Wichita’s City Council tackled critical policy questions about a proposed sales tax ballot measure during their December 23, 2025 meeting, with Mayor Lily Wu pressing for stronger taxpayer protections before committing public funds to a new downtown performing arts center. The contentious discussion revealed council divisions over when and how to match up to $75 million in sales tax revenue with private fundraising, ultimately deferring the resolution until a comprehensive January workshop covering all five sales tax projects. Meanwhile, the council approved a QuikTrip-funded drone expansion for the Real-time Information Center and heard inspiring presentations from Wichita’s Mayor’s Youth Council and students promoting an HBCU showcase aimed at expanding educational opportunities for local youth. Assistance from Claude AI.
Meeting Participants
City Council Members:
- Lily Wu, Mayor
- JV Johnston, Vice Mayor
- Brandon Johnson, Council Member
- Becky Tuttle, Council Member
- Mike Hoheisel, Council Member
- Dalton Glasscock, Council Member
- Maggie Ballard, Council Member
City Staff:
- Robert Layton, City Manager
- Jennifer Magana, City Attorney
- Shinita Rice, City Clerk
- Sharon Dickgrafe, Chief Deputy City Attorney
- Mark Manning, Finance Department
- Josh Lauber, Finance Department
- Paul Gunzelman, Public Works & Utilities
- Deputy Chief Paul Duff, Police Department
- Nathan Emmorey, Municipal Court
Public Speakers:
- Tyler Williams, District 6 resident
- Elizabeth Timsah, Youth Mayor, Wichita Mayor’s Youth Council
- Amaya Williams, Howard University student, former Youth Mayor
- Alexis Borges, Howard University student
Public Agenda: Youth Leadership and Transportation Innovation
Personal Electronic Mobility Devices Proposal
Tyler Williams from District 6 appeared before council requesting an ordinance change to reclassify personal electric mobility devices currently categorized as “toys” under Ordinance 11.50.090. Williams demonstrated his Meepo Vader Hurricane, a civilian electric vehicle capable of reaching 35 miles per hour, equipped with safety features including a motorcycle helmet with integrated LED lighting.
Williams proposed creating a “personal electronic mobility device” class that would allow these vehicles on roads with speed limits of 35 mph and below, similar to city-owned scooters and bicycles, restricted to the far-right lane. He cited similar ordinances in Austin, Denver, and California (AB-605) as precedents.
Council Member Hoheisel inquired about bike lane usage in Colorado and fatality statistics. Williams confirmed that in Colorado, these devices operate like bicycles in bike lanes or the far-right lane where bike lanes don’t exist, and he had no knowledge of fatalities.
Council Member Johnson expressed support, noting many residents own these devices and want legal clarity for street use. He offered to work with Williams and legal staff on the ordinance.
Mayor Wu requested Williams provide contact information to the City Clerk so interested council members could collaborate on the proposal.
Mayor’s Youth Council Progress Report
Elizabeth Timsah, Youth Mayor of the Wichita Mayor’s Youth Council, delivered a comprehensive progress report highlighting the organization’s community engagement and expansion goals.
Key Achievements:
- 103% increase in volunteering compared to the previous year
- Active participation in Winter Wonderland, Brewer Community Center opening, and Adelita’s Toy Run
- Members serving on the Sustainability and Integration Board and Youth Violence Forum
- 450% increase in social media views on Council-wide project videos (from 2,000 to over 11,000 views per video)
- Eight major volunteering events in the first semester period
Four Issue Group Focuses:
- Homelessness
- Sustainability
- Freedom and Equity
- Wichita History
Timsah emphasized the transformative impact of the Youth Council experience and advocated for council expansion to engage more young people. She noted the program’s recovery from COVID-19 setbacks and requested invitations to future city events and parades.
Council Member Glasscock announced an opening on his District 4 Advisory Board for a youth member. Timsah and Joseph Shepard have been discussing making youth representation a requirement for all District Advisory Boards.
Mayor Wu clarified that every Council District has a youth spot except District 2 (Council Member Tuttle’s district). Council Member Johnson suggested youth members should have voting rights and proposed adding two youth members to maintain odd-numbered boards.
Council Member Hoheisel encouraged Youth Council members to connect with organizations addressing juvenile violence, including Justice Together, violence interrupter programs, and Hope for the Hood.
Mayor Wu highlighted Council Member Glasscock as an example of the Youth Council’s impact—he was formerly a Youth Council member and now serves as the District 4 Council Member.
HBCU Showcase Announcement
Amaya Williams (Howard University freshman, Political Science major, Wichita East graduate) and Alexis Borges (Howard University freshman, Honors Criminology major, Wichita South graduate) presented the upcoming Wichita HBCU Showcase organized by the Wichita HBCU Collective.
Event Details:
- Date: January 3, 2026
- Location: Boys and Girls Club
- Time: Doors open 1:30 PM, program runs 2:00-4:00 PM
- Format: Alumni panel, current student panel, and speed networking
The students emphasized that historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) have a proven legacy of producing leaders, professionals, and public servants, but many students from marginalized communities remain unaware of these opportunities or feel they’re out of reach.
Williams highlighted the “countless opportunities” available at Howard, particularly for students interested in careers benefiting from Washington, D.C. proximity. The showcase aims to empower middle and high school students through real stories and connections with people sharing similar backgrounds.
Mayor Wu and Council Member Johnson confirmed they would attend. Williams noted she formerly resided in District 3 but recently moved to District 1, where she had served on the District 3 Advisory Board.
Consent Agenda
The council approved Consent Agenda items 1 through 18 with one exception.
Council Member Johnson requested to pull Item 17 (First Amendment to Funding Agreement with Wichita Habitat for Humanity) due to a conflict of interest. The item was subsequently approved 6 to 0 with Johnson abstaining.
Notable Consent Items:
- Cereal malt beverage licenses
- Preliminary estimates for water improvements
- KDHE Air Quality Program grant renewal
- Multiple infrastructure agreements (Evergy, transit subaward agreements)
- Property acquisitions for 135th Street North improvements
- Banking services provider resolutions
- Second reading of 11 ordinances including the 2026 budget appropriation, TIF district matters, and multiple zoning changes
Board of Bids and Contracts
Josh Lauber from the Finance Department presented the December 22, 2025 Board of Bids and Contracts report. The council voted 7 to 0 to receive and file the report, approve the contracts, and authorize necessary signatures.
Petitions for Public Improvements
Paul Gunzelman from Public Works & Utilities reviewed petitions for public improvements affecting two developments:
Colter Ridge Addition:
- Water Distribution Improvements (Phase 1 & 2)
- Stormwater Drain No. 556
- Sanitary Sewer Improvements (Phase 1 & 2, plus main improvement)
- Paving Improvements (Phase 1 & 2)
- 55th Street South Turn Lane
47th Street Addition:
- Water Distribution System Improvements
- Storm Water Drain No. 555
- Sanitary Sewer Improvements
- Paving Improvements
The council voted 7 to 0 to approve the new petitions and budgets, adopt the resolutions (Resolution Nos. 25-543 through 25-555), and authorize necessary signatures.
Sales Tax Resolution: Performing Arts Center Funding Debate
The centerpiece of the meeting was an extended discussion about a resolution establishing guidelines for sales tax proceeds designated for a new downtown public performing arts center.
The Proposed Framework
Sharon Dickgrafe, Chief Deputy City Attorney, presented a resolution that would commit up to $75 million in sales tax revenue to match private fundraising for the performing arts center. The resolution specified that public funds would not be expended until a “matching amount” of private funds had been raised or “pledged.”
Council Member Concerns and Questions
Council Member Hoheisel initiated the discussion by seeking clarification on the matching requirement: Would the private fundraisers need to raise the full $75 million, or would the city match whatever amount they raise up to $75 million?
Dickgrafe indicated these details would be included in a public-private partnership agreement, with the goal of reaching $75 million by the end of seven years. If that threshold isn’t met, the council would either dictate terms in the partnership agreement or the matter would return to the council for direction.
Hoheisel then asked about the legal strength of the resolution versus an ordinance. Dickgrafe explained the hierarchy: policy < resolution < ordinance. Her concern with an ordinance was that it would require active amendment if conditions changed, whereas a resolution could remain in place without action if criteria weren’t met.
Hoheisel explored whether an ordinance could be designed with a sunset clause—automatically expiring or being repealed if the sales tax ballot measure fails. Dickgrafe confirmed this was possible.
Council Member Johnson sought clarification on the word “pledged” in the resolution. City Manager Robert Layton explained this recognizes fundraising realities: major donors often pledge contributions over 2 to 5 years rather than providing all funds immediately, though they would need some cash on hand for initial expenses plus sound pledges to move forward.
Vice Mayor Johnston, drawing on fundraising experience, supported the pledge concept, noting people often want to pledge but won’t write checks until they know a project will happen. He argued for a one-to-one match rather than requiring the full $75 million, since the total project cost remains unknown—it could be $130 million, $140 million, or $150 million. If it costs less than $150 million, why should fundraisers have to raise the full $75 million?
Mayor Wu’s Three Specific Concerns
Mayor Wu articulated three major concerns about taxpayer protection:
Concern #1: What if fundraising falls short?
Wu asked what happens if the group only raises $25 million in private dollars. Layton responded that the project would not go forward. Wu then asked what would happen to those collected sales tax dollars.
Layton and Dickgrafe explained the funds could be redistributed to other authorized sales tax categories if there were funding shortfalls, or if all categories reached their maximum amounts, the sales tax could expire early—similar to previous projects.
Concern #2: Public dollars shouldn’t be spent first
Wu drew an analogy to construction loans: when building a project with a loan, the borrower must expend all their own money first before drawing on the loan. She wanted assurance that private dollars would be spent on early-phase expenses before any public dollars enter the project.
Layton clarified the resolution envisions dollar-for-dollar contributions throughout the project. For example, if design costs total $500,000, each side would contribute $250,000.
Wu firmly rejected this approach: “Absolutely not. I don’t think that City dollars or taxpayer dollars should come in playing one-to-one until there has been a certain threshold that has been met.” She suggested perhaps $50 million as a threshold before public dollars kick in, and insisted she doesn’t believe public dollars should match as fundraising progresses. “I don’t believe that public dollars should be or taxpayer dollars should be gambled on in that matter.”
Vice Mayor Johnston offered a compromise: the resolution could specify that all design costs come from private dollars, with public dollars not spent until the project is “shovel ready” or construction begins. But once both funding pools exist, the total would be dollar-for-dollar.
Council Member Johnson supported this approach, noting that once both parties have their full amounts ($75 million each), there’s simply a $150 million pot for the project. Requiring design work come from private funds would address the concern while recognizing that once funding is secured, it’s all “money for the project.”
Concern #3: Ongoing operations costs
Wu’s third concern addressed who would pay for operating the new facility. She pointed to Second Light as an example—the city now faces ongoing operational costs for a building that wasn’t adequately planned for in the budget.
Wu wanted the resolution to require that philanthropic dollars contribute to operational costs, suggesting perhaps 10% of the $150 million should be set aside for operations, at minimum covering the first few years including staff and maintenance.
Council Member Ballard questioned whether sales tax funds could legally be used for operations, believing they were restricted to capital expenditures.
Dickgrafe confirmed the ballot language specifies sales tax funds for “development and construction” of the performing arts center, so those funds cannot be reallocated to a maintenance fund or employee costs.
Wu clarified she was asking about private philanthropic dollars, not public sales tax revenue. Could the private fundraising include parameters requiring operational funding?
Dickgrafe deferred to the proposed public-private partnership agreement, noting the city cannot control private funds until collected, and cannot dictate what representations Wichita Forward makes about their intended use.
City Manager Layton explained this resolution addresses only the city’s expenditure of sales tax funds—the roles of public and private parties, including operational responsibilities, would be outlined in the public-private partnership agreement, which goes beyond this resolution’s scope.
Additional Discussion Points
Council Member Hoheisel raised concerns about what happens to the $75 million sales tax allocation if private fundraising fails. He wanted clarity on whether those funds could be redirected to other sales tax categories.
Layton confirmed the money would go back into other authorized categories until maximum amounts are reached, then the sales tax would be retired.
Hoheisel noted that other projects (homelessness, etc.) would likely be addressed first, meaning the performing arts center funding would come “towards the back end” around seven years out.
Layton agreed that large capital projects—performing arts center, Century II, Bob Brown improvements—will take considerable time for design and construction, so they would indeed be toward the back end.
Wu asked if Dickgrafe’s proposed language would ensure no public dollars come into play first. Dickgrafe offered specific language additions:
- Private funds collected would be utilized for design costs prior to expenditure of any sales tax revenue
- Alter Paragraph 1 to state no public funds shall be expended until $75 million of private funds has been raised (rather than “matching amount”)
Vice Mayor Johnston warned this creates the “wrong incentive to design a building.” If they can design it for $140 million, that’s better for taxpayers and donors. Requiring them to spend an extra $10 million just to reach $75 million would be wasteful. He reiterated support for dollar-for-dollar matching but agreed public dollars shouldn’t begin until construction commences.
Dickgrafe synthesized the concerns: if private fundraising doesn’t produce matching funds, the performing arts center won’t be built. The question becomes: what can the center be built for? If there isn’t matching funding, “we don’t build a performing arts center,” and money gets reallocated.
She noted they’re “shifting that partnership a bit” from the original intent of equal dollar-for-dollar contributions throughout, and questioned whether anyone from Wichita Forward was present since they’re changing the allocation framework.
Vice Mayor Johnston clarified his position: they don’t have to spend dollar-for-dollar from the start. If fundraisers have $20 million in pledges and $5 million cash, they can spend that $5 million on design without matched public money, until they raise the full expected cost.
Resolution Deferred to January Workshop
Wu requested tighter verbiage addressing all raised concerns before passing a resolution. She asked Council Member Tuttle (who had asked “Are we voting on this?”) and confirmed the council wanted to see revised language.
Dickgrafe agreed to bring it back with the discussed directions.
Wu then broadened the discussion, noting this is one of five sales tax projects. She mentioned Council Member Hoheisel had requested a January workshop on homelessness and housing, and identified three other components needing similar attention:
- Property tax abatement (actually property tax relief/mill levy reduction)
- Century II improvements
- Public safety CIP projects
Wu stated she’d like to see resolutions for all components that “tighten up how these dollars will be spent if the sales tax passes.”
After opening for public comment (none received), Hoheisel expressed interest in exploring ordinances in addition to resolutions to “strengthen some of those barriers or barricades” and give the public more confidence in the proposals.
Wu agreed on needing more guardrails and raised the issue of prioritizing sales tax dollars. She noted that if the 1% sales tax passes, there would be a mill levy reduction, requiring budget preparation with and without that reduction.
Hoheisel argued that Second Light and homelessness services should be “priority number one” since city funding for Second Light stops later in the year. He acknowledged the need to address the budget and property tax reduction but prioritized continuation of homeless services.
City Manager Layton respectfully disagreed: “Property tax relief is promised as part of this. And I believe you have to prioritize those dollars into the property tax relief. I don’t think that’s optional.” He suggested the first trigger must be property tax relief based on how it’s written, though he understood the urgency of funding Second Light.
Hoheisel countered that the language is “pretty loosely drawn up” to provide leeway, and in his view, property tax relief could be weighted toward the back end, though he agreed that’s not ideal given what’s promised to voters.
Council Member Johnson proposed broadening the January workshop beyond just homelessness to cover all sales tax items. This would allow discussion of homelessness but also enable the council to work out prioritization collectively. He noted the public safety piece is probably easiest since it’s all in the CIP (Capital Improvement Program)—publicly documented projects already approved by council. The buffer amount exists because construction and purchasing costs sometimes increase.
Johnson suggested this approach would provide “transparency of conversation and the information that people are looking for in all of it.”
Wu supported making the January workshop comprehensive, covering the sales tax and all five projects.
Layton suggested they could resolve the current performing arts resolution faster by bringing it back to the first meeting in January rather than waiting for the workshop.
Wu preferred the holistic approach, believing it makes better sense to have the workshop cover all five projects with the performing arts framework already established as a starting point.
Vice Mayor Johnston sought clarification on timing for the mill levy reduction, confirming with Mark Manning (Finance) that it wouldn’t start until the 2027 budget since the 2026 tax levy has already been set. Manning confirmed this covers approximately $20 million.
Johnston calculated that if the sales tax passes and collection begins July 1, 2026, the city would collect approximately $11 million between July 1 and January 1, 2027—providing a “running start” before the mill levy reduction takes effect.
Council Member Tuttle asked a practical question about the workshop: who would present? She suggested notifying Second Light, Wichita Forward, and potentially Susie Santos from Visit Wichita (regarding convention matters) to get it on their calendars. Staff presentations are valuable, but having stakeholders present would enable answering detailed questions—for example, how Second Light’s fundraising is progressing and whether they might not need 2027 funding if fundraising succeeds.
Layton outlined that staff would present based on stakeholder feedback, involving Wichita Forward, Second Light board and staff, and others. Sally Stang is coordinating the homelessness and housing plan. Public safety is straightforward—just itemizing already-identified CIP projects. The main work involves defining property tax relief specifics and thoughts on performing arts and Century II (which is the city’s own project).
Tuttle emphasized ensuring everyone who could answer questions receives notification about the workshop date.
Final Motion and Timing Discussion
Wu moved to defer the item, asking whether to defer to the workshop or the first January meeting. After discussion about not being able to vote on new business during workshops, Layton suggested potential timing issues—the longer the delay, the more questions arise, contrary to the goal of bringing clarity.
Layton proposed converting that meeting to a regular council meeting (similar to today’s format), allowing presentations by staff and stakeholders with council adoption of resolutions that same day.
Council Member Glasscock expressed support for this approach.
Final Motion: Mayor Wu moved to defer to January 27, 2026, and change that meeting to a regular meeting. The motion carried 7 to 0.
Drone Program Expansion: QuikTrip Partnership
Deputy Chief Paul Duff from the Wichita Police Department presented a proposal to accept a donation from QuikTrip for expanding the Drone First Responder (DFR) Hive program.
Program Details
The donation would fund installation of a DFR Hive at the QuikTrip location at 1010 East Douglas—identified as one of the highest-volume locations for 911 calls in the city, particularly for:
- Street racing congregations (especially weekends)
- Motorcycle gatherings
- Larcenies and disturbances
- General public safety concerns
The Skydio drones have built-in collision avoidance technology allowing multiple drones to operate simultaneously in different locations without risk of collision.
Council Questions
Council Member Hoheisel asked if the expansion would require additional personnel for the Real-time Information Center. Duff confirmed it would not—the system provides extra coverage allowing independent drone operation.
Hoheisel then asked about interaction with the “biker population” that congregates at this QuikTrip location, referencing the city’s no-chase policy designed to avoid dangerous high-speed pursuits.
Duff explained the drone serves primarily as a deterrent for street racing, crime, and disturbances. However, depending on the situation, drones can track individuals to enable safer interception. “If we can take someone into custody and the drone can follow them to their front door then that’s obviously safer than chasing them.”
Mayor Wu asked about success rates since the Hive’s deployment in the second half of 2025.
Duff reported “immense success,” including:
- Prevented burglary-in-progress calls
- Prevented vandalism-in-progress calls
- Significant arrests
- Recent robbery arrest of an individual who was also building Molotov cocktails
Duff stated the drones make situations safer for both officers and citizens, with approximately “nine pages of significant results” documented. He offered to share detailed results with council members.
Wu asked about QuikTrip’s broader public safety commitment. Duff noted QuikTrip has a “large significant presence” in Wichita and chose to partner with the city specifically because of the police department’s reputation, the program’s guardrails, the first-class Real-time Information Center, and best-practice policies and procedures. “We are at the very forefront in best practices when it comes to drone operations.”
Vote and Appreciation
After no public comment, Wu expressed appreciation for the collaboration between QuikTrip, the Wichita Police and Fire Foundation, and Wichita Police in providing public safety.
The council voted 7 to 0 to approve the agreement, authorize necessary signatures, and direct donated funds toward purchasing the DFR Hive.
Municipal Court Judicial Reappointments
Nathan Emmorey from Municipal Court presented the judicial reappointment agenda.
Mayor Wu asked about the 2.5% salary increase amount. Emmorey stated it’s roughly $4,500 per judge, varying based on time with the city and position.
Wu asked why it’s retroactive to January 4, 2025. Emmorey explained the process typically occurs in April according to council policy, but was delayed when a judge became ill. Survey data for that judge wasn’t available until approximately May upon their return. Additional questions about how many judges would be reappointed further delayed the process.
Wu thanked Council Members Glasscock and Ballard for serving on the reappointment committee.
Outstanding Judge Feedback
Council Member Glasscock shared highlights from the review process, reading citizen comments about the judges:
- “Judge is a good and fair judge”
- “Everything went better than expected”
- “I was very comfortable in the courtroom”
- “I was delighted with ease and very professional”
- “Time efficient. I felt like an actual person that was cared about”
- “They were polite and it was delight to see on the bench”
- “I was treated with respect and I was guilty as they come“
- “Patience, punctuality, courtesy”
- “She has a good temperament, is a kind person”
- “I’m very grateful for a judge giving me a chance to change my life and finally start to do things right“
Glasscock stated: “I think that’s a testament of the people that serve Wichita and a testament of the judges. And I don’t think there are very many courtrooms across the country that will get that raving reviews every single time.”
The council voted 7 to 0 to reappoint each Municipal Court Judge to a four-year term and approve the 2.5% salary increase retroactive to January 4, 2025.
Council Member Travel and Appointments
The council approved 7 to 0:
- Travel for Council Members Ballard, Hoheisel, and Johnston to attend Legislative Day in Topeka on January 28, 2026
- Travel for Council Member Glasscock to attend Legislative Day January 27-29, 2026
Appointments approved 7 to 0:
- Carmaine Ternes to the Sustainability Integration Board (nominated by Council Member Tuttle)
- Alex Dean to the Sedgwick County Solid Waste Management Committee (nominated by Mayor Wu)
Council Member Comments
The Great Boneless Wings Debate
Council Member Johnson initiated what he called a serious policy matter:
“Two things. One thing I think the City of Wichita truly needs to do that we did not get done a few years ago is to have a resolution that bans the term boneless wings in the City of Wichita. We still have these things called boneless wings and those are truly chicken nuggets and I think we seriously should have a resolution that does away with that.”
Johnson encouraged the council to pass such a resolution in January after his departure, pledging to return and support it 100%: “There are no such things as boneless wings.”
City Manager Layton jokingly offered to have security remove “this elf from the meeting” for being disruptive.
Johnson responded: “That’s my job.”
Council Member Glasscock noted Johnson has threatened to return for public comment multiple times, adding: “We’ll extend it to 10 [minutes] just for you.”
Johnson quipped: “Thanks to this council I get 5 minutes and I can just keep coming back workshops or regular meetings.”
Holiday Appreciation
Mayor Wu concluded by thanking City of Wichita staff who continue working during the holidays, expressing appreciation for keeping the city operational. She wished everyone a Merry Christmas and thanked staff for their service to the community.
Meeting Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 10:28 a.m. with a vote of 5 to 2 (Nay votes from Vice Mayor Johnston and Council Member Johnson).
MLA Citation
“Minutes of the Meeting of the City Council.” City of Wichita, 23 Dec. 2025, Wichita, Kansas. City Council Proceedings, https://www.wichita.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_12232025-2907.