and you have the

[41:44] right to to purchase it back. This is one where the city would purchase it

[41:48] back. It isn't something where it's forfeited and they have to give it back.

[41:52] So it' be the original purchase price. >> Is is that purchase price negotiable? I

[41:57] mean I mean we have to >> Anything's negotiable. you have a

[42:00] contractual right and they have a contractual obligation to sell it at

[42:04] that $79,000. Um, of course it could be negotiated. We

[42:10] wouldn't negotiate up because we have a right at that price. Um,

[42:16] » so we would not negotiate >> we would not recommend negotiating it.

[42:21] We would purchase it for the price as outlined in the original PSA.

[42:27] » I guess my concern is if we don't uh then we set a precedent and then if

[42:33] uh we do this with somebody else um and just you know let them sit on it. I

[42:41] I mean it it makes sense to me that we go ahead and purchase it back from

[42:45] » I agree >> and this the the money's used for that

[42:48] would be from the Ecodo fund which are set aside for that purpose and this is a

[42:54] situation where we would be >> controlling our own destiny. We would we

[42:58] would then have a property that we could go out and market in an area that is

[43:04] seeing increased activity. So >> So we already have funds that are set

[43:09] aside for a specific >> Yes, we do.

[43:11] » Uh issue. Okay. >> And that's their purpose. It's not like

[43:16] they're just sitting there. That's their purpose is to do that. So

[43:20] » Okay. I have, this is loosely related, but in

[43:23] the original contract are could they flip the property now if if land out

[43:28] there is selling at 12,000 acre and they bought it at 8, can they choose to sell

[43:32] it on to someone else? >> The property is still encumbered by a

[43:35] reversionary interest. >> So, we have right of first and it's not

[43:39] technically a right of first refusal, but we do have an interest to purchase

[43:42] it if they don't make uh >> because they committed to building on

[43:46] Exactly. Yeah. >> And that's recorded on the deed. Okay.

[43:51] We don't need formal action, but direction or if you need more

[43:54] information, we can bring it back to you.

[43:59] » I think I'm I'm good. >> I'm good. Um, can we go ahead with a

[44:03] motion? >> You just need a

[44:04] » head direct staff to come back with a purchase and sale agreement to reacquire

[44:09] the property. >> I motion that we direct staff to proceed

[44:12] with the purchase of this property. >> I second.

[44:16] » We have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I.

[44:19] » I. Any oppose? Same sign. Motion carries.

[44:24] Next item this evening is to consider an asset disposal guidelines. I

[44:30] think Daniellea, are you going to take this one?

[44:32] » Yes, I will. Um, the last few months, uh, city staff have

[44:39] taken on, um, some reorganization of city hall. Um this comes um as a sort of

[44:47] a step number one as to some clearing out some offices and um

[44:54] making city hall also safer. Um through that process we found out we have a lot

[45:00] of old furniture um broken tables, broken chairs, a lot of broken things um

[45:07] or outdated things that don't have a use anymore. lots of cassette tapes and

[45:12] cassette players that don't work. Typewriters,

[45:16] » right? >> What

[45:17] » although it it was nostalgic going through all of this stuff, um, a lot of

[45:22] it has what I would what I would say has um no value or a value of under $100.

[45:30] Um what we did is we asked all city staff and to drop by anything that um

[45:37] they didn't need, they didn't want or was broken. And we would go through it

[45:41] and determine how best to use the uh surplus furniture, whether it was to

[45:46] find a a new home for it, repurpose it, um

[45:52] or throw it away, um or I'm sorry, donate it. And when going through our

[45:57] purchasing policy, we realized we don't really have clear guidelines. And so,

[46:01] um, I put my finance hat on and, um, I think that it would be prudent to sort

[46:06] of give staff some guidelines that we can use going forward. Um,

[46:13] let me let me bring these up real quick. Um I haven't been

[46:21] um okay I haven't worn my finance hat um in

[46:26] a formal role in a while. So, I uh spoke with our assistant finance director um

[46:31] and with our management consultant um Baker Tilly. And I know Ben's not here

[46:35] anymore, but they recommended sort of this these guidelines, which was

[46:40] anything under $100 we can recycle, scrap, donate, or dispose of. Uh $100 to

[46:45] $500 we can sell um if bundled or disposed with minimal staff effort. Uh

[46:51] 500 to 2500 we would sell efficient method. over 200, we would absolutely

[46:57] sell and a formal control documented um process. So, um if you approve this,

[47:03] then we're going to go through our uh surplus room and uh we might find more

[47:09] homes for um a lot of those chairs than we thought we would, but a lot of that

[47:13] will be uh thrown away or or donated. >> Awesome. H happy to answer any

[47:20] questions. Anything?

[47:24] » I don't >> I don't have any. I just I've been there

[47:27] done that. >> Yes.

[47:29] » Yeah. >> I think it was last what

[47:32] » who determines >> Wednesday everybody was in clothes

[47:34] cleaning. >> Who determines the value of these items?

[47:39] » Do you com combined >> or the value? No one item had a value of

[47:46] over $100. >> Oh, okay. Okay. So, we're we're we can I

[47:51] don't have a number of everything combined. It's all stacked in this room.

[47:54] I can see chairs and tables. And >> so, you're talking about combined, not

[47:58] individual. >> Individual. Indiv each item. Okay.

[48:01] » $100 under $100. Yeah. >> Actually, combined I might argue that

[48:05] combined the entire thing is not worth $100. Okay.

[48:08] » These are these these things are 50 years old that have been sitting in

[48:13] corners. more than $100 in staff time to get rid of the dunk or whatever.

[48:19] » Yes. Yes. >> And we have um we have our own internal

[48:24] control. So if there's ever a question of the value of something, we would have

[48:27] some someone else look at it and say, "Okay, I think that's worth $500 to

[48:32] $1,000." I would have someone else look at it and say, "Yeah, that's $500 to

[48:35] $1,000. Let's sell it per these guidelines." And then we would remove it

[48:39] off our asset disposal. Um, we would remove it off of our asset listing, also

[48:45] off of our insurance listing if on the insurance um um

[48:51] listing. Excuse me. >> I motion that we approve the asset

[48:57] disposal guidelines. >> Okay, we have a motion. Do we need a

[49:01] second? >> A second.

[49:03] » Awesome. All in favor say I. >> I.

[49:05] » Any oppose? Same sign. Motion carries. Awesome.

[49:09] » Thank you. Thank you. All right, we are done with our regular agenda items. We

[49:17] don't have any executive sessions this evening. So, we are going to

[49:21] [clears throat] move into our citizens forum. So, first item this evening,

[49:26] Christopher Snow.

[49:34] » How much time do I have? Five minutes or something?

[49:36] » Yeah, three three to five minutes would be great. We got several people on the

[49:40] list this evening and everything. If you would name and address and

[49:44] [clears throat] >> my name is Christopher Snow. I live at

[49:46] one Sherman Court, Newton, Kansas.

[49:52] So, I'm here to talk about the flock cameras and just let you know that, you

[49:57] know, I've had 25 years in cyber security and I hold a CISSP

[50:03] and I defend networks and sensitive data for a living. But I'm not here as a

[50:08] consultant. I'm here as your neighbor because Newton is installing 11 flock

[50:15] cameras at every instance to this city. And I believe we are

[50:21] making a mistake. We will not easily undo.

[50:26] Let me tell you what these cameras actually are because the sales pitch

[50:31] leaves it out. They are not Newton's cameras. They are nodes in a private

[50:36] company's national surveillance database.

[50:39] Every car that enters the city gets photographed,

[50:44] tagged, and logged. Your plate, your truck's dented tailgate, the bumper

[50:52] sticker that says who you voted for or where you worship.

[50:58] And once that record exists, it can be searched by thousands of agencies across

[51:03] the country. Agencies that have never heard of Newton, Kansas,

[51:10] an answer to no one in this room. In 1984, George Orwell gave us the

[51:18] telescreen. And here's the detail people forgot. The

[51:23] telescreen didn't have to watch everyone all the time. It only had to make

[51:30] everyone believe it might. That's what broke the people of

[51:35] Oceanana. not watching the possibility of being watched when every trip to the

[51:41] doctor, the gun shop, the church, the political meeting, the AA meeting is

[51:48] logged and at the city line. Free people start editing their own lives.

[51:56] Orwell wrote the book as a warning. Somewhere along the way, someone started

[52:02] reading it as a product road map. Now, let me put my professional hat on

[52:08] because this is the part I know cold. In security, we live by the simple rule.

[52:16] Every piece of data you collect is data you must defend forever against

[52:21] everyone. The cheapest data to defend is the data you never collect.

[52:27] We're told the data deletes after 30 days. Fine.

[52:32] But for those 30 days, it lives on a vendor's servers outside our control,

[52:38] inside a network we do not audit. Syracuse, New York, learned its local

[52:44] flock data had been searched more than 4 million times by outside police without

[52:50] warrants. Evston, Illinois found federal immigration searches running against its

[52:56] data despite a state law forbidding exactly that.

[53:01] A Texas officer used the same network to hunt nationwide for a woman over pro for

[53:08] a private medical decision. And every vendor database on the breach,

[53:14] every vendor's database is one breach away from being everyone's database.

[53:20] I have watched breach after breach across my career. And the question is

[53:25] never if, it is when, and how bad. When flock is breached, and it will be

[53:32] breached, the travel patterns of every family in Newton are the payload.

[53:41] [sighs] I grew up on Star Trek. I don't think

[53:45] that's a small thing to bring up in this chamber. Star Trek is the story we tell

[53:50] about the future we actually want. A future where we solved our problems

[53:55] without surrendering who we are. There's an episode where Captain Pequard

[54:00] watches a security investigation spiral out of control and he warns that the

[54:05] road from legitimate suspicion to rampid paranoia is very much shorter than we

[54:11] think. He was right. In Deep Space 9, Star Trek or Starfleet put armed

[54:18] checkpoints on every corner of Earth to protect it. And the show haunted us with

[54:24] the verdict in a single line. Paradise has never seemed so wellarmed.

[54:31] Nobody dreams of a future with a camera on every off ramp. We dream of a future

[54:37] where we never needed one. Nobody doubts our officers intentions.

[54:44] This is not about them. It's about the fact that good intentions do not secure

[54:49] a database. And local controls written into contracts is not local control

[54:56] written into physics. The moment our data leaves Newton, our

[55:01] police stop protecting it. So here is my ask and it is specific.

[55:08] Pause the seven cameras not yet installed

[55:12] for any that remain. No national network sharing searches by

[55:17] warrant or documented emergencies only. Independent audits published to the

[55:23] public and an annual vote is open session to

[55:28] review or end this program. If lock will not accept these terms that

[55:35] tells you everything about whose data this really is.

[55:40] Newton has thrived for more than 150 years without logging every soul who

[55:45] drives in. We are a town, not a checkpoint.

[55:51] Orwell warned us. Peard warned us. And 25 years in this field taught me the

[55:57] same lesson they were teaching. The surveillance you accept in fear, you

[56:04] keep forever. Mr. Mayor, don't build the telescreen.

[56:11] Thank you. >> Thank you.

[56:13] » Thank you.

[56:17] [sighs] >> Mr. Sanders, you already spoke. So,

[56:22] you spoke already, right? >> Yes.

[56:24] » Okay. I'm going to go ahead and Did you want to speak again or you could

[56:29] normally when you sign up on the roster, it's at the end of the meeting, but we

[56:32] let you speak earlier, so I'm just double checking. You didn't want to come

[56:36] back up. Okay. Very good. Maggie Snow.

[56:46] » Maggie Snow. on Sherman Court. Good evening, commissioners. You all know why

[56:51] I'm here. At this point, I'm starting to wonder if I should just reserve the

[56:55] podium every other Tuesday. I first stood at this podium on July

[57:00] 28th. I returned again on August 11th, and I am standing here again tonight on

[57:06] August 25th. During that time, I have done exactly what residents are asked to

[57:11] do. I have submitted records requests. I have reviewed the documents the city

[57:15] provided. I have submitted specific follow-up questions. I have communicated

[57:20] professionally and respectfully with staff who, I'm sure, as Denise can

[57:24] attest, probably groans audibly when my name hurts her email inbox.

[57:28] I gave the city additional time when I was told that answers were being

[57:32] prepared. On August 13th, the city clerk told me the staff had hoped to provide

[57:37] responses to my Kora request the following week. That week passed without

[57:40] a response. Sunday, I specifically asked whether I should expect an answer before

[57:45] tonight's meeting. I received additional information, quite a lot of it, at 4:37

[57:51] p.m. today, including the new city website, which was published yesterday

[57:57] and announced this morning. Um, that also has the link to the flock

[58:03] portal on it where you can see that 95,000

[58:06] plus images have already been logged in the Newton Flock system. Again, the

[58:12] website went live yesterday. Here we are again. Same cameras, same

[58:19] fundamental questions, and this time we've got a little bit more data, but

[58:26] not sufficient to answer all of my questions.

[58:31] Our first duty is to truth. And so, I think tonight it is about time to get

[58:35] real with where we are. The cameras are already installed.

[58:42] Again, the database that went live yesterday

[58:46] shows that as of right now, 95,145 images, unique images have been

[58:52] detected. 30-day data retention. Total of 81 searches to date. The contract's

[59:00] been signed. a sixf figure 36-month commitment of Newton taxpayers. Your

[59:06] money has already been dispended for this camera installation. For three

[59:12] commission meetings now, I still can't get a clear, straightforward answer of

[59:16] how we got here. This doesn't have to drag on for another meeting. You can all

[59:22] end this easily. If the records exist that I've

[59:28] requested, simply produce them. If they don't exist, then own it and say

[59:34] that I am not willing to accept another

[59:38] iteration of staff is still working on it. The July 13th announcement told the

[59:42] public that there were safeguards in place and documented. If the system were

[59:47] properly authorized, documented, reviewed, and governed before

[59:50] deployment, why is it taking so much time to reconstruct that data?

[59:56] On July 13th, city told the public policies and training were in place. The

[1:00:01] policy I've provided was dated July 14th. If there was anything in effect on

[1:00:05] the 13th, just provide it. If there wasn't, own it and say so. If the

[1:00:11] technology review required by the city's own purchasing policy occurred before

[1:00:15] the purchase, including the security, legal compliance, CJIS compliance, audit

[1:00:20] requirements, compatibility, and future resource needs were provided, then

[1:00:24] provide it. If it didn't occur, then own it and say that it did not occur. I

[1:00:31] repeat, I am not asking the city to manufacture explanations after the fact.

[1:00:37] I am asking for what existed when the decisions were made. At some point,

[1:00:43] we're still working on it stops being an explanation and starts sounding an awful

[1:00:46] lot like obfuscation. So, tonight I have a question.

[1:00:51] Are you willing to request that the flop camera program be placed on a future

[1:00:56] commission agenda for formal public discussion with staff provided directed

[1:01:01] to provide the outstanding written answers and supporting records in

[1:01:04] advance of that meeting? It's a simple yes or no. If the citizens

[1:01:10] forum isn't a proper place to address this, then put it somewhere where we can

[1:01:15] on a commission agenda. Put it on the agenda. review the procurement, the

[1:01:20] policies, the safeguards, and the oversight. According to the uh Flock

[1:01:24] website that just went live, access is controlled for reasons.

[1:01:30] Reasons. What's a valid reason?

[1:01:35] Is it I have questions about where someone's going?

[1:01:38] Is it I suspect something? Is it I have a case number? We don't know.

[1:01:45] That's the controls we have apparently have in place. So, commissioners, I ask

[1:01:49] again, who among you is willing to request that flock be placed on a future

[1:01:53] agenda so these questions can be publicly discussed and answered

[1:01:58] publicly.

[1:02:07] » Well, let the record show. And for the citizens of Newton,

[1:02:11] » Maggie >> Melanie, please. [clears throat] um we

[1:02:15] we get discouraged from interacting with with um

[1:02:21] » during the citizens forum. >> So I think that might be why you're

[1:02:24] getting some [clears throat] fillets. >> So in that case again place it on the

[1:02:30] agenda. As of right now, no one on the commission is willing to express that

[1:02:34] that be placed on a public agenda. That is good information for the

[1:02:40] citizens of Newton. I will be continuing to review the documents that I have been

[1:02:44] provided and I am sure that I will be coming back with more questions.

[1:02:48] » Thank you, Maggie. >> All righty. Tanner Dickerson.

[1:02:56] » Tanner Dickerson down on Winward Drive. Uh just came to the council to see if

[1:03:01] you guys would consider using shipping containers as a garden shed for

[1:03:07] feasibility there. I know it's on the commercial building code already.

[1:03:11] There's some regulations around that which is good. Um I'd like to see the

[1:03:16] regulation around that preferred to just provision continuously

[1:03:21] on the shipping containers. Uh they're durable, they're structurally sound. Um

[1:03:27] they withstand heavy loads transportation across the ocean. They're

[1:03:31] more secure than conventional sheds and they're affordable option.

[1:03:37] Uh, the appearance I get is the big hitter. Uh, rather than prohibiting

[1:03:41] them, I'd like to see the city establish reasonable requirements for paint color,

[1:03:45] condition, screening, setbacks, placement, maintenance, and so they fit

[1:03:49] in with residential neighborhoods.

[1:03:54] Um, I guess it's the big points there.

[1:03:59] That's all I got. >> Thank you for your consideration.

[1:04:03] » Do you have a moment to stay after the commission meetings? I talk to you real

[1:04:06] quick. Okay. Absolutely. >> Thank you.

[1:04:07] » Thank you. >> Cody Salem,

[1:04:14] » is it sllum? Yeah, >> it's good enough.

[1:04:16] » All right. >> Good evening. Uh my name is Cody Silian.

[1:04:19] I live at 1015 East 8th Street. It's good to see you all again. Last time I

[1:04:23] was here, uh I got to speak with everybody, but I didn't get to speak to

[1:04:26] you, mayor. Um so I am also here to talk about flock alprs, which is a bit of a

[1:04:31] misnomer. Um, so for the information that I gathered from the internet, u I

[1:04:36] was really on the fence about this kind of thing. Um, but after hearing what I

[1:04:42] just heard, there's a lot more because I am not a cyber savvy person whatsoever.

[1:04:46] Um, so I didn't get to speak at the first meeting. So I did propose a few

[1:04:50] questions. One of them was if flock was so great for the community, why didn't

[1:04:54] the community know about it? Um, the city of Witchaw is currently

[1:04:58] being sued for the use of lock cameras. And we had two cities in Kansas their

[1:05:03] flock contracts just last week. One was Wellsville, Kansas with a population of

[1:05:08] 2,000 people. Gardener, Kansas with a population of 2,000, sorry, 26,000

[1:05:13] people. Newton has a population of 18,000 people. Having cameras is not the

[1:05:18] main issue. All businesses and homes around have cameras. The issue is the

[1:05:23] aggregation of the information and who it is being shared with.

[1:05:28] Um, currently I believe a lot of that information is stored on Amazon servers.

[1:05:32] That's why we seen a flock was posing with Ring and then that busted up during

[1:05:36] the um, Super Bowl ad debacle. Um,

[1:05:42] we have a wealth of knowledge in this community and experience as well. Um, if

[1:05:47] we were brought in to the conversation from the beginning, we could have worked

[1:05:51] together for an optimal outcome for the community, especially when safety is the

[1:05:55] concern. Um, but Newton's crime rate is actually

[1:05:59] declining and Kansas's crime rates are as a whole are at a 57-year low. So, at

[1:06:06] this point, Flock feels like a solution in search of a problem.

[1:06:10] I'm not a public speaker by nature, but I don't mind spending an evening

[1:06:13] aggregating some information to bring to an argument that passed us by or really

[1:06:18] a conversation. I apologize. Uh, at this point, I'd like to ask

[1:06:23] anyone who may be listening who would like to see flock be removed, come out,

[1:06:27] get involved, and speak at these meetings. Thank you.

[1:06:31] » Thank you. >> Thank you.

[1:06:36] » That's the end of that. Um,

[1:06:41] that's the end of our regular meeting. Um as Maggie Snow shared the city portal

[1:06:47] with the flock um is out there. It shows not only the number of images but the

[1:06:53] few number of actual accesses and searches of the data that has been

[1:06:59] collected in our community. Um I might clarify on the edge of our community.

[1:07:06] It's not patterns within our community. Um

[1:07:10] take a look. You can really dive in there. I am a data monkey. I I like it.

[1:07:15] Um you can even go out and see the communities that we have uh sharing

[1:07:19] agreements with and conversely those that we do not have sharing agreements

[1:07:23] with and everything. Um you know the the commission doesn't get

[1:07:30] into individual procurement issues very often. this this was within uh the

[1:07:35] purview of our police chief and u this was a subscription to a tool that didn't

[1:07:42] bubble up to the the body's visibility of it. I mean many of us have all been

[1:07:49] part of group projects and everything and if we made every project there every

[1:07:53] decision to be a group decision I don't think we'd ever get anything done. So,

[1:07:57] um I don't think it was through any sort of obstucation or or in intent to skirt

[1:08:03] anything. It was just simply uh Chiefs and his team trying to u get another

[1:08:09] tool in in their tool belt. Um and with that, I will go around the horn for

[1:08:15] commissioner comments >> regarding the same

[1:08:20] » regarding anything this evening. We're about to close.

[1:08:24] » U well

[1:08:27] I I think uh the other the commissioners kind of know where I stand and uh with

[1:08:33] this is just that I really think we need to review our

[1:08:38] policy and and do some you know real make it more detailed or something more

[1:08:48] accountability something um as I go as we go along here and I learn more and

[1:08:54] more about these um cameras. You know, I I get it. I get why people are concerned

[1:09:02] about it and um and it I feel it is something that should have came through

[1:09:09] the public and we should have gotten public

[1:09:12] uh feedback from it and and actually that's really good as well because then

[1:09:17] you get policies can get built from the that collaboration. Um, so that's kind

[1:09:24] of where I stand with the the flock stuff. I I'm not to against it

[1:09:28] necessarily. I'm just I just think that we uh could have handled this a little

[1:09:34] better maybe than we did. But lesson learned. I mean, we were not with

[1:09:41] without flaw for for sure. Um, so that that's all I have to say about

[1:09:48] that. >> Thank you, sir.

[1:09:51] No sir. >> No sir.

[1:09:56] » It it was really nice to see that the audit and the budget get, you know, kind

[1:10:02] of wrapped up in the same night. Um it's it's sort of the um the what we work on

[1:10:09] um almost the entire year. We're constantly looking back through an

[1:10:14] audit. Um and we're working in today in our every day and then in our budget

[1:10:20] we're always looking ahead. So we're looking at a period of about three years

[1:10:24] um at any given point during the year and seeing these documents adopted and

[1:10:30] the amount of time that staff worked on these um especially without um someone

[1:10:36] in the finance director role. the finance department um was actually down

[1:10:41] another the um accounts receivable gal so was down 40% of the staff um there's

[1:10:47] just been a lot of transition this year and I I think the it says a lot about

[1:10:53] staff and um we banded together to get through this and I know it was messy and

[1:10:58] it wasn't typical of what you see um every year but we learned a lot and we

[1:11:03] grew a lot and I'm glad that it's adopted but I just wanted to thank you

[1:11:07] for your support and your grace. And I wanted to thank my team because they I'm

[1:11:11] sure they are are happy and will celebrate tonight that we did get

[1:11:14] through a great audit. We're in a great financial position. You see that our

[1:11:17] budget um ended us in a good cash position. Um I'm I'm cautiously

[1:11:24] optimistic about the future of our property taxes. Like Dan um is it

[1:11:28] Daniel? Like Daniel mentioned, I know that

[1:11:31] there's changes that are coming um at at the state level and so we'll be ready

[1:11:36] for those next year. Um we'll be having a lot of conversations in the next 12

[1:11:40] months before you get a new budget of how we can prepare ourselves for

[1:11:44] potential changes. Um because I I I like Daniel understand where our residents

[1:11:49] are coming from and we don't we we don't want to do that for our residents. You

[1:11:53] know, we want to provide them the services that they deserve and they pay

[1:11:55] for, but at the same time, we want to be good fiscal stewards of our money. So,

[1:12:00] um, we hear you and, uh, we're working really hard. So, thank you.

[1:12:03] » Thank you. [clears throat]

[1:12:06] » Just a reminder not to leave because you do all need to sign this budget.

[1:12:11] » It's not done to the paperwork. >> A reminder, [laughter]

[1:12:14] sir. >> No, sir. Okay.

[1:12:17] » Um, well, I will add to what Melanie said. Uh, I'm going to take a different

[1:12:22] take on that. I do appreciate, um, chief, what you are doing. I uh applaud

[1:12:30] applaud you and Erin in the uh building of that website. I've had time to look

[1:12:36] at some, not all. It's very clear. Um I I'm I personally believe that we hire

[1:12:43] our city manager who works with our department heads to make the best and

[1:12:48] wisest decisions with our taxpayer dollars. Um I will say I consider this

[1:12:55] to be a much more dangerous item than that. I have literally sat at

[1:13:02] my desk at work, have visited with other co-workers about

[1:13:07] a this or that only to find within minutes

[1:13:12] something has popped up on my phone with regard to what I have spoken of.

[1:13:18] And I think that can be it to me that's dangerous. Um, I it it requires being

[1:13:25] really careful and mindful about the discussions you might have. So, thank

[1:13:31] you for what you do. I thank all of the staff for this budget season. We always

[1:13:35] take a deep breath after this is over with and we start to look forward and

[1:13:40] move forward. So, thank you for all the hard work that you did. When we asked

[1:13:45] something of you, you gave. And we are so thankful for how you supplied us with

[1:13:49] whatever we needed at the time we needed it. So, thank you very much. Um, that's

[1:13:54] it. >> Well, thank you. Um, policies are living

[1:13:57] documents. We're going to learn from this and we're going to continue to

[1:14:01] grow. So, you know, of that I have confidence. I would like to say to our

[1:14:05] finance team and all of our department heads and everything. Thank you for all

[1:14:08] your hard work on the budget. Congratulations on a clean uh audit and

[1:14:13] enjoy your two weeks off before we have to start thinking about FY28. So,

[1:14:17] [laughter] with that, we are ajourned.

Regular Commission - 25 Aug 2026

Transcript