Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Development District topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leawood schedules public hearing on East Village TDD; resolution passes 4‑2
Summary
The council adopted a resolution to set a Nov. 17 public hearing on a proposed East Village Transportation Development District (TDD) and the possible levy of a 1% TDD sales tax; the resolution passed 4‑2 with Dr. Castor and Councilmember Harrison voting no.
Get email alerts on the Transportation Development District topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Leawood City Council voted 4‑2 to adopt a resolution scheduling a public hearing on Nov. 17 regarding the advisability of creating the East Village Transportation Development District and the city’s intent to consider levying a transportation development district sales tax.
Kevin Wimpey, bond counsel with Gilmore & Bell, told the council the procedural step before the body is adoption of a resolution to schedule a public hearing; the clerk and staff would then provide statutory notice, mailings to property owners and newspaper publications. Wimpey said a subsequent ordinance at the Nov. 17 meeting would, if proposed then, establish the district and could impose the requested 1% TDD sales tax. He said the governing body retains discretion at every step to approve or deny the proposal.
Councilmembers asked whether the statute requires a public hearing and whether the council could decline to hold a hearing. Wimpey said the statute requires adoption of a resolution to set a public hearing as the first procedural step for a TDD proceeding, but that the governing body is not obligated to approve a request and—if it declines tonight—an applicant could submit a new petition later.
Councilmember Harrison asked whether negotiated terms (for example a lower rate or shorter term) could be offered; Wimpey said any bargaining would be coordinated between staff and the developer ahead of the November hearing and presented to the council at that meeting.
Alan Sunkle moved to approve the resolution; Mr. Sippel seconded. When the council voted, Dr. Castor and Councilmember Harrison voted no; the resolution was adopted on a 4‑2 vote.
The resolution only schedules the public hearing and does not approve the petition, tax or development agreement. The record notes the public hearing will be held Nov. 17 at 7 p.m., and staff and bond counsel said an ordinance and a development agreement would accompany any eventual levy proposal for council consideration.

