[0:00] Alright, the
[0:04] time is 3 0 1. Welcome to the fifth regular meeting of the jackson county legislature.
[0:09] it's monday, march 2nd, and we are in the legislative as casey legislative
[0:13] assembly area. Uh, let's do roll call. Anderson. Here.
[0:18] peyton. Here smith. Present. Husky.
[0:22] present franklin. Here. Mcgee
[0:29] lauer smith. Here.
[0:34] um, um, we have seven
[0:38] present. Two absent. And then did,
[0:43] did, um, legislator lauer contact you? Uh, not to my knowledge
[0:47] nor legislator mcgee. She sent us an a legislator at lauer's
[0:51] aid, sent us an email and asked that she be excused. All right. For this
[0:55] weekend, len. Okay. She in it. Uh, seven present. One excused.
[0:59] one absent. Thank you. Uh, is there a motion to approve the journal? So move
[1:04] second. Uh, any opposed? Well, the
[1:08] clerk, oh, I'm sorry. Um, it appears, aye have it
[1:12] as do indeed. Have it. Um, all right. Uh, will the clerk please
[1:16] read 2, 2 1 8 5. Do we wanna do the p oh, I'm sorry. Yeah,
[1:20] I guess we can do the pledge. Uh, legislator smith, vice chair. Will you lead
[1:25] us in the pledge of allegiance? Sure. Taken off the rest
[1:30] I pledge allegiance in student flag of the united states of america,
[1:35] and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under
[1:39] god, individual with liberty and justice for all.
[1:48] all right, so for those who are here to testify, I just want to do one, um,
[1:53] courtesy resolution first, and then we'll move into the public hearing. So, uh, will the clerk please read
[1:57] resolution 2, 2 1 8 5,
[2:02] I believe honoring ms. Gwendolyn
[2:07] grant during women's history month introduced by donna peyton. Okay.
[2:13] uh, is there a motion to adopt? So moved. So moved. Second. Uh,
[2:17] madam clerk, please call the roll. Anderson.
[2:21] yes. Peyton? Yes. Smith? Yes. Husky?
[2:26] yes. Franklin? Yes. Mcgee
[2:31] flower smith? Yes. Abca?
[2:35] yes. Seven. Yes. One absent. One excused
[2:39] legislator. Peyton,
[2:44] where's the microphone? Yeah, I,
[2:52] oh, it was right in front of me. I'm sorry. I didn't know.
[2:56] . That's unusual. Thank you.
[3:01] it is such a privilege and an honor to recognize
[3:06] gwendolyn grant who serves as president and ceo of the urban league
[3:10] of greater kansas city, becoming the first woman to lead the organization
[3:15] in. Its more than a hundred year history. And
[3:19] ms. Grant is a nationally respected civil civic leader
[3:24] whose commitment to civil rights, social justice, public safety,
[3:28] and equitable opportunity has strengthened the urban league's role as a
[3:32] leading regional voice on workforce development, educational
[3:37] equity, health disparity, and po policy
[3:41] reform. It was during the covid-19 pandemic that ms. Grant
[3:45] mobilized public, private, and philanthropic partners to meet
[3:49] urgent community needs, expanding food access,
[3:54] digital connectivity, and support for black-owned businesses.
[3:58] and ms. Grant will have the urban league police accountability task force
[4:03] exposing harmful policing practices within the kansas city police department
[4:08] and prompting a formal request for us department of justice patterns
[4:13] and practices investigation. Ms. Grandfield, a landmark
[4:17] lawsuit, challenging missouri's mandate that kansas city
[4:21] fund a state control police department elevating national attention
[4:26] to the city's lack of local control. And her leadership has
[4:30] further affirmed, was further affirmed when
[4:34] the urban league received a $1 million unrestricted grant gift
[4:39] from philanthropist mckenzie scott, enabling
[4:43] expanded services and organizational stability. Ms. Grant
[4:47] continues to shape public safety and civic reform through
[4:51] her service with the urban summit, save kc, the
[4:55] urban council and national urban league advisory bodies.
[5:00] and we know her to be a respected columnist for the
[5:04] call. And civic reform happens when she speaks
[5:08] up. Her service is to the community is
[5:12] immeasurable, and it is such an honor
[5:16] to present her with this resolution today. Be
[5:20] resolved that the county legislature of jackson county, missouri honors and
[5:25] commends gwendolyn grant for her extraordinary leadership,
[5:30] unwavering advocacy and transformative impact on the
[5:34] greater kansas city area and beyond.
[5:38] congratulations.
[5:57] thank you legislator peyton, and to all
[6:01] of the legislators, uh, chairman of barca. And to everyone
[6:05] here, I just wanna say thank you so much for this honor.
[6:09] I'm truly blessed to have had this opportunity to serve kansas
[6:13] city and all of the people that the urban league works to
[6:17] support, to fight for racial equity and social justice.
[6:22] I accept this honor on behalf of the talented team that supports the work of
[6:26] the urban league. We have a strong and talented staff and a highly
[6:30] committed board and all of the women and other civil rights
[6:34] leaders on whose shoulders I stand. Thank you so much for this
[6:39] honor. I'm truly blessed. I am truly touched, and I
[6:43] will continue to do the work that I have been called to do. Thank you.
[6:47] thank
[7:04] you. Are good. Actually, you might need it for
[7:08] over there. You need it again? No, that's good.
[7:14] alright. We will now move into our public hearing processes. Uh,
[7:18] I'll ask my staff if you would come back to grab these ones. If you have not already
[7:22] signed up to speak, you must be, um, pre-sign up to speak. Uh,
[7:27] I believe, uh, madam clerk, we at least need, uh, city of location of where
[7:31] you reside. Um, in addition to the information that's provided, um,
[7:35] our chief of staff gen man here is gonna carry out, um, another
[7:40] signature block right there. If you want to sign up to speak, please do so. Um,
[7:44] before we get to the end, we will do both ordinances one at a time.
[7:49] um, and do me a favor and tell me if you're speaking, uh, for or against when
[7:53] you come up. Um, and we will take it in that way. So, um,
[7:58] hearings. Thank you madam clerk. If you'll join us and you
[8:02] get to sit next to our wonderful county executive here while you speak, make sure you please speak
[8:06] in, uh, speaking to the microphone, um, and make sure that
[8:10] it is on and ready to go so that we can, uh, have those
[8:14] who are listening online, also hear the legislation or
[8:19] let hear your testimony. Uh, so at this time, the kind of legislature will hold a
[8:23] public hearing on ordinance 60 50 prohibiting law enforcement officers from concealing
[8:27] their faces or badges during performance of their official duties and establishing
[8:31] penalties and exemptions. We will also then hear on ordinance 6 0 6 1
[8:35] prohibiting all permits and zoning approvals for non county or municipal government owned detention
[8:40] facilities. So first we will start with 60 50. We
[8:44] have before us, um, ms. Ingrid
[8:48] flags poller, I'm sorry, when I butcher your names. So, uh,
[8:52] ingrid, if you'll join us, um, question on process. Yes, mr. Chair. Uh, we need
[8:56] to have them sworn in that, um, I was also gonna ask,
[9:01] are we, um, gonna hear from somebody in favor of and
[9:05] then opposed to kind of go back and forth? Unfortunately, I don't have that information in front of me
[9:09] to do that. So we're just gonna read straight down the list and speaking to process. Yep.
[9:13] is there a time limit? Um, yeah. We'll
[9:17] do two minute times and I'll ask that, uh, clerk, if you, one of the clerk staff
[9:21] will execute a timer for us, please. And are we going to
[9:26] request that people not be repetitive if the same testimonies already been provided?
[9:30] uh, I'll let people say what they want for their two minutes. Um, so that's what I'll, I'll
[9:35] stick to there. Ah, thank you mr. Executive. Um,
[9:40] so with that said, uh, clerk's office, you all good with the timer?
[9:45] two minutes. Uh, and again, if you will, when you stand up to join us,
[9:49] um, madam clerk, can we call those who are gonna testify and swear
[9:53] 'em in, I guess? Okay. So that we have that official process
[9:58] as well. So if you plan to testify today on ordinance 60 50 or 60 61,
[10:02] please stand up and raise your right hand.
[10:08] do you swear under the penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give in the matter and issue is
[10:13] the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So help me. God.
[10:18] thank you all. All right, well, welcome up ingrid flags. Poer glass
[10:22] poer. Sorry if I'm mispronouncing that. Is there an ingrid?
[10:30] all right, we'll move on to charlotte turgen.
[10:39] no, charlotte. All right. Beverly harvey. This
[10:43] is fun. . Okay, I'm sorry. Which
[10:47] one is this one? . So 60 50 is the mask,
[10:51] uh, ordinance. Mask, yep. You wanted me to tell where I'm
[10:55] from? Yeah, just tell, yeah. If you join us here at the testifying witnesses
[10:59] side and tell us at least where, what city you're, you reside in.
[11:04] yeah. And what's your name? Beverly harvey. I'm with
[11:08] indivisible, uh, here in kansas city.
[11:14] and probably if I didn't tell you who I was, you wouldn't know,
[11:18] right? You wouldn't know who prove the point. Why? Because
[11:22] I'm word enough. We can't even, speaking of the,
[11:28] I just wanted to prove a point there that when people wear a mask, you can't tell who
[11:32] they are. All right. So the only people
[11:36] who wear masks are people who are committing crimes who do not want to be identified.
[11:41] let me repeat. The only people who wear masks are people who are committing
[11:45] crimes who do not want to be identified. Why do they not want to be identified?
[11:49] because they know or they are committing a crime. Trump has created an
[11:53] armed gestapo. He's doing exactly what hitler did in the 1930s.
[11:58] pick an enemy and blame them for everything that is wrong or bad. That is called scapegoating.
[12:03] after world war ii, hitler began to blame the jews for after world
[12:07] war I. Hitler began to blame the jews for the economic and
[12:11] political problems that of the day. And we all know how that turned out. We
[12:15] all know that illegal immigrants make up a very small number of the population, and
[12:19] even a smaller number of illegal aliens are criminals. So we all
[12:24] know that is an excuse to blame and create hate. Here we are
[12:28] debating on whether a gestapo should or should not wear a mask. What we should
[12:32] be talking about is why we are even allowing ice trump's gestapo
[12:36] into our cities. We've all seen the horror of what ice agents bring.
[12:41] they murder people, they beat people up, they maim them, they spray pepper spray them,
[12:45] they tear gas them. They harass american citizens. They
[12:49] illegally enter people's homes and businesses, and they kidnap children and their
[12:53] parents. They ship them off. God knows where.
[12:57] and then most recently dropped off an elderly blind man after he was
[13:02] released from their custody, custody, who was not an illegal immigrant at
[13:06] a location far from his home, late at night, at a location that was closed,
[13:10] and then lied about it later because the man was found dead soon after being dropped
[13:14] off. So why should ice agents not wear masks? The question should
[13:18] be why are we allowing the gestapo in our city? Let's be real. Immigrants
[13:23] are not the problem. Trump and the gestapo are the people who support
[13:27] trump are the problem. People have been brainwashed by fox news and others. They
[13:31] feed lies to the american public. Trump is a monster. He lies, he cheats, he steals.
[13:36] he is a racist, a misogynist, a pedophile. He is the best example of what
[13:40] the most horrific human can be. We are all immigrants of this nation.
[13:44] unless you are native american, you are a descendant of an immigrant mr. Chair.
[13:49] if the city council allow ice trump's gestapo to wear masks, you are just as evil
[13:53] as he is. I should be banned from kansas city in the surrounding area.
[13:57] time limit. No respected. Thank you.
[14:03] we'll, welcome up claudia toman.
[14:08] claudia toman,
[14:12] please again, look out for the timer so we can stop you so I don't have to reign
[14:16] everyone in, please. Okay. Are you
[14:21] starting it? Tell me when to start as soon as you start off. Yep. Clock.
[14:25] um, well, somebody needs
[14:29] to say something about, um, all the lies that we just heard because we were,
[14:34] we swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But in fact, can
[14:38] you tell us what city you're from? Oh, I'm sorry. Kansas city, missouri. Thank you.
[14:42] um, much of what, uh, the, the young lady who just spoke was
[14:46] a lie, especially what she said about donald trump. And, and I take exception to
[14:50] it. But here, we're here to talk about the mass. And
[14:55] one of the other things she said that was in fact correct, is that the pe people
[14:59] who are committing crimes and don't want anyone to know who they are, are
[15:03] criminals. And during the biden administration, during the pandemic, we
[15:07] saw, um, hundreds of people, if not thousands,
[15:11] committing crimes all over the country and wearing masks.
[15:16] they were wearing masks, supposedly because there was a pandemic. But anyone
[15:20] who knows anything about biology knows that you don't get a virus
[15:24] from being outside in the open air in, uh, a
[15:28] dispersed, um, area. You get that when you're, uh,
[15:33] in, uh, small areas when, when you're, uh,
[15:37] in densely populated areas and closed environments.
[15:41] um, but they have created, particularly during
[15:46] the biden administration when, um, over two,
[15:50] uh, over 25 million people were led into this
[15:54] country, and in fact, encouraged to come into this country and sometimes even
[15:58] flown into this country and around this country by our government,
[16:03] supposedly our government, although clearly it's not. Um,
[16:08] and they were given all kinds of advantages. And
[16:12] basically what was done was that we admitted the enemy
[16:16] into our homes. And it is, and now
[16:21] the government is trying to rectify the situation and
[16:25] get the invading army out. These are murderers, these are pedophiles.
[16:29] these are horrible, horrible, many of them horrible, horrible people.
[16:34] they are, are gangs and, uh, they raped and murdered
[16:39] time. Okay, margaret,
[16:44] how, how this,
[16:49] okay. Thank you. Yep.
[16:55] my name is margaret. How I live in mission, kansas. I'm
[17:00] here to speak today as a resident of the greater kansas city metro.
[17:04] I'm speaking to advocate for banning face masks on
[17:08] ice agents and anyone who enforces laws. No one,
[17:13] even criminals, who, by the way, are supposed to be innocent until
[17:17] proven guilty, should be confronted and detained
[17:21] by someone wearing military gear, carrying a gun, and wearing
[17:25] face covering. How are we to know any of us
[17:29] if we're being lawfully detained, if they cannot be identified?
[17:34] is this a kidnapper, a law officer, someone else
[17:39] please vote to require ice agents to bear their faces, wear
[17:43] identification, and clearly define who they are and who they
[17:48] represent. Thank you very much.
[17:56] thank you for the clapping. I I wanna reign that in as well so that we can keep things moving as quickly as we
[18:00] can. Uh, dennis roland,
[18:06] good afternoon. My name is dennis roland. I'm a resident of
[18:11] jackson county in specifically kansas city, and in
[18:15] particular on addressing 6 0 5 oh, I, um,
[18:19] I like to offer a different perspective. Uh, I do support the, uh, uh,
[18:23] intention of, uh, banning mask in, uh, as
[18:27] the ordinance provides that, uh, during,
[18:32] uh, uh, performance of their official duties. However,
[18:36] I believe that the ordinance is problematic, at least as drafted,
[18:40] um, while I support the premises and goals.
[18:45] uh, the, uh, um,
[18:50] there's no language contained in either proposed ordinance in either
[18:54] in the ordinance itself that, uh, is,
[18:58] uh, where will it be codified, for example. And these are
[19:02] minor issues, and what code number will it be, uh, issued? And in
[19:06] 6 0 5 oh, uh, has no language which provides for
[19:11] any financial penal punishment for, uh, the ordinance
[19:16] specifically says the purpose is to provide punishment, but the ordinance itself doesn't
[19:20] have it. That language in there, uh, there's no effective date
[19:24] of the, uh, second, whereas the purpose, uh,
[19:29] of concealing identities, unless a valid exemption applies, there's basically
[19:33] no definition of a valid exemption other than what you put in the ordinance.
[19:38] uh,
[19:43] the, uh,
[19:47] exemptions that you've, uh, applied seem to be
[19:51] limiting. So I believe it should, uh, contain language, which,
[19:55] uh, includes other
[20:00] potential, uh, incidents. And
[20:05] the other section where it says written documentation, I believe is
[20:09] also problematic time. Thank you, sir.
[20:13] um, well, one last comment. Uh, with all due respect, the ordinance
[20:18] hasn't been signed by the county counselor. It shouldn't even be up for consideration,
[20:22] but I do. Thank you, sir. I do support. Thank you. That's the time. Thank you.
[20:26] I do support the premise kenda to
[20:30] mcclain. Sorry if I'm missing the mispronouncing
[20:35] names here. Beautiful job
[20:51] for the record, it's ken toms mcclain. And I am opposed
[20:55] to this ordinance, our law enforcement city, sorry, tyler
[20:59] city, uh, kansas city, missouri jackson, jackson county.
[21:03] thank you. Uh, this ordinance is
[21:08] flawed in many respects, but predominantly law enforcement
[21:12] are allowed to wear masks when, if there are gas
[21:16] attacks, if there are other reasons. And these ice officers
[21:20] are simply doing a job. These laws are not new.
[21:25] these ice, these, uh, federal laws that they're enforcing have
[21:29] been around since many years, including under president obama.
[21:33] and they were used by him, president biden, many others. So this is nothing
[21:37] new. And therefore, the problem is
[21:41] that the anti-age ice protestors
[21:45] are using, if they see the face or
[21:49] if they see their badge number, they are doxing. These people, they are not only attacking
[21:54] the ice officers themselves, but they are going to their homes and causing
[21:59] disruption, and they're going into their children's schools and causing disruption.
[22:04] so it's a very dangerous job when they are simply enforcing
[22:08] federal law, which again, has been around a long time.
[22:12] this is nothing new. This is not the gestapo, this is a law en a valid
[22:17] law enforcement activity. These people are in the country illegally.
[22:22] they have been given a hearing. There's so that all of
[22:26] that is not disputed. These people have, the ice agents have a lawful reason
[22:30] to be in those communities, and they should not be fearing for their lives from
[22:34] all kinds of people that have nothing to do with the situation.
[22:39] so I would strongly urge you to vote against
[22:43] this. This is a very destructive thing. We do not want our law
[22:47] enforcement to be under attack by everyday citizens and people
[22:51] running into their community, near their homes and harassing them. That is totally
[22:56] unfair and bad. Thank you. Thank you.
[23:00] greg ellerman.
[23:19] thank you. My name is greg ellerman. I'm a, uh,
[23:23] I'm a resident, long-term resident of kansas city, missouri. I'm a retired
[23:28] clinical psychologist, and I'm in favor, I'm in favor of
[23:32] banning the wearing of masks in jackson county for
[23:36] law enforcement officers for the following reason.
[23:42] on the one hand, the mask officers are more anonymous,
[23:46] which can lead to less accountability
[23:50] and therefore greater aggression. On
[23:54] the other hand, the people may feel more dehumanized
[24:00] due to the masking, which also can lead to greater
[24:04] aggressiveness in response.
[24:09] in summary, in my opinion, masking of officers
[24:14] is likely related to greater chance of violence,
[24:19] whereas no masks is likely related
[24:23] to greater safety for officers and the
[24:27] people. Thank you.
[24:35] patricia parks.
[24:44] I'm patricia parks, a retired teacher from blue springs. And
[24:49] I was just coming and I wasn't going to speak, but then I thought, if I'm just sitting
[24:53] there, you won't know what I'm thinking. So here I am with nothing written down
[24:57] and I won't use two minutes. Everyone signed up to do that. But anyway, I'm
[25:01] very much against the mask for the reasons that a lot of people have already said here,
[25:05] and I don't need to go through 'em again. But I think it's very un-american
[25:10] for them to have these masks and hiding their identity. And besides that,
[25:14] they're poorly trained. I will add that, that's all I need to say. I'm
[25:18] definitely against it.
[25:23] joy rush.
[25:32] my name is joy rush. I live in blue springs, like patricia. I
[25:36] also didn't come prepared to speak. I have no prepared remarks. Um,
[25:41] however, I have been reading, and there is a lot of speaking
[25:45] about how we can't make a law in jackson county
[25:49] that supersedes what is federal law and the doxing
[25:54] situation. And in my humble opinion, even
[25:58] if the legislature would pass a resolution
[26:02] to forbid masks, which I would be in favor of, of the people
[26:07] of ice in jackson county, I think it's a
[26:12] symbolic thing that needs to be done. And the more
[26:16] government entities that do that symbol symbolism
[26:20] will make an effect at a nationwide level. And all
[26:24] of you gentlemen, ladies sitting here in the legislature,
[26:30] you all, none of you have on masks. You're all capable of being
[26:34] doxed. You're all capable of having somebody come to your house to do all
[26:38] these things that some of the people here mentioned previously. But you're here without
[26:42] masks. So why can't the people that we as
[26:47] taxpayers are paying to do the job of, and I'm not against
[26:51] enforcement, I'm just not for this type of enforcement.
[26:55] so I'm hoping you all will stand up and do, if nothing else
[26:59] symbolically say, jackson county is against
[27:04] masked men in our county. Thank you.
[27:12] david brock, urman,
[27:24] sorry about your name. Sure. I pronounced it. No, that's good enough. David broman.
[27:28] I'm, um, here in kansas city, missouri. Um, thanks for allowing us the
[27:32] opportunity to speak. Um, yeah,
[27:37] it's, you don't have to go very far
[27:41] to see, to find evidence of
[27:46] what a group of masked individuals, the effect that
[27:50] that has on a, on people in front of them. And,
[27:54] um, one of the primary
[27:59] purposes of law enforcement is to deescalate situations.
[28:05] and it seems that
[28:09] coming on a scene, take aside,
[28:14] I mean, setting aside extenuating circumstances or situations
[28:18] in which, um, clearly it might be necessary for law enforcement to
[28:22] use masks. Um, that's
[28:26] not what we're talking about. We're talking about these general, these large gatherings
[28:30] where, um, it seems that there's
[28:34] a default starting at an escalated point.
[28:39] and that tension,
[28:43] I mean, we see, we see the possibilities of what can happen and this, um,
[28:48] there's an opportunity here to stand
[28:53] up and do what we can to try and prevent
[28:58] bloodshed and violence in our cities that might be
[29:02] in our city, that could have possibly been avoided
[29:06] by, by a deescalated state. And,
[29:11] um, I don't
[29:15] think it takes a lot of common sense to see that. And I would echo our mayor's, um,
[29:21] sentiments on the detention center. I don't think we
[29:25] wanna be in the business of storing and shipping human beings
[29:30] time, especially in terrible situations. Thank you very much. Thank
[29:34] you
[29:38] sarah ferentz.
[29:52] um, my name is sarah farn and I live in kansas city,
[29:56] missouri. Um, I also am a college student. So,
[30:01] um, I wanna start off by pointing out how insane
[30:06] it is that we even have to be here today to try to do anything in our power
[30:10] to prevent mass individuals, um, in our, from terrorizing
[30:14] our community and our immigrant neighbors. Many times
[30:19] may I add without a warrant, it's right in front of our faces. Let's see it.
[30:23] um, when did it become okay to kidnap people without a warrant? If you're
[30:27] denying what is happening and can't realize that this is fascism, then I don't know what
[30:31] will. Um, the real criminals, pedophiles, and rapists
[30:35] are in the white house. Um,
[30:40] we must do everything in our power, um, to resist what is happening
[30:44] and the dismantling of our government. So I support banning masks
[30:48] for ice agents. The trump administration is destroying the country,
[30:53] and we must do anything in our power to show that what is happening is not okay. Even
[30:57] with ordinances like this. Um, even small things are
[31:01] making a point against fascism. Um, this is why I support banning,
[31:05] um, masks. Um, we must support the dem masking
[31:10] to show our humanity and our empathy for living, breathing
[31:14] human beings. This is beyond political, okay? So any
[31:18] small thing we can do to stand up and say, hey, this isn't okay, because we're
[31:22] all immigrants of this nation. If you're white, you weren't born here originally. You come from
[31:27] european immigrants. So I think we need to realize that. Thank you.
[31:35] antoine jennings.
[31:45] antoine jennings from blue springs, missouri. What about biden?
[31:50] this is not about biden. This is about where we are today in 2026.
[31:55] yes, president biden is retired. He's in delaware
[32:00] doing his thing. This is not about biden. This is not about obama. This is about
[32:04] donald trump. This is about this legislature. And the fact that the
[32:08] county executive is not sitting in here listening to these
[32:12] is because the county executive should be in here
[32:16] the end of the day. Whether not you vote on, he has to sign it,
[32:22] where is he? It's travesty.
[32:26] every single person's sitting up on there, you all voted into office,
[32:31] represent people. Whether or not this passes
[32:35] some court is immaterial. The simple
[32:39] fact of you passing this ordinance, it's gonna show the
[32:43] people that voted for you that you care about them.
[32:48] this is about the people. May I remind you, we, the
[32:52] people of the united states of america, a
[32:58] a more perfect union, every single one of you up there were, was elected
[33:02] for a reason. My expectation
[33:07] from my legislature, from my legislator who was not here,
[33:11] is that they would vote for because we
[33:15] the people, it,
[33:20] I don't see, uh, kansas city police department, independent police department,
[33:25] blue springs police department, we don't see them wearing masks.
[33:29] don't act like you care about children and about safety. When
[33:33] we have legislators getting killed and murdered at their
[33:38] homes, don't act like you care. What about humanity?
[33:43] this is not, this is not about democrat or republican. This is about humanity.
[33:47] this is not about documented undocumented.
[34:01] we rolled through two individuals at the beginning of this. I just wanna make sure if they are here
[34:05] and they did wanna speak, they have that opportunity. Ingrid fla poller,
[34:10] mr. Chairman, we have a video of this proceeding
[34:15] out here, so I was able to watch everything. I'm watching everybody's
[34:19] testimony, so thank you. Thank you for your comment, but I need to see you. You
[34:23] got, you got me. I need to see you. You got it. Because you work for me. I need to see you.
[34:27] you do. All right. Charlotte turin, just making
[34:31] sure. Okay. Anyone else that wants to speak on behalf of
[34:36] 50 60? Okay. If you would sign in there. Um, and then just
[34:40] tell us your name and your city, um, as you,
[34:44] uh, you all, I think were here when you, when everyone was sworn in, correct?
[34:49] everyone was sworn in. Yes, sir. Yep.
[34:56] is kind my guess in the order that you've stood up there, please.
[35:14] all right. So just tell us your name, the city, and then go for it for you. Certainly. My name is rebecca
[35:19] oman. I live in kansas city, missouri. I would like to read a few statements
[35:24] from a recent court, um, settlement
[35:29] by, sorry. Federal
[35:33] judge joseph goodwin. The founders
[35:37] recognize that freedom is imperiled not only when government actions lack legal
[35:42] justification, but also when those actions are carried out by
[35:46] agents whose authority is unchecked and whose actions cannot
[35:50] be traced. When officers can wear a mask, fail
[35:54] to verify their credentials, refuse to disclose their names,
[35:59] arrive in unmarked vehicle and neglect to provide
[36:03] a justification for their seizure of an individual.
[36:07] the constitutional protection that the framers envisioned has not
[36:11] just been corroded, it has been eviscerated.
[36:16] when officers can conceal their identity, the system effectively
[36:21] collapses. Individuals lack the information necessary to
[36:25] report misconduct for meaningful judicial review or
[36:29] internal investigation. Officers are thereby
[36:34] emboldened to exercise their power in an arbitrary and
[36:38] oppressive manner, and public trust is decimated.
[36:44] then he addresses imposters, who could just randomly pick people up
[36:48] off the street. Mask does
[36:52] one thing. It hides the face of the officer wearing it on a public
[36:56] highway, and a civil arrest of a person suspected of no crime.
[37:01] the only purpose served by hiding the officer's face is to prevent
[37:05] his identification and preventing identification serves
[37:09] only to eliminate accountability. A law enforcement
[37:14] practice whose sole operational effect is the elimination of accountability
[37:19] is not a safety measure. It is a constitutional deficiency
[37:23] wearing the name of one, and it goes on and on.
[37:33] and forgive me if this is not in the right order here. So is ashley morgan
[37:38] next, sir. Okay.
[37:46] thank you for oh, ashley morgan lee summit missouri.
[37:50] thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm here to state my strong support
[37:54] for the jackson county mask ban. My position is informed both
[37:58] as, uh, by my work as an attorney, and by my lived experience as a woman.
[38:03] I understand professionally and personally how critically
[38:07] critical, uh, visibility and identifiability are to public safety. When
[38:11] individuals fully conceal their faces in public, it heightens the vulnerability
[38:16] that women already navigate every day. It is essential to
[38:20] remember that being unmasked has long been the standard on expected and public
[38:24] life. For many years, even ice officers conducted public
[38:28] operations without covering their faces. The recent
[38:32] move away from that transparency is a sharp break from established practice and
[38:36] has created real risks. We are now seeing individuals in this area attempt
[38:41] to impersonate law enforcement, including federal agents to intimidate harm
[38:45] and abduct women. When faces are hidden, the public has no reliable way
[38:49] to distinguish legitimate authority from those who intend to exploit it.
[38:54] I do support law enforcement. I do not support them being masked. This is
[38:58] not a theoretical concern. It is a direct threat to public safety, allowing people to
[39:02] obscure their identity without cause. Undermines accountability, invites
[39:06] abuse and creates opportunities for bad actors to operate without consequence.
[39:11] women in particular bear the brunt of that danger. The proposed mass
[39:15] ban does not impose a new bo burden. It restores a longstanding norm,
[39:19] one that supports safety, accountability, and trust in our public shared
[39:23] spaces. Visible identifiable presence is a basic expectation
[39:28] in any community that values order and public confidence. For these
[39:32] reasons, I strongly urge you firmly and without my reservation to support
[39:36] the mask, ban and uphold the principles of transparency and safety that our communities
[39:40] depend on. Thank you,
[39:50] paul. Sir. Thank you .
[39:58] mr. Chairman, members board, thank you for, uh, uh, allowing me to speak. Paul salvi,
[40:02] south kansas city, a rise in opposition to the band measure. Uh, the reason
[40:06] I rise in opposition. Why are they wearing masks? Well, they're under a force protection measure. They're
[40:10] under clear and present danger from insurgents dallas sniper attack on
[40:15] 'em. They're using vehicle ramming on these agents, on these police officers.
[40:19] that's why they're wearing masks. Secondly, in the army, when we staff an action and regulation,
[40:23] that staffing action has to go through a concurrence, non concurrence. And a comment.
[40:28] my question is, has this ordinance been through the jttf, the us attorney for
[40:32] the western district of missouri, the sheriff's department, the chief of police at
[40:36] the kansas city police department, us marshals and special agent in charge of the fbi, because
[40:40] those coalition forces have to know what this ordinance means.
[40:44] secondly, what's the rules of engagement? If a deputy from sheriff forte comes up on
[40:49] a, uh, uh, federal police officer in the middle of a mission, is he gonna use deadly
[40:53] force? They're both armed, highly trained, uh, quality weapon systems.
[40:58] I know you're shaking your head, but I've seen it happen overseas. When coalition forces have
[41:02] an adverse effect, will this turn a coalition
[41:06] force of, uh, cooperation between law enforcement into adversarial, uh, condition?
[41:11] and then finally, I would just close with, um, if you guys pass this,
[41:15] uh, both these ordinances, will you go on record to guarantee that any american
[41:19] citizen, whether they live in jackson county or visit, will not be harmed or
[41:24] killed by an illegal criminal alien. Thank you for your time,
[41:33] deborah par,
[41:38] sorry to have you go up and down.
[41:52] my name is deborah par and I live in kansas city, missouri.
[41:57] and if I was approached by these people in totally
[42:01] black outfits masked with no identification,
[42:06] I would think I was being kidnapped. And I would either try to fight
[42:11] or run. And this has happened to many of the
[42:15] people. Ice is nothing but trump's private
[42:19] army, and they are like
[42:23] the brown shirts of hitler. But hitler's brown shirts
[42:27] did not wear masks, and they wore in uniform.
[42:32] and the people, they are arresting illegal immigrants.
[42:36] it's a mist of being to be in this country, not
[42:40] a felony. And many of these people have lived here
[42:45] for years and years, and they have paid taxes.
[42:50] they have paid social security, which they will never get
[42:54] back, but they are keeping social security to
[42:58] be functional. I totally support
[43:02] banning masks. Thank you.
[43:12] shelly rogers.
[43:24] hi, my name is shelly rogers. I live in pleasant hill,
[43:29] and I'm, I'm here because I,
[43:33] the idea of masked men is petrifying.
[43:38] I have never thought about needing to carry
[43:43] or be armed until I started seeing our government running around
[43:47] fully masked where, like, how beverly
[43:52] first introduced you did not, you couldn't see anything of
[43:56] her. The idea, I was just seeing, thank goodness we
[44:00] have people recording because we get to actually control the
[44:05] narrative when we are recording and we've watched plenty
[44:09] of people getting kidnapped, no identifying information,
[44:13] and they go into a car and there are people that are still not being
[44:17] located. That the idea of being snatched by an
[44:22] a masked group of people is petrifying
[44:27] and does not make us safe. It, it literally makes me want to
[44:31] be armed. Just the idea of our government just being able to snatch
[44:35] people up with no rhyme or reason and just because
[44:41] we don't like trump or whatever, it's just, it's,
[44:48] it's so un-american. It's absolutely un-american to,
[44:52] uh, just keep us fearful
[44:56] of our own government. I don't, I don't fear the immigrants. I,
[45:01] I fear my government. That's who I fear is my government.
[45:05] you know, if I could get my passport and go to a country that actually gives us
[45:09] rights, that actually looks at us as human beings instead of caring
[45:13] more about what billionaires care about, you know,
[45:17] I don't know. I'd like to see america be great again,
[45:22] but ain't gonna be, well we got trump.
[45:29] benjamin rosler did you say benjamin?
[45:34] yep.
[45:41] thank you for having this public hearing for the citizens. My name's benjamin
[45:46] resler. I live in the historic northeast kansas city in a neighborhood called pendleton
[45:50] heights. There's a reason that these hearings are held in public because
[45:54] the business of government is supposed to be done in the sunlight. Uh,
[45:58] and it's for that reason that we're asking that law enforcement identify themselves. And I think
[46:02] that's pretty straightforward, where everyone, wherever anyone
[46:07] stands on the issue of immigration, professional
[46:12] law enforcement who work for a legitimate government agency
[46:17] identify themselves. Pirates conceal
[46:21] their identities, thieves
[46:25] kidnappers, conceal their identities. Professional
[46:30] law enforcement wear badges and they provide identification
[46:35] that has an identifying number and their face and the name
[46:39] of the agency they work for. And they also come with things like
[46:43] judicial warrants signed by judges. This is
[46:47] very simple. This is a matter of how law functions and how it's supposed
[46:51] to serve the people. Now, of course, anyone can
[46:56] understand why an officer might say on a motorcycle, choose to wear something
[47:00] to protect their face from the wind in the cold, as has been brought up.
[47:04] and we all know very well that the brave first responders who were law enforcement
[47:08] during the covid pandemic were especially at risk to exposure. And
[47:12] so, of course, one would understand why they might wanna wear some kind of protective
[47:16] device to protect themselves from catching or transmitting
[47:21] pathogens, but surely we can come to a middle ground between
[47:26] they're allowed to do that and they're allowed to not identify themselves
[47:31] at all on the matter
[47:35] of the detention facility. It's incredibly inappropriate
[47:40] to try to take a building. Ms. Rosler, sorry, I have to interrupt you on that one. We have to do that one
[47:44] separately. Okay. Apologies. Jason, thank you for the correction. I'd like to comment on that as well.
[47:48] time,
[47:55] uh, looks like deborah hayes is our last one for,
[48:00] um, the mask ordinance 60 50.
[48:06] thanks. I'm hayes
[48:10] and I live in kansas city, missouri. I do have one question. Um,
[48:14] first I think maybe I haven't read it, clarified it enough, but does this include
[48:18] local, county and state and federal
[48:24] police that we're talking about? Or are we just focusing on ice?
[48:28] or are we talking about kansas city, missouri? Uh, I'm a, that's
[48:32] a, I can't answer unfortunately, a little confus then I have a statement. So can
[48:37] can anybody clarify that? We will, but it has be later. Go ahead. Okay. Thank you.
[48:41] um, I live in the west side, which is along southwest boulevard
[48:45] and we have a very, um, I've lived there for seven years
[48:49] and we have a wonderful community police,
[48:54] two policemen, chaco and john, who come to our neighborhood meetings.
[48:58] and the last time they came, they explained to us that they've always
[49:02] worked with ice in a very well
[49:07] runway where they have the warrants, they
[49:11] don't wear a mask, and, and they take care
[49:15] of what, if anybody is breaking the law, they
[49:19] will go. They don't crash into the doors or anything, but they, it's been going on
[49:23] for quite a while, believe it or not, that we have had ice
[49:28] officers come in and we have had people take it,
[49:32] they haven't worn masks, they've played by the rules, they
[49:37] followed all the laws, and so it's worked. And I
[49:41] don't think anybody, the west side is made up of mostly hispanic people.
[49:45] and I don't think, um, if there was, what is going on
[49:49] now, if that was what was happening, no one would want that at
[49:53] all. But the people who live in the neighborhood understand if people have
[49:58] really committed crimes, criminal crimes and
[50:02] having a warrant, then yes. But, um, I guess I'm just saying
[50:06] I feel for the officers that we have, because it's really made it hard for them to
[50:10] do their job. I think we ought to time. Okay. I just,
[50:14] um, I'm supporting the ban on the mask. Thank
[50:18] you. Alright, so
[50:23] at this point, uh, we have no more, uh, folks who would like to testify on, on ordinance
[50:27] 60 50. Um, just as a point of understanding, for those who are watching
[50:31] and listening, uh, we will take up the legislation and take up actions within that.
[50:35] we'll help define for some of the questions that were asked of us, uh, within that discussion,
[50:40] uh, as well as hear from general counsel, anyone else, uh, in regards to
[50:44] some of the other things that are brought up. So, um, if you have questions, ask them,
[50:48] but we can't an we can't answer them in that moment of your public hearing. So, uh,
[50:52] we'll move on to ordinance 6 0 6, 1 of the moratorium for,
[50:56] uh, ice detention facilities. So, uh, with that,
[51:00] sorry, I forgot. That's also my job. Uh, charlotte turgen?
[51:07] no, charlotte. All right. Beverly harvey.
[51:21] hello and thank you for, uh, letting everybody talk today. My name is beverly harvey.
[51:26] I, uh, live in independence, and I am the founder of indivisible, kansas city.
[51:31] so detention centers the year 2026, and here we are discussing detention
[51:35] centers, concentration camps, really, uh, these are not detention centers.
[51:39] they are concentration camps. We all see what ice agents do in public.
[51:44] it makes me sick to think of what they do behind closed doors,
[51:49] starve people, rape women, beat people, probably kill people. No
[51:53] one knows, as we have no idea what they do. And the
[51:57] question is, if trump wants to deport people, why does he need hundreds
[52:01] of concentration camps that will hold thousands of people?
[52:05] don't you find it odd that he says he wants to deport illegal immigrants, but
[52:10] instead he's actually building concentration camps that would be able to hold
[52:14] thousands of people? This does not pass the smell test. He is
[52:18] lying. Again, his goal is to rid american
[52:23] america criminals and drugs. His goal is to instill fear in
[52:27] americans, to divide america, to have a gestapo that can keep people from voting
[52:31] just like hitler did. Once he puts up this concentration cap, what comes next?
[52:36] crematoriums we see every day on tv and our, and our phones
[52:40] that anyone who goes against him or says anything negative about him, he goes
[52:44] after them. He wants to be a dictator. He wants to rule america.
[52:49] we as midwesterners know for our hard work and our upstanding values,
[52:53] having concentration camps in missouri, kansas, or anywhere in america, goes
[52:57] against every fiber of americans. Millions of women and
[53:01] men have sacrificed their lives and lives to protect this great nation.
[53:05] and yet, trump wants to defile america with his hatred, his gustapo,
[53:10] his concentration camps, and his wars in iran. If we follow
[53:15] trump to have a concentration camp here in kansas city or missouri,
[53:19] or anywhere in the united states, then we do not deserve to be called american.
[53:24] started a war, another big distraction from the epstein files. The americans will die,
[53:29] thousands of others will die for what his ego, his desire to war.
[53:33] we cannot let this go. And building a concentration camp in kansas city would be
[53:37] disastrous. I beg you to stop to not allow the hatred to continue.
[53:41] I say, no.
[53:48] claudia truman. Claudia truman.
[53:58] I'm against the ban on mass and I am for the detention center.
[54:02] I'm sorry with it. Sorry. Scoot this back. Oh, okay. A little bit when you speak. It's
[54:06] too loud. Sorry. No, you're fine. Sorry to interrupt. Alright, we can start. Can we start again? Start your, yeah,
[54:10] we'll start your time over. I am. I am against
[54:15] the ban on the masks for ice, specifically for
[54:19] ice, and I am for the detention center. And furthermore,
[54:24] I am offended deeply, deeply offended
[54:29] that anyone should consider the current, uh, federal
[54:33] administration and the forces that work for them to be
[54:38] gestapo, to be hitler liked to be, and for donald trump to
[54:42] be considered hitler. I am offended because I had
[54:46] family that we were, that were lost in germany
[54:50] in during world war ii. I am of a jewish
[54:54] background on both sides of my family,
[54:58] and I lost family during that and during the pilgrims in russia,
[55:04] um, we need the, the detention facility because there are so
[55:08] many people in kansas city who, um, and the
[55:12] surrounding areas who, uh,
[55:17] they, they hide and they support and they promote
[55:21] illegal immigration. And they, they support and promote
[55:26] the lives of foreigners over american citizens.
[55:30] and we need to get those people out of our country, and
[55:34] we need to stop the people who support them and promote them
[55:38] who are against, um, a better union for
[55:42] ourselves and our posterity. That's all. Thank you.
[55:47] as a reminder, if you'd like to testify, please sign up on that sheet if you haven't already. Um,
[55:53] everyone who has signed in said that they wanted to speak, so I'm gonna read through the names. If you don't, then
[55:57] that's that. Ma'am, please keep your comments to yourself. Thank you, dennis.
[56:02] roland,
[56:11] thank you again for allowing me to speak. Uh, as far as the detention center is concerned,
[56:15] uh, I, I do support the, uh, moratorium,
[56:19] but I have concerns in that, uh, uh, a moratorium,
[56:23] absolute moratorium on any facility has to pass cons,
[56:28] has to pass constitutional muster, otherwise, you're subjecting this, uh,
[56:32] uh, body to further litigation. And I, I refer
[56:36] to, uh, a federal district court hearing decision on, uh,
[56:41] uh, judge christina snyder in california, who addressed
[56:45] a similar situation as far as masks are concerned. She said that, uh,
[56:49] if not applied equally, it, uh, would be struck down.
[56:54] I'd like to see that detention centers are somewhat struck
[56:58] down, but I'd like to see without, uh, uh,
[57:02] subjecting the, um, legislature to ongoing litigation.
[57:06] and I refer to the core civic matter over in kansas. That court
[57:10] also, the appellate court also suggested, uh, cited with the city. Um,
[57:16] but they couldn't prevent the location, but they
[57:20] have to reapply. So, uh, this moratorium,
[57:24] uh, I believe would prevent even the location, even though I do
[57:28] support it in whole. We need to revise the statute at it
[57:32] as it's presented so that we can avoid any further, any future litigation.
[57:37] that's all. Thank you. Uh, ken thomas mcclain.
[57:56] I'm against the moratorium, just like the mask
[58:02] ban ban. I am for the citizens of this city. The
[58:06] citizens of this city do not, should not be subjected to
[58:10] a outright restriction on the use of their property, the
[58:14] lease of their property, or the selling of their property. They should not be told
[58:19] what they can do with their property unless they have a proper hearing
[58:23] and due diligence. It is a violation of constitutional
[58:28] law, 14th amendment and federal law to
[58:32] do a blanket ban to say what you someone can do with their property
[58:36] and what someone cannot do with their property. This ordinance
[58:40] is absolutely abhorrent to our constitution, and
[58:45] it is a hitler like tactic to say that one
[58:49] use that is lawful is restricted.
[58:53] so it's, it's very sad to me to see this chamber
[58:58] take up an ordinance like this to even consider doing something like this,
[59:02] which restricts americans use of their property and
[59:06] their ability to sell it, promote it, develop it, et cetera. That
[59:10] is not the country that we live in. We live in a free country,
[59:14] a free society, and this is not freedom.
[59:19] thank you. Antoine jennings.
[59:32] antoine jennings, again, blue springs, missouri. You know, it's funny because the,
[59:36] uh, government tells us, um, if we wanna add an
[59:40] addition to our home, we gotta go through the government.
[59:45] if we wanna take out an addition to our home, we gotta go through the government.
[59:49] and now we wanna say, oh, the 14th amendment. By
[59:54] golly, g golly, what about the 10th amendment? What
[59:58] about state's rights? The federal government does not get to tell the
[1:00:02] states what to do under their supervision
[1:00:06] as long as it's not against the constitution of the united states of america.
[1:00:11] the 10th amendment. I suggest you read it.
[1:00:16] I suggest you read it. I'm very well versed in the constitution of the united states.
[1:00:22] we absolutely have laws not only in
[1:00:26] this county, but in the city, in the cities in which we live,
[1:00:30] that we have to abide by laws that we don't like, laws that we
[1:00:34] don't agree with, but yet the government tells us on
[1:00:38] a daily basis, we can't even drive a vehicle without having what? A
[1:00:42] driver's license. License. We can't drive a vehicle without what the government tell
[1:00:47] us, telling us we have to have insurance. So absolutely,
[1:00:51] this body has the absolute right to
[1:00:55] state what they want in their county because
[1:01:00] you represent us, the people I
[1:01:04] reminded you before, we voted you in for a reason. And that
[1:01:08] reason is for us to see you act on our
[1:01:12] behalf. Thank you.
[1:01:18] patricia parks.
[1:01:24] okay. Patricia parks from blue springs.
[1:01:28] and again, I didn't prepare anything, but I just want you to know my feelings. I think those detention
[1:01:33] centers are horrible. People get disappeared. Uh, I have seen several
[1:01:37] instances where, um, or the representatives in washington dc have tried
[1:01:41] to go to these detention centers and they're not allowed. So, and that's supposed
[1:01:45] to be their right and their duty to do that. And they're frustrated. They're
[1:01:49] not being allowed to go in and see what's going on in those detention centers. And there's
[1:01:54] like thousands in them. It's, it's just wrong. So I'm definitely
[1:01:58] against the detention centers.
[1:02:05] david broman, did I get it right this time?
[1:02:11] . Oh, thank you.
[1:02:16] david broman, kansas city, missouri. That's alright. Thank you
[1:02:20] again for allowing us to speak. Um, yeah, I, uh,
[1:02:26] I have to definitely echo what this gentleman said and
[1:02:31] , I, I mean,
[1:02:36] it couldn't be a more, uh,
[1:02:43] a more supportive thing of what we're seeing go on with,
[1:02:47] um, with the ice agency and all the
[1:02:51] issues that we're seeing around here to say, yeah, let's bring it here.
[1:02:55] let's bring it here and put it, put it right down the road, right down, right
[1:03:00] down the street from my boy's school. You know, um,
[1:03:04] that's saying, I mean, that is just saying, yeah, we approve of this
[1:03:09] foul mistreatment of human beings and, you know, show us an
[1:03:13] agency that's above reproach, that is willing to
[1:03:17] stand in front of you and say, I'm gonna arrest you for this.
[1:03:21] show you my face, my badge, willing to be accountable.
[1:03:28] then you know that, that's it. That's an agency that you can, you can talk
[1:03:32] to about doing something like putting a, an actual
[1:03:37] detention center, you know, in a community.
[1:03:42] not just turning a, you know, an old shipping house
[1:03:46] next to a trail, a train yard sure brings up some images of the twenties.
[1:03:54] let's just not do it. It doesn't make any sense.
[1:04:01] do we really want to be a part of that? Usher it
[1:04:05] in. I don't.
[1:04:09] and I hope that, uh, I hope you don't either. Thank you very much,
[1:04:18] paul svi.
[1:04:22] thanks again. Mr. Chairman. Members,
[1:04:26] uh, paul svi, south kansas city. Uh, first of all the, uh,
[1:04:30] the analogy of the concentration camps. I'm a jewish american living in the diaspora.
[1:04:35] this in tka, sobi door, bergen be, and auschwitz. They're not dropping cryon b
[1:04:39] down a slot with 500 jewish people in a, in a supposed shower.
[1:04:43] so anyway, I'll move on. Uh, the defensive facility first, uh, responsibility
[1:04:47] of government officials, protected citizens. Part of that is putting a physical security
[1:04:51] barrier between the law abiding citizens and the criminals and those that mean
[1:04:55] to do harm to those citizens. Detention facilities, just like in afghanistan, we took
[1:04:59] the taliban off the battlefield. We took 'em in detention facilities in canada to armed ba why?
[1:05:04] so they wouldn't harm or kill coalition forces and hurt afghanistan.
[1:05:08] afghanistan natives. So the, the issue is just like
[1:05:12] in kansas over in, uh, kansas city, kansas, when you had the domestic violence issue with the illegal
[1:05:16] criminal aliens that shot the woman, had she been in a detention facility, she might still be
[1:05:20] alive. So that's an issue that these detention facilities work to help
[1:05:24] protect people and also give 'em the processing again,
[1:05:28] um, a rising opposition. Uh, those two brothers, they're on the property, uh, management
[1:05:33] company that were terrorized and doxed and harassed
[1:05:37] by, by officials. It, it was shameful. And, uh, thank you again.
[1:05:41] appreciate it. Just wait. Benjamin rustler,
[1:05:49] uh, and final folks that, uh, are interested in speaking, please sign up there. Um,
[1:05:54] I think we're wrapping up on the public hearing section. Thank you. Yes, I'm
[1:05:58] benjamin wrestler again. Uh, well, I thank the gentleman for his service, but
[1:06:03] I think it's interesting to compare his time in combat
[1:06:07] theater to how we run jackson county, missouri. Yeah.
[1:06:11] what are we talking about? It is outrageous to
[1:06:15] even consider that a building that is built to house consumer goods
[1:06:20] in transit can somehow be made to humanely house
[1:06:24] human beings. What are we talking about? Restrictions
[1:06:29] on what you can use your property for. There are rules for residential construction.
[1:06:35] you can't turn a warehouse into a prison. And these people's record,
[1:06:40] dozens of people died in their custody last year from sheer neglect from
[1:06:44] not getting their medicine, from not being treated for the hypothermia that they contracted in
[1:06:48] those facilities. Any other prison that operated in such a fashion
[1:06:52] would be shut down. Legitimate corrections
[1:06:56] facilities don't do this. And as was also pointed out in this hearing, if the
[1:07:00] goal was deportation, then why house? Thousands of them here
[1:07:05] in jackson county where a legal form of slavery
[1:07:09] in the 14th amendment can be used to exploit them for their labor.
[1:07:13] what are we talking about? This is the united states.
[1:07:17] we don't do this. These are human beings.
[1:07:23] and even if it were a criminal offense to be in the united states
[1:07:27] without authorization, which it is not, even if it were,
[1:07:32] you are required to prove it in a court of law.
[1:07:37] these enforcement activities are an insult to the letter and spirit
[1:07:41] of every due process law in this country. And the idea that a nation
[1:07:46] conceived in liberty is for this is insulting
[1:07:51] and a joke.
[1:07:56] these are not legitimate law enforcement operations
[1:08:00] and this is not a legitimate way to treat human beings. Thank you.
[1:08:09] ashley morgan. Ashley morgan.
[1:08:22] hello. Thank you. Ashley morgan lee, summit, missouri.
[1:08:26] uh, thank you for the opportunity to speak again. I'm
[1:08:30] here, um, to oppose any iced detention
[1:08:35] warehouses in in jackson, uh, county. Our community understands
[1:08:39] exactly what these facilities are. Large industrial detention sites
[1:08:43] or camps, uh, in which to concentrate brown people in.
[1:08:48] um, they are designed to confine people and isolating conditions
[1:08:52] with minimal oversight. Changing the terminology of
[1:08:56] detention centers does not change the reality across the country.
[1:09:00] these immigration camps have been repeatedly cited for unsafe conditions,
[1:09:05] rape, torture, and there has been a confirmed murder and
[1:09:09] adequate medical care, lack of transparency and limited access to legal support,
[1:09:13] if any at all. Aligning jackson county with a system that is such troubling
[1:09:18] record would be a serious mistake. Residents are also raising a
[1:09:22] critical point here today. And, uh, in my conversations,
[1:09:26] there are not enough immigrant immigrants in the us to fill the detention camps being built
[1:09:31] nationwide. Existing facilities often sit partially empty to this day,
[1:09:35] yet new ones continue to be proposed that raises real concerns about the motivations
[1:09:39] behind these projects and whether they mirror the private prison model. Profit driven, opaque,
[1:09:44] independent on keeping beds filled. Bringing these warehouses here would
[1:09:48] create fear among immigrant families, discourage people from reporting crimes
[1:09:52] or seeking services and undermine trust in the institutions that
[1:09:57] are already struggling here. It would also divert land and
[1:10:01] resources away from housing, healthcare, education, community safety programs that actually
[1:10:05] strengthen our county residents are asking fair questions. Who truly
[1:10:09] benefits from this? Why should our county bear the moral and social cost of hosting detention
[1:10:14] camps? And why expand detention capacity when the population, these
[1:10:18] facilities target does not justify it? Jackson county deserves development that
[1:10:22] reflects our values. We should be building a community where people can live time and contribute.
[1:10:27] thank you
[1:10:35] deborah parma and sarah ferris, just so that you guys can navigate
[1:10:39] the audience. I,
[1:10:55] deborah parma, kansas city, missouri detention
[1:10:59] facilities is just a euphemism for prisons. Trump
[1:11:03] was supposed to go after the worst of the worst. It's proven
[1:11:08] that immigrants do less than
[1:11:13] half the number of crimes than american citizens
[1:11:17] do. The people they are putting in these prisons,
[1:11:22] again, are people that are mostly just here
[1:11:26] illegally, which is a misdemeanor, like a traffic ticket,
[1:11:32] and they are being mistreated in there. I'm
[1:11:36] a really sad story. I read the other day, is this prison in
[1:11:40] dly, which has families, children that
[1:11:45] recently has been too cold for them to go outside. There's no
[1:11:49] tv or anything. The children would draw pictures.
[1:11:54] the guards came in and took the pictures, the paper,
[1:11:58] the crayons, the pencils, the
[1:12:02] children cried. There's nothing for them to do.
[1:12:07] it's just horrible. Uh uh,
[1:12:12] it's just to be mean to these people. And
[1:12:16] so thousands, hundreds of thousands they think to
[1:12:20] hold, well, if he actually deports these people,
[1:12:24] who's gonna fill 'em talk. What do you think about trump?
[1:12:29] what about the people who oppose trump?
[1:12:34] what do you think might happen to them and where would they put them?
[1:12:41] I just say you should consider that . Sarah
[1:12:45] ferris.
[1:13:01] hello. Um, my name is sarah farn and I am, I live in kansas city.
[1:13:06] um, I'm also a college student. Um, and obviously
[1:13:10] I'm speaking for myself, but I also want to speak for the youth. Um,
[1:13:14] we see mass walkouts in our area against ice operations and detention
[1:13:18] centers. The people have spoken. Um, and I hope that,
[1:13:23] um, my elected representatives will do their job and hear our voices
[1:13:27] to act. Um, additionally, I attend school, um,
[1:13:31] classes with many international students and people from different cultures.
[1:13:35] um, different backgrounds, different countries. These people are here, student visas, they're here
[1:13:39] legally. We see those people being taken up by ice
[1:13:44] and detained, even if they're not citizens, they're here legally.
[1:13:48] um, so we should be against, um, detention centers. If we
[1:13:52] wanna talk about legality. Let's bring up liam ramos, 5-year-old
[1:13:57] from minneapolis, taken from school to an ice detention
[1:14:01] facility. Okay, you're worried about criminals, let's focus on that because that's what's actually happening.
[1:14:06] um, and I just wanna say, you know,
[1:14:10] I love this city. I love this. I love these people. I love our diversity
[1:14:14] and our different cultures, you know, and I think that we should do everything
[1:14:18] in our power to prevent a detention center. We don't want that
[1:14:22] blood on our hands. We don't want those people being hurt
[1:14:27] under our watchful eyes. Um, you know, if
[1:14:31] we're worried about due process, that's not what, that's not what's happening, and that's not what happens in those
[1:14:35] detention centers. Thank you
[1:14:41] brian lambe.
[1:14:50] thank you. Thanks for allowing us all that, the
[1:14:54] opportunity to speak. I'm glad I just followed someone who brought up the word do pro or the phrase due process,
[1:14:59] because to me that's the most important thing we're talking about here. We've
[1:15:03] had people mostly in support of the ban and
[1:15:07] opposing the detention facilities speak about un-american
[1:15:12] actions implications, and then other people who support,
[1:15:17] who oppose the mask, ban and support the detention facilities
[1:15:21] making the same argument. We all like to use the argument of like, this is anti-american.
[1:15:25] what's happening here? What does that mean? What does it mean to be anti-american. What
[1:15:29] does it mean to be american? Fundamentally, the the thing that makes our
[1:15:33] constitution special is the bill of rights. The bill of rights protects,
[1:15:38] uh, or prevents, protects for citizens and prevents the arbitrary use of
[1:15:42] state power. That's what we're talking about. That's what masks do.
[1:15:47] they allow what's essentially a federalized police force
[1:15:51] to create a chilling effect by, by fearmongering
[1:15:56] it's scaring people. Rightly so. Okay, so we're talking
[1:16:00] about due process. We wanna say that what's happening
[1:16:04] is on american, you have to focus on due process. Okay.
[1:16:09] mass detention facilities are
[1:16:14] movements in contravention to the bill of rights,
[1:16:18] to the, the spirit of this country. The literal spiritual soul of this country
[1:16:23] is the bill of rights due process. That's it. Thanks.
[1:16:31] without any testimony, uh, any further testimony. That concludes our
[1:16:35] public hearings for 60 50 and 60 61. Uh,
[1:16:39] we will now move into, uh, communications and reports from our county
[1:16:43] executive, uh, any reports from our county executive. Very briefly, mr.
[1:16:47] chairman, I wanna inform this body
[1:16:51] that the budget books are gonna be online,
[1:16:56] uh, by the end of next week. And we have hard copies being printed out for each of you
[1:17:00] with, uh, our tabs. Everyone wanted the tabs, so we're gonna make sure the
[1:17:04] tabs were in there. Uh, I wanted mr. Mr. Executive, if, if we could just pause
[1:17:09] one second. Okay. Just for the folks who are leaving, um, note that the actions
[1:17:13] will take place immediately upon his report. So, just fyi. Um, so
[1:17:17] if you want to go, you're more than welcome to do so. Um, respectfully of our
[1:17:21] county executive, but just wanted to give you that heads up. So, thank you, mr. Executive. And, uh,
[1:17:25] very briefly, I wanna inform this legislative body. Uh, we have a, a, a
[1:17:29] position of a county veteran services officer. Um, thank you
[1:17:34] for legislator marshall smith, who's talked to me about that
[1:17:38] and, and kept coming to the administration about that. It's been budgeted last year. It's
[1:17:42] an advocate position for veterans. It's been budgeted by this body. It hasn't been
[1:17:46] filled, and it continues not to be filled. We found out that it got caught up
[1:17:50] in hr, didn't go anywhere. So there are applicants for that position
[1:17:54] of a county veteran service officer. That's a very important position to help advocate
[1:17:59] veterans on all sorts of things. Not just a county issue. It's a, they would help veterans, uh,
[1:18:03] on all sorts of. So we're moving forward on that and gonna be doing some
[1:18:07] interviews and get someone in that position as soon as possible. You founded it.
[1:18:11] you thought it was a great idea there, and we need to implement it, and we will.
[1:18:15] um, that's all I have. Thank you. Questions and comments for county
[1:18:19] executive? All right. Hearing none, we'll move
[1:18:23] into the perfection of proposed ordinances and reports of committees 60 50
[1:18:28] prohibiting law enforcement officers from concealing their faces or badges
[1:18:32] during performance of their official duties in establishing penalties and exemptions legislature
[1:18:36] as a whole. Can I ask our general counsel? Um, I think I have passed out.
[1:18:41] um, this, uh, looks like january 28th, um,
[1:18:45] supplement. Uh, can I ask our general counsel to read that for record, please?
[1:18:50] we need it. Here it is. Yes, mr. Chairman, I'll, uh, I'll condense it
[1:18:54] to the specific issues in it so we, I won't have to read the whole entirety of it.
[1:18:59] uh, the county council's office did not sign, uh, ordinance
[1:19:03] 60 50 as to form and cannot recommend its passage or enforcement
[1:19:08] as the county does not have the authority to require a order federal law enforcement
[1:19:12] officers to abide by any local ordinances that are not also captured in federal law.
[1:19:17] federal law due to the supremacy clause that the us constitution
[1:19:21] supersedes any state or local law. To the contrary, while it
[1:19:25] is true that a municipality can make its own laws and can in certain instances
[1:19:30] exceed the strictness of federal or state law, it is not allowed to make or
[1:19:34] enforce law that is an opposition to federal law. For example,
[1:19:38] a state could not amend its own constitution to repudiate the first amendment to
[1:19:42] the us constitution and require all news to be reviewed and approved
[1:19:47] before publishing or dissemination. This principle was recently upheld
[1:19:51] by the federal courts in a challenge made to missouri's second amendment protection
[1:19:55] act, which sought to abrogate specific federal laws within the state of
[1:20:00] missouri. This was soundly rejected as a violation of supremacy clause.
[1:20:05] in this instance, there is no us code provision that prohibits federal
[1:20:09] law enforcement officers from wearing face masks. Attire is set
[1:20:13] by agency policy, not statute, with no authority to change the agency policy
[1:20:18] state and municipalities cannot change or restrict the requirements of federal
[1:20:22] law enforcement officers uniform and the realm of law enforcement. Municipalities
[1:20:27] are not authorized to dictate or restrict the operations of law enforcement
[1:20:31] that is not under its direct supervision. And even agencies that do not
[1:20:35] act under the authority of municipality, of protect, have protections against
[1:20:40] undue interference on their activities by a municipality.
[1:20:45] I point all these out. We've had a similar situation just recently occurred
[1:20:49] where this body passed a, a gun ordinance that was more restrictive
[1:20:54] than the state, and it was kind of in between what the federal law was.
[1:20:59] um, we're in a time
[1:21:03] where there's lawfare and, and everything becomes litigation, and we
[1:21:07] got sued by the attorney general's office on that matter. Um, you know,
[1:21:11] not to go into too much detail, it's a nominal case at
[1:21:16] this point, but they're moving forward with it and they'll get attorney fees,
[1:21:20] and that could cost the taxpayers of jackson county a lot of money. So,
[1:21:24] as much as I understand the symbolism of passing a law like this
[1:21:29] with the supremacy clause that's on the books, and that has prevented other municipalities
[1:21:33] and taxing jurisdictions to do something of this nature, I would be concerned that
[1:21:38] we'd be facing litigation on this matter like we have in the press.
[1:21:43] if you have any questions, please lemme know. Questions,
[1:21:47] comments for our general counsel? Yep. Vice chair. So, I, I
[1:21:51] noticed that mr. Kavinsky, as well as, uh, one person in the audience or wearing masks,
[1:21:55] I'm gonna make an assumption that this is either for your protection or for the protection of others.
[1:22:00] um, yes, it was a horrible time for me to get sick for the
[1:22:04] first time in 10 years, and I, I, I wanted to come in today, but yeah, I could also
[1:22:08] try to others, and I didn't, I didn't wanna to pry into your health, but, but thank you for that. Yeah. And, and I guess the
[1:22:13] question is, um, did you have permission from the legislature to
[1:22:17] wear a mask today? ? No, I did not. Trying
[1:22:21] to. So you, you used your judgment that it might be best for your protection or the protection
[1:22:25] of others to wear a mask today. And, and that judgment will
[1:22:30] be different tomorrow or a few days from now. Um, and, and
[1:22:34] I bring that up just to say, um, legislating
[1:22:38] like this, present legislation is, um,
[1:22:42] to, to mandate something first, that, as the county counselor
[1:22:46] has stated, we don't have the authority to do anything about, uh,
[1:22:50] that can and will cost taxpayers money to defend because,
[1:22:55] um, the county's responsible for defending ordinances that we pass, um,
[1:23:00] is all a representation of irresponsible government. And I'll ask
[1:23:04] the county executive, um, if we pass this ordinance,
[1:23:08] will you sign this ordinance? Or will you veto this ordinance? Or have you, have
[1:23:13] you developed a position at this point? I'll tell you what, I'm listening and the position comes
[1:23:17] if this body passes something, it will come from me for my review. Okay. Um,
[1:23:21] and, and finally, I just wanna say that, that we have an option
[1:23:26] as a legislative body to make, um, statements that we,
[1:23:30] that we feel as a body, we wanna make a majority that aren't subject
[1:23:34] to a veto and aren't subject necessarily to litigation and, and,
[1:23:39] and enforcement. Um, that, that is the resolution process
[1:23:43] in this case. The, um, sponsor of this ordinance, uh, legislator
[1:23:48] of barca, chairman of barca, um, is, is placing the
[1:23:52] county at risk to make a philosophical statement that might be popular
[1:23:56] with the community, but, but is doing so via an
[1:24:00] avenue, an ordinance, which, um,
[1:24:04] is not enforceable, but will have to be defended at a cost to
[1:24:08] the county. And, and therefore, it just smacks to me of
[1:24:12] irresponsible government, um, if we choose to pass this.
[1:24:16] I guess, um, the, the last thing I'll say, aside from the idea that a, a
[1:24:21] resolution would maybe be the correct avenue given, um, the
[1:24:25] desire to make a statement while no, um, enforcement is
[1:24:29] possible, um, that placing laws on the books filing
[1:24:33] and, and passing ordinances that are
[1:24:37] not enforceable actually serves to erode the law.
[1:24:42] meaning if people see that we have a code of ordinances, and some of them
[1:24:46] are subject to enforcement, and others are subject to being ignored, we're
[1:24:50] we're actually compounding the problem of lawlessness that the resolution
[1:24:55] purports to try to solve. It purports to try to say, um,
[1:25:00] peace officers, police officers, law enforcement officers should be open.
[1:25:04] and, and if you accept, accept that premise and think that that should be
[1:25:08] part of the law, there are avenues to get that made part of the law at a federal
[1:25:12] level. And instead of exercising those, we have distracted
[1:25:16] people wasted their time and brought them here to, to advocate for
[1:25:20] or against something that, that can simply have no legal
[1:25:25] impact. Um, so I'll just kind of pause there. Like I said, I, I wanted to
[1:25:29] emphasize the idea that people wear masks sometimes for reasons that
[1:25:33] are specific and to their individual judgment. Um, and I
[1:25:38] also know and wanna note that we did hear from the county sheriff, the only
[1:25:42] agency law enforcement agency that might be subject to this ordinance, um,
[1:25:47] as far as enforcement and, and it being a lawful ordinance.
[1:25:51] and there are times when officers do wear masks for their own safety.
[1:25:55] um, sometimes there are arresting individuals that, uh,
[1:25:59] um, might be affiliated with gangs and therefore have dangerous gang
[1:26:04] members who might seek to retaliate. Um, there are such
[1:26:08] a large swath of potential reasons why law enforcement might
[1:26:12] choose to do something or choose not to do something that for us to, to try
[1:26:16] to, um, legislate that, uh, without
[1:26:21] a thorough understanding, a lot more language, a lot more advice and consent
[1:26:25] from law enforcement, um, seems to me to to be a mistake.
[1:26:30] um, so I'll, I'll, I'll pause there in case my colleagues want
[1:26:34] to, um, ask other questions, questions,
[1:26:38] comments, thoughts.
[1:26:42] all right. I'm gonna pass the gavel to you, sir, so that you can acknowledge me.
[1:26:47] acknowledged. Thank you. Uh, so
[1:26:52] lots of comments. First, thank you all for being here, for testifying, for sharing. Uh, part of this process
[1:26:56] is your public testimony, whether you're for or against any of these, these efforts.
[1:27:00] um, I, I think that the legal opinion here is, is
[1:27:05] interesting. Um, mr. Kavinsky, there is nothing,
[1:27:09] and I think you ci it. Um, there is no us code provision that prohibits federal
[1:27:13] law enforcement officers from wearing face masks. Thus, without
[1:27:18] a prohibition or a, I guess, decision,
[1:27:22] what prevents us from creating, uh, an enforceable local ordinance violation,
[1:27:28] the supremacy would intend that there's a law that we would be violating. So what's
[1:27:33] a, again, it's a supremacy issue. We can't tell a
[1:27:37] federal agent how to, how to address when they're in the state of missouri,
[1:27:41] because it's a, the federal law expands all states
[1:27:45] in the country. But, but what's the law that they're possession of? Well, that protect,
[1:27:50] they have agency policies that will determine whether or not they can do it,
[1:27:54] which is not law. Right. Which is not law.
[1:27:58] I mean, you can say it's not law, but if the agency has a policy
[1:28:02] on what their agents can wear, that's what they will intend to enforce.
[1:28:07] a big issue here is whether or not an action can be taken in federal court or state
[1:28:11] court, and in this case it's municipality. And that's where, again, the supremacy
[1:28:16] clause would prevent us from doing it. Sure. Um, so do, do,
[1:28:20] in that opinion, do ice agents have to follow speed limits?
[1:28:26] of course, that has nothing to do with their enforcement, but that's a local enforcement.
[1:28:31] the state prohibit prohibition. There's nothing that says they don't have to follow it. So
[1:28:35] I'm trying to follow the same coordination here of process. There's nothing that says
[1:28:39] they have to, so why do they have to? I think
[1:28:43] that's a reasonable statute or ordinance that's on the books.
[1:28:48] it has nothing to do with the law enforcement action. And, you know,
[1:28:52] for them to follow the local laws when it comes to speeding
[1:28:56] and all of that, um, is a whole different matter of whatsoever.
[1:29:01] so I think my point here is that there are some means in which local
[1:29:06] laws dictate participation and enforcement of, because
[1:29:10] if they violated, police officers can pull them over. Um, police officers
[1:29:14] have pulled over other police officers violating law. It doesn't prohibit them from
[1:29:19] not participating because they're a higher authority. Um, so there's some legal
[1:29:24] opinions there that I'm sure we can figure out. The other question, uh, that
[1:29:28] I have, uh, or, or I guess reference, um, is, is really about
[1:29:32] understanding how, from one side of the argument,
[1:29:36] six years ago, folks didn't wanna wear masks to protect
[1:29:41] them from public health arguments. And yet now they're advocating for
[1:29:45] hiding behind masks because they're too much of a snowflake, um,
[1:29:49] to try and understand how ice agents have some
[1:29:53] incredibly hard and challenging job to round up 5-year-old children.
[1:29:57] so, I, I don't quite understand how we can have both in our county, because this body
[1:30:01] has regulated masks, um, has faced challenges both federally and locally.
[1:30:06] um, and seemingly, uh, we have similar people who are advocating one,
[1:30:10] one way or another. So tell us about our mask ordinance
[1:30:14] processes. I think that was a health issue and it, it applied
[1:30:18] throughout the state, or in this instance in the county.
[1:30:23] um, we actually had lawsuits with the state agency for
[1:30:27] our mask ordinances. Right. And it's, it's just a, it's a different
[1:30:31] animal when you're talking about protecting your own citizens in your county
[1:30:36] versus law enforcement from the federal level being in your
[1:30:40] county. And whether or not they would be under more restrictions
[1:30:45] for wearing when they, when they have a explanation
[1:30:49] for why they're doing what they're doing, I'm not taking an opinion on it,
[1:30:53] I'm just telling you what the supremacy clause stands for. Yeah. Um, which
[1:30:58] I appreciate that part. Um, would you be opposed to third party counsel evaluating
[1:31:02] this, um, externally and giving us some understanding and perspective
[1:31:06] if, if either you think that would be helpful to you? Um, not, not
[1:31:10] to dismiss your, your report, but just to seek
[1:31:14] additional guidance on constitutionality and means for which we can, uh,
[1:31:19] implement this? Because I, I do think that there's some balance of federal
[1:31:23] law enforcement officers have to follow a speed limit that's a local regulation. So how can we
[1:31:27] find an opportunity here to protect citizens? Because as you've suggested,
[1:31:32] uh, we have, um, the opportunity to protect folks, uh, two people were at least
[1:31:36] killed by mass agents in minneapolis. Um, there's also that requirement of
[1:31:40] protection as well. Um, and so, you know, the, the
[1:31:44] protection of massed men, um, or women, I guess from
[1:31:48] ice, doing a job that they signed up to do voluntarily is not really
[1:31:52] my problem. That's their problem. Um, so I'm not
[1:31:56] as worried about that part. Um, and if they're too scared to do that job, don't
[1:32:01] do it. That's the reality of that. Um, so I
[1:32:05] would like to seek third party counsel, um, in that means to, to
[1:32:09] get us some more understanding about this ordinance. If we're gonna default to, it's not legal to do.
[1:32:13] um, I think we can follow up and get some additional guidance on this.
[1:32:18] there's been a suggestion of third party counsel, legislator anderson.
[1:32:23] uh, mr. Chairman, I'd like to move to hold ordinance 6 0 5 0
[1:32:27] second. It's been moved and seconded and thirded to hold ordinance 6 0 5 0
[1:32:32] at this time. All those in favor by sign of aye. Aye. Aye.
[1:32:36] aye. I'll abstain. I think the ayes have it
[1:32:40] over the, over the intercom internet there. Uh, legislator smith
[1:32:44] and legislator franklin, are you okay
[1:32:49] with the hold? Hold is fine by me.
[1:32:54] okay. I think that's, I think we should do a roll call though. Alright. If you're
[1:32:58] not sure who is in favor or not, I, we had, um,
[1:33:02] four here that were yes. And legislator franklin makes five. I'll,
[1:33:07] I'll take over. So mary jo, if you call the roll on a hold.
[1:33:11] okay. Anderson? Yes. Peyton? Yes.
[1:33:16] smith? No. Husky?
[1:33:20] yes. Franklin.
[1:33:25] franklin. He's gotta be on video to vote as well.
[1:33:31] I'll come back to him. Okay. Mcgee? Yes. Okay. Got it.
[1:33:35] uh, lauer excused smith? Yes.
[1:33:41] abar? No. Um, can we ask the general
[1:33:45] counsel executive's office five, convene five afterwards and talk about third party counsel options
[1:33:49] for the hold, if that's what everyone prefers. All right. So 60
[1:33:53] 50 is currently held, uh, moving on to 60 54,
[1:34:01] requesting a renewal, a conditional use permit, cup and district ag agriculture
[1:34:06] for continuous operation of a horse boarding facility, subject to specify conditions
[1:34:10] as to a 48.09 plus or minus acre track land use committee.
[1:34:16] I report. I was hoping, I'm hoping to,
[1:34:20] uh, perfect all these by a vo vote, voice vote, and then move to
[1:34:24] adopt. Okay. Is there a motion
[1:34:29] we'll move to perfect. Move to perfect. Is there a second?
[1:34:33] okay. It's been moved and seconded. Um, any discussion? Hearing
[1:34:37] none. All those in favor, please indicate by the sign of aye. Aye. Aye.
[1:34:41] aye. All those opposed ayes have it. Ayes do indeed
[1:34:46] have it. 60 55? Nope. Oh, I'd like to if we 6 60, 54.
[1:34:50] move to adopt, please. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any
[1:34:54] discussion? None.
[1:34:58] all right. Um, all those in, in favor of adopting, I need to, I guess
[1:35:02] we, we need a roll call on that, I believe. Anderson? Yes. Peyton?
[1:35:07] yes. Smith? Yes. Husky? Yes. Franklin?
[1:35:12] yes. Mcgee, lauer smith. Epstein
[1:35:18] abca? Yes. 1, 2, 3. Alright.
[1:35:22] six. Yes. One absent. All right. 60 55.
[1:35:28] one abstain. Okay. 60 55
[1:35:32] for the public. Go ahead. Many the
[1:35:36] zoning district pursuant to the unified development code by rezoning a certain 19.48
[1:35:40] plus or minus ac tract from district ag agriculture dis district
[1:35:45] re residential estates land use committee. Uh, there was a motion.
[1:35:49] yep. Is there a second? Second. Uh, any discussion?
[1:35:53] all right. Seeing none. All those in favor, please indicate by sign of aye. Aye. Aye.
[1:35:58] aye. All those opposed? Aye. Have it ayes do indeed have
[1:36:02] it move, move to adopt. Please moved and seconded.
[1:36:06] any discussion? Hearing none. Uh, mayor joe, you call the
[1:36:11] roll anderson. Yes. Peyton? Yes. Smith? Yes.
[1:36:15] husky? Yes. Franklin? Yes. Mcgee
[1:36:19] lauer smith. Ab abstain.
[1:36:24] abca? Yes. Six. Yes. One absent. One excused and one abstaining.
[1:36:28] 60 56
[1:36:34] amening the zoning districts established pursuant to the unified development code by rezoning a certain 20.00
[1:36:39] plus or minus sacred tract from district ag agriculture to district r residential ranch at
[1:36:43] land. Use. Committee report from committee
[1:36:47] hearing per fact. Second. Moved in second. And any discussion?
[1:36:52] hearing none. All those in favor, please? About a sign of aye. Aye. Aye.
[1:36:56] aye. All those opposed the ayes have it. The ayes
[1:37:00] do indeed have it. Um, is there another motion? Move
[1:37:04] to adopt. Second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
[1:37:08] all right. Hearing none. Maryjo, please call the roll. Anderson. Yes. Peyton?
[1:37:13] yes. Smith? Yes. Husky? Yes. Franklin?
[1:37:17] yes. Mcgee. Lauer. Smiths epstein
[1:37:23] abar. Yes. Six. Yes. One absent. One excused. One abstained.
[1:37:28] 60 57 amening the zoning district established
[1:37:32] pursuant to the unified de code by rezoning a certain 70.00
[1:37:36] plus or minus ac tract from district ag agricultural to district r residential
[1:37:40] ranch at land. Use committee. Report from committee
[1:37:45] fact. Second. It's been moved in. Seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none.
[1:37:50] all those in favor, please indicate by the sign of aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed
[1:37:55] appears. Aye. Have it? Aye. Do indeed have it? Uh, is there another motion?
[1:38:00] move to move to adopt? Second. Second. Second. Okay. Moved and seconded.
[1:38:04] any discussion? Hearing none. Mary jo, please call the roll.
[1:38:08] anderson. Yes. Peyton? Yes. Smith? Yes. Husky?
[1:38:12] yes. Franklin? Yes. Mcgee lauer
[1:38:17] smith. Epstein arka. Yes.
[1:38:21] six. Yes. One absent. One excused and one abstain. 60 58.
[1:38:28] appropriating 3 630 $6,425 from the designated fund
[1:38:32] balance of the 2026 park fund for construction services provided by heartline
[1:38:37] construction of north kansas city, missouri for use by the parks plus rec department. Public works
[1:38:41] committee. Uh, committee did not meet, so it'll be held. Um, moving on
[1:38:45] to 60 59. Submitting to the qualified voters of jackson county, missouri at the
[1:38:49] general election to be held on april 7th, 2026. A question to amend the jackson county
[1:38:53] charter with an effective date intergovernmental affairs committee report from committee committees
[1:38:58] holding. Alright. Committees holding 60 61
[1:39:04] prohibiting all permit and zoning approvals for non county or municipal government owned detention
[1:39:09] facilities. Legislature as a whole. There a motion
[1:39:14] move. I'd like to ask that we get a legal opinion on this one. It feels like
[1:39:18] a violation of the 14th amendment that gives people the right to their property,
[1:39:22] and we are proactively, uh, essentially eliminating,
[1:39:26] uh, the right to use their property as they see fit to every jackson county
[1:39:31] resident and property owner without any due process.
[1:39:37] okay. Any thoughts? So I'd move to hold. Yeah. Okay. Is there
[1:39:41] I second. Okay. Is there move? And second. Any discussion?
[1:39:48] okay. So please roll. Call this one. Mary. June
[1:39:53] anderson. No. Peyton
[1:39:57] on the motion to hold. . Um,
[1:40:02] no. Smith?
[1:40:07] yes. Husky? Yes. Franklin?
[1:40:12] yes. Mcgee lauer smith? Yes.
[1:40:18] abca? No. Four. Yes.
[1:40:24] three. No one absent. One excused.
[1:40:29] remind us, madam clerk, do we have to have a certain number two. We,
[1:40:33] we need a five. Five. Okay. So the hold fails. So, um, other
[1:40:37] actions for ordinance 60 61? Mr. Chairman?
[1:40:42] uh, yes. Legislator anderson. Mr. Chairman, I move to perfect.
[1:40:47] okay. There's a motion to perfect. Is there a second? Second.
[1:40:51] okay. Uh, is there a discussion on the ordinance, mr. Chairman? Yes, mr. Anderson.
[1:40:55] mr. Chairman. Uh, as we have seen over the last, uh,
[1:40:59] year and a half, um, uh, really
[1:41:04] ever since the beginning, the creation of ice, we have seen
[1:41:08] an attack on individuals, uh, human beings
[1:41:13] who may not be american citizens, but are still human beings. At
[1:41:17] the end of the day, the discussions that have gone on today
[1:41:21] have been focused on, uh, not only about if,
[1:41:25] if we, uh, choose to do what is right, whether it is by
[1:41:30] the citizens of jackson county, or, uh, whether that, uh,
[1:41:34] means how we personally feel about what's going on
[1:41:38] in our country. Uh, I believe that both are in one and the same
[1:41:43] as we look at this and we have documentation of
[1:41:48] what has happened, even when these opened up. Uh, some have argued
[1:41:52] about, uh, under, uh, president obama or president bush,
[1:41:56] president obama, president biden, president trump, I
[1:42:00] will say they've all been wrong. They've all been a
[1:42:04] horrible human rights violation and wrong.
[1:42:10] these camps,
[1:42:14] these, uh, uh, uh,
[1:42:18] buildings that the current secretary of the department of homeland security
[1:42:23] uses to parade herself in front of. When you
[1:42:27] have human beings stacked on each other with one
[1:42:32] bathroom, if they're lucky, with one air conditioner, if they're lucky
[1:42:37] with any type of medical aid, if they're lucky, but you
[1:42:41] have thousands and thousands of people being forced into
[1:42:46] a cell and to say, well, they'll be fine. They've
[1:42:50] just broken the law. The reason why
[1:42:55] I believe that this ordinance, I think anything relating to
[1:42:59] the challenges that we face now is so crucial
[1:43:03] is because we are slowly but surely losing our humanity
[1:43:07] in this country. At
[1:43:11] one time in this country, it was illegal for
[1:43:15] my mother to be married to my father. At one time,
[1:43:20] it was illegal for me to exist. One time it was
[1:43:24] illegal for my colleagues on this legislature, the women that are on this
[1:43:28] legislature, to even hold public office or to be able to vote.
[1:43:35] when we look back at our history, and people will say, this is not america. We have done this before,
[1:43:41] , I'm still very proud of my country because
[1:43:45] one thing that my country has decided to do is that even if it is
[1:43:49] a small, and forgive me for the real robert f. Kennedy quote here,
[1:43:53] even if it is a small ripple, it can can create a wave
[1:43:58] that destroys injustice.
[1:44:03] so I will say, so if the federal government
[1:44:07] wants to come for us, so be it. If the state wants to come for
[1:44:11] us, so be it. And let me tell you why. I'm now in my seventh year
[1:44:16] on this legislature, I've been through the fights during
[1:44:20] 2020 and the mass mandate I've seen lives destroyed.
[1:44:25] I've seen p advocates, uh, killed.
[1:44:30] I have seen friends who have lost their lives. Not only
[1:44:34] those individuals, and I'm not saying this on behalf of me because I take this on the chin.
[1:44:39] when you serve in public office, you are beholden to the public.
[1:44:44] but when you decide to attack a woman who is dedicated her
[1:44:48] life to being a nurse for well over 45 years,
[1:44:53] and to say that you will find her and that you will do
[1:44:58] terrible things, and when you decide that you'll show up to
[1:45:02] wherever her doctor's appointment is and to do
[1:45:06] unspeakable things, that tells you the mentality
[1:45:10] of those individuals who are anti mask all those years ago.
[1:45:15] and now I find it fascinating, and we now have these same individuals
[1:45:20] who are saying, well, these people will be doxed. Well, these people will face
[1:45:25] all these different challenges. Well, these camps will keep us safe.
[1:45:32] what does not keep the people safe is when fellow citizens
[1:45:37] to say to, even though it is my mother that she should die.
[1:45:43] what does not speak to the advocacy of law and order
[1:45:50] is that individuals are seen as lesser.
[1:45:56] I know the argument will be said again, that this idea that we are impeding on someone's
[1:46:00] right to do what they want with their land. But I will
[1:46:04] say, let jackson county draw the line in the sand.
[1:46:10] because if we look at this as a whole, if we look at the
[1:46:14] amount of children who've been taken in, when we look at the
[1:46:18] amount of those who've been dis who are disabled, who've been taken in and put in
[1:46:22] these camps, if you look at the amount of pregnant women who have
[1:46:26] been put in these camps, if you look at the individual just trying to
[1:46:30] get by in this world, who have been put in these camps, they are
[1:46:34] the vast majority. The president
[1:46:38] has lied. He has lied about what he had
[1:46:43] promised, that these will be criminals and those who threaten our society
[1:46:47] as a whole.
[1:46:53] I know the arguments. I've been here, like I said, seven years, understanding
[1:46:58] how this place works, and I know our limitations.
[1:47:03] but if we refuse to even acknowledge
[1:47:08] to even push back, then what will then be said of us
[1:47:13] when we're no longer here?
[1:47:17] again, many will probably will say, oh, he's just being dramatic.
[1:47:22] referencing slavery, referencing jim crow era laws
[1:47:27] referencing this push by, uh, even during
[1:47:31] the times of busing that we could, uh,
[1:47:36] pick up families and, and, and as so many of the parts down in the
[1:47:40] south wanted to do that, if you were caught a black family
[1:47:44] going into another, uh, school district because the government had
[1:47:48] told you to that we'll put you in a camp, make you feel
[1:47:53] this pain. I urge everyone to read fannie lou
[1:47:57] hamer's statements on that during the sixties.
[1:48:01] this was not that long ago. This should give us great.
[1:48:08] and what we should understand is
[1:48:13] I do not know how
[1:48:18] any individual of this country, or by my faith as a
[1:48:22] christian or even those who are nonbelievers of another faith,
[1:48:26] if you can agree that an individual who's not
[1:48:30] here legally, who is in
[1:48:34] a retirement home and has, uh,
[1:48:39] some sort of a disease that's happened in arizona,
[1:48:44] that individual dragged out, thrown into one
[1:48:48] of these camps and then die because they don't get access to medical care.
[1:48:53] I don't know how an individual can say that. A 5-year-old child,
[1:48:57] the 12-year-old child, the 13-year-old child, the american citizen,
[1:49:02] the american citizen, again, who's been put in these camps because of the color of
[1:49:06] their skin and the language that they speak deserves
[1:49:10] to be in camps where you are not allowed access to medical help,
[1:49:14] access to any constitutional rights, any access to international
[1:49:18] law rights, anything, how we can sit and say,
[1:49:24] well, we have no power. You should just sit by.
[1:49:29] I believe we're better than that. So, mr. Chairman, that is why
[1:49:34] I move that we perfect. Ordinance 6 0 6 1.
[1:49:38] thank you. Other comments from legislators? Mr. Chairman? Uh,
[1:49:42] mr. Vice chair. So, um, for, for our county counselor,
[1:49:47] apparently we're not gonna take the time to get a legal opinion on this one. Um, you signed
[1:49:51] this one. So you consider this to be a lawful ordinance consistent with the constitution of
[1:49:55] the united states? Yes. I do think we have the authority in the
[1:49:59] unincorporated area to ban a zoning situation. Okay.
[1:50:04] whereas if they processed it, that was the ordinance would then apply. That was gonna
[1:50:08] be one of my questions was, was, uh, uh, this only applies to
[1:50:12] unincorporated jackson county. Yeah. I would have
[1:50:16] to review the municipality that they don't have a zoning,
[1:50:21] uh, division. Yeah. Whether or not it applies, but, and, and
[1:50:25] so within unincorporated jackson county, we can preemptively say
[1:50:30] to property owners that they can't use their property
[1:50:34] for a lawful purpose. That, that we as a legislative body happen to have
[1:50:38] an object, an an objection to I think
[1:50:42] so. So without giving them a chance to apply for 'cause 'cause understand there is no
[1:50:47] facility, this is not a question for my colleagues, for the audience. There is no
[1:50:51] facility being contemplated that I'm aware of that's asked for a permit in
[1:50:55] unincorporated jackson county. And we are saying preemptively
[1:51:00] don't bother. We are gonna say no. That feels to me like
[1:51:04] we have reduced property owners' rights, that they bought that
[1:51:08] property. They should have the opportunity to come to us, have due process and say, I want to
[1:51:12] zone this property and have a special use permit for, in this case, a detention
[1:51:16] center. No, nobody's asking for that. But we're preemptively saying to
[1:51:20] every property owner in unincorporated jackson county, you are
[1:51:25] absolutely not allowed to use it that way. I think the authority
[1:51:29] of this elected board can, can do that with the zoning power that it has.
[1:51:33] okay. I, I disagree as a lay person. Uh, it seems
[1:51:38] problematic to me, but, um, I, I think we're gonna, there
[1:51:42] again, have, uh, potentially
[1:51:46] somebody try to litigate that we're gonna take time to litigate something that
[1:51:51] probably wouldn't otherwise have been subject to challenge. Somebody will say, well,
[1:51:55] that's exactly what I was planning to use my property for, and now it's worth less than
[1:51:59] it would've been if I had had that option. And we can, I certainly understand. Be paying them
[1:52:04] damages. So, um, I just wanted to get your clarification that, that
[1:52:08] you signed off on this. You think this is okay? Yes. I think we have
[1:52:12] that authority as an elected body. Thank you. Other
[1:52:16] questions, comments from colleagues? No, uh, online
[1:52:20] legislator smith or franklin? Anything from you all? I'm sorry, I didn't
[1:52:24] realize your hand was up. Legislator smith? Yes. Thank you, mr.
[1:52:29] chairman. Um, mr. Kavinsky, you stated that this was just for
[1:52:33] the unincorporated area that the county owns.
[1:52:37] and my question to you is, do we have a process
[1:52:42] already in place for applicants to submit zoning, uh, special
[1:52:46] use permit zoning applications, all the ones that are listed here in this ordinance? Yes,
[1:52:50] we do. So is there anything stopping,
[1:52:54] uh, a potential applicant who may want to
[1:52:58] put up one of these type of facility facilities from
[1:53:03] applying for, um, a conditional use permit?
[1:53:07] because I don't see that listed in here. I mean, it, it doesn't prevent them from doing so.
[1:53:12] um, but the commission would most likely take into account the ordinances
[1:53:16] passed by this body. Okay. So I
[1:53:20] guess my statement would be to the body that we already have a process in place to vet
[1:53:24] all types of applications, um, that seems to be working
[1:53:28] very well for all types of, uh, rezoning and zoning
[1:53:33] type of projects. So to double down on something that we already have a process
[1:53:37] for, uh, I really don't think there's a need for that.
[1:53:52] any other comments? Ms. Legislator smith?
[1:53:57] all right. Legislator anderson, did you have something you said? Uh, just a quick question.
[1:54:01] um, what did we do in, uh, conjunction
[1:54:05] with, um, the, I know we, we shut down
[1:54:10] a adult entertainment shop, something along those lines. Didn't
[1:54:14] we make it that we can't have any more of those things in unincorporated
[1:54:18] jackson county? Isn't that what that legislation was about? Yeah, it's
[1:54:22] been a number of years. I know we changed the timeframe of when they could, uh,
[1:54:27] be open that, uh, in essence then
[1:54:31] I believe shut it down. But I'd have to look back at the ordinance to remember what specifically
[1:54:36] we wrote specifically on the actual business. Because
[1:54:40] I remember the, the timeframe of when they could be open was an issue.
[1:54:45] and the reason why I brought that up is, again, I,
[1:54:49] I appreciate both smith's statements, but, uh,
[1:54:54] we do this, we, we do this because the
[1:54:58] thing is, is that we knew that that adult, whatever it was,
[1:55:02] was having possibly, well, we,
[1:55:07] it wasn't possibly, it was in the police report that they had,
[1:55:11] uh, uh, underage individuals who were being trafficked, that they had drugs,
[1:55:15] that they were having all these different types of, of, of horrible things going
[1:55:19] on. And we said, you know what? I don't think we should allow this. What's the core issue of
[1:55:24] it? I think we should be done with it. Well, we shouldn't allow that to happen.
[1:55:28] people of blue summit deserve better. So when we decide,
[1:55:33] uh, and I think, forgive, forgive me, I think it was called whatever the spot or something,
[1:55:37] whatever it was, when we say, let's not get too specific,
[1:55:42] we've had this here, here before. Nothing stopped those places from
[1:55:46] keeping their doors open until this body made a
[1:55:50] decision. That's all. Mr. Chairman,
[1:55:55] thank you, mr. Chairman. Uh, vice chair. So in, in
[1:55:59] that instance, there was a business that was violating
[1:56:03] law, and we sought to place restrictions that
[1:56:07] made them less profitable. We didn't tell them that they couldn't
[1:56:12] still have a building. We didn't tell them how they could or couldn't use it,
[1:56:16] but we do that from time to time. Um, generally the,
[1:56:20] the goal of zoning and the goal of, of issuing
[1:56:24] permits is to approve an individual property owner's,
[1:56:29] yes or no. Um, that is very different
[1:56:33] than saying to all property owners, we're going to
[1:56:37] prohibit you from an otherwise lawful use without having seen
[1:56:41] that there was a specific problem with that business owner. So I, I think
[1:56:46] the legislator's, uh, comment is, is, you know, understandable.
[1:56:51] I, I, I see these as distinct things. I see this as a fundamental,
[1:56:56] um, violation and frankly, extremely performative given
[1:57:00] that we have no currently contemplated facilities that anybody's asking
[1:57:04] for a permit for, and that we would've the ability to, to restrict the permit if
[1:57:08] they did choose to apply for it. So, um, it feels like an ordinance without
[1:57:12] a home. And finally, um, mr. Kavinsky, if the federal
[1:57:17] government bought land or took existing land that
[1:57:21] they own inside of jackson county and decided to build
[1:57:25] a detention center, do, do we as a county legislative body,
[1:57:29] have the right to preempt their use of that
[1:57:33] facility for these purposes? Yeah, again, it would be, uh,
[1:57:38] applicable to the unincorporated area, right? So,
[1:57:42] so if an unincorporated jackson county, the federal government owns 40 acres and they decide
[1:57:46] to put a building up and they decide that they wanna keep detainees there, can we
[1:57:50] stop them through a county ordinance? If they, I do think if we have an ordinance
[1:57:54] that says that there could be litigation to support the ordinance and the,
[1:57:58] and the supremacy clause, the united states constitution wouldn't allow them to
[1:58:02] say, this is government property. We own it. We're gonna use it in a lawful manner
[1:58:07] in accordance with federal law as we see fit. I'd have to look into
[1:58:11] it more, more in depth. But we do have the authority to determine
[1:58:15] zoning in the jackson county. And so I do feel strongly that
[1:58:19] we have that ability to do that. Thank you. I'll
[1:58:23] give you this
[1:58:27] quiet. Um, so
[1:58:31] couple things. Um, first I think it's important, again, we think for those
[1:58:35] who are still here, uh, watching this process happen, um, obviously
[1:58:40] this was, uh, a great discussion for both the municipalities who've
[1:58:44] already done this, including kansas city, missouri, and others, um, throughout the country, to
[1:58:48] dictate that we are not gonna allow the caging of people. Um,
[1:58:52] I want to share, um, because although, uh, vice chair smith may not be aware,
[1:58:56] um, I told me directly that they have been pursuing several other
[1:59:01] locations in addition to the one in kansas city, missouri. Um, they are seeking a
[1:59:05] facility that will hold 7,600 people. Uh, ice turns over beds at least
[1:59:09] every 51 days. That is 54,392 people
[1:59:13] that would be effectively detained potentially over a
[1:59:17] year in a facility in jackson county. Um,
[1:59:22] that's a significant amount of population. Um, the reality that
[1:59:26] was said about the population of undocumented immigrants even present, would not
[1:59:30] exist here. Thus, we're looking at regionally grabbing folks from
[1:59:35] their homes, taking them from their family, and incarcerating them,
[1:59:39] um, not deporting them, quickly, incarcerating them. So
[1:59:43] the reality of this situation is going to be of moral,
[1:59:47] uh, suggestion on what you choose to focus your time on. A
[1:59:51] lot of folks are making justifications as to why not. No one yet
[1:59:55] has seemingly said, do you stand for the concentration of
[1:59:59] 54,392 people? Yes or
[2:00:04] no? That is a reality. I wouldn't stand for that for a jail, for
[2:00:08] people that would quote unquote be criminals. The reality of
[2:00:12] this situation is far worse than a code or a zoning ordinance
[2:00:16] or not. This is about humanity. This is about what we believe
[2:00:20] democracy will stand on or fall on. I wanna remind
[2:00:25] us about this little piece. Not
[2:00:29] like the brazen giant of great greek fame with conquering
[2:00:33] limbs destroyed from land to land. Here at our sea wash, sunset
[2:00:37] gates shall stand a mighty woman with the torch, whose flame
[2:00:42] is the imprisoned lighting, and her name, mother of exiles
[2:00:46] from her beacon hand glows worldwide, welcome her
[2:00:51] mild eyes command the air breathed harbor that
[2:00:55] twi city's frame keep ancient lands, your storied pump
[2:01:00] cry. She with silent lips. Give me your tired, your pur
[2:01:04] poor, your hurled masses yearning to breathe free.
[2:01:09] the wretched refuse of your teaming shore. Send these,
[2:01:13] the homeless tempest tossed to me. I
[2:01:17] lift my lamp besides the golden door.
[2:01:21] that's the new colossus by emeral lazarus from 1883. That's
[2:01:26] impended and apart of the statue of liberty,
[2:01:30] the reality that in 1883 we had more humanity and dignity
[2:01:34] of people coming to our country than now is atrocious.
[2:01:41] I don't ask you to vote for this because I think it's not duplicative
[2:01:45] or because it's not, uh, impugned to legal
[2:01:49] challenges. I ask you to vote for this because I don't think we should incarcerate
[2:01:54] 54,392 people in jackson county, whether that's
[2:01:58] in kansas city, in independence, and anywhere
[2:02:02] in jackson county. Unincorporated or not planned or zoned or not.
[2:02:07] we should not imprison that quantity of people, period.
[2:02:11] thus, I'll ask you to vote for this moratorium.
[2:02:15] and if you don't, I hope the people in this room who stand up
[2:02:20] and ask you to do it, remove you from office. Thank you.
[2:02:32] so shall we go, sir? No, I'd
[2:02:36] like to respond. Mr. Vice chair. So the statue of liberty,
[2:02:41] uh, sits in conjunction with ellis island,
[2:02:46] a place where immigrants came to the united states
[2:02:50] to be lawfully processed, tested for diseases, checked to make
[2:02:54] sure that they were safe to the best of our ability at the time, run background checks
[2:02:58] and understand if they were coming to the united states to be productive members of society.
[2:03:04] that is not what happened over the last four years where we had essentially,
[2:03:08] uh, a unregulated open border
[2:03:13] that has resulted in millions of people entering the country without
[2:03:17] us knowing who they are and the law that allows us
[2:03:21] to deport them through an administrative judge and administrative hearing process.
[2:03:26] like we have administrative hearings for so many things, not through
[2:03:30] the full judicial process, unless exceptions exist from time to time.
[2:03:34] these are very different circumstances. And when you say
[2:03:38] we are not going to have a building here that holds people, what you're saying
[2:03:43] is, we would rather not have this here, well-regulated, well
[2:03:47] understood, well monitored, and instead leave it somewhere
[2:03:51] with less moral people. 'cause the fact is, the federal government,
[2:03:56] if they need to build a facility, will find a place to do it. And
[2:04:00] if you'd rather have that be somewhere that's farther from
[2:04:04] civilization, farther from monitoring, farther
[2:04:08] from keeping an eye on things outside of our zoning and,
[2:04:12] and ability to demand what that facility needs to have, well, then
[2:04:17] you're basically saying that, that you think that not having this
[2:04:21] facility here is gonna keep those things from happening that you've mentioned.
[2:04:25] and the reality is you're just going to put it further into rural america,
[2:04:30] someplace where they're happy to have probably those jobs and those temporary facilities,
[2:04:35] and you're going to place people more at risk. When we legislate,
[2:04:39] we have to think to ourselves, what is the unintended consequence of
[2:04:43] what I'm saying and doing? And the fact is that prohibiting
[2:04:48] these facilities proactively. First off, I disagree with our county counselor,
[2:04:52] and there's several court cases I was just able to find that indicate that the
[2:04:56] federal government can build whatever they want on property that they own, no matter what
[2:05:00] the local zoning ordinances are. Um, but there's also just the
[2:05:04] fact that I think if this is going to happen, I'd much rather have it
[2:05:08] happen near where we can keep an eye on it and have some influence over
[2:05:12] the quality and visibility as opposed to further away.
[2:05:16] I think you're placing people more at risk for performative politics, consistent
[2:05:21] with simply trying to placate people, when in reality
[2:05:25] we need to pass responsible legislation that helps keep people safer
[2:05:29] and doesn't pretend to do things that we simply don't have the authority to do.
[2:05:34] that's all. Thanks. Comments, questions, uh, legislators,
[2:05:39] I just wanted to state for the record that I don't know how you got a background check in 1896
[2:05:44] , um, from anybody who's come from all over the world, but fine. The other
[2:05:48] aspect of this is, is that it, it, it will never stop
[2:05:53] because even if, let's say they build it here and it's a beautiful building and
[2:05:57] by golly, and, and we wanna, we're going to be able to watch it by
[2:06:01] god, we're gonna be able to say, you know what, that doesn't look right. Distill, the same
[2:06:06] argument would happen again. Well, it's the federal government. We
[2:06:10] have no way to change it whatsoever. No matter what, what
[2:06:14] happens. So that's what I asked my friend. What, what would
[2:06:18] happen if the federal government built something, if they built
[2:06:22] something and we didn't like it, what are we gonna do? What would
[2:06:26] a legislative body do if they don't have air conditioning, if they don't
[2:06:30] have restrooms? What are we gonna do? Waiting
[2:06:35] till you're ready. So, oh, please, please, go ahead. Yeah,
[2:06:39] so, so again, we've got a county counselor telling us we can regulate
[2:06:43] things. So we would have the option of trying, as opposed to
[2:06:47] if this is something in, I don't know, let's say cooper county,
[2:06:53] then we have no authority. So would you rather have
[2:06:57] something exist that you might have a chance to regulate and improve? Also,
[2:07:01] we have a very active local media here. We have active people who care
[2:07:05] about immigrants here. If we go far, far out into the country, what's
[2:07:09] the likelihood that that same level of visibility is gonna help keep people safe?
[2:07:14] and the answer is obvious. The answer is, if we ship these people to
[2:07:18] the moon, they're much less safe than if they're here. If we send them to
[2:07:22] cooper county in a detention center where there's very few people keeping
[2:07:26] an eye out for their safety, it's worse. It just is.
[2:07:30] and I know that's not the answer you want because the population has gotten
[2:07:34] worked up about something that they've seen for the most part on tv or social
[2:07:38] media. But the fact is that whatever's happening, if you want
[2:07:42] it to happen in the cold, harsh light of reality, the
[2:07:47] closer it is to being in a media market where people
[2:07:51] pay attention, the better, not the worst. Um, as to the
[2:07:55] question of, of, um, how people were vetted, they, they
[2:07:59] were required to provide information upon their, uh, arrival. And often
[2:08:03] that included letters of recommendation from people who already lived here. Often
[2:08:07] it was families that essentially vouched for their, their peers.
[2:08:12] no, it's not perfect, just like it's not perfect today. People come from places that have very
[2:08:16] little record keeping, and we still accept them, but we do our best. The
[2:08:20] point is, when you just opened the border and had no vetting,
[2:08:24] then you really left us in a very bad place where we have bad people who
[2:08:29] might do bad things. And if we don't provide the resources
[2:08:33] or if we try to restrict the resources of federal government to try to fix the problem that
[2:08:37] was created, then we are doing ourselves a disservice. Mr.
[2:08:41] chairman, and then I'm, I'm I just really quickly,
[2:08:46] um, I appreciate that legislator about, um, that
[2:08:50] somebody could find a letter with them from a family member,
[2:08:54] uh, to hand to the united states government, and they'll let you in,
[2:08:59] uh, because somebody vouched for you. Also, there was no way to verify
[2:09:04] if those individuals just wrote it on the ship.
[2:09:10] there just wasn't. So, uh, and, and also what I think is
[2:09:14] quite interesting in the next breath, you say
[2:09:18] that, well, this can be built here. And as what our county counselor has said,
[2:09:22] uh, we can have control over this. But that's something I didn't say control.
[2:09:28] what do we do then? If someone builds something, we don't like it. What is that? We don't have control over
[2:09:32] it. Well, first off, we would try to use our zoning requirements, but
[2:09:36] you disagree with it and our, and our building requirements, you disagree with what he's saying? No,
[2:09:40] I didn't say we couldn't have somebody request a zoning permit. Tell us what
[2:09:44] the facility's gonna look like. Tell us what, tell us what its characteristics
[2:09:49] are, and then make a zoning decision. I think if we said no, the federal government
[2:09:53] maybe could do it anyway, but at least we would have the opportunity to say yes
[2:09:58] before they just go build whatever inhumane thing that you think they want
[2:10:02] to go build. I, I, it seems obvious to me that
[2:10:06] we would rather have something that we have a little bit of say in potentially than
[2:10:10] no say at all. And a moratorium just says, don't bring it here, send
[2:10:14] it somewhere where people don't care. That's what you're doing. You're saying, we don't want it here, so
[2:10:19] I'm gonna rec they don't. So what I think is interesting is that you mentioned cooper county.
[2:10:23] are you saying to the government of cooper county, they don't care? I'm giving an example. Thank you. I
[2:10:27] just don't need that further away. But what the whole fact of the matter is, let's be honest here.
[2:10:32] republican tactics are what? Being used an open
[2:10:36] border by god, they were sending all of these people, you wouldn't even believe it.
[2:10:40] they're running the streets. We can't even walk outside without running into
[2:10:44] somebody who wants to just take us out. Oh, and you're also influenced, you know, young jalen
[2:10:49] anderson, you're influenced by what the public thinks. Well, my god, what
[2:10:53] an idea. You're influenced by what the public thinks. You're
[2:10:57] influenced by what they've seen on tv. Thank god we have phones now,
[2:11:01] because you know, what we witnessed on a phone is that an individual being
[2:11:05] shot because they were trying to take care of somebody else. Thank god.
[2:11:10] we have this ability to see that when a child is taken into a
[2:11:14] facility and not given medical care or the individual from
[2:11:18] arizona who's taken in without medical care or this us citizen
[2:11:22] that's taken in because of the color of their sin skin, thank god,
[2:11:27] I will say, thank god we can see it. Thank
[2:11:32] god people are outraged because you should be.
[2:11:37] it is not this idea of, well, you know, if you just sit back and, and will
[2:11:41] be able to control all this and will be able to do all these different types of things. We've got the media
[2:11:45] here. The people are everywhere. The people have the
[2:11:49] access to film anything at any time, at any point.
[2:11:53] so let's get around this whole idea of that. Well, we
[2:11:57] would be along with this. We would be the compassionate conservative
[2:12:02] if we could just do it here. No,
[2:12:06] no. They have it in florida. They have it in texas. They
[2:12:10] have plenty, lots more money than this county does. What do they have? What
[2:12:14] have they been able to stop? Nothing. That's what we've seen.
[2:12:19] it's nothing. So why would we let the werewolf
[2:12:23] into the house? Why would we let these people come after all
[2:12:27] of our citizens, those individuals who are part of our community for years and years
[2:12:31] and years, why do we say, well, we tried, we let
[2:12:35] 'em on in here, but it just didn't work out. But at least
[2:12:39] we have a medium market. At least we have a possibility of laws
[2:12:44] that we might be able to say. Somebody comes up here and says, oh, don't worry,
[2:12:48] don't worry. We'll be able to get you medical care. Don't worry. We're gonna have a place for
[2:12:52] people to, to, uh, have air conditioning, to have heat, to have an
[2:12:56] actual space to live in. Not treat it just like cattle or
[2:13:00] worse than cattle. But then what happens? They go out and they
[2:13:05] do the complete opposite. I've seen it several times.
[2:13:09] this is a new one. Government people lie to government and this body
[2:13:13] all the time.
[2:13:20] I'll, I'll, I'll, um, I'm done.
[2:13:25] any other comments? Uh, legislator smith. Megan smith.
[2:13:29] sorry. You have your hand up? Yes. Tha thank you, mr. Chairman.
[2:13:33] um, I'll just start by saying I, I do plan to support
[2:13:37] this ordinance, uh, primarily for the reason that the council just stated
[2:13:41] with, um, I mean, I understand that this only impacts the unincorporated area.
[2:13:45] um, and we do have, uh, partnerships with the federal government in unincorporated
[2:13:50] areas. So we would have, if I'm understanding you right, mr. Kavinski,
[2:13:54] uh, some sort of legal standing if that were to ever happen in the unincorporated
[2:13:59] area. So for that reason, I, I will be supportive, but I also think it's important
[2:14:03] to state for the record, um, you know, let's not get to
[2:14:08] q with, you know, with quoting lazarus
[2:14:12] and the statue of liberty. Because just as a, a historical reminder since reciting history
[2:14:17] during that time, there was people who looked like me, who were just fresh out of emancipation
[2:14:21] and dealing with jim crow, who were not welcome in this country and who weren't
[2:14:25] brought, brought here through immigration. Rather, it was forced
[2:14:30] enslavement and forced migration. So I, um, we should tread lightly when we
[2:14:34] start quoting those types of things. They don't apply to everyone. Um, I've
[2:14:38] served for 20 years in this country. I've seen detention centers, I've seen the flaws in them.
[2:14:42] um, our country was just as much flaw then as it's now. So,
[2:14:47] um, I just wanna state that for the record, but I'll be supporting this ordinance.
[2:14:53] any other comment, questions, thoughts? All right. Uh,
[2:14:57] mayor jo, please call the roll. I'm sorry
[2:15:01] I didn't get the mover and seconder on the move. I'm I, second. I was the mover.
[2:15:05] mover and seconder. Okay. Jaylen and donna. Okay. Sorry. Two. This is a perfect
[2:15:13] anderson. Yes. Peyton? Yes. Smith? Yes.
[2:15:18] husky. Yes. Franklin? Yes.
[2:15:23] mcgee, lauer smith? No. Abar.
[2:15:27] absolutely. Six. Yes.
[2:15:32] one, no. One abstine. One abstain. Or I'm sorry, one absent. One
[2:15:36] chairman. Yep. I'm to adopt. It's been a motion to adopt. Is
[2:15:40] there? Objection. Objection. Seconded. Wait, what are we doing? There's an objection. Wait,
[2:15:44] what are we doing? Motion to adopt. Move to adopt.
[2:15:49] motion to adopt necessary. Okay. And there's an objection. Okay.
[2:15:53] we are we still on 60 61? Yes. We already,
[2:15:57] we oh, we already, we already, we already perfected it. I thought with the voice vote. Do we not?
[2:16:02] no. No, we not. Okay. No. Okay. Got it. So,
[2:16:06] uh, madam clerk, can you remind us, uh, what an objection dictates
[2:16:11] objection would, would then mean that they need six votes to adopt.
[2:16:15] okay. So there's a motion to second, um, for adoption.
[2:16:19] the motion was, yep. And any discussion? You were the second.
[2:16:25] all right. Uh, mary jo, please call the roll. And sean ob
[2:16:29] objected. Yes. Yes. Okay. So now,
[2:16:35] anderson? Yes. Peyton? Yes. Smith? Yes.
[2:16:39] husky? Yes. Franklin? Yes.
[2:16:44] mcgee lauer smith? No. A barca?
[2:16:48] absolutely. Six. Yes. One, no. One absent. One excused. We'll be
[2:16:52] sending that to the county executive for signature. It did pass.
[2:16:57] moving on. Uh, madam
[2:17:02] or mr. Chairman? Yeah. Mr. Franklin. Legislative franklin.
[2:17:06] uh, I re I, uh, move that we waive the reading on 6 0 6 4
[2:17:11] through 6 0 6 8. And that there's gonna be a public hearing
[2:17:16] on all of those on march the 23rd at one o'clock.
[2:17:22] all right, I'll second the waiving. It's been moved in second. Any discussion?
[2:17:27] hearing none. Mary jo, would you, you could just do by voice vote.
[2:17:31] oh, just, okay. All those in favor, please indicate by the sign of aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any
[2:17:35] opposed? Ayes have it. Ayes do indeed have it. Uh, final passage
[2:17:40] of proposed ordinances, 6 0 4 9. Establishing a
[2:17:44] third party monitoring program for jackson county projects and authorizing access for qualified
[2:17:48] contracted third parties to conduct site visits perfected. Move
[2:17:52] to hold second. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
[2:17:58] all right. Hearing none, um, without any objection, we'll hold,
[2:18:03] uh, resolutions and committee 2, 2, 1 4 9
[2:18:07] approving the 20 26, 20 27 jackson county assessment and equalization maintenance
[2:18:12] plan, legislature as a whole. Uh, there is no report from committee.
[2:18:16] uh, any questions or guidance on the direction for this legislation? I drafted,
[2:18:21] uh, proposed amendment and send it to the county counselor's office late last week. I
[2:18:25] don't know that they've had time to fully vet that and take care of it yet. Okay.
[2:18:29] uh, motion to hold. Moved to hold or second to hold. Moved and seconded.
[2:18:33] all right. Without any objection. We'll hold, uh, 2 2 1 5 0 48 36
[2:18:41] month, I'm sorry. Awarding a 30 month term and supply contract with 3 24 month
[2:18:45] option to extend for the furnishing of information technology, products
[2:18:49] and services for use by various county departments to shi international corporation
[2:18:53] of somerset, new jersey under the terms and conditions of omnia partners. Contract number 2 0 2 4 0 5 6
[2:18:59] dash zero two. An existing competitively big government contract, public works
[2:19:03] committee. Uh, unfortunately the public works committee did not meet today. I understand
[2:19:07] legislative franklin might have a request to withdraw, or, I'm sorry, not
[2:19:11] withdraw. Um, break outta a committee. Discharge.
[2:19:16] remove it. Yeah, take it out if you need. All
[2:19:20] right. No, charlie. Charlie, he didn't say anything. Charlie, charlie, hearing none. Charlie,
[2:19:24] should we whisper? Charlie? Charlie, you're keeping it. Yeah, I guess we'll
[2:19:28] hold at this point. Um, 2, 2 1 5 4. Authorizing the
[2:19:33] prosecuting attorney to execute a one year agreement with the city of green valley with one 12 month option
[2:19:37] to extend, to engage in anti-crime, anti-violence and law enforcement, school-based initiatives
[2:19:41] and purposes. It'll cost the county not to exceed $75,000 anti-crime
[2:19:45] committee report from committee. Committee recommends adoption. Alright.
[2:19:50] any objections? All right. Uh, we'll
[2:19:54] advance, um, that as, uh, the consent
[2:19:58] agenda. I'm sorry. 2, 2, 1 0. Lemme excuse
[2:20:02] one. Um, five seven. Oh, I'm sorry. 2 2 1. Five seven. Thank you. Two seven. Authorizing
[2:20:06] the chair of the jackson county drug task force to execute a legal services agreement with williams and campo
[2:20:11] pc of lee summit, missouri to provide legal services for the task force at a cost the
[2:20:15] county not to exceed $3,500. Anti-crime committee report from, uh, committee.
[2:20:19] committee recommends adoption. All right. Without
[2:20:23] any objection, we'll advance to the consent agenda.
[2:20:28] 2 2 1 6 0 authorizing the county council to execute a legal services agreement with
[2:20:32] certain lawyers and law firms at an aggregate cost of the county not to exceed $50,000. Finance
[2:20:37] and audit committee. Um, the committee did not meet.
[2:20:41] there is a request, um, to discharge this, um,
[2:20:45] as the sponsor. I will give that to you, sir. Mr. Chair, I'd like
[2:20:49] to move to discharge, uh, this from committee. It's been
[2:20:53] moved. Is there a second? Second discussion?
[2:20:59] um, I, uh, if I could, mr. Chairman, I'll throw it to general counsel
[2:21:03] or administration to talk about this ordinance a resolution.
[2:21:08] this resolution is to hire grade counsel allison bergman, to help
[2:21:13] with some chapter 100 tax incentive
[2:21:17] legal issues. It has been on the agenda for
[2:21:21] three weeks, maybe, uh, awaiting a committee hearing. Um, there
[2:21:26] was a request, I think, from at least our county executive to add the legislature as a
[2:21:30] means of who can utilize her advisement. So is that something that can be added
[2:21:34] as a friendly amendment or is there, I I don't
[2:21:38] know that it would even need an amendment because it all just goes through the county counselor. So just,
[2:21:42] um, he would direct whatever work the legislature needs, in my opinion.
[2:21:47] but yeah, I, I'm not, say that
[2:21:51] again, I'm sorry. So, in the ordinance or in the resolution, it says specifically that the,
[2:21:55] uh, ms. Bergman's law firm would be accountable to both the county executive and
[2:21:59] general counsel, excluding the legislature. So I just wanna make sure. I think that was a friendly
[2:22:03] suggestion that we add to make sure that we also have the ability to request
[2:22:07] from her what feedback she provides. So
[2:22:13] it directly is opposed to through anyone's office, we, we put this board
[2:22:17] based on the administration's request. Um, you know, they're, they are
[2:22:21] the executive of the administration. So, um,
[2:22:26] you know, it, it's up to what the elected officials would like to do.
[2:22:33] mr. Chair, um, I don't know if you've heard the words, economic development,
[2:22:38] . We haven't been spoken in this courthouse for a lot. Um, this attorney is
[2:22:42] specialized in that, uh, chapter 100 and learn is a very
[2:22:46] good vehicle. And ms. Bergman's firm is, uh, very good at that. Um,
[2:22:50] I, I don't have anything when we asked to, to hire this firm,
[2:22:55] any of that excluded the legislature in any feedback that this law firm would
[2:22:59] give us in any advice that give us in moving forward on anything like that. So,
[2:23:03] um, I, I'm not, I don't have the actual, uh, legislation in front
[2:23:07] of me. I don't, I I hope it doesn't exclude or specifically exclude it. If it does,
[2:23:12] I would ask for a friendly amendment to make sure the legislature, uh, is I, now I have the, the county council
[2:23:16] would say the agent, that, that would report to my office and the county council's office.
[2:23:20] and the county council is also your lawyer also. Uh, so I don't know anything to
[2:23:24] exclude it, but let me go on record, make sure that I don't want any, uh, counsel
[2:23:28] to come in and exclude the legislature from any sort of their feedback or contact.
[2:23:33] I think in, in the past we've had, like when we did the, um, the general
[2:23:38] contract for negotiations with the stadiums, we just listed all three. That way there was no
[2:23:42] discretion one way or another, or, or not. 'cause they're under different administration.
[2:23:47] I think there was some challenges with who, what worked for
[2:23:51] and that interest. I think since it's such a small change, you can just move
[2:23:55] to amend to add the word county legislature. Okay. Wherever it lists
[2:23:59] the other two. Um, I'll make a motion to adopt.
[2:24:05] are we adopting an amendment? You have to accept an amendment. Are we doing an amendment or
[2:24:09] we have had the county executive, um,
[2:24:13] make a statement that on the record, that we would not be excluded
[2:24:17] just as we are not as excluded with our county council. Or do we need an amendment?
[2:24:24] I would like to move that we add the county legislature to
[2:24:28] this. Alright, you second, move in second. It's been moved and seconded to
[2:24:32] amend 2 2 1 16 0 to add the legislature as
[2:24:36] a part of the group that this
[2:24:41] attorney would engage with. Um, all those in favor by sign of aye. Aye.
[2:24:45] aye. Aye. Aye. I think the ayes have it, but just in case. Are there any nays?
[2:24:50] I don't hear any so. We'll, I'll make a motion to adopt as
[2:24:54] amended. It's been moved to adopt as amendment. And seconded.
[2:24:59] um, there's discussion mr. Chair. Have,
[2:25:03] and, uh, mr. Barca, can I give this back to you? Are you done? Okay.
[2:25:07] and then you could, uh, legislative smith, has the motion
[2:25:11] been made to discharge this for from committee? 'cause we're making amendments or
[2:25:15] something that's stuck in committee. Oh, that's a good point. Say that again. Sorry.
[2:25:21] we haven't discharged this from committee yet. And we're making amendments on something
[2:25:25] that is stuck in committee. So procedurally we should discharge it first, make amendments
[2:25:29] and then proceed with adoption. There was a motion
[2:25:33] and a second to discharge. Was there not, not a vote, no.
[2:25:37] okay. I don't have a vote. I don't have a vote issued. So it, it, they breathe.
[2:25:42] so it's been moved and seconded to discharge from committee . I'm gonna pretend I'm
[2:25:46] still the chair 'cause I think that was my miss. Um, all those in
[2:25:50] favor to discharge, uh, from the finance and audit committee.
[2:25:54] resolution 2, 2 1 6 0 by sign of aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.
[2:25:59] all those not in favor of discharging from committee
[2:26:04] hearing none. 2, 2, 1. Six zero is discharged from committee. And just to dot
[2:26:08] our I's and cross our t's. Is there a motion to amend to include the legislature,
[2:26:12] mr. Chairman, now that it's been discharged? Mr. Chairman? Yes. Mr. Anderson, uh,
[2:26:16] uh, . Mr. Str, um,
[2:26:20] uh, I'd like to make an amendment that the legislature is added in
[2:26:25] along with the county executive and the counselor's office. You second
[2:26:29] to amend it. It's been moved and seconded to amend it as per mr. Anderson. All
[2:26:34] those in favor by sign? Aye. Aye. Aye. I make a motion to adopt
[2:26:38] as amended. I second it. It's been moved and seconded to adopt
[2:26:43] the as amended and, and now for discussion. And, and
[2:26:47] my, I just have a couple of questions. Yep. Mr. Vice chair. Um,
[2:26:51] and thank you by the way, legislator, uh, megan smith
[2:26:56] for catching that we hadn't discharged it. So my question is, um, did
[2:27:00] we do any kind of a formal selection process or bid process to determine which
[2:27:04] attorney to hire for this purpose? Because I know that there's lots of people
[2:27:08] who kind of specialize in chapter 100. We did. We did not. This is a, a, a
[2:27:13] a firm that we have had contracts with before and they're specialized in
[2:27:17] this is a firm who we chose to go with. Okay. Um,
[2:27:22] so that's just a personal concern for me that we just pick somebody
[2:27:26] that we've worked with before and didn't do any kind of selection process. I know from time to time
[2:27:30] that's necessary. When things are urgent, is there a specific urgency
[2:27:34] associated with this that you can, uh, tell me yes or no? And then if
[2:27:38] so, is it an urgency that you can disclose without creating a problem? Not an urgency. It's based on
[2:27:42] law. Uh, attorney and law firms based on experience and certain issues are
[2:27:47] entirely different than other agencies that are contracting. And it's, it's not apples to oranges.
[2:27:52] um, this firm has been productive in this, have experience in this.
[2:27:56] um, this is the firm that we chose to go with and, and the firm name
[2:28:00] you mentioned a lawyer's name. Is that the firm name? The firm name is specifically
[2:28:05] grid counsel, gray grid, gid.
[2:28:09] okay. So we're contracting with that firm, but we named a particular,
[2:28:14] it's a solo firm individual. It's a solo firm. Solo firm. Got it. Thank you. Um,
[2:28:18] so yeah, that's, that's, it's a concern for me that we are doing a no bid contract
[2:28:22] for $50,000 for an attorney that obviously somebody knows and we've
[2:28:26] done business with in the past. I, um, I know that we do this from
[2:28:31] time to time, but if there's no urgency, I don't understand why we wouldn't have,
[2:28:35] um, sought bids from qualified participants. So
[2:28:40] I, I would just speak to the council is entirely different than,
[2:28:44] uh, any sort of other bid process. Um, they're intangibles that
[2:28:48] as the account executive, I need to choose someone that I'm comfortable with the exact same
[2:28:53] way this legislature would choose and has chosen law firms in
[2:28:57] the past that they were comfortable with. Do you wanna give general counsel
[2:29:01] your opinions on well, the selection of, no, my
[2:29:05] question was actually related to the amendment. I'm looking at the language here and
[2:29:09] it doesn't actually list the county executive anywhere. So I wasn't sure where you
[2:29:14] wanted it to say county legislature, unless I'm yeah. Not looking at
[2:29:18] she should say in the last paragraph, and maybe I'm look obviously on a phone, so maybe I'm missing it.
[2:29:23] I just wanna know exactly where you want it. Just to clarify, did the general counsel wanna provide
[2:29:27] context for a selection of your own legal advisors
[2:29:34] told in here? What I'm afraid that, which, sorry, which
[2:29:38] paragraph did you want in? I'm working on that part. But you wanna give the opinion on the
[2:29:43] selection of the administration's opinion on, uh, legal advisors.
[2:29:48] sorry, I don't think I heard the question. Y you, you all have the ability to choose your
[2:29:52] legal advisors third party counsel, do you? Not
[2:29:57] actually. It, uh, legislator smith is correct, but when time is
[2:30:01] of the essence, many times we can't go through that process. And it is
[2:30:05] discretionary then to not do it that way. And in this specific instance,
[2:30:10] uh, it was conveyed to us that, uh, this firm, the grid council,
[2:30:14] was specifically interested in working with the administration and they had worked
[2:30:19] with them previously. Is was, I know there was a question about the
[2:30:23] exclusivity of the work. Is that a sole source or is this something that's beyond
[2:30:27] normal uniqueness? It's not a so source.
[2:30:31] I mean, the sole source is, is something
[2:30:36] when it's a unique practice. But when you're talking legal profession,
[2:30:40] you want to work with someone who you trust and who you have worked with in the past.
[2:30:44] and so I don't necessarily believe sole source is necessarily applicable
[2:30:49] when you're dealing with someone who is representing the county. You want someone
[2:30:53] you comfortable with, just as an individual would want somebody that they were
[2:30:57] comfortable with. My doctor, if I
[2:31:01] may. Uh, yes. Vice chair. Yeah. That notion. I
[2:31:05] I would say we could say, I wouldn't say be true of a construction project.
[2:31:09] why wouldn't the same be true of picking a janitorial supply vendor? I,
[2:31:13] I mean, I understand lawyers know lawyers, and that's great that we have a lawyer as
[2:31:17] a county executive and we, we have a county counselor's office. I, I just, I think
[2:31:21] that our procurement policies are put in place, um, both to
[2:31:25] avoid the appearance of impropriety and favoritism as
[2:31:30] well as to make sure that, um, we, since we're spending the public's
[2:31:34] money, we entertain the idea of doing business with as
[2:31:38] many people of the public as possible. Otherwise, we're essentially creating an
[2:31:42] exclusive club. If I know somebody at the county, I might get to work with the
[2:31:46] county. Um, I, so I'm really uncomfortable with this the more I hear. So
[2:31:51] I will say the code specifically carves out legal services for that reason.
[2:31:55] I I understand it's not an explicit violation in terms of our code.
[2:31:59] I'm not arguing that. Okay. I'm saying if there's not a specific reason, more so
[2:32:04] than I know the person that I'm comfortable with them, that it makes me very uncomfortable.
[2:32:08] I don't think anyone said they'd know the person legislative smith. And this is why we come before
[2:32:12] this body and this body gets to approve that if they want, don't like the counsel that we're
[2:32:16] suggesting this body can vote that down, but at some point, legal service
[2:32:20] are not like janitorial services. They're not like construction. Those are measurable things
[2:32:25] to do. Legal counsel is important for us to put the trust of faith in
[2:32:29] the, the, uh, reputation and the experience that someone has.
[2:32:33] you can't just bid out, well, you could just bid out for lawyers. You get a first year lawyer,
[2:32:37] come out with cheaper. And that's not how I want to choose when
[2:32:41] I'm representing the people of who I'm having to hire this, I wanna have someone that I, that has
[2:32:45] the experience to work in chapter 100 thing. So it's my position to bring it to you.
[2:32:50] um, it's your position to review it and review this firm. If you don't like
[2:32:54] it, you can vote it up or down. Um, but, but this legal issues are entirely
[2:32:58] different than our procurement processes. They're, they're
[2:33:02] actually being able to evaluate it across the board on the people who provide
[2:33:07] construction and janitorial providing a, a lawyer is not
[2:33:11] able to do that. And so that's my professional opinion that, that this firm would be
[2:33:15] good. The, the professional opinion of the county counselors. Not that I know them. I've never
[2:33:20] worked with this ca this attorney before, but I know what she does. I know experience.
[2:33:24] so, uh, it should not be something you're uncomfortable with. I understand from
[2:33:28] an overview. It is, but this is why I bring this to this legislature for
[2:33:32] your review on this specific agenda. Yeah. And, and in particular
[2:33:37] the fact that it was assigned to a committee and the committee hasn't had a chance to meet yet. Um,
[2:33:41] oftentimes if we're hearing from a vendor, that's when we do it, now all of a sudden we're
[2:33:45] discharging it from the or we have discharged it from the committee. Um, and,
[2:33:50] and just didn't avail ourselves of that opportunity. I'm, I'm just saying it makes me uncomfortable.
[2:33:54] I'm not trying to convince my colleagues to pass or not pass this. I'm just saying
[2:33:58] for, for me, if there's no urgency and there was no kind
[2:34:02] of broad net cast, whether it's for somebody we're hiring
[2:34:07] or for, in this case, hiring an attorney, that, that just concerns me.
[2:34:11] I I know when we were looking for a new attorney for assessment, um, I had
[2:34:15] some concerns because the person didn't have the right background. But that was the person we could find willing
[2:34:19] to do the work, and ultimately we approved it. But that was after some discussion and some
[2:34:23] opportunity to make sure that, that we were really using the public's money for the,
[2:34:27] for the person who was the best fit, um, and available and willing. Um,
[2:34:32] and, and I understand it's not janitorial services. I I get all that, but,
[2:34:36] uh, it just, it strikes me that, that we skipped the process.
[2:34:40] um, and if you said, well, if we don't, we have to be in court next week for
[2:34:45] x, y, z or we might lose this opportunity to work with somebody who needs to
[2:34:49] work with us on these chapter 100 things. I, I'd say, okay, maybe there's a
[2:34:53] reason. But now we're just urgent because
[2:34:57] I I, I'm just not comfortable with the urgency, given that we kinda skipped the process
[2:35:01] just to respond. We met with this firm in talking about chapter one hundreds over
[2:35:06] a month ago. And, uh, we've been wanting to work on some projects and we've been
[2:35:10] waiting to get it in front of this body. So I, the, if, if you needed another
[2:35:14] week to do something, I'm fine with that. I I was hoping we could get this moving. We get this
[2:35:18] firm on board and start, uh, exploring some of these opportunities
[2:35:23] we have for the county to raise some revenue. I'm not against this sitting
[2:35:27] here for another week or so, but, uh, I didn't know it would have any,
[2:35:31] uh, issues with it. But if it's something you're uncomfortable with, I can definitely inform the,
[2:35:36] the firm that we're gonna go through the committee. Um, I, I,
[2:35:40] I want you to be comfortable with the decisions that I'm making from my office
[2:35:44] that I'm bringing to you. Um, but the, there shouldn't be something that, that concerns
[2:35:48] you. It is of an urgency issue. We're not in court tomorrow, but we wanna move on these
[2:35:52] issues. And we've, uh, met with this firm for over a week. I mean, excuse me, over
[2:35:57] a month and they're ready to go on it.
[2:36:03] any other questions, comments, thoughts? Yes. To inquire
[2:36:07] mr. Chair? Yeah. Uh, legislator smith. Um, I would
[2:36:11] that inquire of, uh, council and administration, uh, because
[2:36:15] like the vice chair, I'm concerned about impropriety as well. Are you aware that the
[2:36:20] individual listed with this firm has political ties to soliciting sitting legislators,
[2:36:24] including campaign donations, things like that?
[2:36:30] are you inquiring of me? Yes. I was asking if you are aware what counsel's
[2:36:34] aware I have no knowledge of this firm being involved in anybody in the legislature. No.
[2:36:39] okay. Well, I think that, that that deserves, uh, further
[2:36:43] investigation. Um, and considering that there's been concerns in the past,
[2:36:47] um, both with this leadership and the leadership from last year, the legislature about
[2:36:52] no bid contracts, um, I think we should follow that same script
[2:36:56] with any contract that we're bidding out. Um, 'cause just by looking at this contract,
[2:37:00] there's no clear scope of work that we're supposed to be expected,
[2:37:05] uh, communication schedule that we're expected throughout this next year.
[2:37:09] um, and that's concerning considering everything else I just mentioned.
[2:37:16] I would assume that if any member of this legislature had any relationship
[2:37:20] with an attorney in a given campaign donations, they would abstain. So I'm not,
[2:37:24] I'm not familiar who you're talking to, but I have the utmost faith in
[2:37:28] the people in this legislative body that they would not vote if they thought there was a conflict of interest.
[2:37:33] I'm not familiar with that at all. This firm was based on their experience and what they've
[2:37:37] done for the county before and the experience they've done in this realm and this
[2:37:41] actually area of the law. And they're, they're very competent in that. I'd
[2:37:45] like to move to hold. There's a motion. Is there a second we can
[2:37:49] hold until we investigate? Second spend moved and seconded.
[2:37:53] any opposition? All right. We'll hold ordinance in legislature
[2:37:58] as a whole. Um, I'm sorry, I lost my place there. 2 2 1 6 0
[2:38:02] will be held in legislature as a whole. Uh, 2 2 1 6 3
[2:38:08] awarding a contract for the furnishing of items for resell by the parks plus rec department of dunlop
[2:38:12] sports of dallas, texas as a proprietary, as proprietary
[2:38:16] purchases public works committee committee did not meet. So it'll be held 2 2 1 6 5
[2:38:21] award, a 12 month contract with three 12 month options to extend for the furnishing of independent
[2:38:25] auditing services for use by the finance and purchasing department to clifton larson, allen,
[2:38:30] llp of kansas city, missouri, under the terms and conditions of request for proposals number 25
[2:38:34] dash 53. And it cost the county for 2026 not to exceed $150,000
[2:38:39] finance and audit committee. Um, the committee did not
[2:38:43] meet. Um, there is an effort to hold this, although I think the finance department
[2:38:47] is asked for us to remove this. I I I'll
[2:38:51] yield to the county executive if he wants to justify and advocate for that effort
[2:38:56] or if we can hold it for another week. It's your prerogative. Yeah. Could we
[2:39:00] hold that? Okay. Uh, will be, it will be held 2 2 1 7 0.
[2:39:05] we're in contract for the purchase of a deep core airier for use by the park plus rec department.
[2:39:09] two for the fred urbana golf course to some north america inc. Valley
[2:39:13] park, missouri, under the terms and conditions of invitation have been number 25 dash five five
[2:39:18] at cost the county not to exceed $52,541. Public works
[2:39:22] committee. Committee did not meet. So this will be held 2 2 1 7 1
[2:39:26] award, a contract for the furnishing of two ford f 600 trucks and installed snow
[2:39:31] snowplow packages for used by the public works department to viking thieves midwest
[2:39:35] of morley, missouri under the terms and conditions set forth inable contract number 0 6 2 2 2 2
[2:39:41] vcm and existing competitively, big government contract and actual cost the county in the amount
[2:39:45] of $287,050 public works committee. Uh,
[2:39:49] the committee did not meet. So we'll hold that. Uh, 2 2 1 7 2
[2:39:55] recognizing the honorarium payments to community volunteers who assisted in the evaluation
[2:39:59] of nonprofit grant applications, legislatures a whole move to adopt. There.
[2:40:04] a second. Second. It's been moved. Objection. Any discussion? There's
[2:40:08] no objection. There's no objection. One objection. Um, and that would mean that
[2:40:12] we need six votes at this point for resolution. Oh, I'm sorry. No
[2:40:16] five votes. My apologies. I'm just not clear on what an objection for resolution does.
[2:40:21] touche. Is there anybody wanna clarify?
[2:40:25] all right, mr. Kavinsky, you take the vote
[2:40:30] at that time, judge, do you not? Yeah. Rather than wait until the confront
[2:40:34] agenda. Okay. Um, so, uh, with that
[2:40:38] we will do a roll call vote. Is there any discussion or point
[2:40:42] of information? Uh, no. Go ahead. Adam clark.
[2:40:47] two thirds majority needed front. Objection, majority. 'cause
[2:40:51] there's an objection, correct. Two thirds majority, which would give us how many votes?
[2:40:55] six. Sit those present tion. That's what it's saying right
[2:40:59] here.
[2:41:06] okay. So
[2:41:13] paying his friend.
[2:41:19] um, I thought, I thought we already voted on that.
[2:41:28] so is it
[2:41:40] a lot of money?
[2:41:45] is this record setting for our longest meeting in like this, this,
[2:41:50] no, not the legislate, but this, this term, this group of legislators.
[2:41:54] no. ? No. No. 'cause we, no. Yes, we've
[2:41:59] had a meeting longer than this order. .
[2:42:03] okay. Come on. Let remember, let's just go on in the back row and get it over with
[2:42:08] a stack of papers. Yeah, there was a stack. Yeah, there was a stack.
[2:42:12] I think I was absent the next day. Yeah, we we had a longer meeting than
[2:42:16] that. Was I remote and on vacation? Because it might seem
[2:42:20] like it's going faster if I had a cocktail. Uh, mme. Clark, go ahead. I'm sorry. Is
[2:42:25] she just objecting to it going on the consent? So she wants a roll call. Is that the objection?
[2:42:29] legislative smith. That's what we're trying to find. Can you repeat that? I didn't hear the
[2:42:34] question. Go ahead and repeat it again, madam clerk. Oh,
[2:42:38] we're wanting to know. Do you, are you just objecting that it goes on to the consent agenda and
[2:42:43] you want a roll call vote? Yes.
[2:42:47] and I wanted to have discussion. That was the point of my objection.
[2:42:54] okay, so, so we'll move on with the vote vote. Uh, we'll, we'll
[2:42:58] give a discussion. So go, go ahead and, uh, discuss legislator smith.
[2:43:02] which one is that? What you okay, well, I just want the point. Oh, go ahead, mr. Chairman legislator.
[2:43:07] megan swift smith. Sorry.
[2:43:11] I just wanted to point out and make the, the body aware that, uh, resolution
[2:43:15] 2 2 1 7 2, um, is seriously legally flawed
[2:43:19] as well as ethically flawed, um, legally flawed because it's
[2:43:23] stated and well known that these individuals that were seeking to pay
[2:43:28] are volunteers and they were under no contract, nor were they expecting any type
[2:43:32] of compensation. And so in addition to that,
[2:43:36] there was also an open encumbrance that was created january
[2:43:40] the 27th, um, which is an earmarked amount of money to
[2:43:44] pay someone for that current fiscal year of work. Um, and we know
[2:43:48] that this, uh, quote unquote work that was done by these evaluators was done last
[2:43:52] fiscal year. So to open up another, uh, line
[2:43:56] of, uh, uh, of funding this fiscal year is fiscally improper.
[2:44:00] that violates the, the missouri state statute as well as the missouri constitution
[2:44:05] is fiscal procedures. Um, so if, if that's not
[2:44:09] enough to understand the serious legality of this, uh, the ethical flaws
[2:44:14] of these individuals that we're seeking to pay. Um,
[2:44:18] these specific volunteers have political ties and have made political
[2:44:23] donations to current city members of the legislature, myself included.
[2:44:27] uh, which is why I take this very seriously because I was not involved in selecting
[2:44:31] any of these volunteers. Uh, these volunteers were selected, uh,
[2:44:35] by four members of the legislature, uh, one being the chairman from last
[2:44:40] year, chairman from this year, as well as the budget chair and finance and audit chair.
[2:44:44] and so, um, so go a step further with the,
[2:44:48] uh, impropriety since we, we just stated we didn't like impropriety.
[2:44:52] uh, one of these volunteers is a current treasurer of an active campaign of one of
[2:44:56] our legislators, legislator mcgee. Um, and another is also
[2:45:01] a board member of one of the organizations that received money from those
[2:45:05] evaluations that they did for the arpa funding. So,
[2:45:09] um, considering all of the investigations going on in our metro area
[2:45:13] right now about fiscal impropriety and, and illegality,
[2:45:17] I think we need to tread lightly when we try to do things retroactively that
[2:45:22] we're not legally obligated to do. So I'm not supporting this
[2:45:26] resolution. I forgot the light. Uh, you
[2:45:30] may, if you would forward those over to the general counsel's office for evaluation and then we can take this
[2:45:34] up. I think if there's move to hold. Thank you. Is there a second? Second? Any objection?
[2:45:39] yep. No objection. But I have a question. Yeah. Um,
[2:45:43] can we make publicly known that list of people that would be
[2:45:47] f this were to pass be receiving an honorarium? I think it's within the documents
[2:45:52] already, is it not? No, I don't even see any names. Okay. The answer to that question
[2:45:56] is yes. We can amend this to list the names. There you go. Thank you. Or
[2:46:00] even provide us the names because I don't know the names of everyone
[2:46:04] that was on the committee. And I agree with legislator smith. I would not want
[2:46:08] to do, do anything that would not be ethical. Okay. Agreed.
[2:46:13] all right. So, uh, we will hold, uh, 2 2 1 7 2 2 2 1 7 5
[2:46:21] according a 12 month contract with three 12 month options to extend for training, consulting
[2:46:26] services and software maintenance on the mobile assessor software for use by the
[2:46:30] assessment department to walpert inc. Of dayton, ohio as a sole source purchase
[2:46:34] at actual cost the county in the amount of $114,355 finance
[2:46:39] and audit committee committee did not meet. So this will be held 2 2 1 7 6 award,
[2:46:43] 8 36 month contract with three 12 month options to extend for the furnishing of fuel products
[2:46:47] and related services for use by various county departments. Chief frazier oil and lp
[2:46:52] gas company, inc. Of gower, missouri, awarded under the terms and conditions of city of
[2:46:56] kansas city, missouri. Contract number ev 4 0 2 4, an
[2:47:00] existing government contract budget committee, um, report from committee
[2:47:04] committee recommends adoption. All right. Without any objection,
[2:47:08] we will add to the consent agenda 2 2 1 7 7 authorizing the interim director of finance
[2:47:12] and purchasing to issue a check in the amount of $8,330 to
[2:47:16] harvest av solutions of kansas city, missouri for the relocation of meaty equipment
[2:47:21] used in the kansas city legislative assembly area budget committee.
[2:47:25] a report from committee committee recommends adoption without objection. We'll
[2:47:29] add that to the consent agenda. Agenda 2 2 1 7 8 authorizing the county council
[2:47:34] to execute an addendum to the legal services agreement with sherry simkin of lee
[2:47:38] summit, missouri under the terms and conditions of request for qualifications number 24
[2:47:42] dash six and cost the county of $600 per day not to
[2:47:46] exceed $70,000. Finance and audit committee. Committee did not meet. So it'll be held 2 2 1 7 9
[2:47:52] authorizing the county executive to execute a permanent utility easement in favor of spire missouri, inc.
[2:47:56] for a fee payable to the county land use committee. Report from committee
[2:48:01] committee recommends adoption without any objection. We will
[2:48:05] add this to the consent agenda.
[2:48:09] all right, 2 2 1 8 0
[2:48:15] awarding a 24 month term supply contract with two 12 month options to extend for the furnishing of
[2:48:19] ellie webb law enforcement computer information services for use by various county departments
[2:48:23] to the regional justice information service. Regis commission of st.
[2:48:27] louis, missouri is an acquisition from another governmental entity anti-crime committee.
[2:48:31] report from committee. Uh, committee held is held in committee,
[2:48:35] sorry. Uh, 2 2 1 8 1 award, a 12 month term supply
[2:48:40] contract, one 12 month option to extend for dump truck repair for use by the public works department
[2:48:44] to rush truck centers of kansas city, missouri as a sole source purchase public
[2:48:48] works committee committee did not meet. So it's being held 2 2 1 8 2. We're a 24
[2:48:52] month term supply contract. One 12 month option to extend for the furnishing of legal process services
[2:48:57] for use by the family support division of the prosecuting attorney's office to dmb legal
[2:49:01] services of prairie village, kansas. Under the terms and conditions request for proposals number 25
[2:49:05] dash five one budget committee report from committee committee recommends
[2:49:10] adoption 2 2 1 8 3 consent object going to
[2:49:14] the eight two is going to the, oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Sorry. Go to the consent agenda
[2:49:18] without objection. All right. 2 2 1 8 3
[2:49:22] authorizing the county executive to execute an intergovernmental cooperative agreement with the city of oak grove to provide
[2:49:27] for the mill and overlay of pavement on the shared portions of robinson and white roads at
[2:49:31] an actual costa county in the amount of $121,595
[2:49:35] in our governmental affairs committee. Report from committee, uh, committee was
[2:49:39] holding. Alright, onto the consent agenda, madam clerk, I got 2 2 1 7 6 2 2 1 7 7 2 2 1 7 9 2 2 1 8 2.
[2:49:47] is that correct for consent agenda?
[2:49:52] I'll let you read it back if you .
[2:49:57] okay. 2 2 1 5 4 2 2 1 5 7. Okay, so I
[2:50:01] missed one. 5, 4, 5 7.
[2:50:05] okay. 2, 2, 1. Five four. 2, 2, 1. Five seven. Yeah.
[2:50:12] 2, 2 1. Seven six. 2 2 1. Seven. Seven. Two two. One. Seven. Nine.
[2:50:16] 2 2 1. Eight two. Everybody agree with that? Yes. Alright.
[2:50:21] move to a dot. Is there a second? Second. So moved and seconded. Um,
[2:50:25] any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? Go ahead. Mary anderson.
[2:50:31] yes. Peyton? Yes. Smith? Yes. Husky?
[2:50:35] yes. Franklin? Yes. Mcgee
[2:50:40] lauer smith? Yes. Abar? Yes. Seven. Yes.
[2:50:44] one absent one excuse, uh, introduction
[2:50:48] of proposed ordinances and assignment to committee. Uh, I see we have none. Madam clerk, are there any add-ons?
[2:50:54] yes, mr. Chairman ordinance 60 69
[2:50:58] and I believe she's gonna be passing those out. All right. Repealing and replacing
[2:51:03] resolution 2 2 1 6 9 date of february 9th, 2026 and appropriating
[2:51:07] $20,683 within the 2026 general fund and awarding a
[2:51:12] contract to lcp tracker of orange, california for an additional
[2:51:16] single software package for use by the compliance review office for nonprofit partnership
[2:51:21] grants and an actual cost of the county in the amount of $20,683
[2:51:26] as a sole source purchase. Uh, introduced by,
[2:51:30] what was that? Myself, manuel barker. Um, I
[2:51:34] think we'll hold this in legislature as a whole, um, so that we can discuss, um,
[2:51:38] I think at this, the next gen of legislative meeting, we'll have the general counsel's office,
[2:51:43] uh, give us an update on that. Uh, for the sake of time though, we'll hold it. Uh,
[2:51:47] introduction to proposed resolutions and assign to committee 2 2 1 8 4 awarding a
[2:51:51] contract for annual software maintenance for used by the collection department to menton technologies
[2:51:56] of niagara falls, new york at an actual cost of the county in the amount of $642,563
[2:52:02] as a sole source purchase introduced by donna peyton. Uh, sign it to finance and
[2:52:06] audit 2 2 1 8 6 awarding a 34 month term supply
[2:52:10] contract with the fur for the furnishing of facility, fire suppression systems, equipment
[2:52:15] software, and related services fu by the public works department. Two. Johnson controls of staples,
[2:52:19] minnesota under the terms and conditions set forth and source wall contract number 1 2 1 0 2 4
[2:52:24] an existing competitively big government contract introduced by manuel barker iv.
[2:52:28] uh, sign of public works 2 2 1 8 7
[2:52:32] award a contract for the purchase of two vehicles for use by the jackson county drug task force. Two
[2:52:36] cohen motors of springfield, llc of springfield, missouri under the terms and
[2:52:41] conditions of state of missouri contract number mc 2 51 82 and
[2:52:45] cc 2 4 1 6 6 2 1 5
[2:52:49] existing competitively, big government contracts in an actual cost of the county in the amount of $99,502
[2:52:55] introduced by manuel barker, iv sign of justice and law 2 2 1 8 8
[2:52:59] we a contract for the purchase of rifles for use by the sheriff's office to
[2:53:03] clyde armory, inc. Of enss, georgia under the terms and conditions of invitation
[2:53:07] to bid number 25 dash five six and cost county not to exceed $83,565
[2:53:13] introduced by manuel barker iv sign of justice and law 2 2 1 8 9
[2:53:17] awarding a contract for the purchase of 3 20 26 ford transit t three
[2:53:21] 50 passenger vans for used by the jackson county sheriff's office detention center,
[2:53:26] two midway ford truck center of kansas city, missouri into the terms and conditions of state
[2:53:30] of missouri. Contract number mc 2 5 108 2 1
[2:53:35] dash mc 2 58 2 0 0 1 1.
[2:53:39] an existing competitively big government contract in actual cost of the county in the amount of $230,220
[2:53:45] introduced by manuel barker. The fourth signed justice and law 2 2 1 9 0 award,
[2:53:49] a contract for annual maintenance of the trons recording software for use
[2:53:53] by the recorder of deeds department to tron, inc. Of chicago,
[2:53:58] illinois at an actual cost of the county in the amount of $106,772
[2:54:02] is a sole source purchase introduced by donna peyton. I sign a fine and audit
[2:54:06] 2 2 1 9 1 according a 12 month
[2:54:10] term supply contract with three 12 month options to extend for the first unit of t-shirts and wearing appar
[2:54:14] for use by various county departments to exhibit arts llc of wichita, kansas,
[2:54:19] e-a-I-s-l-l-c of atlanta, georgia. And so what llc of lisa,
[2:54:23] missouri to the terms and conditions of invitation to number 25 dash five introduced by
[2:54:27] donna peyton sign of finance and audit 2 2 1 9 2 authorizing the county counsel
[2:54:31] counselor to execute a 12 month contract with one 12 month option to extend
[2:54:35] for legal service to seaforth blumenthal and harris, llc of kansas city, missouri at
[2:54:39] costa county not to exceed $100,000 as a sole source purchase introduced
[2:54:44] by donna payton, uh, sign of finance and audit county executive uh, orders.
[2:54:48] madam clerk, are there any executive orders? Yes, mr. Chairman,
[2:54:53] executive order 26 26 0 5.
[2:55:04] appointment to the community mental health fund board, I hereby make the following appointment to
[2:55:08] the community mental health fund board. Crystal hart johnson is hereby appointed to a new term
[2:55:12] set to expire january 31st, 2029. The seat was previously
[2:55:16] vacant. Ms. Hart johnson's resume is attached. Executive order
[2:55:20] 26 0 6. I hereby make the following appointment to the plan commission. Greg
[2:55:24] locke is hereby appointed to a new term to set to expire february 28th, 2030.
[2:55:29] mr. Locke lives in the sixth district and his resume is attached,
[2:55:34] uh, unfinished business. Is there any unfinished business seeing
[2:55:38] non new business? Is there any new business? Um, legislator paid? Yes.
[2:55:42] I would like to ask for an excuse ask that
[2:55:47] legislator duram mcgee be excused. He, um,
[2:55:51] is dealing with some medical concerns today and is unable, was unable to make it.
[2:55:56] thank you. Uh, any additional new business?
[2:56:01] um, I'll, I'll have a piece of new business. Um, we are going to appoint ad hoc committees
[2:56:05] to assist, uh, with, uh, expansion of our efforts to try and
[2:56:09] accomplish, uh, goals that we've all, uh, dictated we, we want as priorities.
[2:56:14] um, worked with the county executive to talk about some of these things. Um, so
[2:56:18] you'll see that. Uh, in addition to that, um, I'm asking advisors to step in to
[2:56:22] help with having seats at the table. Although not voting members, their voices are important
[2:56:26] from representatives of the community. So, uh, you should be expecting that to be coming,
[2:56:30] um, probably now tomorrow. So that, uh, we can give our clerk staff some, some break.
[2:56:35] um, adjournment. So the next legislative meeting is scheduled to be held on
[2:56:39] march 9th, uh, 2026 at 3:00 pm at the eastern jackson county courthouse,
[2:56:43] 3 0 8 west kansas independence, missouri. Uh, ground floor legislative
[2:56:48] chambers. Is there a motion to adjourn? Opposed? Second. Moved in.
[2:56:52] seconded. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed,
[2:56:56] sean's opposed? Uh, as of 5 58, we
[2:57:00] are now adjourned. Thank you all for your patience and time.