Information was presented to Eureka City Council members on Monday, Aug. 27 in regards to a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) being pursued for intended use at Memorial Hall. City Administrator Joel Laws drafted a memorandum in addition to presenting the information to members of the council. Up to $600,000 can be applied for through this match grant, which stipulates 25% be matched by the applicant. The initial project scope included completion of windows at Memorial Hall and improving building efficiency. An agreement has been established with South Central Kansas Economic Development District (SCKEDD) for provision of administrative services. In 2022, BG Consultants was hired to draft a Historic Structure Report and Physical Condition Assessment. To proceed, Laws told council members that Radon Testing for the amount of $1,600 and an updated Preliminary Architecture Report (PAR) for the amount of $4,750, quoted by BG Consultants, would need completed. If funds were received, the city’s match would be $150,000.
It was shared that $50,000 had been raised for window replacement by the Greenwood Preservation Society. Mayor Stephen Coulter noted that he believed there was also approximately $50,000 in tax credits to sell, that could also be applied towards windows. Coulter told council members that he had tried to call Heather Fuesz so he would be able to provide additional information on this, but had not reached her.
In committee reports, it was shared that representatives from the City of Eureka attempted to convene with the airport advisory board, but due to lack of a quorum, this failed. It was shared that only one airport board member, George Turner, had attended. Proposed airport rules and regulations were forwarded to board members prior to the scheduled meeting and were an intended subject of discussion. Laws noted that City Attorney James Watson, who was absent from the meeting, had reviewed the document and given his blessing. When Mayor Coulter spoke in favor of having the airport board review this before bringing the item to vote, Councilman Marks noted they had the opportunity to attend the scheduled meeting to discuss them and did not do so. Marks spoke in favor of moving forward. As this was the general consensus, the item was brought to vote. Council members approved the rules and regulations.
Lawsnextbroughtairport board membership to the floor for discussion, noting the need for having people willing to show up for meetings on the board. Laws noted that Turner had been the only one to attend and members had been notified weeks in advance. He also described trying for the past few months to get the board to convene for a meeting. Mayor Coulter noted that for some, a call would be more effective than a notice by email. Coulter continued by stating that he felt these were a good group of people with interest and knowledge about the subject of airports. He then voiced uncertainty towards finding individuals who have interest in the subject to replace members. When Councilman Campbell questioned if the city needs an airport board, Mayor Coulter noted that having individuals knowledgeable about the airport acting in an advisory capacity was beneficial. Councilman Jason Brandt stated he felt they needed the advisory board, and was sorry they couldn’t attend the meeting, but noted he didn’t feel bad proceeding with rules. It was noted that attendance may have been impacted from a bitter taste left from past issues that have since been transitioned away from as well as a scheduling conflict. It was noted that an event was held that evening and some may have attended this. It was shared that Turner, who was in attendance, had no issues with the rules proposed. Coulter was slated to speak with members of the board.
The sewer lining project in Eastbrook has been completed. Laws noted that the goal with this project was repairing a line that has been a problem for years. Laws suggested that, when the city looks at moving forward with more projects in the future, officials look at developing water and sewer ordinances.
The subject of the upcoming Culpepper and Merriweather Circus was brought to the floor. Mayor Coulter referenced the contract permitting the circus to come to town, noting he had hastily signed this without first seeking council approval and extended an apology to fellow city officials. After sharing that the event would be held Friday, Sept. 13, it was explained that a previous employee had got the ball rolling for this and the date had been predetermined. Coulter explained that he had initially thought it was the organization that had set up in the city last year. In further discussion, it was shared that the event would not be costing the city anything. City Clerk Renee Burk noted that, though they would not be paying rent for the parking lot, the city would be getting a portion of the funds for advanced ticket sales.
In upcoming items, Laws reported that a Greenwood County Community Center (GCCC) meeting was coming up (slated to be held last Wednesday, Aug. 28).
The 1% Sales Tax informational meeting was slated for last Thursday and was to follow the Greenwood County Hospital wellness event presentation. The two entities scheduled these in conjunction with one another, hoping to improve attendance.
A flyer developed for the city through the services of JEO Consulting was provided to members of the council last Monday. This fact sheet outlines information in regards to the 1% sales tax. Laws told officials that he had spoken with The Eureka Herald newspaper about blowing up a selection of images to aid in provision of information to the public.
IdeaTek is moving forward with line installation for fiber connection.
In his weekly report, Administrator Laws shared that the city’s New Holland tractor was delivered locally for repair. In pending items, Laws is working to develop a buy-local policy, requested by the council.
Community member Roy Wade was present requesting approval for shooting off fireworks at Phillips Cabin on Saturday, Sept. 14. Wade noted this is something his family has done annually. Members of the council approved the request.
The consent agenda was approved. This included the following items: minutes of the Aug. 12 meeting and scheduled claims list of expenses due through Aug. 26 in the amount of $106,093.67.
An executive session for discussion of employee performance and policies was held for 15 minutes with the City Clerk and City Administrator in attendance. Following the session, no action was taken.
An executive session with the council was held for five minutes for discussion of personnel. Following their return, no action was taken. After returning to open meeting, an additional 10-minutes were taken with the council and administrator for discussion of personnel. No action followed. A final 10 minutes were taken for the same subject with council members and Laws in attendance. No action was taken.
The city’s Budget Hearing will be presented during the Sept. 9 regular meeting.
The next meeting of the Eureka City Council will be held on Monday, Sept. 9 at 7 p.m.
After discussing dollars available, Coulter spoke in favor of reducing the project so that the city’s 25% is covered by the $100,000 available and focus on completing remaining windows.
Councilman Richard Drake voiced opposition to working with BG Consultants and asked if another company could be contacted. Coulter noted that whatever firm is utilized for the PAR, cannot be the company that completes the project, should funding be received. When Drake asked about putting off the application, Coulter noted that people had donated funds towards the window replacement last year and would be wondering why nothing was being done. He also added that following the upcoming election, grant availability could be impacted.
It was shared during discussion that approximately 40% of windows in Memorial Hall have been completed. Coulter added that $420,000 was now the total to finish remaining windows and the original bid for total job had been $400,000.
When Drake again spoke against working with BG Consultants, Councilman Dan Campbell voiced discontent with utilizing services through BG Consultants, but, along with Councilman Jeff Marks, noted that the city would spend more starting from scratch on a report through another company.
Laws told members of the council the question was, did they want to proceed with the architecture report? He noted they could wait and inquire with Kansas State University (KSU) if they would do this for free, but this would take longer than they have for grant submission. Following lengthy discussion, council members approved for radon testing and the PAR in the amount of $6,350, 5-1, Drake voting opposed.
Further information was provided in regards to the Brownfields meeting coming to Eureka Sept. 12. This is a program through the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) which can provide assistance to communities. Code Enforcement Officer French reported to the council that K-State will work in conjunction with this and conduct some work for free. Items referenced included architectural reviews for grant writing. French explained that they have to get approval from the K-State representative to access their services. French also noted they do asbestos and lead tests. Laws added that an energy audit was needed at Eureka Downs and Memorial Hall and he believed this was something they could do. Among services offered, it was shared that K-State will do a business development plan for downtown areas.
Code Enforcement Officer Steve French reported that the city had received a potential property donation. French explained that he had sent a letter to individuals in California who own the property located at 213 N. Sycamore Street. Following receipt of the notice letter, sent due to failure of the middle section of foundation on the structure, the owner contacted the city and expressed appreciation for the letter as they had hired a company to repair the foundation and nothing had been done. The owner also relayed that they had a warranty from work that was supposed to be completed and they were going to check in on this. When the owner asked if French knew someone who would tear the house down, this as well as potential donation to the city, had been discussed. The center section of the foundation is compromised. French noted that this could be repoured. In his preliminary assessment, French shared that he had found new siding, a roof, reasonably new windows and there appeared to be minimal water damage inside the structure. French shared that there looked to be some plaster damage that could be repaired and told city officials that the owner was interested in donating or having the house torn down. As he noted that rehabilitation of homes was something they have been looking into, French commented that the house is appraised at over $20,000 in its current condition. French noted that this would take money to repair, explaining that the reason the foundation had begun collapsing was because the structure doesn’t have guttering. During this time, Councilman Kevin Lawrence noted that it would be nice to rehab a structure instead of tearing it down. French went on to explain that the house is sitting well on the portions of foundation intact and is not bowing in the center where the foundation is caving. When Lawrence questioned if owners who donate such properties get anything, French noted that the city can give a tax receipt.
As this matter was being discussed, French offered something for consideration in respect to future properties. He explained that, after a structure has been abandoned for 90 days and if it has two years of back taxes, the city can intervene. This was noted as something that could be useful in instances where the owner of a vacant structure is deceased.
French asked for council approval contingent upon a more in-depth assessment. Lawrence asked where dollars for rehabilitation of this would come from. Laws noted they have been saving for demolitions and this budget would aid in covering the cost. Also impacting this budget in the future, was future discontinuation of waiving some expenses assessed to properties during the tax sale. French explained that when a house goes to tax sale, in the past they have been waiving fees assessed. French noted that now, when extensive expense to the city is assessed on a property, he didn’t believe this should be waived. Members of the council approved acceptance of the property subject to in-depth assessment by French.
