[1:19] Heat. Heat.

[1:25] Heat. Heat.

[2:17] Heat. Heat.

[2:39] Heat. Heat.

[3:39] Heat. Heat.

[3:48] Heat. Heat. N.

[4:16] Heat. Heat.

[4:22] Heat

[4:51] up Heat. Heat.

[5:36] Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat.

[6:39] Heat.

[6:53] Heat. Heat.

[7:18] Heat. Heat.

[8:44] forever.

[9:01] We will call to order the regular committee of the whole meeting. Can we

[9:05] please begin with roll call? >> Council member Lee

[9:07] » here. >> Oren

[9:08] » here. >> Seely

[9:09] » here. Dman >> here.

[9:10] » Turpin >> here. Winter

[9:12] » here. >> Karns

[9:12] » here. Uh, first item,

[9:17] Tammy, community development director Johnson.

[9:21] » Yep.

[9:25] » Travis, don't yell at me. It came back. >> It did. I told you.

[9:28] » I appreciate it. Appreciate it, Jamie. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, the

[9:33] first one I have for you, uh, we discussed about a month or maybe a

[9:36] little over a month ago on an offer on offers on two parcels on 19th place. I I

[9:42] reached out to them, worked the development agreement with them.

[9:45] » Um, still the same price. Um, they're willing to start the project in 18

[9:49] months. Gives them time then to get the house designed.

[9:52] » Okay. >> Get a contractor in place and hopefully

[9:55] begin building even maybe they'd like to have it done before it start before 18

[9:59] months. >> Okay.

[10:00] » October. >> Okay. So, we just basically shortened

[10:03] that time frame up for the >> we switched it. So, they have 18 months

[10:05] and three years. >> And this is one of the nicer lots by the

[10:08] newer houses. >> It's two parcels. Long two parts.

[10:13] I I'll make a motion to move this forward. Second,

[10:16] » we have a motion in a second. >> Any discussion?

[10:20] » Where is this exactly? Sorry. >> Longfellow

[10:23] » where they built the What? What was that program?

[10:25] » I didn't live here then. >> It was for Habitat.

[10:28] » Um that they turned over the lots to us when they went to 19th place up off of

[10:33] Comanche Avenue. >> It's a nice little neighborhood. Do you

[10:36] know where? >> I I lived on 19th place.

[10:40] that's probably been torn down way. But >> yeah, it's it's big lot. It's got an

[10:45] alley going through it. Houses on both sides. One of the houses has like the

[10:48] columns in the front of it on the >> It's for sale, actually.

[10:51] » I'll take a drive tomorrow. I'll take a drive. It's easier drive.

[10:54] » I'll take a drive. >> Drive.

[10:55] » All right. >> Any other discussion?

[10:58] » Can we have roll call, please? >> Council member Turban,

[11:01] » yes. >> Winter,

[11:02] » yes. >> Karns,

[11:03] » yes. >> Lee,

[11:04] » yes. >> Oren, yes.

[11:05] » Sely, >> yes.

[11:06] » Dutterman, >> yes.

[11:08] » Go ahead. >> Right here.

[11:10] » Yes. Um, so this one is the uh proposal to do go out for an RFP to sell our city

[11:16] lots um that are buildable, the commercial and the residential. Um,

[11:20] Council Member Winter wanted to do this um and take a look at it. I've got in

[11:24] the packet the RFP. There's four models of how we could um look at doing it with

[11:30] a with a real estate agent. My thought is we put it out for the RFP the

[11:37] way I have it written, which is all four models, and let them bid on those that

[11:40] way. So then you can compare which one >> I'm sorry, what did you say, Sammy?

[11:45] » That's okay. So there's four models of how we could do that. One of them is a

[11:48] hybrid. The fourth one is a hybrid where we kind of combine two of them.

[11:52] » Uhhuh. >> Like commission flat fee.

[11:54] » Yep. One's a commission flat fee and then um a bundle portfolio price. Um,

[12:02] and then the hybrid model is commission and flat fee.

[12:04] » Yep. >> What I typically see on these lots that

[12:09] because are a lot of these going to be pretty low price points. T

[12:12] » I think your or your residential ones. >> Yeah. Like those I see a lot is just a

[12:17] all it's a flat fee split. >> But on the bigger ones I think it should

[12:21] maybe the commission or the you could do the hybrid too.

[12:25] » And that's why I had the hybrid model of both. Yeah. Figured the commercial would

[12:28] be the commission. Um the residential buildables would be the flat fee.

[12:33] » I agree. >> Um but I think we should put it out for

[12:35] bid that they give us a proposal on all four. That way we can pick then.

[12:40] » Okay. >> I think it's just a good base that we

[12:42] can decide by proposals on how they >> and and they could say, "Oh, I don't

[12:47] want to give a proposal on type C." >> Yep. Yeah. They would.

[12:52] » So they can just give a hybrid proposal or it could just give whatever. They

[12:56] could give all four or just one, >> whichever one they choose. they would

[13:00] like to try. >> Will that be confusing?

[13:03] » I don't think so. >> Okay.

[13:04] » I I don't think it will. >> I see it both ways. So,

[13:07] » um >> it'll be able to

[13:09] » I think it'll be more competitive that way.

[13:11] » Okay. >> Yeah.

[13:13] » We're going to, >> you know, your standard

[13:17] listing fees usually 6%. Um that's normal. But on these lots that they we

[13:24] may only sell for $500, let's say, they're they're gonna want a flat fee.

[13:30] That might eat up the entire value, >> you know, and I don't know how much

[13:34] work. I think we're looking at them more to use their internet base.

[13:39] » Yep. They'll get them on. >> These are lots. So they're other than a

[13:41] commercial one they'll go out and look at. Um they might drive by and look at.

[13:45] I don't think they're going to go, >> but they can also help us with pricing

[13:48] and stuff like that. a better idea in the market with some of our we have a

[13:51] couple in the north end up by center that lots that

[13:55] » be good ones. Yeah. >> Yeah.

[13:56] » Um >> Oh, go ahead.

[13:58] » Go ahead. >> Um how how did you plan on you just

[14:02] going to send it out to the local? >> I was going to send it out to local and

[14:05] kind of reach out to maybe even Quad City area some of them just to get a

[14:09] feel and just send the RFP out to them with a letter saying this is what we're

[14:12] doing. Give them a date and >> Yep. Like if you go to like the rule and

[14:16] rule office here, there's no need to go to another one because they're all but

[14:20] um if it's a company that's not here. Yeah, you could do that. Yeah.

[14:26] » Yep. It would be nice to keep it local obviously, but

[14:29] » Yes. And I think we'll get >> we've already had some interest a little

[14:32] bit just from it being out that they've called. So

[14:35] » cool. Good. >> Yeah, let's get them off the lawn mower

[14:39] list. >> That was going to be my question is just

[14:40] how it's going to get marketed. I was hoping it wasn't just going to get put

[14:43] on ion wave and >> no I don't think putting this on ion

[14:47] wave uh would justice so I think it's better just to mail it out to the state

[14:51] agency give them that way there will be one change on two of the residential

[14:56] lots um the two on second avenue and 800 and 756 2nd Avenue South okay

[15:02] » we'll remove those engineering is using that as a staging area and everything

[15:07] for the bluff expansion so those will get removed

[15:10] » okay And yeah, I would just go directly send

[15:14] it to the broker >> of the company. Yep. Okay, cool.

[15:19] » I'll make a motion. Move it. >> Second.

[15:21] » Second. >> All right, we have a motion in a second.

[15:24] » Move this to u. It's got to go to a business meeting. Yeah, I guess it

[15:27] would. >> Yep. Okay.

[15:29] » Um, >> can we have roll call, please?

[15:33] » Council member Turpin, >> yes. Winter,

[15:35] » yes. >> Karns,

[15:36] » yes. >> Lee,

[15:37] » yes. >> Oren,

[15:38] » yes. >> Sely,

[15:39] » yes. Det. >> Yes.

[15:41] » Thank you, Tammy. Uh, Council Member Oberin.

[15:44] » Thank you, your honor. Um, Memorial Day weekend, we had a child break a fibbean

[15:51] a tibia by being run over by an ebike. And in some short short discussions,

[15:57] communication with Chief Jurian. um they have been working on this because I did

[16:03] not know this but there actually three classes of ebikes

[16:07] » and now there's e scooters. >> Yeah.

[16:10] » And what um we kind of had, you know, just some communication back and forth

[16:14] and what we'd like to do is put together a workg group. um he suggested and

[16:19] offered up Captain Lorenzan to kind of head this up and kind of put a work

[16:24] group together with some of our PD folks and and I would volunteer my services on

[16:29] that kind of you know see what you know what we can do um just to kind of you

[16:35] know as I stated before things are moving fast with technology and this is

[16:41] just another one of those things that is moving fast because of technology.

[16:46] technology and I think we need to handle it just like we did with our um side by

[16:51] sides. I think we need to start handling it with ebikes and e- scooters.

[16:56] » So, I'd like to forward a motion. Well, I don't know.

[16:58] » What's the plan here? >> Just to get a workg group going to kind

[17:02] of figure out what we need to do is if we need to update an ordinance.

[17:05] » There are other cities that are writing ordinances for these things. Um in my

[17:10] mayor's association, um I've I've had some there's been some discussion there.

[17:14] So I can forward some of those discussions to you, council member

[17:17] Oberin. Maybe you can use some maybe something some other community is doing

[17:20] will work for you >> or hybrid of it. So

[17:23] » yeah, just I I think we just need to, you know, kind of

[17:26] » What's the police department say? >> Major Davis,

[17:31] » I can help you with it. >> I I only ask and I understand. Yes,

[17:36] » I could give you a draft to work off of easily.

[17:38] » Great. as well.

[17:42] Well, is it is it a problem that we is it a problem that we really need an

[17:46] ordinance or is it a one >> I think we've Major Davis Clinton Police

[17:49] Department I think it's something we just need to look at because of I think

[17:52] there's going to be similar to what we have for bicycles and bikes but some of

[17:55] the scooters I know like even the scooter I bought one for my daughter for

[17:58] college it was only a 50 cc you know some are faster than others there's

[18:01] three different types so I think we just got to look at it and maybe plan out

[18:04] » I remember when we had this discussion when I was on the other side of the

[18:08] table about uh rollerblades and skateboards birds downtown.

[18:13] » I remember that discussion. >> It's hard to, you know, they don't

[18:17] » it's hard for they're not obeying stop signs.

[18:19] » Yeah, exactly. >> Those things, they should follow the

[18:22] rules of the road. So, it's good to get a work group with it together.

[18:25] » Don't step away yet. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Second.

[18:30] » The scooters and ebikes, I see them drive. I don't know if it's driving is

[18:35] the right term, but I've seen them literally leaving Walmart with the flow

[18:38] of traffic that

[18:41] » with the flow of traffic >> with like literally like they're a car

[18:44] like in >> they can ride in the road. I mean, some

[18:46] of them it depends what the CC is. Some of them are depends if they're ready to

[18:49] I mean, but yeah. >> Yeah.

[18:51] » 50 cc can be on the roadway. It's no different than

[18:53] » There's three classes of of ebikes. >> We want them riding with traffic.

[18:58] » There's a gentleman I see ripping down Second Street out of my office window

[19:01] all the time. Makes me nervous. So they are they can be problematic. We've had a

[19:05] few >> Well, you better regulate the segways,

[19:07] too, while you're at it. >> They wear helmets.

[19:13] » Okay. >> So, what's who's who the work group is?

[19:16] Council member Oberin. And >> anybody else want to help?

[19:19] » No. >> Council member O.

[19:23] » I will. >> Council member Winter. Council member

[19:26] Oberin. All right. Perfect. We'll work with PD and get going there. I have way

[19:31] too much emotionally involved right now. I'm I'm good. Thank you, Tanner. Thank

[19:34] you. >> Anything else for that 2C item?

[19:37] » No. >> All right. So,

[19:39] » we're just going to start a work group. >> We should do a work group.

[19:41] » Yeah, just do a work group. >> It probably should go through the

[19:43] traffic safety commission. >> Yes, of course. Working through that.

[19:46] » I think I think that would be part of the work group.

[19:49] » Perfect. >> All right.

[19:51] » I can't even go to one. >> Council Council Member Lee

[19:56] » 2D. Thank your honor. >> Uh, let me figure out how to start this.

[20:01] » Can you make it bigger? >> PowerPoint.

[20:04] » Power. >> We have We do have two citizens here to

[20:07] talk. Do you want them to talk first? >> Yeah, that sounds good. Okay.

[20:12] » Which one Which one would like to go first?

[20:14] » You've been waiting patiently.

[20:20] » We appreciate it. You're doing a great job.

[20:23] » You're doing a great job. >> Hello, mayor and city council members.

[20:26] Uh my name is Bill Tweford. I live at 702 Desperado Road in Bailey, Colorado.

[20:31] And I wrote you guys a letter uh I don't know, last week, week before, something

[20:36] like that. I've really thought long and hard about

[20:40] this. I'm requesting that the topic of relocating the bis the building and

[20:45] safety division from the fire department be placed on the committee of the whole

[20:52] agenda for today. Basically, I would like the council to discuss moving the

[20:57] building and safety division back under city hall administration, potentially

[21:02] within the community development department under the direction of Tammy

[21:06] Johnson or another appropriate department. After researching,

[21:12] you know, many other communities in Iowa, I have found that most cities

[21:18] separate building and development functions

[21:22] from fire suppression and emergency response operations. In my

[21:28] opinion, the fire department already has a significant responsibility

[21:34] related to emergency response, fire prevention, EMS services, and public

[21:40] safety. And I think they do a great job. Allowing the department to focus on

[21:45] their core functions may improve efficiency while placing building and

[21:50] development services within a department more focused on economic growth,

[21:56] development, customer service, and permitting.

[22:00] Now, I also believe relocating the division would improve accessibility for

[22:05] residents and business owners. in the past. I could visit city hall, obtain

[22:10] permits, ask questions, make payments in a centraliz centralized location, and

[22:17] also returning these services to the city hall would create more of a

[22:22] convenient and a customer-friendly experience. Additionally, I would like

[22:26] the council to discuss how the city balances public safety objections with

[22:32] economic development. I've heard concerns regarding the

[22:36] building that houses the troll exhibit and the possibility that the occupacy

[22:41] issues related to the sprinkler requirements may affect its future

[22:46] operation. While safety must always remain a

[22:51] priority, I believe the city should work with property owners and businesses to

[22:57] identify practical solutions when possible. However, when we get something

[23:02] good going for this city, I believe sometimes the city gets in the way. It

[23:06] throws up roadblocks and slows things down. And I don't know why that happens.

[23:11] Clinton cannot afford to discourage investors, tourism, redevelopment when

[23:17] alternatives may exist that both protect public safety and support economic

[23:24] growth. I would also like the council to discuss the consistency on how fire and

[23:29] building code requirements are applied. The city invested significant resources

[23:35] into remodeling the Eagle Point Lodge yet. To my understanding is that there's

[23:42] not a sprinkler system was not installed in that project.

[23:47] I can't imagine if I would have bought the Eagle Point Lodge what they would

[23:51] have ran me through. They would have wanted me to sprinkler it like they do

[23:56] other buildings. Okay, I get that. But the thing of it is we need a level

[24:01] playing field for all parties. At the same time, private party or private pop

[24:06] property owners and businesses are being required to make costly sprinkler

[24:12] upgrades in order to continue operating or complete renovations. We need to help

[24:18] the city flourish, not diminish. in my understanding is correct. I believe the

[24:25] public deserves an explanation on why different standards appear to be applied

[24:30] to public and private projects. Consistency, transparency,

[24:36] don't like that word, but it's there. Consistency, transparency, and fairness

[24:42] are essential to maintaining public trust and encouraging investments in our

[24:47] community. More broadly, I believe the building and safety division should be

[24:53] structured in a way that encourages problem solving encourages customer

[24:59] service and economic development while maintaining appropriate safety

[25:04] standards. I believe in moving the division out of the fire department and

[25:09] into a department focused on development and community growth would help achieve

[25:14] that balance. I appre appreciate your consideration of this request and look

[25:20] forward to discussing these issues at the committee of the whole meeting.

[25:26] Is there any questions on that letter that I sent you guys? All of you.

[25:33] » No, I I appreciate it, Bill. >> I'm sorry.

[25:37] » I I appreciate you sending that letter out. Um, I've actually been on a small

[25:41] work group with Rhonda and Travis and Gro Clinton and some others um that have

[25:46] conducted some factf finding information with contractors in the area, business

[25:51] owners in the area, and kind of came to the same conclusion that they liked how

[25:56] it was before and they didn't understand why it switched.

[25:59] » Yeah. >> Um,

[26:00] » I'm the I'm under the same thing. >> And um they and a lot of the contractors

[26:05] work in dual counties. So they'll work in um Scott County or Jackson County and

[26:11] they claim that our system is a little harder to work in.

[26:14] » Um not so much it I think it's the organizational

[26:18] structure rather than they don't like the answers they're getting. I think

[26:22] they it just needs to be structured different because no nobody wants to um

[26:26] jeopardize safety at all. >> No, not at all.

[26:29] » And that's not like our concern at all. It's mainly just how do we make this

[26:32] flow better so that we're comparable so when a contractor comes to our area they

[26:37] get the same thing as if they came to Davenport.

[26:39] » Well, and that's the thing. I mean, I I went through and had my staff I sent

[26:43] this to you guys, too. I went through and had my staff go through all the

[26:47] cities in Clinton that have more than 20,000 people and went through how do

[26:52] the how many inspectors do they have? Like in Clinton we have three. Davenport

[26:56] has six. Deuke has four. You know Iowa City has six. And do they all wear their

[27:03] badges? They do in every city. Okay. Clothing.

[27:08] They just wear plain clothing is what they wear in these other cities. Here

[27:15] they wear bulletproof vests. Now I door knock for a living with people that are

[27:21] losing their homes and stuff like that. And if I went looking like some of the

[27:26] inspectors here, they would nobody would open the door. People I'd feel people

[27:30] were going to start shooting at me. But I mean, you have to go up to the door

[27:36] dressed in just normal clothes. Even if you got a jacket that says city

[27:39] inspector or you have a badge on, that's fine. But, you know, the way that they

[27:45] dress is very intimidating. And I've had a lot of people tell me that there's

[27:50] only two cities in Iowa that wear cameras. Clinton and Musketine. They're

[27:56] the only two. No other cities have cameras, body cams. Okay? No other

[28:01] cities wear bulletproof vests. So the thing of it is no other cities

[28:07] also do three-party or third-party inspection which I think would be a good

[28:12] two good thing too because third party inspection

[28:17] puts all the burden on the homeowner >> or the or the building owner. Yeah. To

[28:23] do to get the inspections done, turn it in the city, turn it into somebody like

[28:26] Tammy and move on. you know, I I really think uh there's a lot of stuff that

[28:34] could be changed. >> Okay.

[28:37] » So, I just wanted to bring that up. >> Thank you.

[28:39] » Bill, for those of people that don't know you, can you explain what your

[28:42] involvement is with Clinton? >> Well, I've been here since 2018, late

[28:50] 2018. And between myself, my son, and his wife, and my wife,

[28:57] and seven other students, we've bought 97

[29:01] properties in eight years here. Buildings, houses, rentals, multi-units.

[29:08] We bought We've had 97 closings so far in eight years. That's a lot. We spend a

[29:13] lot of money in this town. When we go out and flip houses in Denver for $600

[29:18] 700,000, we make $1500 or $200,000. We bring it here and we work on

[29:24] buildings that haven't been worked on for 50 years. We put money into the

[29:30] downtown. I have brought in or started or saved 13 businesses downtown from

[29:38] leaving. from Holl's Hot Dogs to the Lighthouse to a management company to a

[29:43] construction company to Riverfront Antiques and Consignment to the

[29:46] boutiques at Riverfront to the Riverfront Event Center to H to um Lewis

[29:53] right down here in the Tucker building that's working for Gold Clinton right

[29:56] now. I brought him to town. I brought underground to town. I kept Ashley here.

[30:00] I kept Graham's here. I moved Gary Dorne down here. thing of it is I have a tight

[30:06] grip on what's going on downtown because I really like it says on the back of my

[30:11] shirts, you know, grow downtown Clinton, make it great again, you know, and I'm

[30:16] really really trying to do that and I just, you know, need a little bit of

[30:21] help, you know, with the city going, hey, listen, you know what? We see what

[30:25] the guy's doing. We see what everybody's trying to do, you know, with all of

[30:29] these investors I'm bringing to town. They're all students of ours. So, and

[30:34] it's not drug money coming in. I want to clue you in on that. I might look like I

[30:38] do drugs, but I don't. I've never puffed a cigarette. I've never been drunk. I've

[30:45] never done drugs. And I've only dated two women, married both of them. So, the

[30:50] thing of it is my wife now tells me, she goes, "You're like a dinosaur." But you

[30:55] know what? I I just And and everybody thinks it's drug money coming into town,

[30:59] but it's not. I promise you it's not. you know, so

[31:03] » it's true legal in Colorado.

[31:07] First couple years, all we bring money >> and it's Yeah, it's kind of ridiculous,

[31:14] but you know, and and and I have a

[31:18] relationship over there, Patrick, too. I mean, you know, I I know all the dudes

[31:22] up in Cedar Rapids. You know, I've spent $18,000 in attorney's fees fighting the

[31:26] city. And you know what? That's ridiculous. I could put that money into

[31:30] buildings because that's what I would do. I'm not going to go out and just

[31:33] blow the money on on a fancy car. You guys see what I drive. I drive an old

[31:37] beat up van that hit a deer. That's missing half the front end and I haven't

[31:42] been pulled over yet. But I'm getting ready to take it to Mike's body shop and

[31:45] get it fixed. But I don't drive fancy vehicles. I drive old vehicles. I put my

[31:50] money into Clinton. And I told the Smid a couple months ago, I said, "You know

[31:54] where I vacation? I vacation in Clinton. That's what I do. I come here and I

[31:58] work. And I know you guys see me out there work.

[32:02] » So that's just all I've got to say. I know other people have to talk. Was

[32:06] there any other questions? >> No.

[32:10] » No. Carrie. >> Well, thank you very much for your time.

[32:13] » Thank you, Bill. >> Y

[32:17] » Hello everybody. Carrie Wade. I'm a property owner at 408 South First

[32:20] Street, Clinton, Iowa. I'm here as the president of your local downtown Smid.

[32:26] I'm also here as a business owner. I'm also here as a proud member of this

[32:31] community. I may not live in this community. I educated my children in

[32:35] this community. I open enrolled to your community. Okay? I am a big community

[32:40] supporter. I'm just not willing to move. The reason I'm here today is to ask you

[32:47] guys for a little consideration. Obviously, it's no secret there's nobody

[32:52] lining up at our downtown or even in some of our Lions businesses where there

[32:57] are empty buildings and there's nobody lining up beating down the doors to buy

[33:02] these buildings. But I'm also asking you guys to consider

[33:06] safety because I do believe safety is important. I'm a rule follower. This is

[33:12] where Bill and I don't generally get along. I follow rules. I enjoy rules. I

[33:17] like to follow them. But I do think that our fire code and our building and

[33:22] safety codes are very extreme in this town. I think we need to put together a

[33:27] committee or a work group um with community members, business owners,

[33:32] council members, whoever. But we need to come forth and realize that we are

[33:36] stopping growth. We are stopping things from happening. I don't want to go into

[33:41] a dark, deep hole because we've all been here way too long tonight. Um, but I do

[33:45] want you guys to know I am so proud to have everybody sitting up here on this

[33:50] council. This is a very thankless job. And I do appreciate that when I call

[33:55] council members, they answer. They call back. I appreciate when I call the mayor

[34:00] and he called me back. >> Well, you're a mayor, so I

[34:02] » You're right. >> the biggest town in Iowa, right?

[34:06] » But I I appreciate everything you do, but I really am I'm begging you guys. We

[34:11] need to start growing our downtown, our Lions district. I've got lots of great

[34:16] ideas. We've got lots of people who want to see this town flourish. But

[34:20] unfortunately, I think soon we're going to have more empty buildings and tumble

[34:24] weeds than we are people who own the buildings. I want to touch a little bit

[34:28] on our troll situation. Guys, you all know if you know me, I was not the

[34:34] biggest fan of the concert series. It did not do my business well. I am here

[34:40] for myself. I'm here for other business owners. We have a troll across the

[34:44] street from my business at Happy Joe's that thankfully the sawmill brought to

[34:49] our town. They projected only it's like 60,000 people which was a lot. And I

[34:54] will be the first to say I was like yeah right we're never going to see it chain

[34:58] the doors. I am seeing so many customers so much business as I was at a point of

[35:04] where I was like you know what I don't know if I can hang on much longer. The

[35:07] economy is tough right now. This is bringing people from Virginia, Vermont,

[35:11] Florida, Texas, all over the world to come see this. So, I'm asking that we

[35:16] not make our fire codes and our our rules for this city so hard and extreme

[35:24] that we can't we we don't we're deterring people from coming here, from

[35:27] living here, from from owning a business, which is most people's dream

[35:30] to be a business owner, but it's tough. It's tough in this town. Um, so I'm just

[35:36] asking you guys to take this into consideration. Let's get a committee

[35:39] together. Let's look at these ordinances. How long have these

[35:42] ordinances been in place? You know, are they even appropriate right now? Are

[35:45] they appropriate for what this town is trying to do? Ask yourselves that

[35:49] question. And like I said, I'd be glad to to be a part of a workg group. I'll

[35:54] be glad to get my hands dirty in all the free time I have. But let's do it, guys.

[35:59] Let's bring Clinton back. Let's bring businesses back. Let's stop deterring

[36:02] business. Let's stop making these guys jobs harder. You know, when the the

[36:07] inspectors come to the buildings, when the fire department has to come and

[36:11] inspect something, I'm sure they don't love the kickback that they get. Let's

[36:15] make it a little easier. Let's look at these ordinances and say, "What makes

[36:17] sense? What makes sense for growth?" So, you guys have a wonderful night.

[36:22] » Thank you. I will I will say that we did we did have some meetings recently to

[36:27] talk about code stuff and I probably slowed that down a little bit just with

[36:30] all the other stuff going on and meetings and things like that. So the

[36:35] discussion is not lost on that I guess. So, so we we did have some conversations

[36:40] and so yeah, >> thank you.

[36:43] » Mayor, Council, Fire Chief Mike, got to admit,

[36:46] » wait, you didn't fill out a card. >> A little taken back by the discussion

[36:50] being on the cow. Um I was called Friday said, "Hey, it's going to be on the cow.

[36:55] We have a work group already put together that we've done some work on

[36:58] it, which I want to discuss that work group with you, mayor, and I believe it

[37:02] may end up in a closed session." Um >> Okay. I'm going to start with our codes.

[37:07] So, currently the city of Clinton adopts the state building code,

[37:13] which means we have to follow the state building code and we cannot amend it to

[37:18] be less strict. That's how it's worded in law. Now, we're looking to change

[37:23] that to where we the IBC, which is the international building code, the IBC,

[37:30] which is the existing building code, and one other one.

[37:39] » Yeah, there's one other one that we can adopt as long as it's substantially in

[37:44] accord with the state's adoption. >> Mike, can I butt in for a second? This

[37:47] isn't this isn't about codes. We we don't want any codes. um how to carry on

[37:52] safer. >> Okay.

[37:54] » Are no not safer, more lenient so that businesses can come into town. So I'm

[37:59] telling you that cities aren't more lenient than we are. They're adopting

[38:05] the exact same fire code that we are except maybe making local amendments

[38:10] that have to be at least as stringent as the state. The fire code, the mechanical

[38:17] code, the electrical code, the plumbing code, they all have to be substantially

[38:22] in accord with the state and cannot be amended to be less stringent.

[38:28] That's the law. We did a lot of research on it. Um, and I remember standing up

[38:34] here, I don't know, a year and a half ago and it was like, yeah, we have to

[38:36] adopt everything because that's the state law. And at the time we did

[38:42] because we currently adopt the state building code. Now is everybody at dial

[38:46] going to enforce that? Maybe, maybe not. Not my call, but I know that we are in

[38:51] line with the law. Now, we found out that there are a few

[38:55] codes that we can amend locally to be substantially in accord with the state

[39:01] law. We can look at doing that. I have no problem with looking and doing that.

[39:06] I have no problem with a workg group to do that. Um, again, I'm a little taken

[39:11] back. I was just told about this on Friday. Just given this nice PowerPoint

[39:16] presentation prior to the other meeting starting,

[39:20] totally uninformed that this is even going on. Troll

[39:24] trolls a fire hazard. Um, and we're working on a way to make it work.

[39:30] » Can you tell me about the >> Can can we can we get I um I'd like to

[39:35] go back to this discussion for tonight. Not that either one of your points

[39:39] aren't valid. They definitely are. But tonight,

[39:42] » there's a lot of stuff thrown around here that I really think I should have

[39:45] the opportunity to talk about because you guys have been talking about it

[39:49] behind closed doors without my opinion, without my thoughts.

[39:54] » Yep. I I agree, Mike. And when we did have a meeting recently, Carrie, it was

[39:58] actually Pat, myself, the mayor, Mike, Eli, Greg, Tammy. Is that anyone else?

[40:07] And we're actually I believe we're waiting on Pat, aren't we?

[40:11] » Last I knew. >> No,

[40:13] » he was supposed to follow up on something.

[40:14] » I already told you that I probably slowed that up a little bit.

[40:17] » Oh, okay. >> Okay. All right.

[40:18] » I thought we were still waiting on Pat because I have some questions. I have

[40:22] some questions that came out of >> advice has been clear. I I I I said that

[40:26] we could we could get we gave the option that if

[40:30] we wanted we could get rid of adoption of the state building code and adopt

[40:33] those those international codes >> independently. So I think

[40:39] » as long as they substantially comply and Mike agreed and we said that abs the

[40:43] state didn't even adopt chapter one of the state building code. They got rid of

[40:47] it entirely. They did they have their own administrative rules so we can do

[40:50] all that locally. That's what we settled on. But

[40:53] » right, >> I don't think you were waiting on me. I

[40:55] just think the council needs to do that. >> No, I I just said I'm the one I'm the

[41:00] one that slowed that up. I had some I have some conversations out of that

[41:03] meeting, but we've been dealing with uh data centers and uh city administrator

[41:10] duties and a lot of things that have come up in the last month that needed

[41:14] priority. And I know codes are important, but I slowed those

[41:18] conversations down just because I do have some questions and it is on my

[41:22] radar. So >> yeah, you can put that on me.

[41:25] » We're standing in a public forum um talking about operational level stuff,

[41:30] » the inspectors wear vests for their safety. And I think that if anybody

[41:35] questions whether or not citizens of Clinton threaten our our inspectors

[41:40] crazy because they do. They wear the cameras for the exact same reason. You

[41:45] also wear the crank cameras because when they when I get a complaint, I'll go

[41:48] back and watch the footage and be like, "Uh, I'm sorry, sir, but here is what

[41:53] was said." Or to solidify a complaint that was made.

[41:58] Third party inspections, we have them. Okay.

[42:03] $18,000. I can't control that. >> Sorry. I'm going to go back to what I

[42:09] actually prepared before I had all the information before I saw this. I want to

[42:13] better understand the objective behind the proposed organizational change so we

[42:17] can evaluate it from an operational, fiscal, and civil service delivery

[42:22] perspective. Given there has been no documented performance concern, I think

[42:26] it's important we clearly define the problem we are trying to solve. When

[42:30] we're trying to clarify the purpose of this proposal, we should ask, what

[42:33] specific issue or gap are you seeking to address by moving the building safety to

[42:39] community development? Has an analysis been conducted comparing current

[42:43] performance metrics with your desired outcomes?

[42:47] Do we have data showing deficiencies in inspections, plan reviews, timelines, or

[42:54] enforcement under our current structure? Is there a concern with current service

[42:58] levels, response times, or customer experience?

[43:02] Currently, the building safety division operates within the fire department. The

[43:06] structure aligns the building code with the fire prevention and life safety

[43:09] functions. on a daily basis. This allows for coordinated plan review,

[43:14] inspections, and code enforcement activities that are closely

[43:18] interconnected. At this time, there have been no

[43:22] identified performance concerns with the building safety division. Permitting,

[43:26] inspections, and plan review functions are being carried out in a manner that

[43:30] meets operational expectations. Additionally, no formal analysis to my

[43:35] knowledge or defined objectives have been

[43:39] presented outlining what specific issue this proposed change is intending to

[43:43] address. As you consider this po proposal, I

[43:46] would encourage focusing on a few key areas.

[43:50] First, service delivery. Any restructuring should clearly improve

[43:54] outcomes, whether that's permitting timelines, customer service, or

[43:58] development activity. At this point, it's not clear what measurable

[44:02] improvement is being sought, and all those things that Mr. Tweifer could do

[44:06] at city hall before, he can do at Central Station.

[44:10] Second, operational coordination. Building and fire code enforcement are

[44:14] closely linked. Separating these functions would require new processes to

[44:18] ensure consistency, communication, and alignment, particularly

[44:23] on life safety issues. Third, organizational capacity. As

[44:28] currently structured, community development primarily focuses on

[44:31] nuisance enforcement and property maintenance. And I'm sorry, Tammy, I

[44:34] know you do more than that. That's what I have.

[44:38] How do you envision in integrating technical building code enforcement?

[44:42] They are technical, right, Cody? Sometimes difficult to read and

[44:46] interpret and sometimes you have to look in four different books to get your

[44:49] answer. An oversight into the framework. What

[44:53] staffing expertise or structural changes would be required to support your

[44:57] transition? Fourth, fiscal impact. Obviously, you

[45:02] are seeking $5,000. Um, organizational changes often come with costs, whether

[45:07] that's through restructuring, training, or administrative adjustments. To date,

[45:12] I guess maybe a a financial analysis has been provided, but I didn't know of it.

[45:18] Fifth, risk and compliance. Consistency in code enforcement is critical for

[45:22] legal defensibility. And I can tell you in the last two years and especially the

[45:27] last year with Eli, that has been our focus because that was the number one

[45:31] complaint of our department before was inconsistencies.

[45:35] That's why you have 60some pro or policies because we wanted to make sure

[45:42] that when I came and inspected, you got the same inspection as when Cody or

[45:47] Connor or whoever does them. That was our number one complaint

[45:54] in public safety. Any fragmentation between building and fire code oversight

[45:58] could introduce risk if not carefully planned. Finally, best practice. From an

[46:03] administrative perspective, organiza organizational changes of this scale are

[46:07] typically driven by a demonstrated need, supported by data, and aligned with

[46:11] strategic goals. I would recommend we follow that same discipline approach

[46:15] here. In closing, without a clearly identified problem, measurable

[46:19] objective, or supporting analysis, it is difficult to fully evaluate the

[46:23] necessity or benefit of this proposed change. I would recommend that any any

[46:29] decision be based on defined goals, data, and a thorough understanding of

[46:33] operational and financial impacts. How many people sitting up there know what

[46:38] the building safety division does on a daily basis?

[46:44] All right. Furthermore, that this conversation happen at the operational

[46:48] level between the city administrator or interim and departments with the plan to

[46:53] meet your desired goals and outcomes presented.

[46:57] » Thank you. Any questions? >> Mike, I got two questions.

[47:00] » Can I run through my PowerPoint too after that so it can because I don't

[47:04] want to get off topic. We're not Mike, you're doing a great job. We're not

[47:08] trying to lessen safety. All I'm trying to say is the organizational change so

[47:13] that They're not quite the same.

[47:18] » So I guess my first question would be is when the department was at city hall,

[47:23] how was it rain? >> Way back when. Yes. It's So I'm going to

[47:28] I don't know if this is foul language or not. When I took over the building

[47:32] department, they said we are the bastard children, sorry, of the of the city.

[47:37] Why? Because we get moved around. Different leaders, different that.

[47:41] Anytime there's a problem, something happens to BNS. There's a change in

[47:46] leadership, whatever, because the focus is on all the negative things, right?

[47:51] You said you have 21 20ome complaints that are sitting on your desk at home. I

[47:56] asked for them so I can work on them. I haven't seen them. So, we do SWAT

[48:01] analysis to ensure that we're performing the standards. And if there's

[48:04] expectations that are out there that we're not meeting, give them to us.

[48:08] We'll meet them. And if by law we can, we will. So, let me go back to your

[48:14] original question. We adopted the building code in 2012. I

[48:21] think at that time, I'm trying to remember who was in

[48:24] charge. Anyways, when Jessica Kizner was here, the building department was not in

[48:28] a good place. Kraton Reganweather retired from the fire department. He

[48:32] went over there with an order to shape it up. spent a couple years over there

[48:36] shaping things around, getting rid of people, moving people, and then he

[48:40] wanted to retire or actually go to the street department. And so Jeff Chapman

[48:44] took over to Billy Neighborhood Services. He remained over there until

[48:48] 2020 when he came over to the Clinton Fire Department. That move I won't

[48:54] discuss in public. There was personnel matters that came into that move. So

[49:00] it's been with the Clinton Fire Department for do the math. 20

[49:05] » 14 years >> for a while.

[49:08] » So, it wasn't moved because anything was wrong at the city hall. It was moved

[49:12] because of >> Well, again, uh I think multiple reasons

[49:17] come into play. I keep hearing that Matt wanted to have an office for Gro Clinton

[49:21] over here, so he wanted them separated. So, he moved the inspectors to the fire

[49:25] over to the fire department and moved Nuisance over to the police department.

[49:28] Nuisance came back. inspector state and Bill Clinton never had an office

[49:34] over here. >> When did when did you say it was

[49:36] separated to fire department?

[49:40] » So the records that I went through >> 2013 would be the year that record sorry

[49:46] Kraton came over to man the ship. However, he retired from the fire

[49:51] department to do that. The information that I got um through

[49:55] some city records was 2020 is when um it officially went to the fire department.

[50:00] » That is when it came over to the fire department. That is correct.

[50:03] » So it's only been the last four years. >> Yes.

[50:05] » Yes. >> Correct.

[50:10] » So as far as financing goes, can somebody come over there and pay with a

[50:13] credit card? >> You guys have a credit card reader?

[50:16] » They pay online with a credit card. >> Online?

[50:18] » Yep. So when it was at city hall, they could just walk over to finance, pay it,

[50:23] bring it back over, get their permit, get their certificate or whatever

[50:26] without >> Now they can just stand there, pay it,

[50:28] and get their permit. It's a lot more convenient.

[50:32] » But they have to go online to do it. >> Yep.

[50:34] » Okay.

[50:42] » Thank you, Mike. Any other questions? >> Let's see. I truly think this should be

[50:47] done at the operational level and then a presentation brought to you guys.

[50:54] Can I just clarify Travis your question and actually Mike I think when Kraton

[50:58] come over he was still as a battalian chief if I remember right because I was

[51:02] working under him he was still a battalion chief and administrator at

[51:06] that time Kissner brought him over due to issues to clean it up that was done

[51:12] at some point then he retired went down to the street department Jeff came in

[51:18] before then we had a community development director Mike Reynolds for

[51:22] that there was uh Stzeski. I think it was John Stzeski.

[51:26] » John. >> So,

[51:28] » so did you guys work all together when it was at city hall before?

[51:31] » Yes. >> Yep. And in 2020,

[51:34] previous administrator made the decision to separate the department.

[51:38] » Did it work? >> Leading question.

[51:43] » Code enforcement was brought back to city hall.

[51:49] » Thank you, Tammy.

[51:53] Connor, go ahead. >> You want to run through your

[51:55] presentation or >> Yeah, it's almost 10.

[51:57] » Can I just say one thing? >> Yeah, please.

[51:59] » The only issue that I ever have with the inspections is they'll come out and say,

[52:07] "Take care of these three things and we agree on it." And I say, "Okay, we'll

[52:11] get those done the next two weeks." But then when you get the letter, there's 15

[52:16] items on there. And I'm like, "We didn't talk about all this stuff." So that's my

[52:20] issue with it. If we're talking about these three things, put the three things

[52:24] on the letter, not 12 other things on top of the other three we talked about.

[52:28] Because then I send these letters when I get them, which I'm not I've only been

[52:34] in Colorado 16 days this year. So if they send me letters, I don't get them

[52:39] most of the time until I come home a month or two later. By that time,

[52:43] everything's passed. So, I have a great relationship with Tammy and we work back

[52:49] and forth together on stuff if something comes up and things like that. So,

[52:55] that's the big reason, you know, I I think that's the reason a lot of people

[53:00] have trouble with the inspectors is because they say we'll take care of

[53:04] these two things and then when they get the letter in the mail, there's 15.

[53:07] » I think we can discuss that at a different

[53:09] » I think so too, but I I just let's go through this presentation. Yeah, when

[53:13] they were talking about safety and stuff, I just thought,

[53:16] » you know, that's that would what drives me nuts and I probably drives other

[53:19] people nuts. >> I understand. All right, Connor.

[53:22] » Thank you, Bill. And and also, just to clarify, uh Friday when I put this on

[53:26] the agenda was the day that I notified Mike and Tammy at the same time. Prior

[53:31] to that, neither of the department heads knew. Um this wasn't something that I

[53:36] wanted to discuss with department heads and not all together the same time. Um

[53:42] so just to clarify that so this presentation was brought to us a

[53:48] few months back um to discuss why it's at the fire department and should it be

[53:55] back at the building safety division. So in this presentation I went through um

[54:00] just a short summary and Christa can get you these powerpoints. I don't want to

[54:04] waste any morebody's time. We compared peer cities um to who is running

[54:10] building and neighborhood services, permitting, code enforcement, and

[54:14] nuisance out of their fire department. And if you I'll jump to that slide.

[54:20] Um I couldn't find one that was running out of the fire department.

[54:24] » Ames, >> Ames, Iowa. I I I appreciate that.

[54:30] But in our local area or city our size, I couldn't find one. So we had called a

[54:35] couple of them to kind of get an idea of how they functioned and why they were in

[54:40] that place. That's what made our decision to get to that point. So if we

[54:45] get back to history, um we did a little bit of history of where building and

[54:49] neighbor services was. And currently or up until 2020, it had always been under

[54:55] code enforcement. Um and it had operated

[55:04] And then our core question, this isn't about safety. We're not trying to make

[55:08] safety go away. We're not trying to change codes. Um, that's not my

[55:12] objective at all. And that wasn't discussed in the work group one bit. All

[55:16] we care about is how it's perceived to the citizens and to the business owners

[55:20] and contractors. Fire department will still have their

[55:24] roles um as they are in the state code. That's your job. All we're trying to do

[55:29] is change the optics and how the citizens perceive how this this looks

[55:34] and moves forward. Um that touches on what we found

[55:43] communities. So that's the current structures there on your left, the

[55:47] proposed structures on your right. Fire department still involved with their

[55:50] same practices under life safety and critical activity.

[55:56] Kind of defines the roles. Um, all fire departments operate under the same

[56:00] rules. Ours is a little different having code enforcement with it or I'm sorry,

[56:05] permitting and um,

[56:08] » code enforcement. >> Code enforcement. Yes.

[56:13] Um, customer service is really this main focus is how do we get better for our

[56:18] community? Again, I I don't want to change codes. That's not this objective

[56:22] at all.

[56:26] Um, this was brought up because also contract contractors that work in other

[56:31] communities claim that the our city is a little harder to work in and they don't

[56:36] get the same structure that they operate in

[56:40] currently. That hurts our investments from outside companies.

[56:46] Um so recommendation would be to move back to city hall under the direction of

[56:51] code or under the direction of community development and Tammy.

[56:57] We talked a little bit about um what would be required to make this move. Um

[57:02] that was just a hypothetical number. We think it's going to be much less than

[57:06] that. Um but that would ultimately come out of permitting fund as if it was a

[57:10] permitting expense anyways. Um, so work group, the work group that

[57:15] we are for council was Winters, Lee, and Karns. Um, I'd spoken with Brian about

[57:20] how to make this move happen under our budget system. I talked to Tammy about

[57:25] it. I talked to Kevin about safety. Matt Parbves was our um, community outreach,

[57:30] so he's the one that kind of met with all the business owners on that. And as

[57:34] Carrie suggested, I'd love Carrie to be on the board as well or the committee.

[57:39] Um that's just a little bit of how the structure looks now. Um

[57:46] still everything pretty much stays the same just the perspective to the

[57:51] community. Um

[57:55] back to the same structure it was before and then our proposed timeline. So work

[58:01] group would be phase one, then getting to the relocation plan, and then

[58:05] hopefully by the end of summer having a set in stone, here's how we're moving

[58:09] forward to help better our community.

[58:14] That would be the motion that I would like to make. Um I motion to have the

[58:17] work group listed above proceed forward with the necessary steps

[58:21] to accomplish this move.

[58:26] Um, the work group has to include the fire

[58:30] department. >> Yeah,

[58:33] » they're definitely more than welcome for sure.

[58:35] » This just kind of turned into an odd conversation how it's going.

[58:41] » Yeah. >> Um, yeah. I mean, if that's what you all

[58:45] want to do, but the fire department has to be an integral part of this

[58:48] conversation >> cuz even if so, I go to court with all

[58:53] these people all the time and you know, the fire department handles its

[58:57] expertise and Tammy handles generally private property. You know, the rental

[59:03] side is almost always >> Rich and Eli and those guys

[59:09] fire code. the fire code. The fire department usually I just mean for the

[59:12] work. >> So yeah,

[59:13] » what I'm trying to say is you could put everything under Tammy. You could change

[59:17] the code to change our code to say that. >> But if you did that, she would still

[59:22] have to have Eli and Greg and Mike involved in all of that.

[59:28] » 100%. Yes. >> You know, they'd still have to have

[59:32] their division correct under her. >> So that's just how it appears to me in

[59:37] court. Like when I know it's a rental code violation and I'm there with Eli,

[59:42] » Tammy doesn't really go usually unless she has a nuisance issue in the same

[59:47] case, right? It's she just deals with nuisance mostly and you know like unsafe

[59:52] buildings, that type of thing. But a lot of times it's a mixed bag. I've got the

[59:57] fire people there and I've got her there.

[59:59] » Um you know it's almost 10 o'clock guys and

[1:00:03] I think everybody's starting to get a little cranky. Um,

[1:00:06] I mean, if that's what you all want to do and the council's okay with that, as

[1:00:10] long as everyone's getting together and talking about this and actually going

[1:00:13] through it and strategizing to figure out, yes, this makes sense, no, it

[1:00:18] doesn't, I'm fine with that. And I will make a motion for you all to do that.

[1:00:22] » Can we Can we Okay. Can we do it a little differently?

[1:00:28] » Yeah. Can we actually look at

[1:00:33] some of the data points and the goals and objectives and and what it's going

[1:00:37] to look like? Like I I feel like we're

[1:00:42] » this isn't a new structure to cities. This is how all the other cities are

[1:00:45] operating. >> No, I understand that. I understand

[1:00:47] that. But why are we doing it other than customer service?

[1:00:52] » Well, customer service, >> anybody can do customer service. Well, I

[1:00:54] figured once they got together and started hashing this out, they would

[1:00:57] come to some conclusions. >> I I guess going through it, it's just

[1:01:01] kind of a odd way to have this conversation in my opinion.

[1:01:07] » It's really It's really choppy kind of. >> It's an idea. I kind of I'm I'm tired,

[1:01:11] too. I'm kind of understand where Scott's coming from. Maybe like have a

[1:01:14] work group to then come back to a separate cow to have those conversations

[1:01:18] with the departments. I understand where you're coming from, Connor. I understand

[1:01:22] where Bill and Carrie's coming from. I also understand where Mike and Sammy and

[1:01:26] everybody else is coming from. >> We never had a work group to move a

[1:01:29] department though. That's what I'm getting.

[1:01:31] » Well, we didn't have a work group to move it the first time.

[1:01:34] » Well, technic because >> I don't know if changing structures is

[1:01:39] the city administrator's job. Pat, I mean, I think Matt's change should have

[1:01:44] probably went through the council when that whole department was re completely

[1:01:50] gutted and moved. I think that was something we should have talked about,

[1:01:54] but we came in one day and it all had happened and it's been that way for six

[1:01:58] years. So, here we are. Um, so I don't mind if you all want to talk about it,

[1:02:02] but I already think I have an idea where you all going to end up concluding. And

[1:02:07] I don't know if it is going to be concluded that a move is what's

[1:02:10] necessary, but I'm fine with you all talking about.

[1:02:14] » Eli, go ahead, sir. >> Thank you. Eli Voss, building official

[1:02:17] with the fire department. Um, there's a couple points I want to just maybe add a

[1:02:20] few more talking points to that have been

[1:02:24] addressed and then I want to address the codes that might help answer questions

[1:02:28] you guys have regarding them. Um, regarding peer cities, Connor, I took a

[1:02:34] fire inspection class, got my certification a year and a half ago out

[1:02:37] in De Moines metro with all the De Moines metro fire marshals. And um

[1:02:43] although it's relatively uncommon in Iowa, our model has uh gained a lot of

[1:02:47] attention from those professionals out there because of its effectiveness and

[1:02:51] discussions with those De Moines metro area fire marshals and code

[1:02:54] professionals reinforced that the structure provides substantial benefits

[1:02:57] in communication, coordination, and life safety oversight. And our model was

[1:03:01] viewed by many of them out there as forward thinking and highly effective.

[1:03:05] So it's not necessarily modernize it. Maybe we were ahead of it and we're more

[1:03:10] advanced than other cities like us who don't think that way because

[1:03:14] seriously they were impressed. All those bigger cities out there were absolutely

[1:03:18] impressed with how our model works here in Clinton. So I just wanted to share

[1:03:21] that. Um regarding customer service, so I took over about a year ago. One of the

[1:03:27] programs we implemented was quality assurance and we hand out um anonymous

[1:03:31] quality assurance questionnaires and we get them back and I'd be happy to share

[1:03:35] every single one of those with you. We have high remarks on everything we do

[1:03:40] and so we are addressing customer service and where we do have downfalls

[1:03:44] we address those weekly at our um team huddle every Thursday morning to start

[1:03:49] our day off and that's one of the items we always go over are the QAs and where

[1:03:54] there are issues we address them and we fix them and we move forward and we get

[1:03:57] better. So, we address that every single week and I will share every one of those

[1:04:02] with you guys if you want to see what we've been doing because it's working.

[1:04:05] And I've heard that from contractors out on site. I had somebody say um a couple

[1:04:09] months ago building a new house that I don't know what's changed, but I went

[1:04:12] into your office and it was very pleasant.

[1:04:15] » That's good. >> I thought it was great.

[1:04:18] » Seriously, I thought that was great. >> You wonder what was happening before

[1:04:21] though, don't you? So, I just want to let you know we are

[1:04:25] addressing customer service and we actually hold that very high on our list

[1:04:30] every single week. So, I I'll share those with you. Um, regarding

[1:04:35] contractors from other cities, we do a lot of work with contractors from other

[1:04:38] cities. On a ECIA job, I was dealing with a customer um who does primarily

[1:04:43] all their work out of Debuke, and he he uh commented how pleasant it was to work

[1:04:47] with the city of Clinton because up there it could take up to 14 days to get

[1:04:50] an inspection schedule.

[1:04:54] um dealing with a contractor from Bentonorf on a big project here in town.

[1:04:58] He said he was told in Bentonorf it could be up to 90 days to get his

[1:05:01] permit. We exceed that by far. And so those are

[1:05:06] some comparables in this area of other contractors who also work here who are

[1:05:10] actually glad with the services they get here. Um, as far as the committee goes,

[1:05:16] I would love to be a part of that conversation because there's a lot of

[1:05:19] insight I think I can bring where like the QAS, maybe you guys didn't know that

[1:05:23] we were doing those kinds of thing. We've implemented a lot of things to get

[1:05:26] better in our office. So maybe that's just not known and I'd love to share all

[1:05:30] that kind of a show and tell um for Carrie and Bill. So, the city of Clinton

[1:05:36] has codes and ordinances and we've adopted them and it's become law. And

[1:05:41] once adopted, those laws cannot simply be ignored in order to make it just

[1:05:46] easier to build here. Um, city staff both um have both a legal and ethical

[1:05:52] obligation to interpret administer the the adopted uh regulations consistently

[1:05:56] and fairly. and selective administration or intentionally looking the other way

[1:06:01] creates significant ris uh risk, excuse me. Um such as increased liability

[1:06:06] exposure for the city, for the building safety division, for us inspectors

[1:06:10] personally, increased danger to occupants, inconsistent and unfair code

[1:06:15] administration for customers if we're not treating everybody the same, then

[1:06:18] that can be viewed poorly. Um loss of public trust, and increased likelihood

[1:06:23] of future incidents if something goes wrong because we didn't enforce it. If

[1:06:27] it's believed that certain codes should change, there's a legal process to

[1:06:30] change them through legislation uh legislative action. And the mayor just

[1:06:34] talked about how Cody and Connor and Pat and a few of us met to talk about that

[1:06:38] right now. So, we're in the middle of that. And I think we have some wiggle

[1:06:41] room because the state cut out a big section of where we were really tied

[1:06:44] with. So, we we're going to look at those options and try to make those the

[1:06:48] administration part of that much user friendly. Until that occurs occurs

[1:06:54] though, the code officials are obligated to interpret and administer the codes as

[1:06:57] they're adopted. And as they're adopted, the codes provide the rules that we have

[1:07:03] to follow. First and foremost, the codes tell us

[1:07:07] what we must do. Second, if the codes do not include rules for us to follow, then

[1:07:12] we can approve alternatives as long as they meet or exceed that code minimum.

[1:07:18] Lastly, if an approved alternative is not available, then we can approve

[1:07:22] solutions designed by an engineer. Those are the options. If it's in the

[1:07:27] book, we follow it. If it's not in the book, we can approve a alternative that

[1:07:30] meets it. And if there's no alternatives, then solutions can be

[1:07:34] prepared by a registered design professional.

[1:07:37] So, approving anything outside the scope of those three options willfully

[1:07:41] violates the code and puts legal risk on the code officials who look the other

[1:07:46] way. and we do not want to put ourselves in that position. I don't know if

[1:07:50] anybody's paid attention to city of Davenport in the last couple years with

[1:07:53] the building collapse. I wouldn't be surprised if some of those people are

[1:07:56] going to be held criminally for actions. We don't want to put ourselves in that

[1:08:01] position. Um the thing about the rules, they're

[1:08:05] not always crystal clear. Cody saw this firsthand when we were dealing with

[1:08:08] chapter 152 a couple years back. How many different books you have to get

[1:08:12] into and how this references this. So they're not always clear and so they

[1:08:15] must be interpreted. Code officials interpret the rules to ensure that the

[1:08:19] proper scope and applicability of that code went into the proper ruling. So we

[1:08:24] got to make sure we're dealing in the right book and then do these chapters

[1:08:27] apply to this project. So we got to break it down like that every time to

[1:08:31] make sure our ruling is correct. If a customer disagrees with the code

[1:08:37] official's interpretation of those rules, um the code official cannot

[1:08:41] simply ignore or change the rules. By law, we cannot do that.

[1:08:45] » Those rule changes only come through legislative action. Um, we can only

[1:08:49] approve that alternative if there's one there or we can accept something

[1:08:54] designed by a professional that says it meets those rules. Um, if the customer

[1:08:58] is dissatisfied with those options, they have the right to appeal what we

[1:09:01] interpreted. And appeals are not viewed negatively or taken personally. I

[1:09:06] actually prefer them um because it's my preferred method of reaching a solution.

[1:09:10] It puts it on a a board. It takes it off of everybody else and the board says,

[1:09:15] "Did I make the right ruling or not?" And then we move on from there. Um, the

[1:09:20] building safety division prides itself on working with customers to find those

[1:09:23] solutions and approve projects. We do this all the time where we can within

[1:09:28] those rules that we have to work within the code book. Um, and I can give

[1:09:33] examples of that that we do that every day. Um, one is, um, YWCA, the new

[1:09:38] building, you know, they were they had to have a temp CFO or CFO by a certain

[1:09:42] date or they were going to lose all their funding. Well, we absolutely

[1:09:45] worked with them. We go through, we find out, is this thing safe to be in for

[1:09:49] right now and can they work on these other minor things and we work with them

[1:09:53] and we reach that conclusion and we approve them, gave them that tempo and

[1:09:59] everything's good to go. Um, we've done that for Unity Christian School, we've

[1:10:03] done that for private residential dwellings. Um, just this probably two

[1:10:07] weeks ago, I had a customer put an addition on the back of a house. They

[1:10:11] were one truss short. Trusses can only span 24 inches on center. So, the first

[1:10:16] one was 24. Second one was 24. The next one was 30. The next one was about 38.

[1:10:20] The next one was 40. So, they tried. So, what's the solution? We need an extra

[1:10:25] truss back in there so they're all spaced right. Well, that was going to

[1:10:28] require ripping all the roofing off, all the shingles off, all the um sheathing

[1:10:33] off and then adding another truss in. So, they have to buy another truss. They

[1:10:36] were going to have to cut plumbing vents. So, working with them, I said,

[1:10:39] "How about you just stick frame another rafter in to cut that 40 in down to make

[1:10:45] that compliant?" And the guy was almost in tears and wanted to hug me because we

[1:10:50] saved him all that time and money because we do that. We work with our

[1:10:54] customers to find those solutions where we can. we just can't look the other way

[1:10:58] or not follow something if it's adopted. So, I just wanted to share that that we

[1:11:02] do that all the time for our customers and and where we can we we try to do

[1:11:07] that. >> Yeah.

[1:11:08] » Can I ask a question, Eli? Cuz because I don't understand the process because I

[1:11:12] don't own anything that's got to be inspected anymore.

[1:11:15] » But how did we get down to on the troll? How did we get to where everybody's

[1:11:20] frantic and >> it's not really on the agenda though,

[1:11:24] » but it was brought up, >> but it's part of getting way off.

[1:11:27] » We're getting way out in the weeds. >> I think you we need to decide do they

[1:11:31] want to get together and talk about this. Yes or no?

[1:11:34] » Yes. >> Okay. Then I think you all should get

[1:11:36] together and talk about this and then if you guys have something meaningful,

[1:11:40] we'll talk about it in another committee of the whole. How's that sound?

[1:11:44] » That sounds good. >> Perfect. Great.

[1:11:47] Good deal. Do we need to motion that or just let it happen? I don't think so.

[1:11:52] » Just a work. >> Well, then it would be just a work

[1:11:54] group. >> That's what you proposed.

[1:11:57] » He proposed. >> I proposed what was brought.

[1:12:00] » Oh, well, I'm not comfortable without you guys going and meeting with the fire

[1:12:03] department first. >> Okay.

[1:12:05] » Y that's got to happen. >> That's got to happen.

[1:12:08] So the motion is to put forward to a to direct at a working group including

[1:12:14] Connor's people that he suggested plus the fire department.

[1:12:17] » Yes, that sounds good. If Yeah, they they too many moving parts to not have a

[1:12:24] » Yeah, there's just too much. >> I think we need I suppose we should

[1:12:26] include Tammy because >> Yeah. No, Tam whoever was on that list

[1:12:30] and the fire department. >> There's a lot of people talking right

[1:12:33] now. >> Yeah. Let's

[1:12:36] » All right. We got a motion. A second. >> Second.

[1:12:40] » You're getting sleepy. >> It's all you, buddy. A meeting if you

[1:12:43] want to. >> I know. Go do it.

[1:12:46] » Is there a motion to move the work group forward?

[1:12:49] » I make the motion. >> Is there a second?

[1:12:51] » Second. >> Second.

[1:12:53] » Can we have roll call, please?

[1:12:57] » Council member Turpin. >> Yes.

[1:13:00] » Winter. >> Yes.

[1:13:01] » Karns. >> Sure.

[1:13:02] » Yes. >> Lee?

[1:13:04] » Yes. >> Oren?

[1:13:05] » Yes. >> Celely?

[1:13:06] » Yes. Determin. >> Yes.

[1:13:09] » Are we talking about 2E? >> Oh god. Do you want to skip it?

[1:13:13] » I mean, sure. >> Is it urgent?

[1:13:15] » Nope. I motion to remove it from the committee.

[1:13:20] » We just place it on the next committee of the whole.

[1:13:23] » Yep. >> Perfect.

[1:13:24] » Make make a motion to move it to date certain, which is

[1:13:27] » 23rd. >> 23rd.

[1:13:30] » I'll make that motion. >> I'll second.

[1:13:33] » Can we have roll call, please?

[1:13:38] Karns, >> yes.

[1:13:40] » Lee, >> yes.

[1:13:41] » Oren, >> yes.

[1:13:42] » Seely, >> yes.

[1:13:43] » Yes. >> Turpin,

[1:13:44] » yep. >> Yes.

[1:13:48] » We have a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion.

[1:13:51] » We're adjourned.

[1:14:03] Heat. Heat.

Regular Committee of the Whole - Jun 09 2026 - Amended

Transcript