[0:00] All right, I've got six o'clock. We'll
call the meeting to order. Please call a
[0:04] roll.
>> Hammer
[0:06] » here.
>> Hampton
[0:07] » here.
>> O Kelly here.
[0:08] » Morman
>> here.
[0:12] » Here. Angstrom
>> here.
[0:16] » All right. Number two, approval of
agenda.
[0:18] » Any changes, your honor?
>> No changes.
[0:20] » Move to approve.
>> Second.
[0:23] » Call roll.
>> Henson.
[0:26] » Yes.
>> Kelly.
[0:27] » Yes.
>> Mormon.
[0:29] » Yes. Lson,
>> yes.
[0:30] » Angstrom,
>> yes.
[0:31] » Hammer,
>> yes.
[0:34] » And number three, presentation of
petitions and other communications a
[0:39] public hearing to review an application
for state revolving funds, SRF loan, and
[0:44] uh and to make available to the public
the contents of an environmental
[0:50] informationational or information
document and the city's project plan
[0:54] water expansion.
Are there any written comments? Yes,
[1:01] » you'd like to read those.
[1:08] » There is a total of four questions.
There are some graphs and things on
[1:13] here, but
you have to bear with us here. A legal
[1:17] limit versus health limit. The EPA
standards of 10 milligrams per liter was
[1:22] established in 1962 exclusively to
prevent acute blue baby syndrome in
[1:28] infants under six months. Extensive
medical research links long-term
[1:33] drinking water nitrate exposure at
levels as low as 3 to 5 milligrams per
[1:38] liter to significantly increase risk of
colon cholesterol cancer, thyroid
[1:44] disease, and birth defects. Why is the
city settling for just staying under the
[1:49] legal ceiling rather than aiming for a
health protective target below 5
[1:55] milligrams per liter?
[2:04] » Go on.
>> That's the question. That's the question
[2:08] is is why is the city settling for
staying under the legal ceiling rather
[2:13] than the aiming for health protective
target below 5 milligrams per liter?
[2:18] Well, currently um the test results have
been coming in around 2 to three
[2:22] milligrams per liter. So, uh currently
our our nitrate levels are below the
[2:28] five
>> and and we do shoot for as low as we can
[2:32] possibly get. It's not like we're just
shooting to stay around eight or nine.
[2:36] We're shooting for as low as we can get
them. So,
[2:40] » uh, what target nitrate concentrates in
milligrams per liter will the city
[2:44] guaranteed at the tap once Daisy is
operational? Will levels be kept
[2:50] consistently below a safer threshold
like 3 to 5 milligrams per liter or
[2:55] allowed to float near the legal 10
milligrams per liter limit during peak
[3:01] spring runoff.
[3:06] I don't know how we can guarantee that.
>> Yeah, I don't either. Um, you know, all
[3:12] cities struggle in Iowa struggle with
this. Um, we do our best in blending the
[3:19] water. Um,
we don't know for sure what Daisy's
[3:23] going to cause. We are going to put a
new well in uh to help offset the
[3:28] nitrate levels. Um we expect that they
will stay within the same range that we
[3:33] have been um seeing. Um we have looked
at alternatives in in treating the water
[3:42] um if if that is necessary.
[3:47] » Um
>> we also talked about putting on CIP,
[3:50] right?
>> Right.
[3:51] » That nitrate system on CIP. Yep.
>> So and that's coming up shortly. Y uh
[3:59] many states trigger mandatory
intervention when nitrates reach 3 to 5
[4:05] milligrams per liter. Given that Boon's
raw raw water regularly pushes 6 to9
[4:10] milligrams per liter, why is well
blending treated as a permanent strategy
[4:16] instead of setting a lower finished
water target?
[4:22] I think if you look across the state of
Iowa, you'll find that most um water
[4:27] plants are using the blended method um
along with the RO system.
[4:35] Since Daisy's 1.4 for MGD demand focuses
high nitrate walls to run continuously.
[4:43] How will the city prevent finished tap
water from spiking higher than it
[4:47] currently does during peak May through
July runoff events?
[4:57] I think I think that well number 30 is
is our solution to that. I'm not quite
[5:01] sure I understand that question
>> and we the city doesn't control runoff
[5:07] so I yeah I don't
>> that's a tough one so
[5:15] » um
well uh well second set of questions
[5:20] well number 30 and the aluvial aquifer
risks
[5:25] site specific draw down proof aluvial
wells draw directly from riverbank
[5:30] infiltration.
What hydraological
[5:35] modeling process modeling proves well
number 30 can pump continuously without
[5:40] pulling in surrounding high nitrate
groundwater during high flow spring
[5:44] months.
[5:48] » Do you want to
>> Yeah. No, no modeling was done
[5:52] performance. Something we can easily
look into, but that wasn't something we
[5:55] were contracted to look into. This is
well number 30 is in the area of your
[6:00] well number 27. It should result in
similar pulling of low nitrate water. If
[6:07] you would experience high nitrates at
well number 30, I would expect you to
[6:11] experience high nitrates at well number
27. It's in the same general area which
[6:16] then with the blending process you're
using gets into
[6:22] what after the supply and using that
blending. How high are we actually
[6:26] talking with these numbers for what gets
supplied to the city?
[6:31] » Public data. Page one of the EID notes.
The city regularly runs seven of its 14
[6:37] wells. Where can the public access
historical individual nitrate test
[6:42] results for each specific well rather
rather than just monthly averages of the
[6:47] combined wells? How high are the nitrate
levels in in the high wells? uh US water
[6:54] would be able to provide those to you.
[6:58] Uh page three admits well number 30 is
being dug specifically to provide low
[7:04] nitrate dil dilution water.
What is the emergency backup plan if
[7:09] well number 30 own nitrate levels rise
during a high runoff season?
[7:20] » The blending limit difference. Oh yeah,
>> other wells. That's why we have so many
[7:24] wells to choose from.
[7:31] » Go ahead, please.
>> Yeah. So, the it the city's using a
[7:35] process called blending. And as I
alluded to two questions ago, well
[7:39] number 27 is roughly in the same area as
well number 30. So if you're
[7:43] experiencing high nitrates in well
number 30 in the new well we're going to
[7:47] drill, most likely it's coming in into
well number 27 as higher nitrates as
[7:53] well. So then it's really becomes a
quantification game of and a semantics
[8:00] game of how high is high and then can we
still utilize what the cities of what
[8:06] the city of Boone's current capacity and
blending all of that together to get
[8:10] underneath what the city standard what
the EPA standard is of that 10
[8:15] milligrams per liter.
Section three, al alternative
[8:21] technologies in the Jordan aquifer deep
well limitations. Page three notes that
[8:26] Jordan oper aquifer wells are ruled out
because preliminary modeling capped
[8:31] pumping at only 500 gpms per well to
maintain tier one status. Was a combined
[8:38] approach using a 500 gpm Jordan well
alongside a lupial blending evaluated
[8:44] for long-term drought and climate
resilience? I'll leave that to you, Eva.
[8:49] » So that this approach was evaluated at
the high level and what I'll say is the
[8:55] Jordan well could still be done. It's
just more money, more cost from the
[9:00] city. We'd have to figure out how to
budget and plan that. Now the regarding
[9:05] the actual questions of a long-term
clout or long-term drought and climate
[9:10] resiliency by just by having the Jordan
aquifer, you have to recognize that just
[9:16] the city of Boone is not pulling from
the Jordan aquifer, but a bunch of other
[9:19] communities pull from the Jordan
aquifer. And it's not just limited to
[9:24] the current impact. So, you start
playing the what if game of how many
[9:29] other communities, how many other new
wells will get drilled into the Jordan
[9:32] aquifer to pull out the water by that
time you hit the long-term drought. We
[9:38] can we need to define what the long-term
drought is to actually be able to risk
[9:43] and assess the resiliency that this
question is trying to get at. But
[9:48] generally by using the term of a
long-term drought, I would say there's
[9:52] multiple other reasons or there's
multiple other communities and multiple
[9:56] other wells pulling from the aquifer
that you'll see that aquafer drop and
[10:02] all the communities might end up in a
tier one or a tier two or a tier three
[10:06] status when it's a long-term drought
situation. Were we not denied the Jordan
[10:12] aquifer by the DNR
>> at the I think you guys wanted to pump
[10:16] about 750 out of it and it's you're if
you want to go out of the Jordan aquifer
[10:23] it's that's where this 500 number comes
from is that's the limit you get a you
[10:28] would pump from it. It doesn't
guarantee. It's not a guarantee though
[10:32] that you would lose that tier one status
and go into you would lose that status
[10:38] where it becomes a tier one or a tier
two or tier three which is all
[10:42] restricting and lessening your water use
and trying to recharge that aquafer
[10:45] because then that aquifer is overdrawn
or an aquifer is kind of starting to get
[10:49] to be a sensitive aquifer from all the
other communities that are drawing from
[10:55] it.
>> Thank you.
[10:58] Nitrate removal assessment. Page three
explicitly states that as a source water
[11:04] nitrate increase, a comparative
assessment of constructing an additional
[11:09] well versus implementing a nitrate
system should be completed. Has the
[11:14] costbenefit assessment been completed?
If so, where can the public view it?
[11:24] » So, what I would say is the cost benefit
hasn't been done. What's still needed
[11:28] for Daisy to come on is the additional
well and additional capacity to pull
[11:33] water out of the ground for the
treatment and the blending process to
[11:37] supply it. So, it's it's not one or the
other here of a nitrate treatment system
[11:43] would work. You still need that well to
pull the quantity of water that's going
[11:47] to be required.
[11:52] » Go ahead.
So, why would this project be started if
[11:55] that assessment hasn't been done yet? Do
you figure out whether that's going to
[11:59] be viable?
>> We did a water assessment through the
[12:02] utility committee. Um, and this would
have been four or three years ago when
[12:07] we did the water assessment and we have
the we have the capacity to supply them
[12:11] with what's needed. It's just when we
get into these future expansions that
[12:16] we're doing with the city with all the
housing and stuff like that, it's going
[12:20] to it changes the assessment a little
bit. So, we're constantly doing these
[12:23] water assessments, whether it's waste
water or drinking water. We're always
[12:27] looking forward on that side of things.
[12:33] » Uh, capital impermit and long-term
financing. Following CIP additions,
[12:38] following acknowledgement at the August
2026 utility meeting that the nitrate
[12:42] removal is not in the 5-year capital
improvement plan, at what date will the
[12:47] nitrate removal system be added to the
CIP and when will it be functional? Uh
[12:52] we start our CIP process in October. Um
and it the final approval is in March or
[12:59] April. Um it goes along with our budget
time. uh at that point is when the
[13:05] nitrate system will get added to the pro
the CIP. Um there still needs to be a
[13:12] process on the engineer side to design
it, determine what we are needed. Um and
[13:20] and then also financial analysis to
determine how we'll pay for that.
[13:26] Um future rateayer burden. Page one
confirms our well-filled firm capacity
[13:32] 5.57 MGDs is technically enough to meet
the 2044 volume depend demands 4.89 MGD
[13:41] meaning these immediate upgrades are
driven primarily by nitrate blending
[13:45] from industrial growth. If blending
eventually fails, how will a
[13:50] multi-million dollar nitrate removal
plant be financed without spiking
[13:55] residential utility rates?
I don't think we can guarantee that um
[14:00] your rates won't increase to pay for a
nitrate system. However, um until we get
[14:07] through all these projects that have to
be done and Daisy gets online, um I
[14:12] can't guarantee or tell you that that's
how we're going to have to fund it.
[14:20] » And I think that's all the written
comments.
[14:22] » Thanks for going through those. Andrea,
are there any other written comments?
[14:26] Okay. Are there any other public
comments on this subject?
[14:33] » No. Yes, sir. I set these at two
minutes. Uh,
[14:39] my name is Elvin Duchess and I'm just a
citizen here in Boom.
[14:44] I'm no scientist, so I have no idea, you
know, what a nitrate is except what I
[14:50] read. That's probably not good for me,
but
[14:57] It seems to me like what we're asking
the city to do
[15:03] is put a band-aid on an elephant.
You know, anything north of us, runoff,
[15:09] farm runoff, whatever, it's going to run
into the rivers.
[15:13] And I think that's where we get some of
our our water. So many people tap into
[15:18] this aquifier or whatever it is.
I personally feel that until that
[15:25] elephant encapsulated
by not just the city of Boone, but by
[15:30] every city around and the state of Iowa
and maybe even every state in the union.
[15:35] We've got a problem and I don't think
we're going to solve it
[15:41] by drilling a well or two. We may delay
it, but we're going to have to have help
[15:47] other than from the city alone. I think
anytime we do a well and increase either
[15:53] my taxes or my water uh bill or whatever
and I you're we're going to have to
[15:58] expect that.
I don't know what the answer is. I
[16:03] appreciate what you're trying to do.
Uh
[16:08] but but again that elephant is going to
be there until
[16:12] somebody higher than us
[16:16] is going to get a handle on this. Thank
you.
[16:19] » Thank you.
Any other public comments?
[16:27] » Well, I I would just like to say that we
have a great partnership with US Water.
[16:30] I said that was part of the reason why
we went on board with them and made them
[16:34] a partner with us. Um we can we rely on
them to talk to other cities and see how
[16:39] they're blending, see what they're doing
for nitrate removal systems. We've been
[16:43] to other cities and seen their nitrate
removal. Not that it's not in our CIP,
[16:47] but it's in our radar. There's a lot of
things within the city that is on our
[16:51] radar. It might not be in our CIP at
this time because we're still doing our
[16:55] due diligence to figure out what the
best process is for us to deal with the
[17:00] nitrate removal. And we really rely on
US Water for that. And they have
[17:03] multiple other communities in central
Iowa that they deal with. So, we can we
[17:08] we piggyback off of them on what they're
doing at these other cities to adjust
[17:11] their uh nitrate levels as well.
Thanks, Kyle. Any other public comments?
[17:20] Okay. If there are no other public
comments, we'll declare this public
[17:24] hearing closed and we will move on to B.
[17:30] B is the public hearing to review an
application for a state revolving fund
[17:34] SRF loan and to make available to the
public the contents of environmental
[17:39] information document and the city's uh
project plan water wastewater expansion.
[17:48] » Are there any written comments on this
subject?
[17:50] » No sir.
>> With no written comments, are there any
[17:53] public comments on that subject?
[17:59] » Yes. No public comments. We will declare
the public hearing closed.
[18:04] Move on to C. Public hearing on the
plans, specifications, form of contract,
[18:10] and estimate of cost for the Hancock
Drive water towers project. Are there
[18:15] any public or excuse me, written
comments on that subject?
[18:18] » No, sir.
>> No written comments. Are there any
[18:21] public comments on this subject?
[18:26] Okay. No or no public comments. We will
declare that public
[18:31] and uh we'll move on to C1
3592 resolution
[18:38] adopting plans, specifications, form of
contract, and estimate of cost for the
[18:42] Hancock Drive water tower project. And
we need a motion for that.
[18:47] » So moved.
>> Second.
[18:50] » Can I ask what the cost estimate for
that is? It's not the packet.
[18:56] I think it's around 7 and a half
million.
[19:00] » Okay. So, what we're expecting the bids
to come in at. There was a memo that I
[19:05] believe I shared with Whan and Andrea
that my intent was shared with you guys
[19:10] to explain I know the original CIP
budget back two and a half years ago is
[19:15] like 4.5 million but kind of explains
how that cost has grown since that time
[19:20] on the CIP which has made
it's almost unbelievable from my
[19:26] experience on how it how it's gained and
how these costs have grown with
[19:30] inflation and everything that happened
through that process. And it was when we
[19:34] helped you develop your CIP at that
time. We had what we thought was a
[19:39] similar water tower in size
performed in a neighboring community and
[19:44] it came in at that four and a half
million cost. But then as we work
[19:47] through the design, the numbers, the
proper sizing,
[19:52] uh comparing of different types,
different whether different shapes, um
[19:59] those costs just outer that
>> are all the engineering costs included
[20:04] in this now.
>> Uh our engineering costs were locked in
[20:08] our contract we signed before we started
design. So as these what I would say is
[20:13] as these costs grew from whatever that
initial cost was when he got us under
[20:18] contract to design it right
>> our fee never grew it
[20:22] » was locked in so it's just it truly is
just those construction costs.
[20:26] » Okay.
>> All right. Thank you. We have a first
[20:30] and a second. Uh please call roll.
>> Kelly.
[20:34] » Yes.
>> Mormon.
[20:35] » Yes.
>> Williamson.
[20:37] » Yes.
>> Angstrom.
[20:38] » Yes.
>> Hammer.
[20:39] » Yes.
>> Henson. Yes, sir.
[20:44] All
>> right, with that, we'll move on to four
[20:46] reports of standing committees, policy
administration and employee relations
[20:51] committee Williamson.
>> No report tonight.
[20:54] » Thank you. Uh B, public safety and
transportation. Hillbec is not here.
[20:59] Kyle, did you have it?
>> Yeah, we just have one item on here and
[21:02] it's discuss and approve downtown Boone
gorilla wayfinding signs. Um Holly
[21:08] Stucker with downtown came to us um
probably a month and a half ago, two
[21:12] months ago with some signs. Uh we asked
her to get with the businesses of
[21:17] downtown and get their opinions on the
signs that she was putting up to
[21:22] represent each business. Um she went
through talked to the 12 businesses. The
[21:27] 12 signs are in the packet. Um
everything looked good in public safety.
[21:31] We went ahead and or would make the
motion to need a motion to approve it.
[21:35] So, so MOO,
no cost to the city, by the way. It's
[21:40] all taken care of by downtown
>> and they're even putting them up.
[21:43] » Yeah. They're very they're very
temporary. They're more of like a
[21:46] corrugated plastic. Uh something that
they can change out throughout the
[21:50] seasons and as you know, businesses
change or they they want to make a
[21:54] different look. I guess
>> got a motion. Do we have Do we have
[21:59] » a second?
>> Please call.
[22:02] » Mormon.
>> Yes. Williamson,
[22:05] » yes. Angstrom,
>> yes.
[22:07] » Yes.
>> Hson,
[22:08] » yes.
>> Ellie,
[22:10] » yes.
>> Thank you. And utility committee.
[22:14] » Uh, no report today. We'll just have a
prior meeting on the
[22:18] 21st.
>> Thank you. Uh, D, Economic Development
[22:24] Committee, Mormon.
>> I have one thing, your honor. Um, Linda
[22:28] is going to give an update on the arts.
on the arts. Um just wanted to share
[22:36] that we did conduct a city survey and
trying to get uh some input from uh
[22:44] citizens just on interest for public art
or public art projects.
[22:49] Uh our survey uh we did this through the
library. the library helped us and and
[22:54] we had initially 118 responses
and from that uh I'll just share there
[23:02] were five questions that we asked
community members. First one, what kind
[23:06] of impact do you feel public art has on
our city's public areas? We had uh the
[23:12] two highest responses of highly positive
impact and slightly positive impact were
[23:18] 94% agreed to that. So, a strong uh
support of public art and the impact.
[23:26] The second, what forms of public art
would you be most excited to see or
[23:31] encounter around the city? The number
one that was mentioned by 87% of the
[23:37] people that responded to the survey were
largecale murals. Murals seem to be very
[23:43] popular in a lot of towns. The second
listed for 78%
[23:50] selected was functional art which are
like artistic benches, um trash
[23:56] containers that are painted, those kinds
of things. So, uh objects that are
[24:00] already in the community.
The next one, where would you most like
[24:05] to see public art integrated into our
city landscapes?
[24:09] Number one was in hightra civic areas
near city buildings, downtown district,
[24:16] main streets. The second uh listed was
in open green spaces like parks, trails,
[24:25] community gardens. Next question, what
stories, themes or subjects would you
[24:31] like the artwork to focus on? Number one
selected highest selection was local
[24:38] history and heritage
celebrating our communities roots and
[24:43] historical milestones. The second one
listed uh highest was nature, wildlife
[24:50] and the environment.
Um the last question was what types of
[24:57] cultural events or arts programming
would you be interested in in attending
[25:02] in our city? Number one listed uh most
highly listed was artist fairs and
[25:08] markets.
Um outdoor community art markets,
[25:12] seasonal vendor fairs. The second live
art performances and festivals,
[25:18] community theater, live music,
interactive cultural festivals. And of
[25:22] course, we have some of that going on
already. A couple of the comments um
[25:27] that I'll share. We also asked to uh
have people leave comments on this and
[25:33] I'll just give you uh just a sample of
what we heard. Um first, wonderful. You
[25:39] want to increase art in Boon. Second,
highlight the history of our town.
[25:45] Public art. I always look for it when I
visit somewhere. More art is a good
[25:51] thing. I like that one. Of course, uh
community will not support it. It's a
[25:56] waste of time and money. I travel to see
public art. Thank you for this survey.
[26:04] So, a lot of different comments on doing
this. I think the next um step for us
[26:11] will be pulling together um some
community members and talking about what
[26:15] kind of art project we would like to
pursue and bring back to the the
[26:20] council.
>> Sound good?
[26:24] » Thank you.
>> Thanks. That's all I have, your honor.
[26:26] All right. Thanks, J. Move on to five
public or excuse me, department reports.
[26:32] Uh Dave A's building official is not
here. B city attorney Ray F. Nothing,
[26:38] your honor.
>> Yep.
[26:40] » C. Director of public works, Wayan
Andrews. No report. Your
[26:43] » honor, I have one real quick question
for you. Um, do you know where we're at
[26:47] or are we moving along with the
engineering for the first street overlay
[26:52] and so forth?
>> Yes, we're moving along.
[26:55] » We're moving along. So, we'll be good.
>> We got Yeah, we got prioritized on that
[26:58] north transmission bane to make sure
that that one met the timelines it
[27:02] needed to and then we're
>> back on that one now.
[27:05] » All right. Thank you. Uh D, Jamie
Williams, library. She is not present.
[27:09] Uh E, public or park director,
superintendent Mike Cornellis.
[27:13] » No reporting.
>> F public safety chief Adams.
[27:17] » No report.
>> Thank you. And fire chief we uh Chief
[27:22] Weeble Police Chief Weeble, sorry.
>> I got a demotion.
[27:28] » Oh,
[27:33] is
wow. He'll now have a comment. I
[27:40] » G City administrator Andrea Elmquist.
>> Uh yeah. Um we uh took applications for
[27:47] the finance officer position. Uh we
received six applications. Uh the hiring
[27:53] committee um
selected three to interview through a
[27:58] Zoom call that took about 30 minutes
each. Uh they recommended candidate
[28:03] number three to the city council to move
on to the next level. Uh the next level
[28:09] would be that you guys can choose to go
ahead and in do an in-person interview
[28:15] with her or another Zoom interview. Um
she's not local. Um so uh if you would
[28:21] prefer to do a Zoom interview that would
be fine also
[28:24] » but in state she
>> she's in state. Yes.
[28:28] Um or if the alternative um is that you
would like to continue to do a search, I
[28:34] did reach out to a consulting company um
out of North Dakota uh called Seveny, I
[28:42] believe is how you pronounce it. Um it'd
be about $18,000 uh for them to do the
[28:47] search. They are uh just finishing up
Pleasant Hills uh finance officer
[28:52] search. um they would like 12 weeks just
to collect applications. Um primarily
[29:00] what they would be doing is making phone
calls um to try and find an applicant or
[29:07] a candidate that would fit our our
needs.
[29:11] » 12 weeks
>> 12 weeks just to do the search.
[29:17] I would like to point out that this is
our busiest time of the year especially
[29:21] for a finance officer. Uh there are
multiple deadlines that we need to meet.
[29:27] Um first one being getting caught up on
bank wrecks, doing an audit and then we
[29:32] have four state financial reports that
are not um one pagers. They are fairly
[29:37] extensive. Um and then we are also
entering into our capital improvement um
[29:43] plan uh process and our budgeting
process.
[29:48] » So is this candidate qualified or no?
>> Um this
[29:53] » your opinion
>> this candidate I I want to respect the
[29:57] hiring uh committee and they chose the
best one um out of the applicants that
[30:02] we received. Uh the applica the
candidate that they are recommending um
[30:08] is coming from a community that is very
very small. Um
[30:14] they do not have an accounting degree.
They are working on a master's in
[30:18] finance. Um
>> when will they finish that?
[30:22] » I do not know that. She did not put that
on on their application.
[30:28] Um
it would uh the candidate would
[30:34] have a big very big learning curve,
>> very big. Uh their current budget that
[30:40] she's used to is a $1 million budget and
50% of that is a bond payment. So
[30:45] basically her budget is $500,000 that
she actually has to deal with.
[30:50] » How many years experience?
>> Four years. She's the only employee for
[30:54] that city. So, she also is not um very
wellversed in payroll and FLSA.
[31:03] » I think we need to do a search. I think
that's going to be a waste of time and
[31:07] money.
>> I agree. After hearing that,
[31:13] » uh, we need somebody with qualifications
that can at least jump in and start
[31:21] payroll on day one instead of having a
six-month training period.
[31:27] » What was the cost again for this search?
>> 18,000.
[31:31] » So, 18 grand.
>> They do have a one-year guarantee. Uh so
[31:35] if the person does not work out um
within that first 12 months um they
[31:39] would uh redo the search. Uh they do
have a periodic check-in with them. Um
[31:46] they do different types of testing to
make sure that they fit um be a good fit
[31:50] within our community.
>> I think we I mean we should at least
[31:55] like interview or entertain and like
look into what the candidate they pick
[31:59] credentials are. maybe speak with like
the hiring committee before we go out
[32:04] spending money. But that's just my
opinion.
[32:06] » We're gonna spend way more than that
because this gal is comes from a
[32:12] population of 750 people. It's a very
small community. She has very little
[32:18] experience when it comes to what we're
up against.
[32:23] you're going to
>> but our search you know we we found that
[32:28] there are few applicants who are
qualified to do this. So that's the
[32:33] challenge is even when we try we can't
come up with many to even interview or
[32:39] consider.
>> That's why it's time the nice thing
[32:41] about this company is you're going to
get applicants that are qualified.
[32:45] That's what I'm saying is this this
might be worth it in that they're going
[32:48] to have a much larger pool to pull from
and will guarantee that they you know
[32:54] can bring qualified applicants for us.
>> Do they have a good track record for
[32:58] doing so?
>> Uh they have not done a lot of finance
[33:02] officer searches in the state of Iowa.
Pleasant Hill is their only one.
[33:06] » What do they do normally?
>> Um private businesses.
[33:12] They don't do a lot of government.
Uh they have reached out to over 200 um
[33:18] potential candidates for Pleasant Hill.
Uh their consistent um response from
[33:24] individuals is that they don't want to
leave their current cities due to
[33:28] property tax reform um and the unknowns.
Um, they also made the comment that
[33:34] they're finding that either the finance
officers are
[33:40] are seasoned and are closer to
retirement and therefore don't want to
[33:45] leave and the ones that are ready and
able to leave just don't have the
[33:50] experience to come to a community our
size.
[33:53] » And I think we also have to look at
probably what we're offering. I mean, if
[33:58] this is a very difficult position to to
fill, we're going to have to be
[34:02] competitive.
>> The salary range is um the same salary
[34:07] range that Pleasant Hill and Automo was
offering.
[34:12] » So, we're So, we're in range
>> that we are. Yep. So, we're comparable
[34:15] to that at the moment.
I will tell you that um one of the
[34:20] hiring uh committee members um is a
finance officer of a community um here
[34:27] in Iowa and he was paid more than what
I'm being paid and that's why he did not
[34:32] apply.
[34:37] the last officer that we tried to that
we hired, you know, came from a
[34:41] community bigger than the community that
we're talking about now. And it was a
[34:44] huge jump for her as well, and it didn't
work out. I I just I'm not saying that
[34:50] we're going to throw $18,000 out the
window, but at least there's a guarantee
[34:53] there that we that if if it doesn't work
out, we're not sitting here again.
[34:58] They're going to be the ones going
through the the process going to school
[35:01] for finance. And the last chick we
hired, was she going going to get her
[35:06] masters in finance and anything like
that?
[35:09] » She was not, but she had 18 years of
experience.
[35:12] » Smaller.
>> Wasn't going to school for anything
[35:14] pertaining to finance or anything like
that.
[35:17] » No. Um,
>> there's a difference.
[35:19] » You're talking a five, you know,
$500,000 budget compared to a $6 million
[35:23] budget, you know. So,
>> we have a $27 million budget.
[35:27] » 27. And and I think the issue is we
don't really have a lot of time for
[35:32] somebody to get up to speed. We have a
lot of things going on right now.
[35:37] » So, you know, hiring I mean having
somebody that says, "Yeah, within months
[35:42] and months they'll come I mean I think
we have to move ahead."
[35:46] » Agreed.
>> It's pretty complex. So, we need
[35:51] somebody wellqualified.
>> I I I see it as the cost of doing
[35:54] business. The only downfall is the 12
weeks that they get for the search time.
[35:59] And we need somebody like
>> we try to convince them to go a little
[36:03] quicker.
>> Yeah. See if they can get
[36:05] » you know, you know,
>> if they're doing it for already some
[36:10] place,
maybe we can kind of get a similar those
[36:15] results.
>> I just had the conversation with them
[36:17] about a week ago and that is what she
she had requested is 12 weeks.
[36:22] You can see we're kind of looking for
>> right now.
[36:27] » They did uh mention that some of the
people that they've reached out to were
[36:31] recently retired and maybe potentially
able to um do a temporary Yeah.
[36:37] » Yeah.
>> I think we have to look at all options
[36:41] right now.
>> Doing this for two years. It's it's time
[36:44] to build
>> get to it. So,
[36:51] » do you need a motion to go to that or
what do you think on there?
[36:54] » I will uh reach out to them and I'll
bring back a agreement with on the 21st.
[37:00] » Sounds good.
>> Anything else, Andre?
[37:03] » That's all.
>> Okay. Thank you. With that, we'll move
[37:07] on to the cons consent agenda.
All items listed under the consent
[37:12] agenda will be enacted by one motion.
There will be no separate discussion of
[37:17] these items unless unless a request is
made prior to the time of council the
[37:27] » prior to the time council votes on the
motion.
[37:30] » So moved.
>> Second.
[37:32] » Please call.
[37:36] » Yes.
>> Hammer.
[37:36] » Yes.
>> Henson.
[37:38] » Yes.
>> Kelly.
[37:39] » Yes.
>> Mormon.
[37:40] » Yes.
[37:44] » All right. With that, we'll move on to
seven, which is ordinances.
[37:48] A second reading, ordinance 2330 to
allow the city of Boone, Iowa to change
[37:56] the
stop intersections in the code of
[38:02] ordinances action adding section 65.02
subsection 59. The intersection of West
[38:10] Fifth Street and Jefferson Street is a
stop inter stop intersection for all
[38:17] northbound and southbound traffic on
Jefferson Street.
[38:21] » Moved.
>> Second.
[38:25] » Please call roll.
>> Yes.
[38:27] » Hammer.
>> Yes.
[38:28] » Benson,
>> yes.
[38:30] » Kelly,
>> yes.
[38:31] » Yes.
>> Yes.
[38:33] » Hey, mayor. I'd like to make a motion to
wave the third reading on ordinance
[38:36] 2330.
Second,
[38:41] please call roll.
>> Hammer,
[38:43] » yes.
>> Henson,
[38:45] » yes.
>> To Kelly,
[38:46] » yes.
>> Mormon,
[38:47] » yes.
>> Williamson,
[38:48] » yes.
>> Angstrom,
[38:49] » yes.
[38:52] » To approve or adopt.
>> Move to adopt. I'm sorry.
[38:55] » Second.
[38:59] » Please call RO.
>> Henson,
[39:02] » yes.
>> Kelly,
[39:03] » yes.
>> Mormon,
[39:04] » yes.
>> Lson,
[39:05] » yes. Thanks Jeffrey.
>> Yes.
[39:10] » All right. Thank you for that. With
that, we'll move on to B, second
[39:15] reading, ordinance 2331 to allow the
city of Boone, Iowa to change the
[39:22] persons with disabilities parking in the
code of ordinance
[39:27] ren moving section 69.07 07 subsection
4J
[39:33] 7th Street North side first space east
of Keeler Street and adding section
[39:41] 69.07
section 4 FFF
[39:46] first space east of Boom Street and 7th
Street intersection on the south side.
[39:52] » So moved.
>> Second. Please call R.
[39:56] » Kelly.
>> Yes. Mormon.
[39:58] » Yes.
>> Yes. Angstrom. Yes.
[40:00] » Hammer.
>> Yes.
[40:01] » Henson.
>> Yes.
[40:03] » Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to wave
the third reading of ordinance 2331.
[40:08] » Second.
>> Who's call?
[40:11] » Mormon.
>> Yes.
[40:12] » Williamson,
>> yes.
[40:13] » Angstrom,
>> yes.
[40:14] » Hammer,
>> yes.
[40:15] » Hson,
>> yes.
[40:17] » Kelly,
>> yes.
[40:19] » Move to adopt.
>> Second.
[40:22] » Please call a roll.
>> Lamson,
[40:25] » yes.
>> Angstrom,
[40:26] » yes.
>> Hammer,
[40:27] » yes.
>> Henson,
[40:28] » yes. vote. Kelly,
>> yes.
[40:30] » Mormon,
>> yes.
[40:32] » All right. Thank you. And number eight,
public comments for items not on the
[40:36] agenda.
If you do have one, please raise your
[40:40] hand high so I can see you back there.
If you would come up and gate or inside
[40:46] the gate and please speak loudly.
>> And again, we give two minutes for
[40:50] public comments.
>> My name is Dana Baker. I live on the
[40:54] corner of 12th and Benton Street and I
have some concerns about some of the um
[41:00] activities going on in our neighborhood.
Um
[41:05] have pictures
on um we have a lot of there's a house
[41:12] on the corner of between them. Um
there's people there's like seven nine
[41:18] people living in the house. There's
people living in the trailer. There's
[41:21] people potentially living in the car.
There is a minor girl that lives there.
[41:25] Um there's a lot of traffic that come
and goes um all hours of the night. Um
[41:32] there's a lot of garbage in the yard.
I'm going to say garbage. There's stuff
[41:36] in the in the yard. And there is a
trailer that is backed up over the
[41:40] sidewalk with orange over it. I recently
had a fall, so I have to walk with a
[41:46] walker and I am unable to go around my
block because they have cones. Um, we
[41:52] have another neighbor here who's also
has to use a walker who can walk a
[41:56] little further than I can, but she
cannot make it. She can make it around
[42:00] different blocks. Um, so that's the
first thing. We've had an increase in
[42:05] rodents, possums, I don't know if it was
a rat, raccoons, snakes. Um, we have
[42:12] another neighbor that was going to show
up tonight and he was unable to um that
[42:18] he sent me a text saying what he wanted
me to say. If I can have my husband read
[42:23] it because I don't have my glasses.
>> Yep.
[42:27] » Yeah. It just says the abundance of junk
they've strung everywhere is getting
[42:31] old. I've heard the been mentioned a few
times to get cleaned up and the license
[42:35] has been taken.
[42:46] He didn't know if it's illegal or not,
but nothing's happening with property.
[42:51] » This one's currently on our radar.
>> It's been going I mean, we've complained
[42:56] over it over the last couple years.
We've had um contact with Ron And I know
[43:01] he's been working on it. It just seems
like it's getting worse instead of
[43:04] better. Um, but we're just kind of we're
kind of frustrated. And then to be
[43:09] honest, we're kind of frustrated with
even the house next to us is that
[43:12] duplex.
People are coming and going in that is a
[43:16] is an eyesore. We've done a lot of work
to our property and um needs to get a
[43:22] little bit. And there's pictures that
are close as well. Um they had reached
[43:28] out to some other neighbors and a lot of
them were just fearful of retaliation
[43:34] here that just can't keep living with a
couple years ago. We were pretty sure
[43:38] there was a drug deal that went down at
the end of our driveway and I am a
[43:42] medical professional and last thing I
want to do is have to fight for my
[43:45] license else.
[43:49] » This one Ron Freyer.
>> Yeah.
[43:52] » Yeah. We we've uh we have weekly
meetings. Andrea, Ron, and myself. Uh,
[43:56] and this property has come up a few
times, and we've, uh, I know Ron's
[44:02] reached out to them and taken different
steps to try to clean up garbage left on
[44:05] the curbs and stuff like that. Um, we
can maybe talk outside of a public
[44:10] hearing about the trailer situation. Um,
because you might have some additional
[44:14] information that would be helpful for us
to address that.
[44:17] » And then there's just one last thing is
um, there is a house to the east of me
[44:21] on 12th and and Benton. Um he has a art
um a tree a volunteer tree coming up
[44:30] right next to the fire hydrant.
>> Is that the one the picture that you
[44:33] pass around? Yeah. Okay.
>> Pitch on fire and the water couldn't
[44:37] come on.
>> And then there's also a like an 8 foot
[44:43] artificial
volunteer tree coming up along the
[44:47] sidewalk that's probably going to break
the
[44:50] straight. I I really appreciate you guys
coming up here and bringing it up and
[44:53] bringing it to our attention.
>> The police department is rather well
[44:56] aware of this property. And I didn't
know about the trailer blocking the
[45:01] sidewalk, though. I'll have the office
shut that thing.
[45:06] » It's a pickup block and sidewalk.
>> It's a pickup. It's a pickup and a
[45:09] trailer.
>> Yas
[45:18] driving down the street. You can't see
what's going on because you have two
[45:21] things blocked.
>> Sure.
[45:24] » It's just it's getting
[45:30] » Thank you.
>> Thank you for your time.
[45:31] » Thank you. Thank you guys.
>> Thank you.
[45:35] » Motorome somebody you talk to that motor
home to take it out. Now it's back.
[45:45] » Yeah. I think I think there might be two
different ones. um one was removed at
[45:49] one point and another one showed. Like I
said, we're trying to deal with the
[45:52] situation and and any additional
information um is helpful. So,
[45:57] appreciate it.
>> Thank you guys.
[45:59] » Thank you.
>> Any other public comments for items not
[46:02] on the agenda?
[46:06] » I just have a small wastewater update
for you guys. I was not sure if I can
[46:10] make it to your next meeting, but just
to give a general update, um I'm your
[46:14] wastewater engineer. um working with a
whole team of people for your we sweater
[46:20] treatment plant. Um and I've been
talking with Andrea and Whan and just
[46:25] want to to update you guys. Um we had I
had come before to do an amendment for
[46:30] the flows and loads the wasteland
allocation facility plan and all those
[46:35] things have been completed and we just
received facility plan approval in
[46:39] August. So we are good to proceed on the
rest of the week.
[46:44] And so that contract signed a few years
ago. I think
[46:53] with that and I was waiting to do some
of the last
[47:01] green light to go ahead. Um, so the next
thing is just for us to finish our work
[47:06] and then to submit for approval to the
DNR. So I hope to do that and I hope to
[47:11] do it soon. I'm in the next month or so.
So um the only addition with that it
[47:17] will be on the next council.
[47:21] So
in the middle of our design
[47:27] for Daisy products said they were
increasing our flows by half million
[47:31] gallons and also reducing their so
taking away carbon from water supply. So
[47:37] that affected our design. So when I
wrote here report in your facility plant
[47:43] I accounted for that additional flow in
there. So that's all good with the DN.
[47:47] Um, I also accounted for addition of a
chemical called microine and that
[47:52] supplements carbon to your wastewater
system and that's needed to nitrify and
[47:58] dnitrify and take the nitrates out of
the water before it goes back to the De
[48:03] Moine River. So, um, so that you can
meet your ethanol needs for that. So, so
[48:08] everything is included in my design
except for that micro seed edition. So,
[48:13] it's a chemical addition. Look, there's
a tank that goes with it, a building to
[48:17] heat it, and then a chemical pump, and
some monitoring for that. So, next week,
[48:22] that will be on the agenda, but I just
wanted to make you guys aware of what's
[48:27] you got. Any questions about your waste?
[48:34] » That is all.
>> All right. Thank you.
[48:37] Any other one more? Yep.
>> Yeah. Um, all this development felt like
[48:43] the D uh uh far and daisy building. I'm
concerned because it doesn't work. I
[48:50] feel doing a job of what's going to
happen with the traffic.
[48:55] We've got the ledger uh elementary
school out there on industrial park.
[48:59] You're going to put a bunch more people
going in and out of that daisy and that
[49:03] complex you can barely see it. Go down
on 30. It's a hill. I think the city
[49:09] needs to take a little action on finding
some of these subdivisions to make sure
[49:13] we're covered with the increase in
traffic now and also we don't end up
[49:17] with nightmare traffic and danger.
>> We we Daisy did do a traffic study um
[49:23] that has been addressed. So there will
be a right lane um they their policy is
[49:27] to go right. Uh so there'll be a turning
lane where they go in there'll be a
[49:32] traffic light they'll go in right
turning right and then they'll leave
[49:35] turning right.
But I think you need to address the one
[49:40] on 32 there coming out complex.
[49:47] » That's DOT.
>> Yeah,
[49:49] » that's the DOT and they're going to be
doing a roundabout there.
[49:53] » I don't like roundabouts.
[49:57] People in more access than
that is a state highway and we don't
[50:04] have jurisdiction over that.
They need to learn
[50:09] that
[50:15] other places. They had round took a long
snow oper.
[50:35] » Nobody likes them. They're showing up a
lot.
[50:49] But I am concerned about
[50:56] going out.
[51:10] » Well, we appreciate your concern and
your comments. So, thank you very much.
[51:14] » Any other public comments?
[51:19] If not, we'll move on to nine, which is
mayor comments. Uh, the only I have is I
[51:23] want to thank everybody for coming on
Labor Day evening. Um, council members,
[51:28] public department heads, and obviously
you folks as well. So, but that's all
[51:32] I've got under my comments. Number 10,
council member comments.
[51:38] No council member comments. We will
adjourn.
[51:44] Sorry, we have to go into close session.
So, I need a motion to go into move.
[51:49] » Second
roll.
[51:53] » Yes.
[51:58] » Yes. Hson.