City Council: Remarks by Dan Rouser on Public Art and Otterness

We're explained in detail primarily by the principles involved. Mary Jo, the president of the Public Art Advisory Board, is here together with others. Staff is here. And the architects, the engineers, for the bridges are here to respond any questions. Mr. Mayor and members of the council, I guess it's up to you how you want to proceed. It would be my hope that we can allow those in attendance that want to share their point of view with the council to have that opportunity. I will say that the public art in this issue clearly develops strong feelings in the community both ways. There are people that fully appreciate the value of this. There are those who feel very strongly that money should be directed in other areas. My view this morning in terms of how we're going to handle this is to try and suggest that

everyone's point of view has a place. And they should be able to express that point of view free from anyone interfering with that process. And that's what we're going to do here. We're going to allow anyone who wants to share their opinion to do it. What I would ask is that people who feel strongly for or against don't just keep repeating what other speakers have said. We're going to listen very carefully. I'm sure that each member of this council has already spent a significant amount of time trying to assess his or her position on this. And they have their reasons. And if they feel like it, they'll express their reasons as to how they vote and how they expend public funds.

But I think it's very important how we work through these kinds of issues. It's not unusual to take the idea of public art and never be able to find agreement in regards to what the piece would be. But what I would like with the council's permission is to allow maybe Mary Jobe, or whom her committee to deliver some comments and then allow citizens to share their views as to how they would prefer this council to proceed. And then we'll discuss it and make a decision. I think it's important that we bring these kinds of matters to ahead and make decisions. So if that's all right with the council, I would invite Mary or some member from her committee to address the city council and for the benefit of those watching at home. Or in the council chambers to briefly summarize what we're going to be deciding here today.

Okay. Welcome to the city council. Thank you, Mirror Knight. I will be as brief as possible. We did go into detail a few weeks ago in the workshop session. So I will try not to be too repetitive. Basically what we did was hold a national competition. We had a distinguished panel and jurors from the Wichita community. Each one, a professional art practitioner, a user of the facility. Someone involved in community service, business interests were represented. It was a very strong committee. We reviewed 39 entrants, people who submitted resumes and passed work slides, narrowed it down to three, asked them to come back to us, make a presentation, provide mockets for the jury to review. At that time we selected the project that now is before you.

We had a CPO meeting, we had a public hearing, then public art advisory board decided based upon the jury recommendation, the recommendations from both the CPO and the public hearing to unanimously recommend to city council that you approve this project. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Anyone want to speak here? Welcome Ben. Give your name for the record. My name is Ben Grissmore. I reside at 4515 metal lane and I appreciate very much the opportunity to speak to you Mr. Mayor and members of the council. I currently serve as the immediate past president of the Downtown Business Association and we've had the opportunity to speak before you in the past concerning many projects relating to downtown. We speak this morning in support of the public art advisory board recommendation of the Douglas Naval Street projects, two way main street gateway and the center of project.

In recent months as we have, DPA has appeared before you, the key projects that we feel are important have been reviewed, vital to building, rebuilding the downtown development area. Two of those being the convention hotel as well as the two way gateway project. We continue to advocate the public and private partnership and development which is before us today. We applaud you in creating this public art advisory board that are assisting design professionals in creating structures and landscaping such as even the new Metropolitan Transit Center which was one of those projects. We respect the advisory board and appreciate their art expertise and experience as they have coordinated with city staff in the private architectural design community to select artists and evaluate their work. Their effort is greatly will greatly contribute to the overall image and aesthetics of our

community. We appreciate the thoroughness of which they work. The quality and design of our new downtown development projects visibly reflect who we are as a community. Our sense of commitment to growth, our sense of commitment to a quality of life that we all enjoy is what citizens and visitors as well expect of an all-American city. The DBA is vitally concerned about the vitality of our center city as it represents the important city tax base that affects us all. Quality projects we feel are a sound investment for all which it has. The projects before you this morning are already designated for funding under CIP and through some additional federal funding sources and we just view this as a good sound business decision. Our organization asks for your support in approving the public art advisory recommendations to you this morning.

Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Baker. Morning. Good morning. My name is Elizabeth Willis and I grew up in Wichita, I moved back here 10 years ago. I have my, I'm a doctoral candidate in art history and religious studies at the University of Kansas and have been active in educational and civic and educational organizations in this city for the last 10 years. After seeing Robert Wresch's concept for Wichita's gateway and reading about his process of research that led to the design in the Wichita Eagle yesterday morning, I did something I've never done before. I felt compelled to voice my strong support of approval for the funding of this project by the Wichita City Council. Such a gateway should be both a monument and a masterpiece to honor our city past, present and future and I believe that Mr. Wresch's concept most, most successfully and effectively achieves both these goals.

It is obvious to me when I look at this monument that the sense of pioneering spirit from our past, our Native American heritage and our unique surrounding landscape are reflected in the multi-leveled visual symbolism of this powerful construction. The word monumental means larger than life and this integration of towering cliffs, soaring winged fans and illuminated pyramids certainly achieves that, but it is the masterpiece quality that excites me the most. A masterpiece was once defined to me as a work of art that has survived the test of time because it speaks to people on many levels and every time you see it, it reveals something new to you. Just on first glance, I was struck by so many symbolic meanings communicated to me by Mr. Wresch's masterpiece, I'd like to share some of them with you. The pyramids remind me of an encampment with Kansas' low cliffs as a backdrop and high atop the cliffs to Native American sheep, their headdresses flowing down their backs, confronting

one another across the river valley, another glance and I think of those huge fan shapes as soaring wings, symbols of our pioneers and aircraft flying above the prairie landscape. Even the stratification of the limestone ledges reflects the land formations found throughout our area. Finally, there is the use of light that I find so provocative. Light, fire, illumination symbolize the lighting of the way of the pioneers of centuries and decades ago, the pioneering spirit that has always been at the core of what Wichita means to me. The fires across the prairies and the camps and houses that signified protection, safety and nurturing for the settlers, the Native Americans or the cattle drivers reflect the nurturing quality that brought me back to Wichita to raise my children. Light also has another symbolic meaning, one of a more spiritual nature, and one that is particularly fitting to a desperate need found in our city, pride in oneself.

One of my favorite passages in the New Testament, Caution's one not to hide one's light under a basket, but to place it up on a candle stick, where light can shine for all to see. I believe that one of the most eroding characteristics of the citizens of Wichita is our inability to recognize and to celebrate all the wonderful qualities of this city. What better way to wake up that sense of pride, but to commission a new gateway that pulls the cover off that brilliant, beautiful light and lets it shine as a tribute for all we have accomplished and as a promise for the illuminated path to a glowing future. Dr. Wresch's magnificent structure can be just the visual and spiritual boost our civic pride cries out for. Thank you. Thank you. Going down. Next speaker. Good morning. My name is Jim McNeese.

I'm the principal at Northeast Magnet High School for Visual Arts, as well as I reside at 1213 Manchester Court here in the city. I'm here to speak to you in support of the recommendations and I'd encourage you to support those. I can't speak as eloquently as our last speaker about the art that I think the need for public art should go undisputed as to the qualities of the art. I don't think we'll ever all agree on that, but I can tell you one thing that I can support wholeheartedly and I praise that the council is one of the city manager and John D'Angelo for involving students, both the WSU and at Northeast Magnet Threat, USD259 in these projects. We've been involved with several projects within the city murals, the 21st Street Substation, and we've been asked to be involved in feedback and information even on some of these projects. I think it's crucial that you not overlook the fact that many of the art projects are intimately involved with the education of the students here in the city. At Northeast Magnet, as well as other city high schools, as well as elementary and middle schools, students have been work collaboratively with the artists.

They have worked collaboratively with city personnel to make art a reality within our city. The big payoff, though, I think, is really for the students. We talk about the connection between the world of work and the world of school, and this is one of the most ideal situations. Students learn so many more things, the presentation programs that have to go through, the planning, the documentation, the accountability that is so vital for the students to learn in today's world to be prepared for that world of work. Now, I don't want you in any way to overlook the fact that what the city is doing for the community in a long-lasting way in the art is very important, but what you're also doing for the students and for the future citizens and workforce of this community is vitally important, as well. Thank you. Thank you for coming down. Next speaker. Good morning. My name is Donald Byarm. I reside at 240 North through 10. I'm speaking to you this morning in support of the major projects of public art that are

before you for action. To individual citizens of Wichita, these projects seem very expensive if we were to finance them ourselves. When compared to the annual budget of the city, which provides a high standard of living and a wonderful environment to live and work, the cost is minuscule. It is true that Wichita does provide a vast array of cultural opportunities that are both free and some on a fee basis. But participation in these cultural opportunities are limited to size, concert hall, museum, or arena, and the dates of the event. Public art provides unlimited opportunities for citizens to enjoy culture that reflects their heritage and accomplishments and to their children and grandchildren. I hope as you consider your vote and support of public art for Wichita, that you agree with American poet Maya Angelou when she says, when members of a society wish to secure that society's rich heritage, they cherish their arts and respect their artists. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker. Welcome to the City Council. Thank you. Mr. Mayor and council members, my name is Dr. Les Ruth von, I live at 7330 Northwick Drive here in Wichita, and I own an office building at 401 East Douglas and downtown Wichita. I'm a psychologist, a dealer in 19th and 20th century, early 20th century American art, and I had the privilege of serving on the jury that selected the Gateway's culture. I'm also the founder and president of Preferred Mental Health Management and Corporated, one of the most rapidly growing mental health management firms in the country. My firm is 26 employees, five full-time psychologists, and if we continue to grow, we will be recruiting 15 to 20 new psychologists to come to Wichita in the next five years. When I'm recruiting as psychologists to come to our firm in Wichita, some reject Wichita

out of hand, thinking it's just the countdown. Others give kinder words and say, well, but I'm looking for a community with cultural opportunities with theater, art, music, ballet, opera. We have those here in Wichita. I have to sell them. We have in Wichita a richer cultural community than I think most cities twice our size. We have at WSU, the finest sculpture collection of any university west of the Mississippi. But I think we need something highly visible to reflect an image of progressiveness in this city, and I'm here to support the proposed gateway and art bridge projects. Every major city in this country is and has been involved in public art in a major way. Last few years, I've been traveling around this country a great deal, and I can see this

in every major city that I visit. We have to admit that Wichita still has an image problem with the rest of the country. This is why the great gateway bridge projects can be a major first step in correcting this image. My firm is beginning to bring potential employer clients to Wichita to see our firm first hand. We lost one possible client because they said, how could a mental health management firm in Wichita, Kansas, be as good as one from Los Angeles, and actually we're a lot better than that firm? Actually we have to sell Wichita along with the products of our firm. We bring in clients, we're bringing in one next week, they have two million covered laws that begin a joint venture with us, we'll be picking them up in our airplane at mid-continent, bringing them on catalog and downtown to our offices.

Right now, there's no magnificent sculpture there in the gateway, but when that is, that image of itself will correct a lot of the image of Wichita. We also have a tape that we show, you know, we have a man to bring them in that describes the Wichita, and it says the home of the pizza when we can't, we don't have that anymore. But I'm here primarily as kind of a business man, and public art is good for business. It brings, and we're in a lot of competition with other cities, our size. And it's good for business. It also reflects that Wichita's business is more than just business. It reflects a belief that beauty and wonder are enjoyable and important in themselves. Also this piece of sculpture, and I've been involved in art since a little kid, this

is a magnificent piece. And I think it will be really tremendous for Wichita, and it's a great investment in Wichita in the future. Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to share your views. Next speaker, could I see an indication of those that intend to speak? Okay, we'd ask you to come forward so we can have the benefit of your thoughts. Please give your name. Welcome to the City Council. Morning. My name is Chris Barunner, a citizen of Wichita, I live at 86.21, Tipper. I'm a local sculptor here in town, I'm also an employee at the Boeing company. There's just several things I wanted to touch on. One basically, some of the process that's involved in this whole public art movement, the design of this particular piece that being the gateway, and the money issue.

As far as the process goes, I have some reservations about the way the process is working in Wichita. This is not really the forum to discuss that. I would like, in the future, to be able to sit down with individual council members, maybe with John DiAngelo, and other interested parties, and see if we can find a more streamlined system to make public art a reality in Wichita. That can issue that of the design of this piece. I think you've heard from many people this morning about what an excellent addition this would be to Wichita, and I agree wholeheartedly with them. I'm not going to take the time this morning to really get into the aspects of that piece that I enjoy because the real concern of citizens that may have opposition to this, and the city council members that may have reservations, is probably about the money.

In regards to the money, as the last speaker indicated, the amount of money being spent per individual in this city is very small. A lot of people would like to see that money diverted and use somewhere else, but as we know that money is tied to the overall downtown project, and without the downtown project, you wouldn't have that money available for anything. I think the most important thing about the money that is involved in this project, and one that everyone seems to be overlooking, is the fact that what Robert is playing on doing is moving here. The man is going to live in our community by materials from our vendors, from businessmen in this town, incorporate contractors and laborers in this city. He's going to provide education and practical experience for young artists that will be

helping on the job. It's a rare opportunity. We're not talking about some New York or LA artists who comes here, takes three photographs, goes to the studio, builds a sculpture and has it shipped out here. This is an interactive piece, a chance to give the city, all of the city, an opportunity not only to watch the piece grow, but know that they were there and part of it for the future. When you take that into account, when you realize that the majority of that $150,000 which is a very small amount of money in the big scheme of things, that the majority of that is going to come back to the city in one form or another, we're not really spending money. We're just loaning money out for a little while to be reinvested back in our city. I strongly encourage you to not only support the Gateway Project, but the bridge project

as well and appreciate the opportunity to speak. Thank you. Thank you. Welcome to the city council. Thank you very much. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. My name is Sophie. Please come to me. And I'm very, very delighted to hear what was happening already in the city. And this project, I think, is going to be very magnificent, is going to help us all. I've been downtown for many, many years, in fact, over 26 years. And finally, I see some light is coming and some things are happening, which are very, very encouraging. I know that sculptures and art is really the most important thing in the city. I come from Greece where, of course, we're not building a part of the home, but let's

say, if those people in the old times, they were not building any art, or they were not doing nothing that what we're doing, today, nobody would like to go see Greece because there is nothing there. But art brings people in, brings business and beauty in the city. And I very much encourage the council to vote in favor of the release project. And also some other projects that we have already started. Thank you very much for the opportunity. Thank you. Next speaker. Well, she's on her way down. Do you agree, Chris, with his comments on Greece? I think there's a lot of things to say. Hello. My name is Dr. Courtney Ruthven. I'm a psychologist, and I live at 7330 Norfolk Drive. We've heard from my husband previously, and so I'm going to cut my talk of my comments a little bit, because without reading his speech, I find that we have duplicated ourselves

some. We, as you know, have recently bought a building at 401 East Douglas. We both support the gateway in the bridge project for several reasons, and I'd like to tell you why. We bought a building downtown because we saw things moving as Mr. Archimedes commented. We see things changing for the better in Wichita, and we think that's very important. We think it's very important because we, as said before, we bring clients here. And mostly they think Wichita is a podent town. We know it isn't, but other people don't. I think the fact that we are putting up visible signs of change is a very important way to counter that impression. I happen to think the art that's being proposed is very good, but even if it weren't, it would be important.

It would be important because it shows that Wichita is a city ready to move forward, to progress, and to invest in its citizens, and in its community. I hope you will support this project because I think it's great for Wichita. Thank you. Thanks for coming down. Next speaker. Does that conclude the speakers? If so, the rest of the discussion will be, but the City Council. Any, Greg? Thank you, Mayor. Are we going to take these individuals? Yeah, I think we, just for the benefit of those in the chambers that don't have an agenda, we have three separate issues here. We have the design competition, which is for the maple and Douglas Street Bridge. The second part is the proposed art, which most of you have shared your views on. And the third is the proposed art for Seneca and McLean intersection.

What I would like to do with Council permission is to take them in that order and discuss them and be prepared to make a decision, Greg. Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate the work that was done on the bridge projects. I'd like to speak in support of selecting the designated team and having staff work with them to come up with appropriate documents, et cetera. I would, if staff goes into this process, like to express a couple of concerns. One is the way that that's designed, I think it's a great looking structure, but I think some functional things were overlooked, and I hope the engineers will take into consideration that, and maybe just the scale threw me off, but it appeared to me that the traffic on those bridges would be carried at a significantly higher level than the pedestrian's, and the

idea was to create this wall that would create a barrier between traffic and pedestrians and also be an art wall. I think reality tells us two things, one, that if patrolling officers going over bridges cannot see clearly all aspects of the pedestrian walkway, you may be inviting trouble on those pedestrian walkways, nobody wants to walk in a tunnel, and this would have a tunnel effect in some degree. I'd hope they would take that into consideration, the other thing, and that by creating a wall, it may become a graffiti wall if it's not easily seen by a great number of traffic folks that are going through there, so I hope we'll select the design team and ask them to work with staff on some of the functional issues on those bridges to make it land, I also would hope that the motion would include working with those folks doing the River Corridor

study so that it would be tied in together, so that the bridges in the river banks wouldn't have two structures that didn't have some kind of an integration with the river bank itself. So other than that, I don't have any concerns about selecting, I think the process was well done and should be embraced. John, before I recognize you, the vice mayor asked if there are any slides on the bridges, because anyone here, John, do you have a slide? The vice mayor was out of town when he brought in. I don't have any slides, but I have the boards over here. You have the board? The design board. Okay. You want to look at those, shall we? John? I just wanted to comment, I'm delighted that my colleague is as supportive as he indicated, but I did want to indicate that in the past, there have been one or two shirats where

everyone involved in the creation of a gorgeous, stunning and exciting river corridor from Kellogg to Seneca have compared notes and attempted to coordinate design so that it does look as if we've done this in a collaborative way. And it is my understanding and hope that those kinds of shirats may happen again or at least there will be that moment of coming together to be sure that we look as if we have planned comprehensively. So I merely echo Councilman Ferris' hope, a more than hope, desire that we continue in this fashion. And I've been led to believe by all of those folks involved that that will happen. And I think the really important piece of this is that the bridge is are being designed

and built by local teams. Would either one of you like to make the motion on 6A? Shall and do you have questions? No, 6A. Great. Why not you do this? I would move that we approve the selected design team that we instruct staff and negotiate a contract to work with the design team to make both bridges conform with the river corridor study that's being currently done and also that the, some of the functional issues that all areas of staff advisory be integrated into that so that there would not be any question between art and function and that that would then be returned to us to prove the final design.

Okay, second that motion. I keep hearing how this is going to improve which ton of hard body wants it. I've been getting quite a few calls of those who really don't want it. I would, what kind of motion I'd support would be one where there's the city pays half and the public private sources are matching type of situation. I want to see if they really, the public really does want one of these, are these type of monumental art projects. If they are, then there shouldn't be any problem raising the half the money.

And then they'll give me some indication what to do on the future projects. But I'm not sure that's the case, that's what the majority of people are even a large, even a large minority that people want. I have no indication of that. That's my feeling on this particular project. Greg. Thank you mayor. This is a project that we sat through, I believe four or five of us sat through an enormous amount of controversy some time ago. And the controversy surrounded the nature of the art. Any of you that were in attendance at that will recall that my comments were not directed at the art. I believe very strongly that art is something that you really can't vote on legislate, determine. It's almost impossible for people to decide what's good art and what's bad art, what's

good art a hundred years ago, maybe setting on a shelf somewhere and nobody recall. There is some universally accepted art that even some people don't like as well. So rather than trying to discuss art, which by the way that whole philosophy and thought is the reason why I don't support public art because when the public gets involved in financing something it shouldn't be things that really are directed where some people like it and some people don't and it's irritating and we should be focusing our efforts on things that are public safety, public streets, those types of things. I have with the bridge project we need the bridges and if we can do bridges and do them to look what some people, which is our public art advisory board, things looks extraordinary. Fine.

We're going to redo those bridges but to spend $150,000 on one part of a project that really was a million dollars more than we should have spent anyway. Most of your recall I voted against the Main Street project while I fully supported the two-way main, we went way beyond costs in my opinion of what was needed. I took these stands before I was the last election. There was no question in the mind of any of the citizens in my district how I felt and they voted for me and I'm here and I think that was part of it so I won't be changing my support. Mr. Cayman, I think your approach to public art in general should be that it would only be done on a matching basis and then we could find out if there really was this overwhelming public support for quote unquote public art. On this project however, it may be too late to go forward with that type of a strategy.

So I don't know what the rest of the council members, I won't be supporting anything on this project and I don't think it comes as a surprise for many people. As CIP it was one speaker that said that this money would reinvest it. Well if we took that $150,000 we would reinvest it in the CIP somewhere and almost all of that money is going to local companies to build local streets and projects that there are very little controversy when we do those kinds of things. We have had budget cuts in this building throughout different areas and I think that to spend $150,000 on this project does not send a good message. But I know there's some support for it. I'm not going to argue anymore about this project and it has nothing to do with the art. It has nothing to do with whether it's magnificent or not magnificent.

It has to do with public art and public art should not be financed by tax dollars because of the nature of what it is. Thank you, Craig. It's no secret that I do believe that societies and governments must in addition to caring for the physical needs of its citizens pay some small attention to their need for beauty and quality in their everyday environment. I am supportive of this project. You heard me say before that cities are not known for their shopping malls or their suburbs but really by the vitality and the image of their downtown districts. I've been fortunate enough to serve for two years at a time where dramatic changes are taking place in the downtown.

I would remind the council that many of those are not publicly supported. Many of those are similar to the investment that we heard described by two of our speakers. They have purchased buildings, are redoing them. Public dollars are flowing to the downtown area. I see that we have the opportunity to dramatically alter the image of that entire river corridor from Kellogg to Seneca in a way that I find so exciting that I talk about it all the time. This is our front door and I think that it is important and I think it's appropriate that we make the decision on what our front door is going to look like. It is our city. It is one of the charges I believe we have been given and I agree that public art should be matched by in some ways, private dollars, it's happening.

There are many pieces of sculpture in this city that have been privately donated. In fact, we accepted one valued at close to $30,000 I believe at our last meeting, a gift to the city. I do not wish to wait to collect private dollars for this gateway piece. I would like to take care of our front door immediately. I do see it as an investment. I entered St. Louis at the time of the major controversy over the arch. $30,000 were spent and certainly that investment was one of the smartest things that those public officials did and has paid back that money over and over again. I support this project and I hope that we approve it.

I think for over a year now the public art advisory board has done what we charged them with or at least what the majority of this council charged them with. We didn't say scrap the project. We said go out and do a national search and bring us a recommendation. They have done that today and I honor their work, their energy, the team that they put together, the jury was I believe a splendid jury. So I intend to support this project and I do hope we approve it and get on with fixing up that sad front door we have to look at day after day. Other Bill? Yes. I spent part of the weekend last weekend in Boulder, Colorado and I was impressed by the support in that city for public art or statuary for a wide bike paths through the city and

the very progressive nature of that city. I also went through Golden where the headquarters of Coleman is moving to and I noticed the same kind of progressive spirit there in the commitment to public art. In Dallas I've noticed a commitment to public art and to the kinds of things they do to enhance their image and we're losing a headquarters to that city as well. It seems to me that what really is going on here with these projects is this is a high level and sophisticated level of economic development and some folks who are interested in economic development don't see that. I think that if they'll look more closely they'll see that this is in fact economic development. These projects say several things about Wichita and I'm not really just talking about just the bridge project but the Gateway project to me says Wichita is a modern city that's

on the move. The Seneca and McLean project says this is a Native American city as well and I think these kinds of things give Wichita class and keep it from being in the words of Dr. Courtney Ruffin, a podunk city. If we're going to show the world that this is a city that's on the move I think we need to fund some public art. So I'm going to be voting in favor of all three of these projects. I realize we're just on A at the moment but I'm going to be supportive of those. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Greg pretty much articulated my philosophy about public art but like many people if we look at the same thing and we come up with two different opinions I'm not even going to discuss

the art part because a cabbage is pretty to me. Public art seems to me by its nature, mandated to be paid for by public money. Otherwise why would we call it public art and we're talking about private art I think these have been individual citizens by whatever they like. So it's just the way that one conceptualizes philosophically these kinds of things. I don't want all of the citizens in Wichita paying for me to paint my house. But if it was a house that housed all of Wichita's I would expect to pay a part of it. So I mean it's a matter of how we look at these things and I guess I'm trying to get to I think some of the speakers have tied together very articulately the relationship between

the economic growth and development and the quality of life of all citizens and public art. So I'm not even going to attempt to do that again. I simply think that this is a reasonable well thought out monument as they have said. That becomes hopefully peculiar to Wichita which enhances all of the things that we've all talked about. So I'm certainly going to be in support of this. Other opinions? I sense that this may be splitting out. I'm not sure at this point but I'll try and give you my appraisal of this. I've spent considerable time trying to to work through it. The dilemma for a lot of people is that they agree with both arguments and some find that

I suppose intellectually incompatible I don't and as a person who hates controversy I suppose on the surface it's kind of odd that I've presented myself for public service but I think to the degree that we can minimize controversy in this community and pull together to that degree will advance and succeed as a community and these kinds of issues naturally divide us. I think there's something to be said for the process we've gone through. I remember Greg taking the position he's taken now when we were working through the downtown plan. I don't even know how many years ago that was four or five whatever it was. It has clearly been my intention to support something like this for those years. Joan wasn't on the council end but she was very involved in being an advocate, Sheldon

was and I think he may have voiced the similar concerns. I think that this city is competing, Dr. Ruth van talked about the cities in the United States that he is familiar with that have public heart. I think it's even broader than that. I think this city is competing in a global marketplace in virtually every city and I've traveled all over the world if some of you have virtually every city that I'm familiar with that's succeeding and advancing and invests in these types of projects. In my reading of history I can't recall a time that they were probably ever popular. They probably never were in ancient Greece or Italy or Germany or anywhere else. I think people today are glad that those that preceded them set aside small amounts and

it's interesting that Greece was a topic. You know we're in the process now of trying to confront the reality of people feeling insecure in this community and we have a lot of statistical data that suggests that we shouldn't when compared to other communities but we still have to deal with perceptions because the perceptions drive an awful lot of the reality and the connection to Greece is that in ancient Greece at least my understanding of it, they spent a tremendous amount of their resources on the military, they were the world's most powerful nation, they controlled much of the then present world but they turned around and there really wasn't much worth protecting because they allowed the culture to decline the things that keep people together

and whole decline and I guess my point is that we're trying to respond to some things in this community but I think it requires a balance that I'm prepared as one of seven to make significant investments in public safety because I think it's required. I believe that the world we live in dictates that, we have demographic and sociological kinds of challenges that are pressing us in that direction but I think we also have to look at the other side of our community and if we want to be an advancing succeeding community, if we want to be a winning community among those cities that are competing to be great cities, we're going to have to offer quality features as so many of the speakers today identified correctly in my opinion. I think in many ways our city is adrift, I think it's spirit is flat and defensive and

I think we need things that lift our spirit and enable us and give us confidence that with our human resources and our financial resources, if we pull together and we're balanced in our approach, we can do truly great things as a city. Now this is a symbol and correctly $150,000 is a lot of money to me and it's a lot of money to I would think any citizen in this city and I don't think anyone takes it lightly. But I believe that the original intention was to dedicate a component, a relatively small percentage of the costs that we directed toward participating with others and reversing the decline in our core area and I think it's justified. Most of the calls I've received have been opposed to this and so I understand full well

that this is going to create that little spark that people can use to divide this. I'm going to be supporting it, I think we should continue and I think whether it be Joan or Greg or Sheldon or anyone else George, everybody believes that the time spent by our neighbors on this subject was it's a quality work product. Greg doesn't agree with the expenditure and I understand that. I have some of the same things tugging at me but I'm going to support this and it's my hope that if it passes that we'll do our best to try and convince our neighbors as to why we're doing this and as a result come out a better and more beautiful city. I know that once again the ancient Athenians had an oath of citizenship that I think in

summary said that people, all of the citizens of Athens committed to work together to leave their community better and more beautiful than they received it and I think that is a pretty noble goal for us so I hope we can minimize the controversy and move on and you know I thank you for your time, Joan. I would try a motion and let someone else say something. Are there other comments? If not I would recognize Joan for a moment. Then I would move that we approve the project and authorize a contract with Robert Rush for the gave way, please. George G. Second discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed no.

No. Sheldon, Greg. Bill. Are you a no or yes? No. Motion passes four to three with council members Gail, Cayman and Ferris in the negative. Greg. Thank you, Mayor. I won't linger on that project, that project I think had some groundwork laid that made it almost irreversible to this point. Project before us in 60 is not the case. I will tell you that you will hear the loud and long arguments against 60 if there seems to be support for this project. This is an expenditure of over estimated $200,000 for an intersection. It is a project and again I'm not going to discuss the art or any of that because to me that's irrelevant. What is relevant is the scope of the project, the need for that kind of expenditure at an intersection.

Those of you that did not have the opportunity to go through a campaign here recently should have had the opportunity to hear the comments of the citizenry on the main and Douglas intersection. Basically that was a non-controversial art design but the expenditure of capital dollars at the expense of street projects and other types of projects for a project of that limited importance. I can't argue against enough and just so the council be warned I will be making a motion to do some type of intersection improvements that we have done at other areas. If there are members of the community that want to donate public art and they want to have an Indian theme I have no problem with that. If the Indian center wants to get involved and use some of their folks to do some type of Indian art I don't have any problem with that but I will tell you that when the time

comes I will make a motion and argue loud and long against expending any city funds to do this project. I don't know that there is anyone here to speak specifically to this project. I would just say I am ambivalent about this. I like the design very much. I think the dollars are excessive at this particular time. I'm also very grateful that the previous two projects were approved so I guess I am a little conciliatory on this one. I'm wondering if there isn't a way to move on this without making a decision it's my recollection that we looked at some really fine plans for a museum corridor, a museum drive that would provide better signage, better introduction to folks for all those museums. I'm not sure exactly where that drive would end but I'm wondering if somehow we might

suggest to the public art advisory board that they hold this design and talk about other ways in which to incorporate it in that wall or in that corridor rather than placing it in the center of the intersection. We've approved evidently they have approved a design which I think is a handsome one but I'm wondering if there is not a way to use that in and about the museums that would not be as costly and if that's anything you all would entertain I'm wondering if we could not ask the public advisory board, public art advisory board to think about that because the only thing they're bringing to us today is the use of this design in an intersection. Bill, well I'd like to speak very much in favor of this project despite the offer of kind of a compromise by Councilwoman Hold.

It seems to me that the Native American community was here long before any of the rest of us got here and this is kind of a sacred site where the Indian Center is where the two rivers come together. This particular piece of art that's set in that intersection is set to be a landmark, a way to give directions to people from outside this city or to children or to anyone else. This particular design in the street is going to be quite provocative I think for a long time it's going to be something that people are going to easily find their way into the museum district and realize that this was a Native American city long before which it all grew up to be the expansive city that it is now. I'm going to want to support this project.

I would urge my fellow council members to do the same. I would be willing to wait somewhat on this if there's some way that we could re-examine the costs and see if we could bring it down. I don't see why it should cost so much to put this kind of design in. I don't see why the downtime for the intersection would have to be as long as I've seen in some of the paperwork that we've been presented with. If we want to continue to look at it, I'm in favor of that. But ultimately I'm going to come down in favor of this project very strongly. I will just tell you that I don't support it and I hope that my lack of support in a way is interpreted as lack of value toward Native Americans. I look at the previous project as a project for the whole community. Native Americans, regardless, whoever calls which attack ends as home and whoever visits

this city, has the benefit of that project. I really haven't seen anything bill that would lead me to conclude that that is justified. I really thought that what we were doing on May was something that we tried to work through as a community and while we understood that there were obviously people that didn't agree with the conclusions, the majority of the council made, that was going to be a plan that we were going to try and work through. This is a new one to me and so I don't support that. Someone had their light on and I missed it. Greg. Thank you, Mayor.

I would move that we discontinue any discussion of public art in the middle of the intersection at Seneca and McLean that we inform the public art forward of our appreciation of their efforts in that if they have any recommendations of any private art that may lead as a gateway into that area that would be fine and we would be willing to discuss that but at this time we would ask the intersection be designed compatible with other major intersections in the city. Discussion of the motion. Pat Bill. I'm sorry. When you say compatible with other intersections, you mean the lawquays be break. Well sensing that we may have lost the requisite number of votes here to pass this project, I'd like to make a substitute motion that the matter be referred back to the public art committee

with the recommendation that it be explored as to whether or not there is a way to reduce the amount of money that it would cost to put this design in place. Mr. Secretary, do you want to do a second? Yes. Discussion. Voting on the substitute motion. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Show me your hands. Those opposed? No. No. Motion fails. Four to three with council members. Gayle came in. Night. First and negative. Voting on the original motion. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? No. No. Who's voting? No. General, would you vote? No. Motion passes five to two with council members, Rodgers, and Keither and the negative. That concludes that.

I almost take a five minute break. I can vote. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . is taken in the lives of some of our citizens this past year. We've had 10 citizens die as a result of gaining violence. So I would hope that everyone on the council bench feels careful in this taking some time at 10 o'clock sharp. And I would ask Mr. Clerk that you would bring that to my attention if I'm not aware of it regardless of where we're at in the proceedings on any item. Each week we start our meetings with prayer. We think that it's important. Our council in many ways reflects our community. There's very diverse histories, faith experiences. But all of us agree that our city council and our community at large should have prayer.

We ask for prayers of restoration, healing, unity of purpose. And we probably don't say it enough, but we deeply appreciate those men and women who come over each Tuesday morning to pray on behalf of this community. This morning we have Pastor Bill Esther from West Side United Methodist Church that's here to give the invocation. We would ask all of those that feel comfortable to stand for the invocation and remain standing for the pledge of allegiance. Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. I bring you greetings from the faith communities of Wichita and all their diversity. I express my appreciation for this opportunity to share this moment of prayer and reflection with you all. Let us bow and let us be in prayer. Oh, God, creator and sustainer of all that is. And all that is to come.

We greet you this morning with thanksgiving. Thanksgiving for this a new day. Thanksgiving for the opportunities of serving you and our community that this day brings. Bless us with your presence throughout this day. As we begin this day and this time together, we can fast our wrongdoings that have clouded the days of our past. Through your grace and mercy renew us for a new day as we labor on behalf of our community called Wichita. In the midst of orange barrels and concrete and steel and finding hockey rinks in unexpected places, remind us of the human faces of our community, oh, God. Take our anger, oh, Lord, and channel its energy to change and reconciliation. Take our caring, oh, Lord, and channel its energy into acts of compassion. Be with all of us, all of us, this day, oh, God. Bless these council members and all city employees and staff.

And especially, Lord, extend your protection to those who put themselves in harm's way in our behalf, our police and fire persons. Watch over and care for us today, tomorrow, and always. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Pastor Esther. We have the council proceedings of October 10, 1995, any corrections. I move, we accept the minutes as presented. Discussion of the motion, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed, no, motion carries 5-0. We have a series of proclamations,

which I have the privilege of presenting on behalf of the city council and this community. At first, I would ask Francis Irvin and group to come forward. Hi. How are you? Thank you very much. Thank you. Morning, how are you? We have a proclamation, which reads, whereas alcohol, tobacco, and other drug abuse costs more than $1 billion annually. And whereas following nearly a decade of declining use, alcohol, tobacco, and other substance abuse among our youth is on the rise again. And whereas the Wichita-Sexwick County Red Ribbon Coalition is part of a statewide effort to provide opportunities to demonstrate a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle through the Red Ribbon Campaign. Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign will be celebrated in every Kansas community during the Red Ribbon celebration. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Bob Knight, Mayor of the City of Wichita, Kansas, do hereby proclaim October 23rd through October 31st, 1995

as Red Ribbon Week and encourage all citizens and especially parents to participate in alcohol, and other drug education and prevention activities and to make a visible statement that we are strongly committed to a drug-free community by wearing a red ribbon, symbolizing our intention to establish drug-free communities for our citizens, especially our children. Appreciate all of you coming down. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor. And we do have a football or poster to present to you on behalf of the Red Ribbon. Thank you. From our representatives. Thanks a lot, Mayor. Thanks. Thanks for all you're doing. Thank you, Mayor. D. San Filippo. I think it's very important, everyone, to have their name pronounced correctly. And I lucked out. It is D. San Filippo.

We have a very important proclamation, which reads, whereas, white ABCA, the oldest women's membership movement in the United States has a long history of empowering women and families, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, five, empowering women and families, fostering racial justice and preventing violence through 374 local member associations with programs in more than 4,000 communities in all 50 states and representing more than 1 million women, girls, and their families. And whereas, YWCA's provide a wide range of programs and services, including battered women, shelters, and counseling, childcare, support to victims of rape and sexual assault, job training, sports, and fitness opportunities, and legal advocacy. And whereas, since 1976, the YWCA Women's Crisis Center Safehouse has sheltered over 10,000 women and their children who are victims of domestic violence,

providing food, clothing, advocacy, support, and a safe haven. And whereas, the YWCA has initiated a week-long public awareness campaign, including a series of national and local forums that will inspire communities to work together to create effective alternatives to violence. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Bob Knight, Mayor of the City of Wichita, Kansas, do hereby proclaim October 15 through 21st, 1995, as the YWCA week without violence as a challenge, to all Wichita's to spend seven days without committing, condoning, or contributing to violence. We're very supportive of this, and we thank you for all you do. Thanks for coming down. Denise Moss. Morning. How you doing? Let me see.

Here's your bodyguard here. Hi. What's your name? I'm getting used to this person. I have a proclamation which reads, whereas 1995 marks the 26th year that dental hygienists, as licensed oral health care professionals, have been actively promoting oral health and preventing oral disease. And whereas, dental hygienists, as preventing specialists, contribute to the oral health of Wichita, Kansas, residents, and provide an essential service contributing to their oral health. And whereas, dental hygienists voluntarily give up of their time and effort in providing education on preventing oral health care services to special needs groups, such as the elderly, mentally and physically disabled, the underprivileged, and children. And whereas, these services are essential in the dental office, public health facilities, schools, private organizations, and research facilities to provide the best possible oral health care for all citizens. Now, therefore, bear resolve at IBOB 9.

Mayor of the city of Wichita, Kansas, to hereby for claim October, 1995, as National Dental Hygiene Month in Wichita, Kansas. And urge all citizens to recognize dental hygienists for the many-valued services they provide and to become more familiar with and appreciative of the practice of dental hygiene. Thank you for coming down. Good to see you. Mike, we'll even try that one. Dr. Howard Johnston and his group. Morning. Good to see you. We have a proclamation, again, on behalf of the Wichita City Council and the City of Wichita, Kansas, which reads, whereas we live in a world economy in an information age in which we have constant interactions

with all parts of the world. And whereas the problems of disease, terrorism, child, and woman abuse, crime, illegal drug use, war, and environmental degradation sweep across national boundaries and affect local communities. And whereas solutions to these problems must be found among the people of the world working with their local and national governments, and working also with established international agencies, such as the United Nations. And whereas the United States of America and its people led in founding the United Nations 50 years ago, and remains in a position of leadership with the United Nations. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I Bob Knight, Mayor of the City of Wichita, Kansas, do hereby proclaim October 24, 1995, as United Nations Day, and urge all Wichita's to renew our efforts to help the United Nations solve problems with increased efficiency in ways that will add to freedom, security, and quality of life for all people everywhere. Thanks to all of you for all you've done.

I know you've worked very hard on that. Thanks for coming back. We have a city council that's very active. We represent obviously many different constituencies in this community. We bring to our public service different approaches and perspectives, and many of my colleagues up here are involved regionally, nationally, as well as locally. Dr. George Rogers, who represents district number one, is that right, George? I can't keep the number straight. North East Wichita and Central Part of Wichita, George just went to a conference in New York, New Jersey. He's very involved.

It's called NBC Leo. It's a national black caucus of the local elected officials who are very proud of George's service. And I asked him to take a couple of minutes and share with the city council and the citizens of this community the results of his meeting, some of his impressions. And we're glad that you're back, George. And again, we want to express our appreciation for all you're doing in this community. And if you'd like to take a couple of minutes and share with us, I appreciate it. Thank you, man. I'd like to thank all of you for allowing me the time off. It was an exciting experience, along with many others that come out of the National League of Cities. It's one of the subcommittee caucuses that address the specific kinds of problems. NBC Leo, as Bob mentioned, are local elected officials for the National Black Caucus out of the National League of Cities.

And this particular conference was devoted to one that I think is of vital importance to all cities and that's economic development in basically in the inner city. I was extremely surprised to find local elected officials from all across the United States that are attempting to address that same kind of problem. And I can say to this council that we are moving in the correct direction if what they're saying across the country is accurate. The things that they are talking about are the things that we have implemented and are doing and are trying to promote and we're enhancing. It is basically the public-private partnership as the direction to go philosophically. It's also a comprehensive plan because, and I think we've mentioned this before, that you cannot involve yourself in economic development in inner cities

in an isolated fashion. You have to have a comprehensive plan. It also involves health, cultural activities, parks and recreation, libraries. But you must have public involvement in that and you must attempt to create ownership so that you can create a circular cash flow within these communities, all of which we're doing. The one part that I forgot that was vital was the infrastructure. You must deal with the infrastructure first. And that's the only way that you can encourage private businesses and even public operations to go into areas that we're talking about. And I was additionally gratified when I looked through North New Jersey and New York, New Brunswick, some of the other surrounding towns. We have an awful lot of needs to be addressed

in the city of Wichita. But we're so far ahead of the kind of concerns and dilemmas and problems that other cities have. That I think we all need to sometimes cut out all the caustic venomous kinds of dialogue that we have about some things and simply discuss them and objectively come up with a way to solve them. Because we have the possibility of a level of a quality of life in this city that most cities couldn't even imagine. And so I'm very gratified that this council has all of us involved in different areas. And I just want you to know that the rest of the country would be envious if they do with all of the kinds of things that are taking place here and how the quality of life

is being enhanced so dramatically. Well, George, I just want to mention once again, it's nothing novel to my understanding because I'm reminded of it daily by phone calls. But I think this city is very fortunate to have your leadership. I'm talking about the whole community, the surrounding region, the state. And I grow an appreciation of it each week as I do in my appreciation of my colleagues. I think there is such a reservoir of experience and goodwill on this council. And I do appreciate it. I'm thankful for the fact that we can have deeply differing opinions on some subjects and hopefully disagree in a civil way and try to work together. But I think your leadership is simply valuable and I appreciate it, thanks for giving us a report.

We have a public agenda which provides an opportunity for citizens to address the council on matters of importance to them. And we have the benefit this morning, appearing from Mr. Dan Rouser, who's on the museum board. And he has some comments he wants to share with the council. Welcome to City Council, Dan. Thank you, Mayor. Honorable members of the commission, Mr. Manager, staff, and as important as that, citizens, which stuff. I would ask that you speak in the microphone, children, and I, and you might fight climate on YouTube. We are not hearing as well as we should. Oh, I'm of an age where I have the same problem. My name is Dan Rouser. I serve as a trustee at your museum. It's our museum, actually. And I'm here to talk to you about art. It's a topic much to discuss these days.

And I'm here to talk to you about a piece of public art, one which, as we speak, is probably being taken off of the truck by the Dunlinger people at the museum and being put up in front of the museum. A number of people at the museum, George Palmer and Starch, myself, a number of other people have been out in the community talking about this for the last several months. We have decided that, unlike a hockey rank, it wouldn't be a good idea to just have a large piece of public art appear overnight in front of the museum. So we have spoken to CPO's, neighborhood organizations, everything from the Chamber to Kwanis, anybody would hear us. And we have given a three-part message. And that is that we are putting up a major important work of American sculpture at the museum. Actually, there are two works involved in this, that it is by a local boy who made good, a man named Tom

Otterness. And you may have read about some of this in the paper already. And the third point that we've made very clearly is that there is no tax money involved. And in fact, when I was telling Tom about this, he thought about that a minute and said, well, maybe I should just change the title of the piece to no tax money involved. But we've decided to stick with the original title, which is Dreamers Awake. And most of my surprise, when we set out on this business of inoculating the community against the disease of ignorance, we thought that it would probably be a tough sell. And I've been very pleasantly surprised to find that most people, once they have the information in hand, and once they understand what it is that the museum is doing, don't have much of a problem with it. And we've been very well received by a number of these people. And people have come by the museum. One piece of this sculpture is already in place. That is a piece called The Tables.

It's three large picnic tables that are inside the museum upstairs. On the tables are a profusion of small figures. These are figures that are engaged in all sorts of human activity. And it's basically, and in large part, this is a piece of sculpture about the battle between good and evil. This is a traditional topic. It's a traditional topic in American discourse. It's been a traditional topic in rural civilization discourse, for as long as men and women have been on the planet. We've dealt with these problems. Tom deals with him in a way that is sometimes quite humorous and sometimes quite serious. And we have been so impressed with this local boy's work. He was a local boy who left here that we elected to put some of the museum's private resources into acquiring one of these works. And in talking about this, we've talked about three important dates. One was 60 years ago when Louise called Elmerdoch made a deal with the city and said, I'll buy you an art

collection if you'll take care of it. And she did a very nice job of buying an art collection. And the city has done a very nice job of taking care of it. And most people don't realize that the largest patron of the Wichita Museum year after year is the city of Wichita. The second date is 1970. And that's the date that Tom Otterness graduated from Southeast High School and promptly left town to seek fame and fortune in the larger world. And he has achieved that in the capitals of Europe and major cities in this country, the name Tom Otterness, as well known. If you live in New York, you're probably familiar with some of his pieces of public sculpture. They're all over the city of New York. His family still lives here. His mother's lived here. Gernette Otterness has lived here all over life. And we're happy to welcome Tom back. And he's happy to be back in the city where he was born. The third date is 1985.

And on that date, a woman named Bernita Adair, who was a wonderfully flamboyant supporter of the arts of funny, amusing, very alive woman, unfortunately passed away. And in her will, she said, she made a deal with the city as well. She said, I'm going to give you the money to buy art. But you can't spend the money. You can only spend the interest. So that money's invested in over an interest. And the interest from the million dollars that she gave us, which was a pretty significant gift, is now the money that we use to buy art. And in fact, that's that and some other money that's been given over the years to the museum. Some other private funds are the only funds we have to buy art for the citizens of which time. We do not use tax money to buy art. So how did those three dates come together? Well, we're using Bernita Adair's money to buy work by Tom Otterness to put in the museum's collection to continue this deal that was made with what we call the Murdoch. Why am I here today?

I'm here to tell you what we're doing and to tell you that you're probably going to get some phone calls about this work of art. Be quite frank with you. It's a difficult image. The tables inside are not particularly difficult. Kids love them. We've had already had classes walk over from Horace Man and sit at the tables and do a writing project on what they saw at the table. Kids just love this piece. One of the pieces on the tables is a large female figure, which is really meant to be a universal human figure. And we have made costs to be cast in a family in New York, a 15-foot tall version of that in bronze. It is large piece. It will be placed in front of the museum in the material that you've been given there. You'll see this image. And I would encourage you, in fact, after this meeting, that piece of sculpture will probably be either laying on the ground or about to be placed up

right in front of the museum. And I would encourage you to drop by after the meeting and meet the artist and take a look at this piece of work. Why do I need to tell you that you're going to get some phone calls? I think that's fairly obvious. Public sculpture has become an object of debate in this town. I think that the message that we have about this work that we're putting up in front of the museum is a message that, as it was when I spoke to people in the community, it's a message that people will understand. Once people have information, they're much less likely to fall into the traps of ignorance. And that is why we're speaking to you today. Also, I would inform you that in connection with this, beginning today and through January, there will be at all three museums in the city of Wichita, exhibits concerning the human figure in American art.

This, do I need another five minutes here, by exceeded five minutes, two, three? I move that we allow Mr. Rouse or three minutes to conclude his remarks. Discussion? All those in favor signify for saying that? Opposed, no, motion carries. Six zebra. Thank you. I've never been able to be as cogent as I should be. The significant thing about having a show at all three museums in the cities that it's never been done before, or a city of 300,000 people, that means we have one art museum for every 100,000 occupants in the city of Wichita. In the 20 or 30 years that we've had these three museums, never once have all three institutions collaborated on an exhibit. And now, because of the last two directors, the Wichita Art Museum, your department heads, who reached out to these other institutions, and because there are intelligent articulate directors

at the other institutions, they said, look, this is silly that we're not doing joint ventures. In fact, we're now exchanging lists of all the works of art that we have at the three museums so that we can have joint shows so that we can do things to benefit the citizens of Wichita by combining the resources of all three institutions. This, unfortunately, and believe it or not, is a major step forward. And it's one that I think could, with continuing support, be a major source of cultural activity in the city, one that has unfortunately just not existed in the past. So what we did with all of these community groups, and what I'm asking you to do is to spread the word about this, tell people, when you get the phone call about what the heck are they doing over there at the museum, you can say they're putting up an important work of American art, it's by a local boy. We didn't spend your tax money on it.

And it's an important work of art because it's a difficult work of art. I recently went through the Project Beauty handbook that portrays all the public art in Wichita. And I was amazed to find how many pieces there are in there that are abstract, which is usually one of the things that sets people off. And how many works there are in there that actually have some potential for difficulty? Wichita actually has a very large and significant collection of public art, many of which works are in the category that could be called difficult. I thought I was amazed by that. And what it says to me is that there is no such thing as safe public art. I've heard just the other night at the Wichita Symphony. I heard a member of this council who very much supports the tri-podal. And a few minutes later, I turned around and was talking to his wife. And she was telling me how much she hated the tri-podal. She had it in the smartest people.

Oh, I shouldn't have thought of that. Even Gino Salerno has detractors. Even Gino Salerno deals with difficult issues. His teenage pregnancy piece. Most people don't think that Gino is going to be a tough artist to deal with. Some I hear people who don't like the wheat stocks in the front of City Hall. I hear other people who, you know, when keeper of the plains was first put up, there were people who said, my gosh, what have you done? What kind of image is that? So we trust that some day, dreamers awake, which is the title of the piece in front of the museum, will be as well known as the keeper of the plains. And I note that our state flag and our state motto is and uses the word difficulty. And I thought about that a minute and thought, and Gino, we don't have a city motto. So maybe I'll come down here one of these weeks with a proclamation to make dreamers awake for City motto. I thank you for your time,

and I'd be happy to answer any questions there. Thank you, I'm a little not so much disappointed and disgusted that you betrayed my confidence from Saturday night. Being a good friend, I guess it shouldn't surprise me. I do love the tri-podal. Sheldon, can this be viewed from the river drive? Yes, it can. Then you really have three things going forth, I think, are great. First, it'll be viewed by many people. Second, it's a local artist to understand. And third, there's no tax money used, right? Right. I don't see how I can miss them. I'm sure, thank you. I appreciate it what they're doing down there. Well, thank you. I appreciate, Dan, all you've done over the years in this community. Generally, very quietly. I appreciate you coming down here this morning. And finally, I appreciate you being such a good patient friend with me and bringing me along slowly in my lack of sufficient appreciation for a lot of the good things in life

that you're a very valued citizen. I appreciate what you've done. Well, thank you all very much. Mr. Clerk, would you call item 1A? Proposed contracting of street sweeping services? Mr. Manager, Greg called in with a request that we defer this matter until his arrival. So with the concurrence of council, I would go on item number 2 if that's all right with everything. Item number 2, Mr. Clerk. Hearing on proposed assessment for construction of water and sewer projects, morning, Mike. Morning. No action needs to be taken today on these items. Under water items B and C, we'll notice a public hearing will be given to people for next week. And the other two items will be the following week. Thank you. Item number 3, Mr. Clerk. Condemnation review for 27 East Lewis. Morning, Kurt. Morning, Mayor of City Council.

Kurt Shrutter, Superintendent of Central Inspection. Property at 427 East Lewis was before you back in August. It's a large apartment building. It has 24 units in it. At that time, you voted to continue with the condemnation proceedings. Since that time, we have had an asbestos survey done in sampling. It costs $685. It's taken bids for remediation, which are in. It costs $5,585 in a rate of proceed to tear down the building. There was a purchaser at the tax sale in August 23. They have submitted a letter requesting the extension of time. They have agreed that they will secure the building, do some temporary repairs of the building immediately. In fact, they were out there yesterday doing some board-up work and cleanup work on the property, although they do not yet have a deed from the county.

They would like, they have asked in their letter for 120 days to come back to your report if they secure it and keep it maintained, to come back to your report on it in 120 days as to their financing and the total rehab of this building. We have recommended that they proceed to clean up the property immediately, board all the lower windows and doors, which they're working on now, and recommended 60 days for them to come back and report to you on their progress on obtaining loan and financing for this project. Joan, I want to recognize you, but Sheldon, who's a question at first. There's David. This building is one of two buildings that are identical side by side. What's the, what's the fate of the other one? Is it up for condemnation, too? It has also been condemned and has been, it's ready to have the asbestos remediated and then proceed to condemnation. Different ownership on that building. But it is going to be torn down now?

Yes, I see. Thank you. This is in Council Member Cole's district and I would be very interested in her thoughts on this, ma'am. Those contract purchases are the tax proposal purchases are here, like to ask them questions. Thank you, Mayor. I certainly came prepared today to support the recommendation of Mr. Schroeder and staff. That has been our normal procedure. I want to be very clear that you're suggesting the two weeks to secure the structure and clean it. And then if that is done, the additional 60 days, that's the way the green sheet is written. Is that, is that, am I understanding that correctly? I don't really see anything here that to me suggests enough different than other situations to allow an additional 60 days beyond the two weeks and the first 60 days.

So that would be my motion and I'm ready to make that unless there's reason not to do so. Is there anyone here that wants to be heard on this item at 427 East Lewis, if I'm not, I would recognize Council Member Cole for a motion. Then I would move to allow two weeks to secure the structure and clean the premises of all debris. If that is done, then I would move to grant an additional 60 days to make both temporary repairs and bring a plan for complete rehab of the structure back to the council. Second discussion, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Close no, motion carries 6-0. I'm sure that the owners will be fully briefed on this right away. They are here, but they're agreeable. Item number four, Mr. Clerk. Thank you. Thank you. Agreement for use of city facility for roller hockey rink. Mr. Manning.

Mr. Mayor, a member of city council, this item was deferred from the last week's council meeting to grant additional time to meet with the representatives of the hockey association pertaining to a lease agreement which would allow the hockey association activities to continue to use the water reservoir in behind the Hess pumping station. The agreement over the past week has been modified slightly from that submitted to the council on October 10th. And essentially the highlights of this lease agreement that's before you today for consideration provides that there will be $300 a month lease charges to the hockey association together with $100 a month deposit to offset the payment of taxes for the property. And in lieu of a $10,000 performance bond,

staff is recommending along with the agreement of the hockey association that the $100 a month guarantee for repairs, extra account be raised from $100 to $200 in lieu of a $10,000 performance bond. The city assistant city attorney Doug Moser was instrumental in negotiating this agreement and is available to respond any direct questions the council may have. So, is the principal here, I have some questions, I ask. Mr. Cody here, would you come forward, please? Welcome to the city council. Let's go to the city again. Shall I? Okay, the performance bond, why was that change made? Basically because the performance bond,

our insurance carriers had looked into obtaining a performance bond for organization, but because of the size of our organization and the lack of deep financial strength, we would have to meet that bond almost dollar for dollar. So, basically we would have to trade $10,000 with our insurance company to get a $10,000 bond. In other words, if damage was done to the structure, they felt that you couldn't meet the performance bond. No, any damage that would be done to the structure is covered in the insurance policy that has been, okay. Launch waiters is a second, but Chris, what is the performance bond? What was the reason for that read and recommend in the first place? Perform what? Just to guarantee all that all our repairs and the provisions of the agreement are adhered to the correct answer. Well, okay, let me get back to this then. If there's damage to the roller rank, to the ice, to the reservoir, under this lease that we're talking about,

who's responsible then? Because the city responsible, like if we collect a couple hundred dollars in the first couple months, $400, I would like to ask legal counsel to respond. Don't go away though, I guess I have the questions. Doug Moser from the Law Department. Under the agreement, the central inline hockey league is responsible for any of that damage. One of the problems, as Mr. Cody said, is they're not a very deep pocket. They're a soon to become a charitable organization and they don't have any assets to speak of. So, in order to make that a meaningful promise on their part that they would make good any damages, we ask to have a performance bond, which would essentially provide $10,000 worth of security behind their promise. The proposal now, based on Mr. Cody's inability to get that without having to essentially put up that amount of money, is to accumulate in essence a sinking fund over the term of the lease

in the amount of $200 a month to apply to that. If I'm understanding your question, in the event that we had a fund of, for example, $1,500 at some point and they caused $3,000 worth of damage, they would still be obligated to the city for the additional $1,500. That would, however, not have any security behind it and we would have recourse against the Central Inline Hockey League to the extent that they had money or assets to collect. And the Central Inline Hockey League, what do they consist of? I'm not sure, I know what's the financial background of it or how they do. Well, we are a youth hockey organization, primarily youth, we don't have any adult leagues. We have been an organization now for, this is going into our fourth season. So, it's basically a legal, that's a local outfit, something. Right. This $200, are we just going to, we can't take out an insurance policy on the reservoir with the $200 ourselves, can we?

Or, I mean, what do we, you know, I guess, well, $200 is really a pretty pittance as far as any damage it might be done to the reservoir and my estimation. It's, if we could buy insurance ourselves or how would, we just, it's self-insured, in other words, in other words, right, at this time? Point, yes. And what, what a reservoir, you're talking about it pretty, if there was, well, have we examined any of the work that's been done to it to see how deep they drilled and all that sort of stuff? We have examined the work and came up with approximate costs of what it's going to take to seal those holes, fill and seal the holes. We have not taken out any of the bolts to determine depth. I might add there, while this does not provide absolute protection to the city, we were taking the cues from the council that this represents a youth activity and the city had a facility and was trying to accommodate

the youth hockey and the youth recreational aspects as best we can, but still trying to provide for some protection to the city to offset some of the direct costs of the city like the taxes will have to be paid. We did not attempt and we reason why we agreed on the deletion of performance bond is that the hockey association is performing a recreational need for the city and we're just trying to accommodate them. And so we felt what we were asking for was within their ability to pay. Okay, then in other words, what we're saying really is, I don't really, if we're talking about a youth activity that's fine, as long as we have the proper costs and figures involved, the $200 a month is really a pittance compared to what the damage would be. I really feel that we need a little bit more information as to what the extent of the damage could be.

So this, if there was damage, the $200 is negligible. It's just what could possibly happen and I don't know what could happen. I know that the reservoir is quite an expensive thing but I don't know how it would break down. Let me ask you some other questions too. Is this role or rank bigger or smaller than the one you had previously in the private facility that you had previously? It's about 10 feet longer and there's not much bigger. No, sir. Okay, what was the rent you were paying on the private facility before? Well, when we had the private facility, we had twice as many participants in our program. Since we've moved outdoors, there's another league that's opened up out towards the Goddard area. Our, it's dropped down tremendously. Originally, the agreement that we had gotten into was based on an ability to pay because the property had been vacated for as many as 10 years. So the original agreement was a $3,000 a month lease. We then negotiated that lease to $1,500 a month

and like I say, this size of our league then was almost twice as what it was at this point. So you're going down from $1,500 a month to $300 a month? Right. Were you paying any other things like insurance property tax? Yes, we were. On top of the regular rent fee. I got two problems with that. You know, I have no problem as far as the youth type situation. But I have a problem. The way the lease is really set up. It's really, you got to miss a pretty good deal for you. I think, I saw your interview in the paper where you had doubts. If I was in your shoes and I was paying $3,000 or $1,500 before plus a bunch of other expenses and you got offered $300 plus some other expenses, I would think it'd be a windfall. I don't know what your hesitation was. Certainly it's a good purpose to have a youth facility

this sort. But the taxpayers are putting the bill and if there's any damage to the structure, I think we need to look at that further and also if I think the rent is a little bit low considering what he was paying before. We're using, I don't want to have a bad deal for the taxpayers when I'm up here for representing them. If we're going to allow, I have no problem with the youth aspect. I have no problem with the youth aspect going to bowl. I have no problem if we set up basketball courts, tennis courts, whatever. But I think we need to know what we're getting into as far as the maintenance. And I think the least pavements are quite low considering what he was paying before. Mr. Manager, I think you've clearly followed my preferences. Maybe others on the council don't believe that you have. I think what we're trying to do is strengthen quality recreational options for citizens of this community,

primarily younger people. If there is a litany of criticism concerning the city from young people, it's what do we have to do? I think it ought to be inexpensive. And I assume that there's going to be some oversight by people from the water department. I mean, just if nothing more than a casual review of the condition of the property. Now, this property was parking before? The property was just a grass area, then we constructed a nine to 10 million gallon reservoir. I understand that. But what are they used for? And then put a surface parking. I mean, it was used for parking. You know, I've had criticism launched against me because they say it's unfair to other businesses. I don't believe that that's a compelling argument.

I want, you know, I am sorry that it happened, the way that it happened, but that's being addressed. And I really hope that this council doesn't place so many restrictions and conditions on this that it's impossible for this to continue. This really isn't a big deal. And it's consuming an awful lot of time up here, quite frankly, on a matter that doesn't warrant that much time in my judgment. George? Yeah, thank you. I guess what you and Sheldon both have said is, you know, it's a reason I'm not really concerned about what the least price is because, as you said, that's offset with the community benefit. And when I look at this, I guess I think in terms of what has already been done and the impact of that, and I just don't know.

I mean, I don't know how deep the boats went, and if they would go through to the reservoir, if they rusted with that contaminate the water, and would you get sea beach down this, I just don't know those things. And I'm willing to accept the water department's recommendation if they have one on what the impact of those kinds of things would be, because it seems to be if that reservoir was contaminated, it would be substantial. But I would like to know that before I voted for it, I'm not really concerned about the least price and all that. Bill, can you? Well, I'd just like to say that I appreciate your efforts on this. It doesn't concern me a bit that we have a rink of some kind there. This thing's been apart in a lot anyway. If the cars don't damage it, I can't see how somebody's wheels on their roller skates are going to cause problem for it. The only thing that I can see could ever cause problem is some kind of grilling. And it was unfortunate that that was done and not proved first. But I can't hardly imagine that there

would be much of a problem like this. And I just, I think we ought to proceed with this. And I appreciate your forging head with it, Mr. Manager. Joan, we have two minutes now. We're going to take a break, but you're in there. OK, I want to be sure we're talking 300 rent and 200 in lieu of the performance bond for a total of 500 a month. Is that what we're? Total of six. 300 for the rent. 200 for an escrow repair account and 104 taxes. Is this a lease to be negotiated annually? It would be, it could be extended our canceled annually. But are we making the decision today to do it on an annual basis, or is that something we need to discuss? You have to prove the lease. The lease in it has a provision that it can continue as to mutual agreement. Thank you. Well, I would say that I'm certainly willing and ready to support this. I think this is the group that is making the good faith effort to deal with a performance bond that they simply are not able to acquire.

I've worked with nonprofit organizations. And I know how difficult that is. I'm really, I go over there. I've watched this group. I do believe what we've heard today, that their change has changed forever. You You

You You You

You