Great Bend City Council meeting at a glance
Here is quick look at what Great Bend City Council did Monday night:
• Approved an incentive to encourage Great Bend city water customers to return the Lead and Copper Pipe Questionnaire. This is a $25 credit on the utility bills of those with active accounts who complete and return the questionnaire by the Aug. 31 deadline.
Those who miss the deadline are not eligible.
The survey is on the city’s website and will also be mailed to all active account holders, said Public Works Director Jason Cauley.
This is necessitated by new revisions to the lead and copper rule that have been implemented nationwide, Cauley said. The City of Great Bend is required by the Environmental Protection Agency and Kansas Department of Health and Environment to survey its system for the presence of lead service lines. This mandate requires all cities to inventory — and ultimately replace — all lead pipes.
As the survey dictates, the city will come up with plans to replace lines. This includes those that are the property owner’s responsibility.
• Accepted the 2022 city audit after a report from Sean Gordon with Gordon CPAs. The audit received an “unmodified opinion,” he said.
“That is the highest and cleanest opinion we can issue,” Gordon said. “That reflects very well on the financial internal control management of the city.”
• Approved a conditional use permit for an RV park at 833 10th St. as requested by Kyle Walter. The Planning Commission considered the matter at its April 24 meeting and recommended approval, said Interim City Administrator Logan Burns.
• Adopted an ordinance regulating signs, awnings, canopies and marquees.
This is an effort to consolidate all information regarding signs and adding definitions and language to come up to date on our regulations, Burns said. There are no major changes to this ordinance that would affect business owners.
• Adopted an ordinance regulating fences, walls and hedges.
The existing ordinance has been untouched for many years, and this is an effort to bring the information up to date, said Interim City Administrator Burns. The information went before the Planning Commission April 24 for informative purposes and, though it did not require a motion from the Planning Commission, they were in favor of the changes.
The biggest changes concern the language in the front yard for corner lots where fences would now be allowed to come out to and along the non-address property line.
They also added language for double frontage lots where there are currently fences in town and are not address, as well as in preparation for Amber Meadows to be developed along 24th Street.
The remaining information in the ordinance was cleaned up for language and references that do not exist anymore.
• Approved offering gym memberships for city employees to Club 1 Fitness via payroll deduction, but they can only sign up as new hires or during the city’s annual open enrollment period. The city had been paying for the memberships for two years, but this was not well utilized by city personnel, Human Resources Director Randy Keasling said.
Employees will also be made aware of other fitness facility options, but payroll deductions will not be available.
Employees are responsible for the entire cost of the memberships.
• Heard a report from Interim City Administrator Logan Burns. He focused on the Justice Center, splash pad and skate park projects.
• Heard a report from Christina Hayes, Convention and Visitors Bureau director and community coordinator. She focused on the importance of National Tourism Week and tourism’s value locally, as well as June Jaunt.
• Approved a one-day cereal malt beverage license for Greg King with the Sunflower Shrine Club to operate beer garden during June Jaunt on June 3 in Jack Kilby Square.
• Approved a host of permissions for the Great Race which will have a lunch stop in Great Bend June 30 at Brit Spaugh Park.
• Approved abatements for trash and refuse violations at: 1202 Morphy St., Loretta and Billy Byington; 2402 24th St., Timothy and Kathleen Williams; 321 Fruit St., Baulilio and Manuela Hernandez; 2013 Hubbard St., Marleen Davison; 819 Adams St., Tony C. Jones; 400 Dogwood St., Margarito and Epifania Muniz; and 910 Stone St., Uno and Margarita Guerrero.
• Approved abatements for motor vehicle violations at: 1523 Lakin Ave., Gustavo and Judith Prieto; 1400 12th St., Carolyn Stacey Farris; 2541 7th St., Thomas and Lynda Vandermeer; 2527 7th St., Justin L Schartz; 1429 2nd St., Uno and Margarita Guerrero; 442 Dogwood St., Samantha Naab; 228 Maple St., Magdalena Carrasco; 301 3rd St., Ricardo Fabela; 1309 Hubbard St., Yadira Sorcini.
A large number of Great Bend residents flocked to the City Council meeting Monday night, supporting the idea of raising chickens within the city limits, as well as voicing their frustration with what they called a vague ordinance governing backyard fowl.
However, not all on the council were keen to the idea that arose during the public comment section of the City Hall meeting. No action could be taken, but it will be on the agenda June 5.
“Dear Council members of Great Bend, you have a problem and I have a solution for you,” said Kathryn Schaffner. “The valuable resource of time for the police officers, Humane Society and code department is being squandered due to a poorly written ordinance.
“There are far too many 911 calls and far too few police officers to deal with ambiguous code regarding backyard hens in an agricultural community,” she said. “There are many law-abiding citizens of Great Bend who have backyard flocks. They have read the law and found no prohibition to them.”
She said the ordinance as written does not explicitly deny backyard fowl. And, codes, in three other places, also regulate what can and can’t be done with chickens within the city limits.
These codes acknowledged chickens are allowed as long as they are contained within the owner’s premises, she said. City officials she’s talked to agreed the ordinance verbiage is unclear.
“Law-abiding citizens who read the code prior before purchasing their chickens are being threatened with removal of chickens or misdemeanors equivalent to a DUI,” Schaffner said. “Many other citizens who want to own chickens are under the false impression that they are illegal.
“Exploding food costs, notably recently of eggs, have only increased this desire,” she said. Many other Kansas cities, like Wichita, Overland Park, Topeka, Gardner and others allow chickens.
She said the Tractor Store in Great Bend estimated 110 to 150 Great Bend residents purchased chickens this year at minimum of four per person. “With all the chicks that have been purchased this spring at local farm stores, the best solution for the City of Great Bend is to clarify the poorly worded code.
“Your citizens are simply trying to use their resources, the land, to provide sustainable protein for their families,” Schaffner said. “Your solution can be simple.”
She sat down to a round of applause from others supporting the idea.
Not all favor chickens in town
But, “I’ve had quite a few calls about this and quite a few citizens are not in favor of having chickens within the city,” said Ward 2 Councilwoman Jolene Biggs. “So I’d like to see us put this on the agenda for our next meeting. And I personally would like to see (City Attorney Allen Glendenning) put together an ordinance to not allow chickens within the city limits.”
Alan Moeder, Ward 1 councilman, said he wanted to see ordinances from other communities.
“I was just thinking on the way here about the economy in general, about what’s going on right now,” said Mark Presson, speaking in support of Schaffner. “Great Bend is not a top tier economy. Some of the people are having a really hard time, especially just putting food on the table. And I’m thinking about common sense here.
“If people want to augment their food stores with some chickens, why should we say no? That’s ridiculous.”
But, Biggs said people don’t always obey common sense. There are plenty of pet owners who let their dogs run at large, and that is against city codes.
“So even though many people would do exactly what the rules say, there are many people who do not,” she said. “And I certainly don’t want chickens running in the house next door to me, loose, and having to call all the time and try to get that taken care of. So that’s my concern.”
Others supporting idea said raising chickens also provide a learning experience for children. And, some were concerned about the unequal enforcement of the ordinance as it is now.
