The Wichita City Council convened at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 21, 2025, and did not adjourn until 7:05 p.m. — a nearly ten-hour session that stands as one of the longest in recent memory. The meeting’s centerpiece was a sweeping package of housing and property maintenance ordinances that drew more than 38 public speakers, overflowed the gallery, and ultimately produced a divided outcome: the council unanimously referred the main property code reform to a newly created task force while splitting 4–3 on two of the most controversial sub-items, voting to deny a rental registry and to deny adding “source of income” to the City’s nondiscrimination ordinance. Other significant business included approving a development agreement extension for the EPC Real Estate mixed-use project near Riverfront Stadium, authorizing police equipment and heavy vehicle funds, greenlighting the conversion of the old Central Library’s first floor into a revenue-generating event venue, clearing the path for Union Pacific-funded environmental remediation at 29th and Grove, approving healthcare revenue bond hearings, and adopting a new three-year cultural funding model for Wichita’s arts organizations. Assistance from Claude AI.
Attendance and Opening Business
All seven council members were present: Mayor Lily Wu, Vice Mayor JV Johnston, and Council Members Brandon Johnson, Becky Tuttle, Mike Hoheisel, Dalton Glasscock, and Maggie Ballard. Staff members present included City Manager Robert Layton, Chief Deputy City Attorney Sharon Dickgrafe, and City Clerk Shinita Rice.
The council opened by approving the minutes of the October 14 regular meeting on a 7–0 vote.
Awards and Proclamations
The council recognized several observances and individuals before moving into regular business:
Proclamations were issued for Domestic Violence Awareness Month, National Chiropractor Month, and Mindful ICT / Coming to Our Hearts Day.
Awards honored the Five-Year Anniversary of an unspecified organization’s founding, the 2025 Open Streets ICT Championship, and an individual Service Award recipient.
Public Agenda (Open Public Comment)
Before diving into its formal agenda, the council received comment from members of the public on any topic of their choosing.
Arthur Stokes of 2614 South Topeka addressed the council on the topic of indoor environmental health quality, focusing specifically on black mold. Stokes described his personal experience with mold exposure, explaining that it produced a wide variety of symptoms — much like COVID-19 — that crept up on him gradually. He spoke of the financial toll the health problems caused and said the issue “chose me, I didn’t choose this topic.” He indicated he was working to bring more affected people forward to share their experiences publicly.
Consent Agenda
The council approved Consent Agenda Items 1 through 16 as a block on a 7–0 vote, with the exception of Items 8, 15, and 16, which were pulled for separate discussion.
The consent agenda encompassed routine municipal business including applications for cereal malt beverage licenses, preliminary engineering estimates, several agreements and contracts (including a supplemental greyhound lease agreement), design services agreements, sewer improvement estimates for the Oak Tree Addition in District IV, a settlement of a declaratory action, second readings of several zoning ordinances (Ordinance Nos. 52-823 through 52-826 covering zone changes at Pawnee and Hillside, an annexation near 143rd Street East, and changes at 825 West Douglas Avenue), a subdivision plat for the Northeast Substation area, the sale of two City-owned properties at 2704 East Ethel Street and 832 North Grove Street, a use and lease agreement for Hangar Dynamics at Colonel James Jabara Airport, and a recognition agreement with Wichita State University Campus of Applied Sciences and Technology (WSU CAST).
Consent Item 8 — Crystal Prairie Lake Park Phase 1 Funding
Mayor Wu pulled this item to get a briefing on the park project and to determine whether future phases of the master plan beyond bike trails would be constructed.
Tim Kellams and Reggie Davidson of the Parks and Recreation Department explained that Phase 1 will install a multi-use trail along Hoover Road, a gravel parking lot, and a fence separating the park area from the adjacent landfill. The trail will ultimately connect Crystal Prairie Lake Park southward to Sedgwick County Park, with a signalized pedestrian crossing across Hoover Road and a negotiated tunnel passage under K-96 (in coordination with KDOT). A $1 million donation helped launch the project, and the city has approximately $2.5 million in approved Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) funds dedicated to the park. Staff sought authorization to initiate the remaining $2,370,000 of the CIP allocation, bringing the total project budget to approximately $2.6 million.
Council Member Glasscock asked for clarification on whether the “future phases” shown on the master plan graphics referred to bike lanes or promised development projects. Kellams confirmed the areas shown were potential bike path extensions and that nothing beyond the trail network was locked in. Glasscock also verified that future CIP funding earmarked for the park carries no associated grants or matching obligations.
Craig Gabel, speaking from the public, questioned whether the project primarily benefited developer Jay Russell’s neighboring residential development to the west, rather than the broader public, since the park is bounded by highway, landfill, and sewage treatment infrastructure. He also raised concerns about maintenance costs and the condition of existing parks like Watson Park.
Council Members Hoheisel and Glasscock both pushed back, citing the recently completed $5 million Clap Park in South Wichita (which features fully accessible playground equipment including wheelchair-accessible slides and a sign language communication post), more than $1.8 million invested in Pawnee Prairie Park, and an Osage Park Fitness Court currently under construction in the southwest area. Council Member Ballard, whose District V includes Crystal Prairie Lake, noted that the park’s beneficiaries include multiple nearby HOA communities and said the project aligns with the council’s frequent discussion of building a walkable and bikeable city.
The item was approved 7–0.
Consent Item 15 — Hangar Dynamics Jabara Airport Lease
Council Member Tuttle recused herself due to a conflict of interest and did not participate. The item was approved 6–0.
Consent Item 16 — WSU CAST Recognition Agreement
Council Member Tuttle again recused herself due to a conflict of interest. The item was approved 6–0.
Council Business
Board of Bids and Contracts (October 20, 2025)
Josh Lauber of the Finance Department reviewed the Board of Bids and Contracts report. The council voted 7–0 to receive and file the report, approve the associated contracts, and authorize the necessary signatures.
New Council Business
Item VI-1 — Housing and Property Maintenance Reform Package
This item consumed the vast majority of the council’s day, lasting from mid-morning through approximately 3:30 p.m.
This agenda item was in reality a bundle of ten interrelated ordinances and charter ordinance changes, representing the most sweeping reform of Wichita’s property maintenance and housing enforcement framework in decades. Troy Anderson, Assistant City Manager, presented the package, which included:
- Repeal of the Neighborhood (Environmental) Court — The current municipal neighborhood court, which hears property maintenance cases, would be eliminated. Charter Ordinance No. 241 would repeal the judge position for that court, and Charter Ordinance No. 242 would amend the structure of the remaining municipal court judges.
- Adoption of the International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) — Ordinance No. 52-833 would replace the City’s existing patchwork of property maintenance regulations with the nationally recognized IPMC, with local amendments. The IPMC is one of roughly six international building and construction codes Wichita already uses in its Building and Inspections Department.
- Sunset of Existing Maintenance and Nuisance Codes — Ordinance No. 52-832 would sunset the existing Title 8.01 and Title 20.04 provisions relating to property maintenance and the prior neighborhood nuisance enforcement code. A new Title 20.05 would incorporate the IPMC in their place.
- Reinstatement of the Board of Code Standards and Appeals — Ordinance No. 52-829 would restore this board (which had been deleted from City code), giving it authority to hear property maintenance appeals, consider exceptions for hardship, review alternative compliance approaches, and recommend code updates to the council. Membership requires Sedgwick County ratification, and the board would become effective January 1, 2026.
- Rental Unit Registration for Properties with Violations — Ordinance No. 52-827 would require landlords with two or more code violations on a property to register that rental unit with the City. Registration is not a conviction. It would create a searchable public record of problem properties. The current draft treated all violations equally regardless of severity.
- Nondiscrimination Based on Source of Income — Ordinance No. 52-828 and an amendment to the City’s existing nondiscrimination code (Section 2.06.010) would add “source of income” as a protected class. This would make it illegal for a landlord to refuse to rent to someone solely because they pay with a housing voucher, Social Security, tribal benefits, or other non-wage income. Importantly, city staff clarified that the ordinance does not require landlords to accept Section 8 — it only prohibits refusing to rent based on the source of income once a tenant approaches with funding in hand. A landlord who declines to participate in the HUD Section 8 program entirely would not be violating the ordinance; the ordinance would apply when a voucher-holding tenant actively applies for a unit and is rejected on the basis of how they pay.
- Adoption of a Fire Insurance Proceeds Procedure — Ordinance No. 52-831 would create a process for the City to accept fire insurance proceeds to facilitate property repairs in cases where landlords fail to do so.
What the Package Does NOT Include: Staff and the City Attorney clarified that the package contains no rent caps, no requirement for routine interior inspections of rental units (which would be prohibited under state statute), and no requirement that landlords accept Section 8 vouchers.
Council Discussion
Council Member Hoheisel opened the questioning by asking how many international codes the City already uses — approximately six — and raised constitutional questions about requiring out-of-state property owners to designate a local management contact. City Attorney Dickgrafe explained that such a requirement would pass constitutional scrutiny because it would only be triggered after a code violation occurs, giving the City a rational basis. She noted about 12 to 14 Kansas cities have similar provisions.
Hoheisel also sought clarification on the inspection process. Dickgrafe explained that tenants, like property owners, can legally invite a code inspector inside their unit.
Council Member Glasscock asked whether there is any distinction in the rental registry between a minor nuisance violation (such as a long lawn) and a serious health or safety violation (such as active mold growth). Troy Anderson confirmed that under the current draft, a violation is a violation — no hierarchy exists. Dickgrafe noted, however, that the council could narrow the registry trigger to cover only interior, structural, or health-and-safety violations if it chose to. Glasscock also asked about whether the ordinance constitutes a “conviction,” and confirmed it does not — it would be triggered by the issuance of notices, not court findings. He also probed whether forcing a landlord to accept Section 8 vouchers would indirectly compel them to participate in a federal inspection program; Dickgrafe explained that the contract relationship is between the landlord and the Public Housing Authority (PHA), not directly with the federal government.
Sally Stang of Housing and Community Services confirmed that HUD requires bi-annual inspections of Section 8 properties (reverting to annual if a deficiency goes uncorrected), and that Wichita currently has about 3,500 authorized vouchers but can only fund approximately 2,700 due to HUD funding gaps and rising housing costs. She said 30 to 40 vouchers turn over monthly.
Council Member Johnson praised the long-running development of the package, crediting input from multiple landlord and tenant meetings dating back to August 2022. He noted feedback from those sessions directly shaped some of the current amendments. He asked about the Board of Code Standards and Appeals structure and confirmed that its membership consists of individuals with relevant technical expertise appointed by the council, and that it is legally distinct from the Metropolitan Area Building and Construction Department (MABCD) — which handles building code compliance — though their areas overlap.
Mayor Wu asked for data on environmental court outcomes. City Manager Layton provided the following figures from 2019 to 2024: out of approximately 6,900 total cases, about 4,500 (65%) were dismissed; approximately 900 resulted in guilty findings or diversions; only 5 were found not guilty; and about 1,500 could not be processed because the respondent could not be served.
Mayor Wu also expressed concern about public engagement, noting that many of the dates cited by Troy Anderson for stakeholder meetings were from 2022–2023, predating the current council composition. She said that most residents she speaks with don’t even know which district they live in, let alone when their council member holds monthly advisory board meetings, and argued that the level of engagement had not been sufficient for a package of this scope.
Council Member Glasscock echoed this, saying the packed chamber was itself evidence of insufficient engagement: “When we properly engage people, this many people don’t show up to a meeting.” He noted that the District IV advisory board meeting had only discussed the IPMC at a high level, not the rental registry or source-of-income provisions.
Chris Labrum of MABCD explained that the most effective enforcement strategy for problem multi-unit properties is a unit-by-unit approach — listing individual units as uninhabitable while working with landlords and tenants to arrange repairs or temporary relocation — rather than condemning entire complexes at once, which would displace dozens of residents simultaneously.
Public Testimony
The council heard from 38 public speakers over the course of several hours. Testimony was roughly divided between tenant advocates supporting the package and landlord representatives opposing it or requesting delay. Key themes included:
Tenants and advocates described firsthand experiences with mold, pest infestations, broken HVAC systems, retaliatory landlords, and the difficulties of finding housing for voucher holders. Lavonta Williams, a former council member and AARP volunteer, described inspecting a unit she said required a hazmat suit, and recalled a senior constituent who she believed died from her living conditions. She urged the council not to wait another year: “For ten years we didn’t move it. You have the opportunity to move this in the direction it needs to go.” Rachelle Small-Clifford described becoming disabled after living in a unit with poor air quality, noted that the IPMC does not explicitly address mold (only moisture control provisions that could contribute to mold), and argued that chronic exposure to biological contamination causes DNA-level harm. Adalia Carter, a member of the ICT Tenant Union, cited wage and housing cost data, noting that at Kansas’s $7.25/hour minimum wage, a worker would need 81 hours per week to afford a one-bedroom apartment at fair market rent. She told the council that expired vouchers — lost because tenants couldn’t find willing landlords in time — represent a direct failure to deliver on the City’s commitment to addressing homelessness.
Landlords and property managers generally argued that the package unfairly punishes responsible landlords for the failures of a small number of bad actors, and that the City already has enforcement tools it has failed to use effectively. Garrett Holmes, an attorney representing landlords citywide, argued that the ordinances were drafted without meaningful industry collaboration, that they would create red tape and resentment rather than cooperation, and that the existing bad actors — like properties he referred to as “Emory Gardens” — have already demonstrated they won’t comply with laws. He called for targeted enforcement of existing tools rather than systemic new requirements on all landlords. Nela Bayouth, owner of Cedar Mills Property Management, said she opposed passing the ordinances that day but acknowledged the underlying problem is real: “That 15% that are not getting hammered when they need to, I think that’s the issue we need to resolve.” Lisa Hattrup recounted a damaging experience with a Section 8 tenant who vandalized her property extensively, said the City’s response was dismissive, and said she and her husband now refuse to accept Section 8 as a result. David Robinson, a multi-property landlord who said he has never accepted Section 8, raised concerns about the registry being triggered by administrative notices rather than convictions, and worried that the package would push small responsible landlords out of the market — leaving a vacuum that bad actors would not fill. Cody Arnett of PMI Wichita, who described having been a tenant in substandard housing himself as a child, said he understood both sides but predicted the ordinances as written would drive up rents.
Several speakers sought a middle path. A representative of a community restorative housing organization described a program using paid participants to rehabilitate substandard properties, and called for registry pathways linked to restoration assistance rather than pure penalty. Celeste Racette, a longtime civic watchdog, addressed council later in the day on the baseball stadium item but was also present and engaged throughout.
Outcome
After exhaustive discussion, Council Member Tuttle moved to delay all recommended actions on Item VI-1 until December 9 and to establish a task force including staff, landowners, tenants, and stakeholders.
Motion carried 7–0.
Mayor Wu noted for the record that January 6, 2026 would be the last council meeting that would definitively include Council Member Johnson, whose term is ending.
Council Member Hoheisel then moved to give the task force until the December 9 meeting to produce recommendations on the full package.
Motion failed 3–4 (Nay: Wu, Johnston, Tuttle, Glasscock).
Council Member Glasscock moved to deny authorizing the city’s nondiscrimination ordinance to include source of income.
Motion carried 4–3 (Nay: Johnson, Hoheisel, Ballard).
Council Member Glasscock moved to deny rental unit registration.
Motion carried 4–3 (Nay: Johnson, Hoheisel, Ballard).
Council Member Johnson moved to send the rental registry to December 9 for task force review as well.
Motion failed 3–4 (Nay: Wu, Johnston, Tuttle, Glasscock).
The result: the council unanimously referred the core IPMC / property code reform package to a task force for development; rejected both the rental registry and the source-of-income nondiscrimination provision outright; and did not direct the task force to take up the rejected items, though several members expressed hope that it would do so voluntarily.
Council Member Johnson expressed concern about this outcome: “I think those paying attention and especially the tenants who didn’t show up today probably feel a little bit let down by that.” He said the rental registry was the one concrete tool in the package specifically targeting bad actors, and that sending only the broader code reform to a task force, with no official direction to revisit the registry, was a step backward.
City Manager Layton noted the task force composition would be worked out within a day and committed to ensuring transparency and compliance with Kansas open meetings law (KOMA).
Item VI-2 — Police Equipment
Captain Jason Cooley of the Wichita Police Department reviewed a request to initiate additional CIP funds for officer equipment replacements, including body armor, ballistic shields, and other protective gear with five-year lifecycles mandated by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). Council Member Hoheisel asked whether technology advances might extend the five-year lifespan in the future; Cooley said the NIJ has not signaled any change to the standard. No public comment was received.
Motion to approve initiation of funds and authorize signatures: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-3 — Police Heavy Equipment Vehicles
Captain Cooley also presented a request to initiate $3.25 million in CIP funds to purchase a fleet of police command and tactical vehicles, including two command vehicles (one approximately 30 feet for SWAT and tactical operations, one larger for major events and disaster response) and a new SWAT armored vehicle and bomb unit vehicle. The total fleet budget is structured as a single CIP project with sub-projects, so surplus in one vehicle category can cover minor overages in another without returning to council.
Cooley explained that the Wichita Fire Department’s 40-foot command vehicle — which police have tried to borrow — is too large for many residential streets and requires fire personnel to operate, making it impractical for police SWAT activations. He described an actual SWAT call at Central and Ridge where officers operated in the rain because no appropriate staging area existed. Vice Mayor Johnston noted the same incident had caused significant disruption near his home.
Glasscock asked whether the size limitations of the fire command vehicle had ever been formally flagged. City Manager Layton said no operational complaints had been brought to his attention formally, though Cooley clarified the impracticality is situational, not universal.
Council discussed storage for the new vehicles. Cooley said current facilities for both the SWAT and bomb teams are already at capacity, and that CIP funding for a dedicated storage facility is not budgeted until fiscal years 2029–2031. The City’s evidence storage building was ruled out due to full occupancy and weight/size concerns. Cooley said staff is actively scouting options.
Motion to approve initiation of funds and authorize signatures: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-4 — Industrial Revenue Bond Letter of Intent: Lange Gen Y, LLC (District IV)
Troy Anderson reviewed a request by Lange Gen Y, LLC for a letter of intent to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRBs). Mayor Wu sought clarification that the existing property tax levy of $63,752 on the property would remain in place — that any abatement would apply only to the increase in assessed value resulting from new investment, not to the baseline. Anderson confirmed this.
The council opened a public hearing, received no speakers, and closed it. Rather than taking final action, the council deferred the full resolution to the November 6 meeting.
Motion to close hearing and defer to November 6: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-5 — Health Care Facilities Revenue Bond: Larksfield Place (District II)
Troy Anderson presented a request by Larksfield Place Retirement Communities, Inc. to issue health care facilities revenue bonds to fund the addition of 48 independent living units. CEO Mike Hambley explained that Larksfield Place currently operates 185 independent living units, 80 skilled nursing beds, and 72 assisted living units. The expansion would add 48 independent living units to the existing campus.
Council Member Tuttle praised the investment, noting that without aging-in-place housing options, seniors are often forced to leave Wichita at the end of their lives. No public comment was received.
Motion to close hearing, adopt the resolution, and authorize signatures: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-6 — TEFRA Hearing: Ascension Health Alliance Revenue Bonds
This item involved a federal Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) public hearing required before the Indiana Finance Authority can issue revenue bonds on behalf of Ascension Via Christi Hospitals Wichita, Inc. Because the bonds would benefit Wichita facilities, local council approval is required. The funds are restricted to capital improvements — new diagnostic equipment, CT scanners, and similar — and cannot be used for operating expenses or staffing.
Carol Sampsel, an ICU nurse with 41 years of experience at Ascension facilities, testified in opposition. She described consolidations that resulted in St. Joseph’s Campus losing neurology, gastroenterology, orthopedics, and catheterization lab services. She said current staffing shortages make her skeptical that any new facility could be adequately staffed. Mayor Wu acknowledged the concerns and thanked healthcare workers for their service, but clarified that the council’s action only approves the bond issuance for capital equipment, not any staffing decisions or operational changes.
Motion to hold the public hearing and adopt the resolution approving the bond issuance: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-7 — First Amendment to the EPC Real Estate Development Agreement
Troy Anderson and Austin Bradley of EPC Real Estate presented a first amendment to the development agreement for the mixed-use project adjacent to Riverfront Stadium. The amendment extends the deadline for vertical construction to begin on both the hotel component and the apartment component to July 31, 2026.
Bradley confirmed the hotel will be a Hyatt affiliate and that a binding hotel management agreement has been executed. He said the site preparation work — earthwork, utility relocation, pad preparation — is substantially complete, giving the project a significant head start toward its construction timeline. He acknowledged he cannot guarantee what unforeseen events might arise, but said EPC is “as close as we’ve ever been.”
If vertical construction does not commence by July 31, the development agreement provides for a default process: an initial notice, an opportunity to cure within approximately 30 days, and a second final notice before the City can pursue default proceedings. Vice Mayor Johnston asked what would happen if default proceedings were necessary. Anderson acknowledged it would likely become a lengthy legal process.
Mayor Wu used this agenda item to press the City Manager and staff on the full financial picture of the stadium and surrounding development. She asked Troy Anderson to explain the financing structure on the record.
Anderson explained:
- Approximately $13 million came from Community Improvement District (CID) funds
- Approximately $15 million came from Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funds
- Approximately $42 million came from STAR bonds (State of Kansas Sales Tax and Revenue bonds)
- The Phase 1 STAR bond district (established circa 2007) will begin winding down in 2027, removing approximately $2.5 million per year in captured revenue
- The Phase 2 STAR bond district (the stadium, established 2017) runs through 2038
- The total debt (principal plus estimated interest) on the STAR bonds is approximately $62 million, with the debt service obligation running through 2034
- From 2028 to 2034, the City will depend on CID and STAR bond revenue from the newly developing properties east of the river to service the debt; if revenue falls short, the obligation falls on the general fund
Celeste Racette, a private citizen who monitors city finances closely, addressed the council during public comment. She presented her own analysis of CID and STAR bond debt schedules and stated that current CID revenue in the stadium district does not yet meet the annual debt service of over $1 million per year that will be required starting in 2026. She supported approving the extension — “we are stuck and we’ve got to meet this debt schedule” — while urging the council to make the debt schedules and revenue tracking publicly available on the City’s website so taxpayers can monitor the gap between obligations and revenue.
Mayor Wu seconded that call for transparency, and Finance Director Mark Manning confirmed the information can be published in a broken-out format on the City’s website.
Motion to approve the amendments and authorize signatures: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-8 — Municipal Court Competency Evaluation Services
Nathan Emmorey of the Municipal Court presented contracts with two clinicians who perform competency evaluations for the municipal court. The municipal court’s competency evaluation program is relatively new and serves defendants whose attorneys or judges believe they may not have the cognitive or psychiatric capacity to understand the charges against them or assist in their own defense.
Of 79 evaluations conducted in 2025 to date: 37 individuals were found incompetent, 23 were found competent, 2 refused, and 10 produced indeterminate results. When a defendant is found incompetent, their municipal case is typically dismissed and referred to the District Attorney’s office for possible restoration services, though Emmorey acknowledged the DA rarely picks up those cases.
Council Member Glasscock noted with interest that two responses were received to the RFP and two contracts were awarded — an unusual coincidence. Emmorey explained the field is extremely niche: most competency evaluators in Kansas work for defense attorneys or are reimbursed through state channels in district court, not municipal court. Multiple outreach efforts prior to the RFP had yielded responses from potential clinicians saying “not a chance.” The two contractors are the only individuals who came forward willing to do the work.
Mayor Wu connected this item back to the housing discussion, noting that some environmental court cases may involve defendants later found incompetent — meaning the case gets dismissed and the property conditions go unremediated. She asked that this intersection be part of the housing task force’s work. City Manager Layton agreed it could be addressed through staff.
Motion to approve contracts and authorize signatures: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-9 — Animal Services Advisory Board Structure
Jan Jarman of the Law Department presented Ordinance No. 52-834, which restores the Animal Services Advisory Board from eight members back to seven — correcting a 2016 change that had created an even number of members (and the potential for tied votes). The measure had broad support.
George Theoharis, a longtime animal advocacy voice in Wichita, addressed the council to applaud the change while using his time to also note his frustration with the pace of City action generally and to advocate for cat licensing similar to dog licensing in peer cities.
Motion to adopt the ordinance: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-10 — Central Library First Floor Conversion to Event Venue
Lindsey Benacka of Arts and Cultural Services presented a request to approve a project and initial budget to renovate the first floor of the former Central Library building (825 West Douglas Avenue, the historic downtown library that has been vacant since 2018) into a revenue-generating event and venue space. The project will not address the full building at this time — only the first floor. Once approved, the project would go out for competitive design proposals (an RFP).
The building has been vacant since the Advanced Learning Library opened in 2017–2019. Various RFPs and requests for information over the years have not produced viable applicants willing to take on the capital cost of a full building renovation. The city has allowed intermittent use by nonprofits, including the Salvation Army’s Operation Holiday program and a COVID vaccine clinic.
Gary Janzen of Public Works confirmed the roof has been replaced and that any lingering water damage from the third floor will be assessed as part of the project scope, with the goal of ensuring nothing above the first floor will compromise the venue renovation.
Mayor Wu connected the building’s vacancy to the broader pattern of the stadium-era riverfront decisions in 2018, noting that the library sat idle while the baseball stadium moved forward. Both City Manager Layton and Council Member Johnson explained that the library’s future was always intended to be part of the Riverfront masterplan process, which was derailed by COVID, leaving the building in limbo.
Council Member Glasscock called it “the perfect plan” for saving a historic building and expressed enthusiasm for the project. Council Member Ballard, given the day’s earlier mold discussions, asked staff to confirm the building would be assessed for mold as part of the renovation scope. Janzen confirmed it would.
Motion to approve project, adopt the bonding resolution, and authorize signatures: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-11 — Four Mile Creek Digester Expansion (Deferred)
This item, concerning a Phase 2 agreement and funding for the Four Mile Creek Digester Expansion in District II, was moved by the City Manager to the November 6, 2025 meeting.
Item VI-12 — 29th and Grove Environmental Remediation Agreements
Gary Janzen and William Summer of Arcadis presented a package of agreements that will allow Union Pacific Railroad to construct groundwater remediation infrastructure on city-owned rights-of-way and property near 29th Street and Grove Street in District I.
The 29th and Grove site has been contaminated by railroad-related chemicals that have migrated into the groundwater. Union Pacific, as the responsible party under Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) oversight, is funding all remediation costs with no financial obligation to the City of Wichita. The agreements authorize private use of public stormwater management systems and right-of-way to install the remediation equipment.
The remediation infrastructure will include a new treatment facility to be built south of Murdock Street, while the existing facility north of Murdock (on KDOT land, adjacent to Murdock Park) will be decommissioned once the new facility is operational, returning that land to park use. Construction of the remediation devices is expected to begin in the third quarter of 2026. The clean-up timeline is estimated at 10 to 15 years from when the devices go in the ground — meaning the neighborhood could be declared clean between 2036 and 2041.
Council Member Johnson, who is leaving the council at the end of his term, expressed deep personal satisfaction at reaching this milestone: “One of the key things I wanted to get done before I left this seat was to make sure that these remediation devices got into the ground. We know it’s at least a decade to clean that groundwater and that clock doesn’t start until these devices are in the ground.” He said making the community “feel safe again” is what this action is about.
Council Member Hoheisel confirmed there is no federal funding involved — Union Pacific bears the full cost — and that the buildings to be built on City rights-of-way will be strictly infrastructure, not public-use facilities.
Motion to approve the stormwater and right-of-way agreements and authorize signatures: Passed 7–0.
Item VI-13 — 2026 Cultural Funding Operational Grant Recommendations
Lindsey Benacka and Jesse Koza of Arts and Cultural Services presented a new three-year cultural funding model, replacing the previous year-by-year grant cycle that had produced inconsistent and sometimes disorienting funding swings for arts organizations.
Under the new model, arts organizations are placed into three tiers:
- Institutions (e.g., Exploration Place, Music Theater of Wichita, Wichita Symphony Orchestra, Arts Partners): Each receives a flat $35,000 per year for three years, providing budget certainty regardless of application quality variations year to year.
- Anchors (e.g., Harvester Arts, Mark Arts): Receive graduated amounts based on scoring, with the two highest scorers (Harvester Arts and Mark Arts at the same score) each recommended at $30,000.
- Partners (smaller organizations): Receive amounts based on scoring and organizational capacity.
In total, 16 organizations were recommended for operational grants. Three organizations applied but were not recommended; staff has already outreached to those organizations to encourage them to apply for a separate Activation Grant program instead, which is designed for project-based or program-specific funding.
The Cultural Funding Committee, chaired by a District III appointee and staffed by Benacka and Koza, unanimously approved the recommendations.
Mayor Wu raised several concerns:
- She noted that Exploration Place received the highest composite score of all applicants (95.7) but is receiving the same $35,000 as every other institution, while it received slightly more than that last year. She questioned whether high scorers should be rewarded with higher allocations.
- Committee chair Dominic Guana explained that in the institution tier, uniform funding was chosen deliberately to provide stability and remove the year-to-year variability that larger organizations with more grant-writing capacity naturally exploit. He said Exploration Place’s higher score partly reflects the organizational resources available to write a superior application — not necessarily superior community impact relative to smaller organizations.
- Mayor Wu also flagged a concern that institutions cannot compete for activation grants under the current rule (an organization may only receive one grant from the cultural funding program), which means Exploration Place could not, for example, apply for an activation grant to fund its popular free summer RiverFlix movie series at the Arkansas River amphitheater. She called the prohibition “unfair” given that RiverFlix is exactly the kind of free, accessible community activation the program is designed to support.
- Benacka confirmed that the one-grant rule was set by the Cultural Funding Committee. Mayor Wu said that should be reconsidered.
Sierra Franklin-Morton of the Tallgrass Film Association described how federal and state funding cuts had forced the organization to reduce its programming at the just-completed 23rd annual Tallgrass Film Festival, which welcomed an average of 1,346 attendees per day and screened 180 films including 14 world premieres. She expressed support for the new stable funding model while noting that smaller organizations like Juniper Arts and Mulberry Arts might be better positioned to receive activation grants rather than taking them away from other grant pools.
Anthony Joyner of Mulberry Arts, the first African-American-owned nonprofit art gallery in Wichita (and only the second African-American art gallery to open in the city’s history), urged council to understand the disproportionate impact of the funding amounts on his organization. He described driving DoorDash to pay part-time staff, working with high school students to complete a paid contract with a New York organization over the summer, and advocated for increasing the overall funding pool rather than reallocating among organizations. “I need you to understand that though they can host an extra event and charge a few extra tickets… I can’t do that. It’s me.”
Council Member Tuttle praised the new stable funding model, noting she had received an email from a community arts partner already expressing appreciation. She cited a 2023 Arts and Economic Prosperity study finding that Wichita’s nonprofit arts sector generates $184 million in local economic activity annually, equivalent to 2,929 full-time jobs and $32.3 million in state, local, and federal tax revenue.
Motion to approve the 2026 cultural funding recommendations: Passed 7–0.
Council Business Submitted by City Authorities
Non-Consent Planning Agenda — None
Non-Consent Housing Agenda: Public Housing Recovery Agreement Status Report (Item VIII-1)
Sally Stang of Housing and Community Services provided the monthly status update on the HUD Recovery Agreement and the Public Housing Disposition program, under which the City is selling its legacy public housing stock, prioritizing sales to existing residents with right-of-first-refusal.
Vice Mayor Johnston noted that a property in the Country Acres development had recently been sold to its resident. Stang confirmed that a second resident-purchase is also in process and will appear on an upcoming consent agenda for contract approval. Mayor Wu praised the team for achieving appraisal-value or above-appraisal-value sales and for keeping the properties cycling back into the community’s housing stock through post-sale renovation.
Motion to receive and file the HUD Recovery Agreement and Public Housing Disposition Update: Passed 7–0.
Non-Consent Airport Agenda — None
Council Member Agenda
Item X-1 — Mayor Wu Travel Authorization
The council retroactively approved Mayor Wu’s travel to the Young, Smart & Local Conference in Tulsa, Oklahoma on Monday, October 20, 2025. A City vehicle was used; all other costs were paid by the Mayor personally.
Motion approved: 7–0.
Council Member Comments
Mayor Wu announced that the Tri-Government Meeting between City Council, the Sedgwick County Commission, and the USD 259 School Board would be held the following evening — Wednesday, October 22 at 5:30 p.m. — at WSU Tech’s National Center for Aviation Training (NCAT) on North Webb Road. The event is hosted by Sedgwick County, open to the public, and formatted as a town hall. Wu encouraged residents to attend and engage their elected officials at all three levels of local government.
Council Member Johnson reminded residents that early voting has begun for upcoming local elections and noted that free transit service will be available on Election Day.
Adjournment
Motion to adjourn at 7:05 p.m.: Passed 4–3 (Nay: Johnston, Johnson, Hoheisel).
Minutes submitted by City Clerk Shinita Rice.
Complete Voting Record — October 21, 2025
| Item | Description | Vote | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minutes | Approve October 14 minutes | 7–0 | |
| II (bulk) | Consent Agenda Items 1–7, 9–14, 16 | 7–0 | Items 8, 15, 16 pulled separately |
| Consent Item 8 | Crystal Prairie Lake Park Phase 1 Funding | 7–0 | |
| Consent Item 15 | Hangar Dynamics Jabara Airport Lease | 6–0 | Tuttle abstained (conflict of interest) |
| Consent Item 16 | WSU CAST Recognition Agreement | 6–0 | Tuttle abstained (conflict of interest) |
| III-1 | Board of Bids and Contracts (Oct. 20) | 7–0 | |
| VI-1 (main) | Delay housing package to Dec. 9; establish task force | 7–0 | Tuttle motion |
| VI-1 (sub) | Task force to issue recommendations by Dec. 9 | Failed 3–4 | Nay: Wu, Johnston, Tuttle, Glasscock |
| VI-1 (sub) | Deny Source-of-Income Nondiscrimination Ordinance | 4–3 | Nay: Johnson, Hoheisel, Ballard |
| VI-1 (sub) | Deny Rental Unit Registration | 4–3 | Nay: Johnson, Hoheisel, Ballard |
| VI-1 (sub) | Send Rental Registry to task force (Dec. 9) | Failed 3–4 | Nay: Wu, Johnston, Tuttle, Glasscock |
| VI-2 | Police Equipment — initiate CIP funds | 7–0 | |
| VI-3 | Police Heavy Equipment Vehicles — initiate CIP funds | 7–0 | $3.25M total |
| VI-4 | Lange Gen Y IRB Letter of Intent | 7–0 | Deferred to Nov. 6 |
| VI-5 | Larksfield Place Health Care Revenue Bonds | 7–0 | 48 new independent living units |
| VI-6 | Ascension Via Christi TEFRA Revenue Bonds | 7–0 | Capital equipment only |
| VI-7 | EPC Real Estate Development Agreement Amendment | 7–0 | Vertical construction deadline: July 31, 2026 |
| VI-8 | Municipal Court Competency Evaluation Contracts | 7–0 | |
| VI-9 | Animal Services Advisory Board — restore to 7 members | 7–0 | |
| VI-10 | Central Library First Floor Event Venue Conversion | 7–0 | |
| VI-12 | 29th & Grove Environmental Remediation Agreements | 7–0 | Union Pacific funded |
| VI-13 | 2026 Cultural Funding Operational Grant Recommendations | 7–0 | New 3-year model |
| VIII-1 | Public Housing Recovery Agreement Status Report | 7–0 | Receive and file |
| X-1 | Mayor Wu Travel Authorization (Tulsa) | 7–0 | Retroactive |
| Adjournment | Adjourn at 7:05 p.m. | 4–3 | Nay: Johnston, Johnson, Hoheisel |
Key Policy Threads to Watch
Housing and Property Maintenance Task Force: The newly established task force will include staff, landowners, tenants, and community stakeholders. Its formal mandate covers the International Property Maintenance Code reform package. Whether it takes up the rental registry and source-of-income provisions — both of which were formally denied by the council — remains an open question, though several council members expressed hope it would. The task force must be ready to present to council by December 9.
Environmental Court Transition: With the Neighborhood Court on track for elimination, the task force will need to determine how property maintenance cases are prosecuted under any new framework and how to address situations where defendants are found incompetent and cases are dismissed without any remediation occurring.
EPC / Riverfront Stadium Debt Clock: The Phase 1 STAR bond revenue stream ends in 2027, removing approximately $2.5 million per year. CID debt payments are already exceeding current CID revenue in the stadium area. The window between 2027 and 2034 (when total STAR bond debt retires) represents significant financial exposure to the general fund. The Finance Department has committed to publishing the debt and revenue schedules in a publicly accessible format on the City’s website.
29th and Grove Remediation: The remediation devices must be in the ground by late 2026. The clock on a 10–15 year cleanup won’t start until they are.
Cultural Funding: The new three-year funding model takes effect in 2026. The one-grant restriction for organizations receiving operational grants — which prevents them from also competing for activation grants — is likely to be revisited.
Voice for Liberty covers Wichita City Council meetings as a public service for Wichita residents. All reporting is based on official meeting minutes. For questions or corrections, contact Voice for Liberty through our website.
#ICT #WichitaKS #WichitaCityCouncil #LocalGovernment