The April 7 regular session of the Wichita City Council ran nearly seven hours and tackled some of the most consequential and contentious issues to come before the dais in recent months. The meeting opened with public testimony raising alarm about the post-grant funding of Flock license plate reader cameras, a tree canopy advocacy presentation tied to urban heat, and constituent frustrations over policing responsiveness. From there, the Council wrestled with a downtown parking garage deal linked to the EPC mixed-use development near the baseball stadium — ultimately voting 7-0 to delay one week after uncovering inaccuracies in background documents and unresolved contractual language. A closely divided 4-3 vote authorized purchasing one of two requested “SPOT” robotic dogs for WPD, with a mandatory policy and data review scheduled for July 7. The Council also voted 4-3 to begin dissolving the Wichita Land Bank after county-level interpretation barriers stalled its operations. Additional action included a unanimous vote to approve a modular homebuilder’s tax abatement extension, issuing multifamily housing revenue bonds for a workforce-housing project in District II, approving a short-term rental licensing reform, formalizing the City’s partnership with Wichita Collective Impact on third-grade literacy, and approving a lease renewal for City-owned retail space in Old Town. Assistance from Claude AI.
Meeting Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2026 | 9:00 AM | Wichita City Council Chambers
Members Present: Mayor Lily Wu, Vice Mayor Dalton Glasscock, Joseph Shepard, Becky Tuttle, Mike Hoheisel, JV Johnston, Maggie Ballard
Staff Present: Dennis Marstall (City Manager), Jennifer Magana (City Attorney), Shinita Rice (City Clerk)
Departing Acknowledgments
Before the formal agenda began, Mayor Wu recognized Assistant City Manager Troy Anderson, whose last day at the City of Wichita this meeting represented. Anderson had accepted a position as City Manager in Missouri. Council members throughout the day expressed appreciation for his work on some of the City’s most difficult and contested projects, including downtown parking, housing development agreements, and economic incentive structures. Council Member Ballard noted that Anderson had handled “almost every hard project in the City.” Mayor Wu thanked him for helping the current Council understand the complicated history behind longstanding commitments that predated many of its members.
I. Public Agenda
1. Urban Heat and the Case for Tree Canopy — Harold Schlechtweg
Harold Schlechtweg, a board member of ICT Trees and a resident of 351 North Fern Street, opened the public agenda with a detailed presentation on Wichita’s rising temperatures and the role trees play as a cost-effective mitigation strategy.
Schlechtweg described a documented multi-decade trend of increasing average annual temperatures, rising summer nighttime lows, and a lengthening of Wichita’s freeze-free season. He cited a 2022 partnership between the City of Wichita and NASA that identified specific neighborhoods suffering from “urban heat island” effects — areas where high concentrations of impervious surfaces (concrete, asphalt) and scarce shade amplify summer temperatures well above surrounding areas. In general, he said, heat exposure worsens as one moves toward the urban core. Heat island effects, he noted, are a product not only of broader climate trends but of Wichita’s own built environment.
On the health front, Schlechtweg referenced a July 2024 McConnell Air Show during which more than 115 people were treated for heat-related illness, and a late-June 2024 stretch during which at least 11 people were treated at Ascension Via Christi for heat issues ranging from severe sunburn to heat exhaustion.
The solution, he argued, is trees. Mature tree canopies can reduce ambient air temperatures by as much as 12 degrees compared to treeless neighborhoods. Trees also lower building heating and cooling costs and provide evapotranspiration — a natural cooling process analogous to sweating. He called on the City to prioritize both protecting existing trees and planting more.
Mayor Wu responded that she wanted the City’s Parks and Recreation website to more prominently feature the department’s transparency dashboard — currently buried on the site — which tracks activities including tree planting, illegal dumping cleanups, and homeless encampment responses. She asked staff to make the dashboard more visible to the public.
2. Who Is Paying for the Flock Cameras? — Andrew Cranmer
District 5 resident Andrew Cranmer, 3626 North Ridgeport Street, delivered what may have been the most procedurally specific public comment of the year, laying out a detailed fiscal accountability question regarding the City’s Flock automated license plate reader (ALPR) camera network.
Cranmer explained that on March 31, 2026 — six days before this meeting — a $1.6 million DOJ grant that had been the primary federal funding vehicle for Wichita’s surveillance camera expansion expired. No press release, agenda item, or public vote accompanied that transition. According to the City’s transparency portal, 191 Flock cameras remained active as of April 1, with no public explanation of who is now paying for them.
He cited the executed Flock contract, obtained through a public records request, which shows a per-unit cost of $2,500 per camera per year. At 191 cameras, the minimum annual obligation is $477,500 — consistent with independent projections that WPD costs would exceed $404,000 once federal subsidies ended. WPD Captain Aaron Moses had acknowledged to the Council as far back as October 2024 that ongoing funding sources beyond the grant had not been identified.
Cranmer also connected the timing to the March 3 failure of Proposition 1, the public safety sales tax that would have generated recurring revenue for exactly these types of costs. He argued that the City entered April 1 with no federal grant, no sales tax backstop, and no visible Council vote authorizing how these costs would be absorbed into the general fund.
He asked two direct questions of the Council: Which specific fund line item is now paying the annual Flock camera subscription cost? And when will this transition from federal to City dollars be formally voted on with public comment?
Cranmer said he had submitted a written summary to the City Clerk requesting a written response from the City Manager within 30 days.
Council Member Hoheisel publicly asked staff to ensure Cranmer receives a response. Mayor Wu echoed the request, specifically asking the City Manager to explain how the Flock camera subscriptions are being paid.
3. Policing, Accountability, and Community Safety — George Theoharis
George Theoharis, neighborhood president representing three neighborhoods and approximately 6,000 citizens, raised multiple concerns in his public comment time. He described two personal incidents involving a neighbor who allegedly attempted to ram his vehicle and later returned to his home multiple times in a single hour — both of which he said drew inadequate police responses despite his calls to 911. He questioned WPD’s closure of the second case after officers twice visited the neighbor’s residence without making contact.
He also described being confronted while delivering neighborhood newsletters and said police had characterized the encounter as assault, but that the City’s legal office had characterized it as a “he said, he said” situation. He offered to take a lie detector test.
Theoharis additionally questioned the meaning of a stated 92% call closure rate at the animal shelter, saying calls he made himself were being closed without resolution, potentially by simply marking them closed when staff couldn’t respond.
He closed with a comment on City Manager Marstall’s compensation — noting that while some residents had complained it was too high, his own view was that it should be doubled if Marstall has to contend with the full scope of the job.
4. Paid Parking at City Hall — Celeste Racette
District 5 resident Celeste Racette, 2239 North Tee Time Court, raised the issue of paid parking at City Hall, expressing concern that residents who wish to attend Council meetings and speak to their government are now required to pay to park. She stated she had not planned to speak on this matter but noticed the new paid parking system on her arrival.
The Council’s response was notably unified. Council Members Hoheisel, Glasscock, Johnston, and Mayor Wu each expressed discomfort with the policy. Hoheisel stated flatly that he does not believe people should be charged to “petition their government.” Glasscock noted his longstanding opposition and called for a Council vote on the matter, expressing particular concern about crime victims who may have to pay to access City Hall for court proceedings. Johnston added that residents who can’t afford their water bill — and come to City Hall to address that issue — “probably can’t afford to pay a dollar either.”
City Manager Marstall clarified that paid parking at City Hall is not new, but that a new system had been installed — one using pay stations and license plate recognition rather than coin meters — and that a validation option still exists. The old system included 30 minutes of free parking; the new system does not, although the City Manager noted that current rates are slightly lower for long-term parking than the previous structure. Marstall confirmed that victims appearing for court purposes qualify for parking validation, but that the City does not separately track how many victims used that option.
Council Member Shepard asked whether the City could collect data to track how many court-related validations are issued per department. The City Manager acknowledged this would be difficult given how validations are currently distributed. Glasscock called for the matter to be brought back to Council for a formal vote.
II. Consent Agenda
The Council approved Consent Agenda items 1 through 31 (excluding item 3a, which was pulled for discussion) on a 7-0 vote. The pulled item — a purchase and sale agreement and lease for the EPC/WBD parking garage — is covered in detail under the Unfinished Business section below.
Consent items covered routine licensing for cereal malt beverages, preliminary estimates for public improvement projects, various developer’s agreements (including Cornejo East 2nd Addition and Young East Addition), design services for Arvada Second Addition Phase 1, change orders for West Street corridor work, several property acquisitions and easements for drainage and infrastructure projects, and numerous other routine administrative approvals.
III. Board of Bids and Contracts
Josh Lauber from the Finance Department reviewed the April 6, 2026 Board of Bids and Contracts report, approved 7-0.
Two issues generated extended discussion:
Local Procurement: Council Member Johnston raised concerns after learning that vehicle purchases were being awarded to Knapp Chevrolet of Houston, Texas rather than Wichita-area dealers. Finance staff explained that Knapp’s low bids — approximately $25,000 below Don Hatton’s competing bids on Groups 2 and 3 — are likely the result of high-volume manufacturer discounts available to large-volume retailers in major logistics markets like Houston. Staff noted that all purchases require freight delivery to Wichita (FOB Wichita, Kansas), so there are no additional shipping costs to the City. Both Johnston and Vice Mayor Glasscock expressed interest in a workshop discussion on how to weight local companies versus out-of-state bidders, without necessarily mandating a local preference ordinance.
Drug Testing Panel Expansion: Council Member Glasscock asked about a contract for drug testing services that now includes Delta-8 THC, a legal substance in Kansas. Court Administrator Nathan Emmorey explained that the expanded panel — which also now includes fentanyl — was driven by what judges are actually ordering, and that including these substances in the standard panel reduces per-test costs by eliminating expensive one-off add-ons. He clarified that the contract covers court-ordered drug testing for defendants, not employee testing. Council Member Shepard asked about restorative justice pathways for defendants who test positive for legal substances; Council Member Hoheisel asked about the possibility of shifting from urine analysis to mouth swabs, which he argued better captures recent use rather than use from weeks prior.
IV. Petitions for Public Improvements
City Engineer Paul Gunzelman reviewed petitions for public improvements in three new subdivisions: Eastside Community Church 3rd Addition, Midland Baptist Church 3rd Addition, and Trinity Point 2nd Addition. The resolutions covered water, stormwater, sanitary sewer, and paving improvements financed through special assessments.
Mayor Wu asked whether all of these projects are paid through “specials” (special assessments), and Gunzelman confirmed they are. She then raised a pending bill before the Governor regarding bond financing and its potential effect on these projects. City Manager Marstall acknowledged the concern, noting that a high bond capacity from infrastructure projects could “work against” the City in terms of assessed value calculations under the proposed legislation. Staff committed to providing a full written analysis once the Governor acts on the bill.
Motion to approve all petitions and resolutions carried 7-0.
V. Unfinished Council Business
1. EPC Downtown Parking Garage — Delayed 7-0 to April 14
This item — originally placed on the Consent Agenda as item 3a before being pulled by Council Member Johnston — consumed more than two hours of the meeting and became its most substantive discussion. At issue were two documents: a purchase and sale agreement (Exhibit J) under which the City would acquire a 300-space parking garage to be built by EPC adjacent to the downtown baseball stadium, at a price of $32,000 per stall; and a parking lease agreement (Exhibit K) under which the City would lease approximately 85% of those stalls back to the developer for use by hotel guests and apartment residents.
Background: The broader development project — which includes a mixed-use complex of apartments (now 192 units, up from earlier projections), a 160-room hotel (expanded from 155 rooms), retail, and an amenity deck — has been in development since approximately 2018-2019 as part of the ballpark district revitalization in the Delano neighborhood. The original development agreement was approved under previous administrations, with the effective date of October 16, 2023 (after Council approval and both parties’ signatures). Exhibits J and K were intentionally left blank in 2023 to allow time for the project to be redesigned from an office use to a residential use; the Council was being asked to formally adopt those exhibits on April 7.
The Key Numbers: The City is committed to purchasing the garage at a not-to-exceed price of $32,000 per stall. At 300 stalls, the maximum purchase price is approximately $9.6 million, which the City would finance through revenue bonds over 20 years, with debt service backstopped by the City’s parking fund. The developer, EPC (represented online by Executive Vice President Austin Bradley), confirmed that the garage — now to be built as precast concrete rather than the originally contemplated cast-in-place post-tensioned structure (a change made to achieve a $6 million cost savings) — is expected to cost considerably more than $32,000 per stall. The actual cost estimate is approximately $12.5 million total, meaning the City’s acquisition price of roughly $9.6 million will be roughly $3 million less than actual construction cost. That $3 million gap would be reimbursed to the developer through TIF (tax increment financing) funds.
For comparison, Mayor Wu noted that the City’s new transit hub across the street from the stadium — also cast-in-place post-tensioned, with 425 spaces — came in at approximately $16.9 million for construction alone, or roughly $40,000 per stall (and approximately $45,725 per stall when soft costs are prorated in).
Why It Was Delayed: Several concerns emerged during the extended discussion:
- Document Accuracy: Mayor Wu identified that the green sheet (the Council’s agenda summary) listed “October 16, 2023” as the relevant development agreement date, while she initially believed the Council had voted on October 17. The discrepancy was ultimately clarified: October 16 was the date the parties signed the agreement (making it the effective date), while the Council’s vote occurred earlier. However, the Mayor argued that the green sheet should show both dates for transparency, since a majority of the current Council was not serving when those votes occurred.
- “Equal To” vs. “Up To” Language: Vice Mayor Glasscock identified a significant contractual issue in item 1B of the purchase and sale agreement, which states the City shall pay “an amount equal to $32,000 multiplied by the number of parking stalls.” Glasscock argued this means the City would be obligated to pay exactly $32,000 per stall even if the garage is built for less — potentially over-paying by as much as $520,000 if construction comes in at $30,000 per stall. The developer responded that he was open to changing “equal to” to “up to,” and the City Attorney indicated review of whether such a change could be incorporated.
- Contingency on Vertical Construction: Multiple Council members wanted language in the agreements specifying that they become null and void if the developer fails to begin vertical construction by the July 31, 2026 deadline established in the most recent development agreement amendment. The City Attorney and Anderson both noted that the purchase and sale agreement itself already contains “upon substantial completion” language, meaning the City has no obligation to purchase a garage that is never built. However, these two specific exhibits do not themselves contain vertical construction contingency language. Glasscock and Mayor Wu both wanted that codified.
- Transparency and Missing Documents: Citizen Celeste Racette delivered a public comment cataloguing what she described as years of opaque and shifting commitments on this project — originally involving Wichita Riverfront LP, then EPC, then split into WBD-H for the hotel and WBD for the remainder. She questioned why the project’s financial model doesn’t account for property tax revenue loss when the City acquires the garage, why depreciation isn’t modeled, where financial statements for the parking fund (which backstops the bond debt) are publicly available, and why there is no minimum lease obligation. Mayor Wu asked her to submit those questions in writing.
The Council voted 7-0 to delay the item to April 14, with a direction to City Manager Marstall to: (1) prepare a publicly accessible website page laying out the full project timeline with all relevant documents from 2018 to 2026 before the next meeting; (2) verify and correct all relevant dates in the green sheet; and (3) address the “equal to” vs. “up to” language question with the City Attorney and development partner. Austin Bradley confirmed that a one-week delay, while creating “headwinds,” would not necessarily derail the project.
2. Police Robotic Dog (SPOT) — Approved 4-3 (One Unit)
After a lengthy and emotional debate, the Council approved the purchase of one SPOT robotic dog from RADeCO, Inc. on a 4-3 vote (Nay: Shepard, Johnston, Ballard), with a requirement that the item return to Council on July 7, 2026 with a policy update and usage data before any decision is made on a second unit.
What SPOT Is: The SPOT is a quadruped robot manufactured by Boston Dynamics and upfitted by RADeCO, Inc. with specialized law enforcement capabilities including a manipulator arm, thermal and 360-degree cameras, CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear) detection equipment, and two-way communication capability. It can navigate complex terrain, climb stairs, open doors, and deliver a phone to a subject in a barricade situation — tasks current WPD robots using tracked platforms cannot perform. The single-unit cost, after negotiation, is approximately $330,000, financed through bonds. The full two-unit request would have been $629,647.56.
The Case For: Captain Jason Cooley of WPD made the department’s case across two meetings. He described a real-time example from the day of the vote itself: a SWAT call involving a barricaded shooting suspect whose residence was too cluttered for WPD’s existing tracked robots to navigate. Officers ultimately had to manually clear the residence room by room without robotic assistance. He noted that approximately 16-20 agencies that purchased one SPOT unit are now in the process of acquiring a second because operational experience shows one unit is insufficient when SWAT and bomb squad need it simultaneously.
Chief Joe Sullivan spoke passionately about the department’s history of robotic use (approximately 30 years) and argued SPOT is a continuation of that mission — not a new surveillance platform. He committed to producing a formal policy and posting it publicly, as was done with the drone policy, incorporating any specific language Council members wanted, including explicit prohibitions on weaponization. He noted the department represents only 2% of the City’s Capital Improvement Program and argued that WPD technology has historically been underfunded. A community member, Nancy Bradley, provided personal testimony connecting robotic police capability to saving lives during mental health crises, barricade situations, and high-risk warrants.
The Case Against: Three Council members voted no. Council Member Johnston stated the vote is ultimately about priorities — he cited deferred maintenance throughout the city and said other needs come first. Council Member Shepard said his constituents in District One have consistently told him they want investment in community policing, prevention, and a world-class training facility before new surveillance-adjacent technology. He acknowledged the difficult position and committed to explaining his vote directly to the police department. He also raised concerns that policies weren’t in place before the request came forward, and questioned whether a community engagement process — rather than a Council-only decision — would have been more appropriate.
What Was Disputed: Public commenter Vince Hancock raised questions about whether SPOT uses AI, noting that public documents from Boston Dynamics describe “advanced AI” capabilities. Captain Cooley countered that the manufacturer has told WPD the system uses “machine learning” and “reinforced learning” that is pre-loaded — not active or adaptive AI — and that the navigation relies on stereo cameras and LiDAR rather than ongoing learning. Hancock also questioned the price markup from Boston Dynamics’ base unit cost of $115,000 to the final price, and Cooley itemized the additions: a manipulator arm (~$75,000), extended radio (~$50,000), and specialized camera package (~$50,000).
Council Member Hoheisel advocated for exploring a non-lethal robotics ordinance and requested that, when deployed in SWAT operations, recordings be made using the robot’s built-in SD card capability. The Chief agreed to incorporate recording requirements into the policy.
The Compromise Motion: Mayor Wu moved the substitute motion that ultimately passed: one unit, with a July 7 check-in at which data on usage and an operational policy must be presented before any consideration of a second unit. Council Member Tuttle, who supported the purchase, added her concern that SWAT should not feel forgotten — she wanted the second-unit conversation preserved for July rather than closed.
VI. New Council Business
1. Webb Industrial LLC Tax Abatement Amendment — Approved 6-0 (Tuttle Abstained)
Vice Mayor Glasscock moved and the Council approved 6-0 (Tuttle abstaining due to a conflict of interest) an amendment to the PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) agreement for Webb Industrial, LLC, a modular homebuilder operating in the City’s SPEC industrial program.
The company, represented by Mr. Philmeyer, is building a manufacturing plant to produce modular homes at an industrial site in District Two. The amendment extends the company’s 95% property tax abatement — originally set at 95% for five years under the SPEC program — by adding new qualifying criteria that must be met at the existing five-year review in January 2028: the developer must have completed tenant improvements, invested in furniture/fixtures/equipment, and created 75 new jobs paying approximately $25 per hour. If those benchmarks are met, the 95% abatement continues rather than dropping to the program’s standard 50%.
Philmeyer described the company’s mission as bending the cost curve on housing. He stated that modular manufacturing could allow homes to be built at approximately $200,000 in markets where $300,000 is the median new construction price. The company plans to build 200-300 homes per year in and around Wichita and expects to generate approximately $1 million in state sales tax and hundreds of thousands of dollars in property and payroll tax from its operations. He emphasized the company’s commitment to hiring “second chance” workers — individuals reintegrating from the justice system — and described the retention and loyalty benefits of that approach.
Council Member Shepard drew attention to the company’s existing work in District One, where he said neighbors had responded with visible enthusiasm to investments in a previously overlooked area.
2. Prairie Glen MF, LLC — Multifamily Revenue Bonds (District II) — Approved 7-0
The Council closed a public hearing and approved 7-0 a resolution authorizing the issuance of a letter of intent for multifamily residential revenue bonds for Prairie Glen MF, LLC, a townhouse developer active in multiple Wichita districts.
The project — located in District II on agricultural land currently taxed at $6 per year — involves workforce/missing-middle housing renting at approximately $1.14 per square foot, or about $1,600 per month for a 1,400-square-foot residence with a two-car garage. Developer Beau Hudson explained the project targets a segment of the market between rental affordability and homeownership entry, noting that average national rent is approximately $1,850 per month while starter home mortgages are often nearly double that. He said similar projects in other Wichita districts have leased up within nine months.
The tax structure involves a 50% property tax abatement for 10 years. The developer projects that when fully taxed, the property would generate approximately $66,000 per year in property taxes, compared to the current $6.
Council Member Hoheisel raised the broader question of whether City guidelines should be updated to offer additional incentives for projects that include affordable housing, noting that current guidelines don’t specifically reward affordability. Council Member Shepard echoed that, saying a recent district advisory board meeting had raised the same question. Troy Anderson confirmed that the City is in the process of updating its economic development guidelines to better address housing.
3. Short-Term Rental License Simplification — Approved 7-0
The Council approved on first reading 7-0 an ordinance simplifying the short-term rental (STR) license application process under City Code section 3.40.080. The amendment streamlines the online application process, consistent with the City’s broader effort to digitize and simplify business licensing.
Vice Mayor Glasscock praised the change as a “huge win” for streamlining government and allowing the private sector to operate more efficiently.
Public commenter Vince Hancock (Delano neighborhood president) expressed support for streamlining but raised a concern: a short-term rental in Delano was associated with a shooting in the past six months, and community policing officers cannot access a list of licensed STRs in the neighborhood. He asked staff to ensure that officers have access to STR location data, and that a clear contact for emergencies be maintained.
4. Lease Agreement — 329 North Mead, Old Town (District VI) — Approved 7-0
The Council approved 7-0 a new lease agreement for City-owned commercial property at 329 North Mead in the Old Town district, presented by Gerri Ford from Development Services.
The discussion revealed a longstanding issue with how the City prices parking for Old Town commercial tenants. Currently, tenants pay approximately $7.50 per stall per month — a rate that is, by the City Manager and Assistant City Manager’s own description, roughly 30 years out of date. At 127 required stalls, the City collects approximately $952.50 per month from these tenants for parking — a figure that covers very little of actual maintenance costs. Total annual parking revenue from Old Town is approximately $250,000, a fraction of what a properly priced system would generate.
Anderson explained that Old Town was deliberately excluded from the City’s 2019 parking management strategy expansion after an Old Town Association attempt to form a Community Improvement District (CID) was denied by Council, and a subsequent attempt to modify CID eligibility at the state level appears unlikely to pass this legislative session. Anderson committed to returning to Council in the coming weeks with a recommendation to expand parking management into Old Town to enable reinvestment in those facilities.
Council Member Johnston raised a structural question about the new lease’s maintenance responsibility provisions — specifically, whether window replacement and similar building maintenance items should be borne by the City (as landlord) or passed through to tenants. Ford explained that these costs are prorated across tenants as a percentage of overall facility costs.
5. Wichita Land Bank — Dissolution Directed 4-3
The Council received the 2025 Wichita Land Bank Annual Report and voted 4-3 (Nay: Shepard, Hoheisel, Ballard) to direct staff to prepare an ordinance for the dissolution of the Wichita Land Bank.
The Land Bank was established to acquire vacant and abandoned properties, clear their tax obligations (the one power a land bank holds that the City itself does not — the ability to wipe prior-year tax debt), and return them to productive use. However, a disagreement with Sedgwick County over the legal interpretation of how properties can be transferred from the county tax sale to the land bank has effectively blocked the bank’s primary acquisition mechanism. Multiple staff meetings and legal consultations with the county produced no resolution — the county stood by its interpretation that it could not streamline that process. The Land Bank last met in December 2024 when it approved the sale of two parcels to Habitat for Humanity (properties that had been acquired before the land bank’s operational barriers materialized).
Housing Director Sally Stang noted that the land bank could be reestablished in approximately 60 days if state law changes or the county’s interpretation shifts, since existing bylaws and procedures remain in place.
Council Member Hoheisel and Council Member Shepard both expressed reluctance to dissolve the bank, noting it is the only mechanism the City has to eliminate back-tax obligations on vacant properties. Hoheisel said he doesn’t “see the point in shutting it down right now.” Shepard suggested the topic be elevated to the June En Banc meeting, where housing is expected to be a focus, and that the City’s legislative delegation be asked to explore state-level solutions.
Council Member Ballard noted that Sedgwick County Commissioner Baty had told her the barrier is more at the state level than within the county’s control.
6. Wichita Collective Impact Partnership — Approved 7-0
The Council approved 7-0 a formal partnership agreement with Wichita Collective Impact, a coalition of approximately 37 organizations (with over 50 engaged) focused on third-grade literacy and kindergarten readiness as intervention strategies for long-term community outcomes.
Misty Bruckner (PPMC) and Tyrone Baker (YMCA) presented the initiative. The program uses a collective impact framework — coordinated, data-driven multi-organization effort — with the goal of measurably improving third-grade reading levels across Wichita, particularly among children in poverty, English-language learners, and other groups who fall behind early.
Council Member Tuttle, who has championed third-grade literacy since early in her tenure, described the effort as deeply personal. Mayor Wu shared that she arrived in the United States at age 8 speaking no English, attended Wichita public schools on free-reduced lunch, and credited public education and community support for her own trajectory. She expressed hope the collective impact model could be applied to other challenges — from homelessness to crime prevention. She also noted that she will participate in the Hunt Mayors Fellowship’s second session in May, which focuses specifically on third-grade reading levels.
Council Member Shepard asked about connections to local bookstores, specifically Left on Read — the only Black-owned bookstore in Kansas, located in Wichita — and Storytime Village. Bruckner confirmed Storytime Village participates and expressed interest in the bookstore partnership suggestion.
The partnership materials are available in Spanish and Vietnamese.
Council Member Appointments
The Council approved a series of board appointments and reappointments 7-0, including:
Council Member Tuttle: Reappointed Joseph Couey to the Police and Fire Retirement Board (one-year partial term).
Council Member Shepard: Rescinded the appointment of TaDonna Neal to the Library Board (she was unable to serve); appointed Troy Williams (Airport Advisory Board), Tranda Daniels (Wichita Employees Retirement Board), Tracy Adams (Police and Fire Retirement Board), and Bryce Graham (WASHAP).
Council Member Ballard: Reappointed Terry Jones (Wichita Retirement Board), Stephanie Merritt (Food and Farm Council), Claire Willenberg (Historic Preservation Board), David Gao (Police and Fire Board), Case Bell (Community Service Block Grant), Jason Chance (Transit Board), Sangita (Cultural Funding Board), and Kim McGahee (Bike/Ped Board).
Mayor Wu: Reappointed Bruce Rowley (Historic Preservation Board), Rebecca Starkey Keasling (Affordable Housing Review Board), Alan Kailer (Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board), Susan Richardson (Animal Services Advisory Board), Shailen White (Board of Code Standards and Appeals), Natalie Gosch (Self-Supported Municipal Improvement District), Robert Green (Wichita Citizen Review Board), Donald Klisch (Food and Farm Advisory Council), Michelle Gifford, Heather Schroeder, Susie Santos, Justin Lee Shore, and Emily Martin (all Transit Board). New appointments: Ebony Clemens (Wichita Advisory Board) and Chad Burish (Board of Code Standards and Appeals).
Travel Authorizations
The Council approved all travel items 7-0:
- Mayor Wu — Community Leaders of America Forum for Community Leaders, Fort Worth, TX, April 29 – May 1 (estimated expenses under $1,500, requires ethics ordinance gift limit waiver)
- Mayor Wu and Council Member Shepard — Greenwood Rising Tour hosted by WPD, Tulsa, OK, May 1 (no City expense, charter bus)
- Council Member Ballard — Greenwood Rising Tour, Tulsa, OK, May 1 (own vehicle, travel expenses reimbursed)
- Council Member Hoheisel — Greenwood Rising Tour, Tulsa, OK, May 1 (riding with Ballard, no additional expense)
- Mayor Wu — Hunt Mayors Fellowship Program, Cohort 1 Session 2, Durham, NC, May 14-15 (estimated $1,214.51, requires ethics ordinance gift limit waiver)
Executive Session
The Council recessed into executive session at 3:25 p.m. for 30 minutes to discuss employer-employee negotiations under KSA 75-4319(B)(1), and then for an additional 15 minutes beginning at 3:55 p.m. to receive updated information on a civil case under attorney-client privilege per KSA 75-4319(B)(2). No binding action was taken. The Council returned to chambers at 4:17 p.m.
Adjournment
Mayor Wu moved to adjourn at 4:17 p.m. The motion carried 4-0.
Voting Record Summary
| Item | Result | Vote | Nay Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Approve March 24, 2026 minutes | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Consent Agenda Items 1–31 (except 3a) | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Board of Bids and Contracts — April 6, 2026 | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Petitions for Public Improvements (multiple subdivisions) | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| EPC/WBD Parking Garage Purchase & Lease (Consent Item 3a) — Delayed | Delayed to April 14 | 7-0 | — |
| SPOT Robotic Dog — One unit, return July 7 for second | Approved | 4-3 | Shepard, Johnston, Ballard |
| Webb Industrial LLC PILOT Amendment (modular housing) | Approved | 6-0 | Tuttle abstained (conflict of interest) |
| Prairie Glen MF, LLC — Multifamily Revenue Bonds (District II) | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Short-Term Rental License Simplification (First Reading) | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| 329 North Mead Lease Agreement (Old Town, District VI) | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Land Bank Annual Report — Received and Filed; Dissolution Directed | Approved | 4-3 | Shepard, Hoheisel, Ballard |
| Wichita Collective Impact Partnership Agreement | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Board Appointments | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| All five travel authorizations | Approved | 7-0 each | — |
| Executive Session (employer-employee negotiations) | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Executive Session (attorney-client privilege / civil case) | Approved | 7-0 | — |
| Adjournment | Approved | 4-0 | — |
What to Watch Next
April 14, 2026 — Regular Council Meeting:
- EPC/WBD downtown parking garage purchase and lease agreements return with corrected documentation, an “up to” vs. “equal to” language resolution, and a City-published project timeline page for public review.
- Troy Anderson’s last day as Assistant City Manager is that Friday; April 14 is expected to be his final Council meeting.
July 7, 2026 — SPOT Robotic Dog Check-In:
- WPD must present a formal operational policy (including recording requirements and explicit non-weaponization language) and usage data before Council considers authorizing the purchase of a second unit.
July 31, 2026 — EPC Vertical Construction Deadline:
- EPC has committed to beginning vertical construction on the mixed-use development adjacent to Riverfront Stadium by this date under the terms of the October 2025 development agreement amendment.
Upcoming — Old Town Parking:
- Staff committed to bringing a recommendation to expand paid parking management into the Old Town area to enable investment in aging parking infrastructure and increase parking fund revenues.
Upcoming — Land Bank Dissolution Ordinance:
- Staff will prepare an ordinance to formally dissolve the Wichita Land Bank; Council will vote on the ordinance at a future meeting.
How to Engage
Wichita City Council meetings are held every other Tuesday at 9:00 AM in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 455 N. Main Street. Public comment is available during the Public Agenda portion at the start of each meeting. Residents may also submit written comments to the City Clerk’s office.
The City’s transparency portal is available at wichita.gov. Residents seeking to track EPC project documentation should check back for the project timeline page that staff committed to publishing before April 14.
Voice for Liberty covers Wichita City Hall so you don’t have to miss a vote. If this reporting is useful to you, share it with your neighbors.