[2:13] We're going to call this uh study
[2:14] session
[2:16] to order. We have three things on the
[2:19] agenda tonight. Two reduction requests
[2:22] and our um visits here annual report. So
[2:25] the first reduction report request is
[2:28] 301 North Court. I believe that's you
[2:31] Ed. You want to come up?
[2:32] >> Yeah, sure. Yep.
[2:36] » Thank you for letting me come to the
[2:37] study session. I really appreciate it. I
[2:39] think it was like five, six weeks ago, I
[2:41] sent a an email out about a bill that
[2:44] I'd received uh for 301 North Court. It
[2:46] was a $1,300 water bill.
[2:49] Normally runs no more than about $300.
[2:52] And I worked with the city on that. I
[2:53] had the city uh the meter guy come out,
[2:56] looked at it, the water department.
[2:58] There were no leaks. We couldn't find
[2:59] anything. And I'd already previously
[3:01] looked.
[3:03] So, this is a recurrent problem. and
[3:05] I'll come to the second phase of my
[3:06] request. But the first request is I'm
[3:08] asking for a reduction based on that
[3:11] $1,300 bill. It should not been more
[3:13] than $300.
[3:15] Um, when we did a thorough thorough
[3:17] search of it, we talked to all of the
[3:19] tenants, we could not find any leaks
[3:22] anywhere and my theory is because I do
[3:25] have a problem with the [snorts]
[3:26] homeless coming around pretty much all
[3:28] of the properties is that perhaps they
[3:30] went and turned on the spigot in the
[3:32] outside. So that's that's a theory. I
[3:35] don't know if it's true or not, but that
[3:36] would help to explain why we got that
[3:38] bill. So that's the first request. The
[3:41] sec should we deal with that now or can
[3:43] I just move on?
[3:44] >> Yeah, let's talk about that. So how much
[3:45] are you requesting?
[3:47] >> Well, I mean I [snorts] don't know. I
[3:50] mean, I'd like to get it down to 300
[3:51] bucks because that's what I normally
[3:53] pay. So that's what I'd like.
[3:55] >> So do you have any proof from previous
[3:57] times that you've had homeless come in
[3:59] and leave stuff on? Yeah, I definitely
[4:01] had proof cuz I I I could tell that they
[4:04] were in there. It's obvious. It's very
[4:07] obvious when they come in. They do weird
[4:08] things for one thing. And unfortunately,
[4:11] the basement has a walk-in basement that
[4:13] goes down to the washer and dryer that
[4:14] we might not. There's also a b second
[4:17] additional bathroom down there. They
[4:19] clearly had been in there. So, it's a
[4:23] problem.
[4:24] >> Can you lock it?
[4:26] >> Yeah. I mean, I tried it once and uh
[4:29] somebody took the lock off.
[4:31] I mean, I could talk for hours about
[4:33] what the homeless do in this town. Um,
[4:36] so I don't know what to tell you.
[4:38] >> Yeah.
[4:40] >> What questions, council, do you have
[4:42] regarding this request?
[4:46] » Did anybody from the city come out and
[4:48] see where the water had spilled in the
[4:49] yard?
[4:50] >> No, there was no, they came out and
[4:52] looked at the meter itself because I was
[4:54] concerned if the meter was defective.
[4:56] >> Mhm.
[4:56] >> And that's when I found out about this
[4:58] Metron system. So, I was very thankful
[5:00] that they did come out and looked at it,
[5:03] my exact meter, and they could not
[5:05] identify any problems with that meter.
[5:08] And, you know, again, we'll go into the
[5:10] next phase of it. What came out of all
[5:12] of this, but no, they couldn't find any
[5:13] leaks.
[5:14] >> There wasn't any proof that it went into
[5:15] the yard.
[5:16] >> There's no proof of any nature.
[5:18] >> Okay.
[5:19] >> Absolutely not. Um, it's a it's a
[5:22] hypothesis.
[5:24] So, the normal course, Ed, just so you
[5:27] know, is that if we have proof, I think
[5:29] the council is more inclined to be,
[5:34] what do I want to say, more open to a
[5:37] refund, but when we just don't know, we
[5:40] just don't know.
[5:43] >> Nobody knows. Yeah,
[5:44] >> I do know that I've paid over $5,000 in
[5:47] excess water bills over the last few
[5:49] years because there was no system that
[5:51] allowed me to find out that it was
[5:53] happening. And that is again the reason
[5:55] why the real reason why I'm here and
[5:57] talk about that.
[5:58] >> Okay.
[5:59] >> Which is actually a win for everyone, a
[6:01] win for the city.
[6:03] >> Well, the uh so why don't you uh go
[6:05] ahead and talk Oh, well, does anybody
[6:07] else have anything to say also?
[6:09] Questions? I have one thought
[6:11] [clears throat] and sometimes this gets
[6:13] brought to my office and ordinarily we
[6:16] try to aortion against
[6:19] uh the hose running outside or the
[6:21] spigot left on but not going into a city
[6:24] sewer treatment. Uh and usually that
[6:28] allocation works out to forgiveness of
[6:30] at least half because it's untreated
[6:34] sewer so to speak water. So, we probably
[6:37] could start by um considering the idea
[6:41] that he probably
[6:43] u would be reasonable in asking for at
[6:46] least a 1/ half reduction if it's the
[6:49] story with the hose outside running and
[6:52] not going down into our sewer and not
[6:54] going into treatment. Uh so, that's a
[6:57] starting point if that is the case. So,
[7:01] >> I will say that I did discover that the
[7:03] hose had been messed with. Absolutely.
[7:06] Someone had taken the hose off. I had it
[7:08] wrapped on this particular place and
[7:10] that had been unraveled, [clears throat]
[7:12] screwed out.
[7:13] >> Yeah. That usually though still leaves a
[7:15] higher water bill because if the hose
[7:18] was running and we were using city
[7:20] water, um $1,300,
[7:24] you might assume there's three or 400
[7:26] extra dollars of water run besides
[7:30] anything that would be on the side of
[7:32] sewer treatment. So, um, at that point
[7:36] it's a committee question, but there's
[7:38] probably the allocation question, too.
[7:41] And that's probably something he
[7:43] deserves a consideration on if that hose
[7:46] situation happened.
[7:49] >> I guess my question, Ed, is do you have
[7:51] any evidence of
[7:54] how much water might have gone out to
[7:56] the host?
[7:57] >> Only that I know what the normal bill
[7:59] is. It's no more than 300,
[8:01] >> right?
[8:02] >> So, it's relax and it, you know, even in
[8:05] people using a lot of the showering and
[8:07] I put in a soaking tub in one of the
[8:09] units,
[8:10] >> it does not exceed more than $300 in a
[8:12] normal month.
[8:13] >> Yep.
[8:13] >> So that's I mean I can show you the records
[8:17] on that,
[8:18] >> which still seems like a lot of money to
[8:20] me, but it's what it is.
[8:25] » So why don't you uh talk about your
[8:27] second request? Well, first of all, I
[8:29] think I mentioned in my first
[8:30] correspondence that I went to Aaron Ker
[8:32] many years ago with this same complaint
[8:36] that why, you know, I get these calls
[8:38] from the water department, Mr. Noise.
[8:41] We've detected, you know, they did the
[8:43] reading at the end of the month and I
[8:44] got these huge bills and it's all after
[8:46] the fact. I race out trying to find out
[8:49] what happened, but it's after the fact.
[8:52] And and that's why I and I had I'd asked
[8:54] him, can you look into these digital
[8:56] meter things? because I'd read about it
[8:59] and then I just got frustrated and let
[9:00] it go. So, the good news is when I had
[9:03] the the water department come over and
[9:05] look at my meter, he told me about these
[9:06] Metron meters and then I did a deep dive
[9:09] into the research and I found out that
[9:10] the city's already mandated these things
[9:12] all over the city and it's rolling them
[9:14] out. So, that's I want to congratulate
[9:17] you because that's a very intelligent
[9:18] thing to do as you know or you wouldn't
[9:20] have done it because it saves a lot of
[9:22] money for the city. you know,
[9:23] everything's done digitally and the main
[9:26] thing is it gives an alert if you're in
[9:27] this system. There's a waterfront system
[9:30] or something they call it. Anyway,
[9:32] there's a there's a particular uh system
[9:35] that you guys are using that enables um
[9:39] immediate notification to the land owner
[9:43] that there's unusual activity. So, the
[9:46] beautiful thing is all I'm at this water
[9:49] scope. It's an advanced meter data
[9:50] management system
[9:52] >> created by Metron. So, it connects
[9:54] Fairfield's mandated sewer meters to the
[9:57] utility department and the consumers.
[9:58] So,
[10:00] I'm sure I'm not the first landlord
[10:02] that's had this problem. The the
[10:03] residents have no incentive to get paid.
[10:05] They just their water is included in the
[10:07] bill. They have no incentive to let you
[10:09] know and they do not let you know.
[10:11] Rarely do they let you know and after
[10:13] the fact so that I'm screaming and
[10:14] running around trying to figure it all
[10:15] out. What this system does if if these metrons are installed in these
[10:21] multi-units,
[10:22] [snorts]
[10:23] obviously what'll happen is it'll
[10:25] immediately notify the landlord and
[10:26] because he's the one that pays the
[10:28] money, he's the one that's going to run
[10:29] around and stop the leak. So, that's a
[10:31] beautiful system because it imposes
[10:33] responsibility where it can actually
[10:35] something can happen that will be good
[10:36] for everyone and you don't have these pe
[10:39] city doesn't have to pay for the water
[10:41] that goes down the sewer and all this.
[10:42] It just goes on and on and on. the
[10:44] landlords don't get these crazy bills
[10:45] that they have to try to impose on their
[10:47] tenants what they never can do. They
[10:49] just have to eat it. So that's that's a
[10:52] really beneficial thing. So again, it's
[10:54] already happening.
[10:56] Uh today I sent out a proposed
[10:58] resolution that and I actually sent it
[11:01] directly over I sent it to everyone, but
[11:02] I also sent it over to John particularly
[11:04] because it's my understanding that any
[11:06] resolution that goes through would have
[11:07] to be reviewed have a legal review. So,
[11:10] I sent it to John and I I got a bounce
[11:12] back that you're weren't in the office
[11:13] today, but that's fine. I don't expect
[11:15] anybody to do anything immediately on
[11:17] this anyway, but I did uh make a formal
[11:20] request and I think I sent three sets of
[11:22] emails out on all this. I don't know if
[11:24] everybody got them, but I I mean fully
[11:26] explaining everything I'm doing. I'm
[11:28] doing all my research and everything's
[11:29] right there. So, um, and there is a
[11:32] proposed resolution for the city to
[11:34] consider that all it would do, it would
[11:36] just recognize that the city, let's say
[11:40] I've got a sixplex and they install one
[11:42] main meter for that six flex, they're
[11:44] getting the benefit of six meters.
[11:46] [snorts] So, the the best bang for the
[11:48] buck is happening here and and again,
[11:50] you're imposing responsibility where
[11:53] someone can actually make a difference
[11:54] and will do it by the financial
[11:56] incentive to do so. So, the first meters
[11:58] that get installed should go out to
[12:00] these multi-units just from an economic
[12:03] standpoint. So, that's all I'm asking.
[12:06] for you to install these
[12:08] meters on and I will provide you with
[12:10] all of the addresses and that's what I'd
[12:12] like to have happen. I think it would be
[12:14] better. It would be really good for
[12:15] everyone involved. That's the basic
[12:17] proposal.
[12:19] >> Okay. Uh Doug, do you know the
[12:23] order in which we're doing
[12:24] [clears throat] installing right now? So
[12:26] right now they it the entire city is
[12:30] about $2 million. So what they're
[12:33] starting to do is they're doing area
[12:35] three and which is our largest area. So
[12:39] they're going to knock that out first
[12:42] and they and and you approved uh to
[12:46] purchase those meters already. I think
[12:48] that was $600,000. And those will go
[12:50] first. Uh they also council did pass a
[12:55] resolution um Ed's Ed's right. They did
[12:58] pass a a resolution that as we go
[13:02] through this is such a large project and
[13:04] cost so much money that we just can't
[13:06] afford to do the whole city because we
[13:08] want to. Um
[13:10] but if you want to jump the line and go
[13:13] ahead of that, they can they can pay to
[13:16] have that. It's like 400 bucks a meter.
[13:18] $450 a meter. It's in a water bill. Um I
[13:22] just got this in mind today. Um that
[13:25] when I opened it, but uh so that's
[13:28] there. And if this the council would
[13:30] like to do something different, then
[13:31] that's fine. But that's the plan. We're trying to get the whole city
[13:35] because you're not wrong at at all. So,
[13:38] um it will be beneficial not only for
[13:40] the property owners, but for the city as
[13:41] well.
[13:42] >> And you mentioned that a couple of the
[13:44] in section three, which I'm not even
[13:46] really sure.
[13:47] >> I think he's gotten to We'll be getting
[13:50] two soon.
[13:51] >> Oh, really?
[13:52] >> Yeah.
[13:52] >> Is that uh Do you know which addresses
[13:54] those are for? I think just West Adams
[13:57] >> is in area three.
[13:59] >> West Adams.
[14:00] >> Yeah.
[14:01] >> Is that in three?
[14:02] >> Yeah.
[14:02] >> Okay.
[14:03] >> What about 503 West [clears throat]
[14:05] Broadway? That's just two blocks up the
[14:06] street.
[14:08] >> Burlington on down.
[14:09] >> Okay. South of Burlington.
[14:11] >> That'd be a start because I've had major
[14:13] bills there.
[14:14] >> Yeah.
[14:14] >> So, we're working on as fast as we can
[14:16] because we want them in too. I'm just
[14:17] what I'm and I understand that voluntary
[14:19] thing.
[14:20] >> What I'm asking for is to recognize the
[14:22] intelligence of prioritizing that's why
[14:25] have the resolution in there
[14:27] >> to prioritize where the money is best
[14:29] spent
[14:30] >> and that is on the multi-units. It just
[14:31] makes sense.
[14:33] >> It just makes sense to do that for
[14:35] everyone.
[14:36] So, council, do you want to have the
[14:38] water and sewer committee look at that
[14:40] option
[14:45] or look at, you know, we can put it on
[14:47] the study session next time to look at
[14:48] that as well since he's emailed that
[14:51] out. Uh, I would say that's one thing we
[14:54] could do either study session or
[14:55] committee
[14:56] >> and bring in uh Steve from the water
[14:58] department, have us talk to us about it,
[15:00] understand what what that works in terms
[15:02] of the economics.
[15:04] >> Yeah. I mean, the other thing is that,
[15:06] you know, just sitting here listening to
[15:08] Ed, it seems like there's not,
[15:12] it appears that there's not will to
[15:16] provide a reduction because we don't
[15:19] have any proof. Maybe you would be
[15:22] willing to go ahead and have these
[15:24] installed at his properties to kind of
[15:28] do a compromise. Didn't you just say,
[15:30] Doug, that you can uh jump the line, so
[15:33] to speak, if you pay an additional fee?
[15:34] How much is it? Something like
[15:36] >> The meters are $450.
[15:39] >> He's got two of them that are 5/8 meters
[15:41] and two of them that are inch. So, the
[15:44] four that are not in area 3
[15:47] >> would be $2,530.98.
[15:50] >> Oh, okay.
[15:51] >> Oh, they're larger meters.
[15:52] >> Yeah.
[15:52] >> Oh, okay. Yeah. I didn't know that.
[15:54] >> Two of them are larger. Yes.
[15:55] >> Yeah.
[15:56] So, I mean, you know, maybe you
[15:58] want to do something
[16:00] >> related to that. I don't know. I'm just
[16:01] throwing it out as a potential option,
[16:04] but I think there should be more
[16:06] discussion.
[16:07] >> Sure. I mean, there is a way.
[16:09] Apparently, there is a way to have those
[16:10] installed sooner rather than later
[16:11] because there's a cost to it. You want
[16:14] >> No, I understand that, Paul. And what
[16:16] I'm saying is if the city wants to get
[16:18] the biggest bang for its buck,
[16:20] >> it makes sense spending it
[16:22] >> so people like me don't have to keep
[16:23] coming back to you and begging for some
[16:25] relief. And and again, it will stop the
[16:28] problem that is ongoing all over the
[16:31] city because we have the incentive to
[16:34] stop the leak and we'll have the
[16:36] knowledge of the leak. Right now, we
[16:37] don't have the knowledge of the leak.
[16:39] So, all I'm saying is you're doing it
[16:41] anyway. You're rolling this all out. The
[16:44] resolution that I propose recognizes the
[16:46] intelligence of putting your money where
[16:49] you get the greatest benefit.
[16:51] >> Do you understand that you can have your
[16:52] these meters installed now? It's just
[16:54] going to cost you. Are you willing to do
[16:55] that?
[16:56] >> I understand that. But like like you
[16:57] said, it's already happening. It's going
[16:59] to happen anyway.
[17:00] >> Right. So what I'm saying is
[17:01] >> that will take some time, but you can
[17:02] have it done soon if you want.
[17:04] >> Do you?
[17:06] >> I want it done tomorrow, but that's not
[17:08] the point. Point is, if the city's going
[17:10] to be doing it anyway,
[17:12] >> which they are. It's been mandated.
[17:15] >> Why not be intelligent and use the money
[17:17] where you get six times the benefit of a
[17:19] one meter? That's all I'm saying.
[17:24] I I don't have the numbers in front of
[17:26] me, but it seems to me we have a lot
[17:27] more homeowners request for water
[17:30] reductions than we do business requests
[17:32] for water reductions.
[17:34] Um
[17:35] I have a problem prioritizing
[17:40] businesses over homeowners.
[17:43] >> Can I say something?
[17:44] >> Sure.
[17:44] >> The homeowners obviously have their own
[17:46] incentive to keep track of whether
[17:48] there's a running toilet in their house.
[17:50] It's right in their house. They can look
[17:51] at it. They see it every day.
[17:53] >> Yeah. But
[17:53] >> I can't get inside those apartments.
[17:55] [snorts]
[17:55] >> I cannot get inside those apartments
[17:57] legally
[17:58] >> during the month unless I find out that
[18:00] there's a leak problem. And I don't find
[18:02] that out because I'm not involved in
[18:04] this in the system.
[18:05] >> But there are a lot of leaks when people
[18:06] aren't home are gone, you know, for a
[18:09] period of time. There are a lot of leaks
[18:11] in toilets that you you don't
[18:12] >> problem all over the place. But I got
[18:13] six times that for one unit.
[18:16] >> That's what I'm saying.
[18:18] >> Six times. I'm just saying I would have
[18:21] a problem with that myself by
[18:22] prioritizing that over homeowners. So
[18:24] that that's me.
[18:25] >> Yeah.
[18:26] >> Okay. Well, um do you want more
[18:29] discussion at a water sewer committee?
[18:31] Do you want to contemplate it over the
[18:33] next [clears throat] week and bring it
[18:35] back to study session? What do you
[18:36] what's your pleasure?
[18:37] >> Well, since I'm on the water committee,
[18:40] it seems to me that this is a pretty
[18:42] straightforward thing that we have a
[18:44] plan. It's prioritized. If Ed you want
[18:47] to jump the line then that will be the
[18:52] cost.
[18:52] >> Didn't view it.
[18:53] >> It seems it seems fairly straightforward
[18:55] to me.
[18:56] >> Okay.
[18:56] >> Weeks ago about how long ago
[18:58] >> I don't remember. There's a reason why
[19:00] the citizens come forward because
[19:02] sometimes they have thought it out
[19:04] deeper than the city has in previous
[19:06] resolutions. I've explained to you the
[19:08] economic advantages to the city to look
[19:11] at this possibility and I would ask you
[19:13] to do so. That's it.
[19:16] Okay.
[19:16] >> Anything else?
[19:18] >> Okay. So, it will be uh on an action
[19:20] item on the council tonight. So,
[19:22] >> y
[19:24] >> Okay. Uh next reduction request is for
[19:27] 1204 Lake View Drive.
[19:29] Do we have about this one?
[19:31] >> So, we just had the request that a hose
[19:34] had been left on and was discovered. Um
[19:38] our sewer department went and did an
[19:40] inspection. They could see where the
[19:42] hose was connected. It had divided into
[19:45] other hoses using a splitter connector
[19:48] and they could see where the soaker
[19:50] hoses hoses were and the landscaping the
[19:53] surrounding yard had been saturated with
[19:57] it.
[19:58] Okay,
[20:03] any questions on that council?
[20:07] If not, again that will be on the that's
[20:09] a action item from the council meeting.
[20:11] Um, let's move on to this Fairfield
[20:14] annual report.
[20:21] » Good evening, council. You have in front
[20:23] of you a black binder.
[20:26] This has all of your tourism goodies in
[20:28] it. Um, you will find in there our
[20:31] visitors guide, some restaurant guides,
[20:33] some different things that we put out
[20:35] for the public and also mail out to
[20:38] interested individuals. Um, you'll also
[20:40] find some articles that we have been
[20:42] producing over the last year that have
[20:43] gone in various magazines as well as the
[20:46] little cards for our uh, passports. So,
[20:50] we have two that were created this year.
[20:53] Uh, one the history tour was created by
[20:55] our interns as part of our 250th
[20:58] celebration. did an indepth research on
[21:01] the history of Fairfield, created this
[21:03] passport so people can go to the various
[21:05] locations, learn about the history, and
[21:07] then earn our stickers that had things
[21:10] to do with Fairfield's history. And
[21:12] we're getting very good response on
[21:13] this. Um, we had one woman who comes in
[21:16] almost daily to get her new sticker that
[21:18] new place she's been. And then, of
[21:21] course, we have the off-the-wall art
[21:23] tour. So we took an inventory of the
[21:25] public art that we have um and created
[21:28] uh this tour. Um we also reward people
[21:31] for doing this. So we commissioned Jenny
[21:33] Sammons to create to offer us her design
[21:36] in a poster form. So if you go to so
[21:39] many places and check in then you will
[21:41] get that poster as sort of a reward for
[21:43] having looked at all the different art
[21:46] pieces.
[21:48] Uh you'll also find in there um a little
[21:51] blurb about our new t-shirt line. So we
[21:54] have a line of shirts that we created,
[21:57] some with some branding, some with just
[21:59] kind of Fairfield stuff on it. Uh the
[22:03] proceeds from the sale of these shirts
[22:05] is going to go toward the public art
[22:06] installation that we've been working on.
[22:09] So um just encourage you to like see if
[22:12] you find something that you want to
[22:13] sport around.
[22:16] Correct.
[22:17] >> The other piece that you have is the
[22:20] annual report itself. Uh this gives you
[22:22] some numbers, some economic impact of
[22:25] what's happened with tourism this year.
[22:27] Um some of the numbers as we've talked
[22:30] about in the past are some of our
[22:32] economic numbers actually are from the
[22:35] calendar year of 2024
[22:38] because our 2025 data does not come out
[22:41] for another week. So, I need to push my
[22:44] report back a little bit so we can get
[22:45] that data in. But, um, the other numbers
[22:48] are from fiscal year 26. So, you can see
[22:51] the visitor traffic that we're seeing,
[22:53] uh, happening. We do like to see that
[22:56] our overnight stays are staying up
[22:58] there. We were starting to notice a
[23:00] trend where the day trips were sort of
[23:02] overcoming our overnight stays, but we
[23:04] in the long run, what we saw the final
[23:06] numbers is that our overnights were
[23:08] staying in at a very nice number. partly
[23:12] thanks to some of our Airbnbs that are
[23:14] in town that are seeing a a pretty big
[23:16] surge in traffic.
[23:19] They're kind of helping to make up for
[23:22] um our need for some hotel space. And
[23:25] obviously, some visitors actually prefer
[23:27] that experience. Um, and that's one of
[23:30] the reasons that in the next coming
[23:31] year, we're going to be working with our
[23:33] Airbnb hosts a little bit to make sure
[23:36] that they have access to the information
[23:38] we have that they greet when they greet
[23:40] their visitors and offer information to
[23:42] the visitors, they know exactly and
[23:44] immediately where to send them for
[23:46] different experiences.
[23:49] On the second page, you will obviously
[23:50] see the investment um that the city has
[23:53] made in tourism through the hotel motel
[23:55] tax collection as well as our budget and
[23:58] how we disperse those funds.
[24:02] The next page really shows you kind of
[24:05] what we're doing. We're creating a
[24:07] demand. Um, we actually think some
[24:11] people think that we're largely a
[24:12] marketing organization and we are to a
[24:14] certain extent, but we're also
[24:16] developing a demand for Fairfield. We
[24:19] want people to see us as a place of
[24:21] interest and a place to come. And I
[24:22] think that's one of the most exciting
[24:24] things is when I have travel writers and
[24:27] individuals come to visit, they're
[24:29] fascinated with the area. There's
[24:31] something that they haven't experienced
[24:32] before. We're all used to being here,
[24:35] seeing the same restaurants, the same
[24:37] streets, the same things, but when other
[24:39] people come here, they're seeing
[24:40] something different. And we're
[24:42] developing more and more of those
[24:44] stories with our itineraries and giving
[24:45] them more of those experiences.
[24:48] And of course, obviously, we want to uh
[24:51] connect all those uh visitors to the
[24:53] businesses in town, which is why we've
[24:55] created a lot of our itineraries
[24:57] um for small bites tour. For example, I
[25:00] actually had a group of ladies come from
[25:01] Fort Madison and they wanted to just
[25:04] have little bites of food from all kinds
[25:06] of restaurants. So, we developed this
[25:07] tour for them to just go and have
[25:09] falafhils here and have samosas here and
[25:11] that sort of thing. And they had a
[25:12] delightful afternoon and we were stuffed
[25:14] afterwards.
[25:17] I'd give you a little idea of what we're
[25:19] working on and where things are moving
[25:21] forward.
[25:23] Um, we're looking into more self-guided
[25:25] experiences, more things with our
[25:27] passports, but also
[25:30] we're looking at how we're going to
[25:31] extend those visits, and that can be in
[25:34] with different partnerships. Um, one of
[25:37] the things that we're planning for the
[25:39] coming year is actually an esports
[25:41] tournament. We're partnering with
[25:43] Marshalltown on this that has a very
[25:45] robust program and hopefully hopefully we're hopefully developing a
[25:51] tour. So, it'll be an actual tour that
[25:55] you go from cities to city and we have
[25:57] seven cities that we're going to involve
[25:59] and that's going to be really cool and
[26:01] we want Fairfield to be part of that.
[26:03] We're looking to strengthen our lodging
[26:05] connections. That has to do
[26:06] predominantly with our Airbnbs, but also
[26:08] working with our hotels on their
[26:10] marketing strategies and how they can
[26:13] become more relevant instead of just
[26:15] saying we have a discount on a room
[26:17] saying this thing is happening and if
[26:20] you're coming for that then we want to
[26:22] reward you by offering you a discount.
[26:24] It's a very subtle thing but it makes a
[26:25] big difference to the consumer.
[26:28] We also are looking at building a um
[26:32] tourism academy. Uh this will be for the
[26:35] general public, but eventually will go
[26:36] into creating [clears throat]
[26:38] a group of individuals that we can use
[26:40] to train for group tours and things like
[26:43] that. But it's really a great way to
[26:46] develop community pride. What What do we
[26:48] already have here? What do you not know
[26:50] about your community? Every time I put
[26:52] things out, first of all, I go and study
[26:55] something and I realize that all the
[26:57] time I've lived here, I didn't know
[26:58] these things were happening. I run into
[27:00] more and more people who are surprised
[27:03] about the things that we have in this
[27:04] community. So, it'll have a little bit
[27:07] of that happening to it. And we're also
[27:09] looking at developing a new meetings and
[27:12] group program. In the past, we've been
[27:15] sort of holding back on that meetings
[27:17] market simply because we haven't had the
[27:19] hotel space. Well,
[27:22] still working on that hotel space, but
[27:25] what we're going to do is move forward
[27:27] with daytime meetings, recruiting those
[27:30] daytime meetings, those smaller
[27:31] meetings, and then offering them
[27:33] >> an overnight experience that maybe only
[27:36] some of their group stays for. So,
[27:38] something very unique and interesting
[27:39] that they would find interesting and to
[27:41] get a a unique experience. So we're
[27:43] working on that program as well as we're
[27:45] also um coming to the conclusion of our
[27:48] website development.
[27:51] One of the things that's obviously
[27:52] happening is the whole AI um search
[27:56] findability and our website is being
[27:59] completely redone. Look, structure
[28:02] content everything is being redone so
[28:04] that we are AI findable as well as being
[28:07] human friendly. So we've been working on
[28:10] that for some time. and that is going to
[28:11] roll out has to be done by the end of
[28:13] the year to fulfill our our grant
[28:15] requirements. Um in addition to that uh
[28:18] we'll be doing some revamping of our
[28:21] social media programs and our marketing
[28:23] plan. Social media is also changing
[28:25] tremendously and we're finding that
[28:27] consumer is going to different places
[28:28] and looking in different ways to find
[28:31] places to travel. Travel is still
[28:33] expected to be at a robust level for at
[28:37] least another year, assuming those gas
[28:40] prices don't go [laughter]
[28:41] really, really high. Um, but right now,
[28:44] people are prioritizing travel even if
[28:46] they have to give up something else.
[28:48] That is the current sentiment. That will
[28:50] probably change in a year, but we're
[28:52] going with that for right now. So, with
[28:54] that, are there any questions, comments?
[28:59] >> Really [clears throat] impressive,
[29:00] Terry. really really impressive and
[29:04] we'll um have some thoughts. We'll have
[29:06] a cup of coffee and talk about them.
[29:08] That's great.
[29:09] >> Absolutely. We'll be starting to um
[29:12] either revise or redesign our visitors
[29:14] guide here in the next couple of months
[29:15] so that we're prepared for next year.
[29:17] Right now, our visitors guide is placed
[29:19] in hotels along Highway 80 and all
[29:22] travel centers throughout Iowa. So, we
[29:24] [clears throat] get that out uh for
[29:26] people to pick up randomly wherever they
[29:28] might be.
[29:29] >> Thank you, Terry. But who was doing the
[29:31] website update?
[29:33] >> Uh we have a company out of Austin,
[29:36] Texas that's doing it.
[29:37] >> Sorry, you mentioned that.
[29:38] >> Yes,
[29:38] >> I know. I you you bring us such a wealth
[29:41] of information. Uh I always feel a
[29:44] little bit of miss. I'm I'm listening to
[29:45] you and also looking at the report at
[29:47] the same time. I feel like I'm doing two
[29:49] things at once. It's tough for me to do
[29:51] one thing at once. Is there a way maybe
[29:53] you could have some of the report, let's
[29:54] say the annual report delivered to us at
[29:57] least a week or a week before and just
[29:58] let us know? That's what I'd like to be
[30:00] able to look at possibly more closely.
[30:01] >> Yeah.
[30:02] You could slip in our box and just
[30:03] email us and say it's there. Otherwise,
[30:05] I find myself looking at this and I have
[30:06] questions, but I only have one chance
[30:08] and that's now
[30:09] >> and I don't always more chances. I'm
[30:11] just a phone call away. And I love to
[30:13] talk about this stuff. I just don't want
[30:15] to bore you. So, if you want to talk
[30:17] more,
[30:18] >> give me a call.
[30:18] >> I don't know where you live, right?
[30:20] >> Yeah. Yeah. If you could slip some of
[30:21] this get some of this reported to us
[30:23] before the meeting before.
[30:24] >> Sure.
[30:25] >> That'd be helpful. I appreciate it.
[30:26] >> And I encourage people to get their
[30:27] t-shirt. get a t-shirt.
[30:29] >> I'm gonna
[30:30] >> Thanks for doing a baseball shirt.
[30:32] >> You're very welcome. That was that was
[30:34] the mayor's request. We do take
[30:36] requests. I plan to change these out
[30:37] from time to time. So, take a look at
[30:39] what's in there.
[30:40] >> Is your phone number or anything else?
[30:42] >> Um, it should be on the Ander report,
[30:47] but might not be.
[30:56] See, I'm the visitor's guy.
[31:01] We we oftentimes get a lot of spam calls
[31:04] on our phone. So, I I might have a
[31:06] block, a mental block of giving out my
[31:08] phone number. Um, you can reach us at
[31:10] 472-2828.
[31:13] >> What?
[31:14] >> Very easy. 2828.
[31:16] >> 472.
[31:18] >> Mhm.
[31:19] >> 2828.
[31:21] >> Yes.
[31:26] Perfect. Thank you for your time.
[31:27] >> Thanks, Terry.
[31:28] >> Thank you, Terry.
[31:29] >> So, that concludes the study session.
[31:31] We'll take a two-minute break. At 7:05,
[31:33] we'll come back and start the regular
[31:34] council meeting. Thank you.
[35:17] Okay,
[35:20] >> I'll [snorts] call the meeting to order.
[35:22] Please call the roll.
[35:23] >> Row,
[35:24] >> here.
[35:24] >> Thompson,
[35:25] >> here.
[35:25] >> Two Hill,
[35:26] >> yes.
[35:26] >> Gandandy,
[35:27] >> yes.
[35:27] >> Ferguson,
[35:28] >> yes. [clears throat]
[35:29] >> Okay, great. Thank you. Council, is
[35:31] there any uh changes to the agenda?
[35:33] Anybody have anything?
[35:35] Not. We will move on to the consent
[35:36] agenda. Approval of the minutes of the
[35:38] September 24 September 14th, 2026
[35:42] council meeting. Approval of September
[35:45] 25th, 2026 payroll in the amount of
[35:47] $164,4352.
[35:51] Acceptance of Arbor committee minutes.
[35:54] Acceptance of the airport committee
[35:55] minutes. Acceptance of the library board
[35:58] minutes. Resolution of employment in the
[36:00] police department. Resolution of
[36:02] employment in the water department
[36:04] [snorts] approval of total claims in the
[36:06] amount of $780,585.
[36:10] We had two claims more than 75,000. One
[36:13] to Krishnner Contracting to the fire
[36:15] station $561,211.90
[36:19] and one to EBS for our health insurance
[36:21] premium in the amount of $79,727.
[36:31] Move to approve.
[36:33] >> Second.
[36:34] >> Okay. Moved by Gandandy, second by
[36:35] Tuhill to approve the consent agenda.
[36:38] Any questions?
[36:39] >> I did review claims and everything
[36:41] seemed in order.
[36:42] >> Okay.
[36:44] Please call the role.
[36:46] >> Gandandy,
[36:46] >> yes.
[36:47] >> Tuhill,
[36:47] >> yes.
[36:48] >> Ferguson,
[36:48] >> yes.
[36:49] >> Thompson,
[36:49] >> yes.
[36:50] >> Ro,
[36:50] >> yes.
[36:51] >> Okay. We have no public forum uh and
[36:54] appearances. I would like to mention uh
[36:57] Mr. Paul Glossup did deliver a a
[37:02] some communication to the council
[37:03] members before the meeting and so this
[37:05] will be something they can review and uh
[37:09] discuss at some point.
[37:10] >> Thank you.
[37:10] >> Okay.
[37:11] >> Is it appropriate to ask to put this on
[37:13] the council meeting for two weeks time
[37:16] >> or should I get some feedback from Doug
[37:19] maybe?
[37:19] >> Yeah. No. Uh we can talk about it and
[37:21] maybe we'll do the study session I
[37:23] think. Um,
[37:25] >> yeah, and then we can give you kind of
[37:27] an update of where we're at with all of
[37:28] this, too.
[37:29] >> So, okay. So, yeah, let's put this on
[37:31] the study session. That'll be good.
[37:33] Thank you. Um,
[37:36] resolution, action items, and
[37:37] ordinances. The first action item again
[37:39] is the consideration of reduction
[37:41] request for 301 North Court Street and a
[37:44] water meter request. We did hear about
[37:45] this in the study session. Um,
[37:49] so, council, what how do you want to
[37:51] move forward on this? Is there a motion
[37:53] to approve? Uh well, let's take these
[37:55] things one at a time. Uh the reduction
[37:57] request for 301 North Court. Is there
[37:59] any um motion to approve? And for what
[38:04] amount?
[38:08] » I know I'm not the longest standing
[38:10] member of council. I think I'm close,
[38:11] but as long as I've been on council, I
[38:14] don't think we've ever red ever had a
[38:15] reduction um that we've honored that
[38:18] didn't show proof or somebody from the
[38:20] city come out and
[38:21] >> Okay.
[38:22] >> and prove that it didn't go down a
[38:23] drain.
[38:23] >> Okay, great.
[38:24] >> So, um I hate to set a precedent where
[38:26] we start saying, "Well, they said it
[38:28] didn't, so it didn't, you know, type
[38:29] thing."
[38:29] >> Yeah.
[38:30] >> And I'm not calling anybody dishonest at
[38:31] all. I just I I don't want to start that
[38:34] go down that road, I guess.
[38:35] >> Sure.
[38:36] >> Yeah. That's my that's my feeling.
[38:38] >> Okay. So, we'll take no action on that.
[38:40] Um, and the water meter request.
[38:46] » That's another one I think we've kind of
[38:47] spelled out if they want a meter and I
[38:49] know people have purchased meters
[38:50] already for various areas. Um, you know,
[38:53] I don't know if we want to go back and
[38:54] have to start refunding all them because
[38:56] we are letting people pick and choose
[38:58] when they want them. Um, and as far as
[39:00] prioritizing a business over over a
[39:02] homeowner, I just I I have an issue with
[39:04] that, too. So, so, um, he's he's more
[39:07] than welcome [clears throat] and he
[39:08] doesn't have to purchase. I think you
[39:09] said it was over $2,000 for all that. He
[39:11] doesn't have to purchase all of them. He
[39:12] if there are certain units that he's
[39:14] having issues with, he can purchase one
[39:16] meter, you know, um
[39:18] >> he's not required to do all of them.
[39:19] It's it's pick and choose.
[39:21] >> Yeah,
[39:22] >> seems reasonable. Okay,
[39:23] >> my my thoughts.
[39:24] >> Okay, great. Thank you. So, no action on
[39:26] that as well. Um next action item is
[39:29] consideration of redu reduction request
[39:31] for 1204 Lake View Drive.
[39:35] That would seem pretty straightforward
[39:36] to me. If there's physical evidence of
[39:38] saturation and you can see what it is,
[39:40] uh I I think there's good reason to
[39:45] approve that.
[39:46] >> Okay. You want to make a motion?
[39:48] >> I'll make a motion to approve the
[39:50] reduction request for 1204 Lakeview
[39:53] Drive.
[39:54] >> Okay. Is there a second?
[39:57] >> Um I'll second.
[40:01] » Okay. Any discussion? Well, I had one
[40:04] question. The person that signed that
[40:05] was a city employee. Okay. All right. I
[40:07] just I didn't recognize the name right
[40:08] away, so I just want to make sure. Okay.
[40:10] >> All right.
[40:12] >> So, uh, it's been moved and seconded to
[40:14] approve the reduction request for 1204
[40:16] Lake Drive. Please call the RO.
[40:18] >> Ferguson,
[40:19] >> yes.
[40:19] >> Tuhill,
[40:20] >> yes.
[40:20] >> Ro,
[40:21] >> yes.
[40:21] >> Thompson,
[40:22] >> yes.
[40:22] >> Gandandy,
[40:23] >> yes.
[40:24] >> Okay, that was approved unanimously.
[40:26] Next action item is consideration to
[40:28] purchase a brush truck in the fire
[40:30] department. uh this amount, correct me
[40:33] if I'm wrong, Brett, but I think I did
[40:35] read $299,500.
[40:37] This is for a 2024 Ram 5500. And my
[40:41] understanding is we're using uh money
[40:43] that we have saved where we put money
[40:45] back every year towards firet trucks.
[40:48] And Brett, anything else you want to add
[40:51] to that for the council of the public's
[40:54] purpose?
[40:57] >> I guess I don't have a lot to add. I
[40:58] mean, it's been talked about about a
[41:00] couple of our trucks needing to be
[41:01] replaced.
[41:03] Um, our current brush truck was built in
[41:05] 99. Um, it's uh had a few issues in the
[41:10] last couple years with overheating and
[41:12] some other issues with the tank leaks
[41:14] and um the truck that we're wanting to
[41:17] purchase is more of a modern wildland
[41:20] truck. I mean, our brush truck unit 13
[41:23] and last 5 years has rolled out the
[41:24] station 539 times.
[41:27] >> So,
[41:28] uh by buying one that's equipped like
[41:31] the one we're that we're proposing to
[41:34] purchase. Um it's got more storage.
[41:36] We've introduced some different
[41:38] equipment for the wildland fires in
[41:39] Jefferson County is getting um you know
[41:42] two years ago we set a record for the
[41:44] number of brush fires and grass fires.
[41:46] We're out on multiple calls a day. Um
[41:49] but that truck does roll out the door.
[41:50] We also use it as a hazmat cleanup for
[41:53] car wrecks in town. um different the one
[41:56] we're purchasing uh would serve those
[41:58] purposes plus more. I mean it could be a
[42:01] quick attack vehicle. The water capacity
[42:04] almost doubled than the one we currently
[42:05] have. Um it's got more PSI pressure on
[42:08] it. It can be used for a quick attack on
[42:10] structure fire if we want them. Um it
[42:13] fits our SOPs and uh you know it's just
[42:16] it's something that we don't buy very
[42:18] often. Like I said, the truck we have is
[42:20] 27 years old. you're looking at and we
[42:22] did do the RFPs, get the quotes, and uh
[42:26] this was a demo model. It does have a
[42:29] couple thousand miles on it just because
[42:30] it's been on the highway was out the
[42:32] actual uh fire department international
[42:34] conference in Indianapolis sitting on
[42:36] the floor out there for all the fire
[42:39] guys to see. It's a demo model from
[42:41] Heyman and that's the miles is all
[42:43] highways. Highway miles are a lot
[42:45] different than
[42:47] go time miles when you're going two or
[42:49] three miles in rough terrain and stuff,
[42:51] you know, but it's all highway miles.
[42:53] So, it is used. Um, that truck was
[42:56] probably built and then, you know, it's
[42:59] really probably only a year old. By the
[43:02] time it was built and stuff, it's called
[43:03] a 24, but it's the truck that our guys,
[43:06] we put a truck committee together. Um, I
[43:08] did and said, "It's not my decision. You
[43:10] guys are out there using it more than I
[43:12] am. Um, what do you want? What specs do
[43:14] you want on it? What do you want to see?
[43:15] What do you want for storage? Um, what
[43:18] do you want for uh hose lines? And it's
[43:21] got different hose lines we have now.
[43:23] So, uh, that's what they wanted. They
[43:25] speced it and we went and found them and
[43:27] this is the one we proposed to purchase.
[43:30] So, it should get 2025. I mean, that
[43:32] sounds like a lot of money, but the
[43:34] money's in the we've had, you know,
[43:36] build up for truck purchases and, you
[43:39] know, the aerial will be next, but by
[43:40] the time that's paid for and we decide
[43:42] what we're going to do on that with the
[43:44] truck committee, you know, that's two or
[43:46] three, four years before that's even
[43:48] built, it's paid for. So, those those
[43:50] trucks take a long time to
[43:52] >> to build. So, this is the truck that
[43:54] we're proposing that we would like
[43:56] permission to.
[43:57] >> Does your old truck have a either
[43:59] >> a trade value or resale value? It's
[44:02] limited. So, uh, the way we operate, as
[44:05] many calls as we get, we would like to
[44:07] keep the old brush truck. So, currently
[44:09] we run a a wildfire or wildland truck
[44:11] out, brush truck out. And then to get
[44:14] extra manpower, we take our command
[44:17] vehicle, which is a half ton Chevy, and
[44:19] we pull our side by side out with that.
[44:20] Gets more people in it. Plus, it gets a
[44:22] side by side to the fire. Also tanker
[44:25] rolls. But, uh, that that command
[44:28] vehicle doesn't have any equipment or
[44:30] anything on it. So, our theory was as
[44:32] busy as we've been is we would like to
[44:34] keep it for now, uh, see how it fits in
[44:36] the new fire station and use it as a
[44:39] another water source because what
[44:41] happens is in those dry days and the
[44:43] climate seems to be getting drier. Um,
[44:46] we're going to one call and we're
[44:47] getting paged to another call and
[44:48] [snorts] at that point then we have to
[44:50] send one of our our pumpers engines
[44:53] which aren't made to go down, right?
[44:55] >> Uh, some of these places we go, so we
[44:57] can't get very close. So, we would
[44:58] utilize it in that. It's probably worth
[45:00] anywhere from 35 to, you know, $5,000
[45:03] maybe. So, would is it worth it to try
[45:07] to sell? We'd like to keep it just use
[45:08] as a backup and then, you know, we find
[45:11] out it's more valuable or we it's not
[45:13] working for our SOPs, then we would we
[45:16] would consider it.
[45:17] >> What How long have we had that one? You
[45:19] said
[45:20] >> 2000. It was It was built in August of
[45:22] 99.
[45:24] >> Aren't we mandated every 25 years to
[45:26] replace them? not replace them. They
[45:28] have to be reertified and go through
[45:29] this process. So it it it is costly to
[45:32] go through some of that stuff.
[45:33] >> So do we have to reertify that one then
[45:34] or
[45:35] >> No, it's a pickup. It's it's
[45:36] >> so it doesn't count as a
[45:38] >> No.
[45:39] >> Okay.
[45:40] >> The pumps and stuff on these trucks are
[45:41] all um checked. Uh we do pump checks on
[45:45] them and I have a company come in and do
[45:47] those have to be pump tested and uh get
[45:51] that sign off. So it's the same way when
[45:52] they test the pump. you. We're excited
[45:54] for a twice the almost twice the amount
[45:57] of water on these calls. And I mean, if
[45:59] you're out in the middle of nowhere and
[46:01] I will tell you this northern part of
[46:02] Jefferson County is a lot of prayer,
[46:04] it's getting it's it's it's it's a huge
[46:07] concern of us on the fire parts dry has
[46:08] been because we had 200 acres burn out
[46:10] there two years ago. We fought that, you
[46:13] know, for several hours and and and
[46:15] actually got called off for another
[46:16] call. So, we we had to but we had
[46:18] different fire departments. But there's
[46:20] places you need to get to. And even that 3/4 ton pickup with the skid in the
[46:25] back, we struggled to get some. This
[46:27] one's designed a little bit more to go a
[46:29] little bit more off-road. Um that's why
[46:32] it's it's called a it's not just a brush
[46:35] truck. It's a it's a wild fire truck.
[46:38] >> When you say as dry as it's been, you're
[46:40] referring to the last couple seasons,
[46:41] not the last couple weeks.
[46:42] >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
[46:43] >> We set records [laughter] as far like
[46:45] the grass fires,
[46:47] >> brush fires. Um, so that's where we're
[46:50] at. I mean, I'd be willing to take any
[46:52] other questions. Um,
[46:55] >> yes. So, any other questions?
[46:56] >> The the recommendation to use the money
[46:58] that we have set aside is made by you
[47:02] guys or because I think weren't we
[47:03] having look at what our best
[47:06] >> We were going to talk with. We were
[47:09] suggesting that we just because this one
[47:12] is a demo and available now
[47:14] >> instead of weighing the 12 to 18 months,
[47:16] right? and weighing all those options. I
[47:19] mean, we're still going to buy two
[47:21] trucks. That's the plan.
[47:23] >> That'll still leave us roughly 300,000
[47:24] in the account.
[47:25] >> Yes.
[47:26] >> Okay.
[47:27] >> Yeah.
[47:27] >> And and so the the quotes we got, so we quoted another demo model from
[47:33] another company. Um and it was around
[47:36] 300 I think it was 370 370 and it was
[47:41] sold in 4 days after we it wasn't even
[47:43] available after we
[47:44] >> Wow. Um and then the other company that
[47:46] we quoted um weren't the same
[47:49] specifications. They were close, but it
[47:51] was um like 305 or 306. So, you know,
[47:55] we're trying to say get the truck that
[47:57] we want to our specifications, but stay
[47:59] under that.
[47:59] >> Okay. No, I was just thinking
[48:01] >> and they're out 14 to 16 months on
[48:03] >> too. And and we just talked about what was smarter, whether to put more
[48:07] money down on the on the
[48:10] >> um what was the other one? the aerial
[48:11] truck or or bond or borrow for it. So,
[48:15] >> yeah, and we had someone in talking um
[48:18] when we were when he brought the when he
[48:20] was talking to us about the brush truck,
[48:21] he looked at our aerial, you know, it's
[48:23] going to it's it's over 20 years old and
[48:26] um he said it's a beautiful truck and
[48:28] still is a beautiful truck. It's just,
[48:30] you know, it's getting close to that
[48:31] reertification time and um he said you
[48:34] guys will be surprised what you might
[48:35] get out of that for.
[48:36] >> I was going to say there's resale on
[48:37] that one to smaller departments, right?
[48:39] probably
[48:40] >> maybe not small rural departments don't
[48:42] use a ladder truck all the time because
[48:44] sometimes their infrastructure is not
[48:46] set up for like water manes and stuff.
[48:48] You got to put you put a lot of water
[48:49] and drain tires pretty quick with a
[48:51] ladder truck that's
[48:52] >> spraying that many gallons. But yes,
[48:54] there's people out there that would be
[48:56] looking for a ladder truck.
[48:57] >> Great.
[48:58] >> Okay. So, is there a motion to approve?
[49:01] >> I'll make a motion to approve.
[49:02] >> Moved by Ferguson.
[49:03] >> Second.
[49:04] by Tuhill. Any further discussion
[49:06] or questions?
[49:08] Hearing none, please call the RO.
[49:09] >> Ferguson,
[49:10] >> yes.
[49:10] >> Two Hill,
[49:11] >> yes.
[49:11] >> Gami,
[49:12] >> yes.
[49:12] >> Row,
[49:12] >> yes.
[49:13] >> Thompson,
[49:13] >> yes.
[49:14] >> Great. Thank you. That was approved
[49:16] unanimously to purchase that brush
[49:18] truck.
[49:19] >> We'll look forward to seeing it when it
[49:20] gets here.
[49:21] >> Yes.
[49:23] >> Let us know.
[49:23] >> Look good in the station.
[49:24] >> Yeah, let us know.
[49:26] >> Uh when do you think you'll have it, by
[49:29] [clears throat] the way?
[49:30] >> Um they're going to they're going to
[49:32] letter it. That's including the price.
[49:34] So, right now it's got fire on it
[49:36] because it was a demo. So they're going
[49:37] to
[49:38] >> or the price was they're going to stripe
[49:39] a
[49:40] >> letter of fair. We just got to come up
[49:41] with a number we want because it's
[49:44] pretty common in fire departments that
[49:45] you don't want to use a truck number you
[49:46] use in the past. So we had a lot of
[49:48] trucks in the last uh
[49:52] 50 50 60 years. So I'm trying to figure
[49:54] [snorts] out what number we're going to
[49:55] use. But um the only thing we will have
[49:58] to purchase is a radio and I'm going to
[50:01] submit that to the 911 board.
[50:03] >> Okay.
[50:03] >> To possibly purchase the radio for the
[50:05] truck and get that installed.
[50:06] >> So like in a couple months.
[50:08] >> Oh, we'll have before that.
[50:09] >> Before. Okay.
[50:10] >> As soon as they get lettered, soon as I
[50:11] let them know that it's been approved,
[50:14] um we could have it probably within
[50:17] hopefully a couple weeks.
[50:18] >> Oh, okay.
[50:19] >> By time they get lettered.
[50:20] >> Okay. Let us know. Thank you. Uh next
[50:23] item. Next action item is consideration
[50:25] of the Fairfield Fire Station change
[50:28] order number seven. If I read this
[50:30] right, it's actually according to
[50:33] Rebecca, five changes in the amount of
[50:35] $25,14.32.
[50:38] And Rebecca, do you want to kind of tell
[50:40] us the detail?
[50:42] >> Yeah, they were cleaned up some
[50:44] paperwork. So, there was like she like
[50:46] mayor said, there's several change
[50:48] orders in this. There was a stem wall in
[50:50] the
[50:51] >> Does that help? this.
[50:53] >> Okay, [laughter]
[50:55] that helps.
[50:55] >> There's a stem wall in the alley that we
[50:57] had removed. Um there was we had a
[51:01] higher grade sealant put on due to the
[51:04] high moisture content. We had this issue
[51:06] at the park and wreck department too. Um
[51:08] when we redid the flooring over there,
[51:11] so this additional moisture barrier um
[51:14] was of course um more money, but we felt
[51:17] it was needed to make it work. Um there
[51:21] was some HVAC
[51:24] um items that need to happen.
[51:27] Um
[51:31] oh there was a diamond plate
[51:35] [sighs]
[51:36] on the island in the in the station. So
[51:41] what we had intended on it was no longer
[51:45] available. So then we went out to try to
[51:47] get the closest thing. it end up being
[51:49] more. So that was another item.
[51:53] >> So all these items together end up being
[51:55] 25,000.
[51:56] >> Okay, great. Thank you. Is there a
[51:58] motion to approve?
[52:01] >> Move to approve.
[52:02] >> Moved by Tuhill.
[52:03] >> Second.
[52:04] by Gandandy. Further discussion.
[52:10] Hearing none. Please call the RO.
[52:11] >> Tuhill.
[52:11] >> Yes.
[52:12] >> Gandandy.
[52:12] >> Yes.
[52:12] >> Thompson.
[52:13] >> Yes.
[52:13] >> Row.
[52:14] >> Yes.
[52:14] >> Ferguson.
[52:15] >> Yes.
[52:16] >> Okay. Next action item is consideration
[52:18] of request to purchase a vacuum cleaner
[52:21] for the library. And we do have Alex
[52:24] here. Uh Alex, do you mind coming up and
[52:26] talking about this uh vacuum and how you
[52:30] got to this situation? Um I just want to
[52:33] let the council know beforehand that,
[52:37] you know, there's a couple ways we could
[52:38] do this. We could do a budget amend
[52:40] amendment because this is not budgeted
[52:42] for. Um we could consider lost
[52:47] uh you know so I guess ponder those
[52:50] things while Alex is talking about this uh vacuum.
[52:55] >> So this this is a Carter chariot 3
[53:00] standing vacuum cleaner. Um it's the
[53:02] kind of thing that you know like public
[53:04] schools and those sorts of environments
[53:06] public libraries um really need to
[53:10] ensure that the the carpeted areas
[53:12] specifically are properly cleaned. Uh
[53:16] our our carpet in the library is now 30
[53:19] years old and it's starting to show its
[53:21] age. Um it's going to continue to
[53:23] degrade faster if it's not properly
[53:25] cleaned. Um I in the last year or so I
[53:29] cons I've started consulting with other
[53:32] kind of facilities managers whether
[53:33] they're public, you know, public schools
[53:35] or um so forth. Um, I I I recently
[53:41] learned that the best thing you can do
[53:43] to
[53:44] clean a carpet is not shampoo it or
[53:48] something like that. It's just just
[53:50] daily or as frequently as you can vacuum
[53:52] it. Vacuum clean it gently, as gently as
[53:55] you can with a vacuum cleaner. Um, and
[53:57] um, we were very fortunate for over a
[54:00] decade to have Tim and Linda Michaels as
[54:02] our custodians. They owned a cartridge
[54:05] chariot and it they purchased a
[54:07] refurbished one with their own money and
[54:08] they kept it at the library for a long
[54:10] time. It's a very serious investment. Um
[54:13] even you know a new a newly refurbished
[54:16] um chariot costs $8 to $9,000. Um new
[54:21] they are $18 to $20,000. So Tim and
[54:24] Linda to make their lives easier and
[54:27] because they cared so much about the
[54:28] library they purchased that this writing
[54:30] vacuum cleaner themselves. it's very
[54:32] difficult to find a custodian or a team
[54:34] of a team of custodians with that kind
[54:37] of equipment and willing to leave it um
[54:39] you know at their at the work site. Um
[54:42] so I believe and together with the
[54:45] trustees we believe that the public
[54:47] library should own its own standing
[54:49] vacuum cleaner um and that we should
[54:51] purchase one similar to what Tim and
[54:53] Linda had because it is sort of an
[54:55] indust indust industry standard. Um, the
[54:58] Carter 3 is an upgrade over what what we previously were using at the library.
[55:04] When Tim and Linda Michaels retired, um,
[55:07] they passed their their carter chariot
[55:10] that was not really functioning to a
[55:12] custodian that had a contract at the
[55:14] library for a year. He did he um he did
[55:17] not during that time do any refurbishing
[55:20] or replace the battery. It got to the
[55:22] point where the the the vacuum cleaner
[55:25] um previously that we had the library
[55:27] would only run for about 10 minutes
[55:29] because the battery was just so badly
[55:31] need to be needing to be replaced. Um
[55:33] this this Carter 3 that we would
[55:35] purchase um is an AEG kind of
[55:38] water-based type of battery. Um it's a
[55:40] lower cost to get started compared to a
[55:42] lithium battery. Um but it will it will
[55:46] last for 7 to 10 years. very comparable
[55:48] to a lithium ion if it's um if it's
[55:51] maintained on a monthly basis. Basic,
[55:53] you basically just need to check the the
[55:54] water level to make sure it's adequate.
[55:56] Um but um because we were anticipating
[56:01] continuing to work with our our former
[56:03] custodian and we thought that he was
[56:05] going to um replace the battery and that former chariot would be good. Um,
[56:11] we did not budget for a replacement
[56:13] vacuum cleaner, but ultimately we
[56:16] believe that that this should be
[56:18] something owned by the library. And um,
[56:21] we we think we think it's a very very
[56:24] good investment, especially considering
[56:26] um, that the library has begun this
[56:28] library renewal project and we will
[56:31] probably be replacing the carpet in the
[56:33] next several years. So, we can get ahead
[56:35] of get ahead of needing this then. Um,
[56:39] and also it can help the current carpet
[56:42] last just, you know, a little bit
[56:44] longer.
[56:46] >> And what what's the price on this? Uh,
[56:49] >> um, the the price is um $8,640
[56:53] with with delivery. The delivery is
[56:56] $150.
[56:59] >> And also, I I failed to mention I think
[57:01] you guys thought you might have a little
[57:03] bit of reserve you could use.
[57:05] >> We do. Um the the reserve we have is is
[57:08] earmarked for um the library renewal
[57:10] project and it's it comes from
[57:12] unspecified gift funds. Um we would
[57:15] really appreciate the support of the
[57:17] city and being able to access something
[57:19] from the general fund or loss funds to
[57:22] be able to um to be able to pay for all
[57:25] or um as much as possible um to purchase
[57:28] this vacuum cleaner. But um you know if
[57:31] push came to shove, we would we would
[57:34] access some of those unspecified gift
[57:37] funds.
[57:38] >> How much is that?
[57:39] >> I I would um I would say um I I would we would hesitate to use the funds
[57:46] for the vacuum cleaner because we feel
[57:48] like it might not represent very well
[57:51] how people hope to see their gift funds
[57:54] used.
[57:56] >> But if we if it was necessary, we would definitely utilize that
[58:03] >> because it's so important,
[58:04] >> right?
[58:05] >> What do we have?
[58:07] >> How much how much do we have currently?
[58:09] >> Um, currently there is $250,000
[58:13] that is um earmarked for the library
[58:15] renewal project, which is a um it's a $3
[58:19] million project. So the and the this the
[58:23] $3 million go toward just really kind of
[58:26] bringing the library up to speed, kind
[58:28] of bringing it up to date because it is
[58:30] a 30-year-old facility and you know we want it to better serve people in our
[58:36] community in 2026 and beyond.
[58:39] >> What happened to the other one? the the
[58:41] >> the other one was was taken by the
[58:44] former custodian who saw it as his
[58:46] property after he picked it up from the
[58:49] former custodian's um residence
[58:51] >> and he's no longer the custodian for the
[58:53] life.
[58:57] » So I'm sorry, Rebecca, do you know how
[58:58] much we haven't lost?
[58:59] >> No, off the top of my head.
[59:02] >> Sorry.
[59:03] >> More than 50.
[59:04] >> Yes.
[59:05] >> Okay.
[59:08] Any thoughts, council? How would you
[59:10] like to move forward with us? You want
[59:12] to take it to committee
[59:14] ways of means?
[59:16] >> You want to make a motion?
[59:19] >> What about a portion of it? We share a
[59:21] portion of it. Let's say loss funds and
[59:24] the general fund that you have which is
[59:28] considerable. I understand the need, but
[59:29] we're compared to that amount
[59:32] >> amount we're talking about. It's not
[59:34] [clears throat]
[59:34] I don't think
[59:35] >> would it be acceptable from a op uptick
[59:38] standpoint if the city went in with the
[59:41] library if you know 50/50 something like
[59:44] that.
[59:44] >> That was that was what I was hoping for.
[59:49] >> Okay. Want to make a motion?
[59:52] I would make a motion that the city
[59:54] contribute 50% of the purchase price to
[59:56] its loss fund allocations and the other
[59:58] 50% we're asking or we assume the
[1:00:01] library contribute from its what is it
[1:00:02] called?
[1:00:03] >> Endowment.
[1:00:04] >> Um reserve funds.
[1:00:05] >> Reserve fund.
[1:00:07] >> I'll second that.
[1:00:08] >> Okay. So, it's been moved and seconded
[1:00:10] to buy the vacuum 50% from loss 50% from
[1:00:14] the library reserve funds.
[1:00:17] Any other questions or discussion?
[1:00:21] Not. Please call the roll.
[1:00:22] >> Gandandy? Yes.
[1:00:23] >> Ferguson?
[1:00:24] >> Yes.
[1:00:24] >> Thompson?
[1:00:25] >> Yes.
[1:00:25] >> Ro?
[1:00:25] >> Yes.
[1:00:26] >> Twohill?
[1:00:26] >> Yes.
[1:00:28] >> Are you going to give everybody a ride
[1:00:29] on it? [laughter]
[1:00:30] >> Yeah.
[1:00:31] >> Pretty good, right? Yeah. It's It's just
[1:00:34] really funny. I'm going after the fire
[1:00:36] department, you know, cuz it's like, you
[1:00:38] know, really cool new brush truck versus
[1:00:40] writing writing standing [laughter]
[1:00:42] vacuum cleaner, you know, librarian
[1:00:45] versus firefighter. There you go.
[1:00:47] >> Maybe we could have a drag. Yeah, that
[1:00:49] would be [laughter] really fun. We all
[1:00:50] got our vehicles.
[1:00:52] >> Okay, thanks Alex.
[1:00:53] >> Thank you so much, Alex.
[1:00:55] >> Okay, next action on consideration of a
[1:00:58] downtown two-way streets agreement for
[1:00:59] conceptual estimates with French Baker
[1:01:01] and Associates. I believe this is 6900.
[1:01:04] Marcus, you want to walk us through
[1:01:06] this?
[1:01:06] >> Yeah, good evening council. This is
[1:01:08] agreement is for converting um
[1:01:10] developing sketches and estimates for
[1:01:12] converting downtown from oneway to
[1:01:14] two-way streets. And the approach that
[1:01:16] we plan on taking is doing in phases.
[1:01:18] Phase one would be um the traffic signal
[1:01:21] improvements and then grinding and
[1:01:23] painting all the block except for court
[1:01:26] south of Burlington uh to Washington.
[1:01:28] And this is done because I think some uh
[1:01:31] more traffic study would need to be done
[1:01:33] there to analyze what kind of
[1:01:35] improvements would need to be done at
[1:01:36] that intersection. So that's why it's
[1:01:37] separate out into then that goes into
[1:01:39] the next phase is phase two would be um
[1:01:42] grinding and painting from Burlington on
[1:01:44] court from Burlington to Washington and
[1:01:47] then looking at uh intersection
[1:01:49] improvements there at that intersection
[1:01:50] if it's going to be a four-way stop,
[1:01:52] two-way stop or if there needs to be a
[1:01:54] pedestrian push button. So that'd be
[1:01:55] phase two. Then phase three would be
[1:01:57] doing an overlay project for all eight
[1:01:59] blocks and node improvements for
[1:02:02] converting those nodes would go in the
[1:02:03] opposite directions. So um we would
[1:02:06] develop meet sketches and estimates for
[1:02:07] each of those phases.
[1:02:09] I believe mayor this is a lowcost ops
[1:02:11] that you had been suggesting that he's
[1:02:15] >> Yeah. This was kind of a starting place.
[1:02:16] >> Yeah.
[1:02:17] >> Are you talking about phase one as a
[1:02:19] starting place?
[1:02:20] >> Yes. Yep. Phase one would be the
[1:02:22] starting place. Then phase two would be
[1:02:25] finishing out that project and then
[1:02:27] phase three would be kind of
[1:02:28] >> redoing the whole thing to overlaying
[1:02:31] and note improvements.
[1:02:32] >> [laughter]
[1:02:32] >> I would move to approve the agreement
[1:02:34] with French Renker Associates. I'm going
[1:02:36] read the whole thing for the downtown
[1:02:38] two-way conversion conceptual estimates
[1:02:39] and sketches in the lump sum of $6,900
[1:02:42] with the liberal deliverables due within
[1:02:45] n within 30 days.
[1:02:46] >> Okay,
[1:02:48] >> there a second.
[1:02:49] >> Second.
[1:02:49] >> Okay. Moved and seconded to move forward
[1:02:51] on the French Rener agreement about the
[1:02:54] downtown estimates. Uh any discussion?
[1:02:57] Yeah, I know this uh project's been kind
[1:03:00] of on the uh on schedule for a long
[1:03:04] time, but uh it's been actually since
[1:03:06] longer than I've been on council. I was
[1:03:07] wondering have a brief summary of why
[1:03:10] you want this change. What are the
[1:03:12] benefits?
[1:03:13] >> Good question.
[1:03:14] >> I've got some constituents who are
[1:03:16] strongly in favor and some are strongly
[1:03:17] opposed.
[1:03:18] >> Yes. And I think over time
[1:03:20] >> I think that's the way it has been.
[1:03:22] >> Yeah. Um, in previous times I I will say
[1:03:25] I've had negative comments go and at
[1:03:27] that time it was like 100,000 to change
[1:03:29] things but I think again that was bare
[1:03:32] minimum because I think depends on how
[1:03:35] much how big the scope you're talking
[1:03:37] about. Um, and this was several years
[1:03:40] ago. So,
[1:03:42] um I guess you know I know some of our
[1:03:44] council members are really in favor and
[1:03:46] so I I'll open it up to discussion
[1:03:50] of how you feel strongly about it or not
[1:03:53] and uh go from there.
[1:03:56] >> Well, there's any number of angles you
[1:03:59] can take. For example, Main Street
[1:04:00] Fairfield, which we were recently
[1:04:02] designated last year. Um it's um when
[1:04:05] they did their assessment of Fairfield
[1:04:07] downtown in 2024, one of their top
[1:04:09] priorities is that we that we engage in
[1:04:11] two-way two-way street restoration. They
[1:04:14] see it as absolutely they see it as very
[1:04:16] important to revitalizing downtown in
[1:04:18] terms of being able to attract visitors, who stay, visitors who will
[1:04:22] shop, visitors who are not just driving
[1:04:24] through town, visitors going to feel
[1:04:26] welcome. So from their point of view in
[1:04:28] terms of revitalizing downtown, they see
[1:04:30] it as something that's [clears throat]
[1:04:31] essential. Similarly, when we speak to
[1:04:33] other people who are interested in
[1:04:34] revitalizing downtown, like for example,
[1:04:35] our conventioners visitors bureau or
[1:04:38] merchants downtown. It's been my
[1:04:40] experience in talking with them, those
[1:04:41] that are there that um whose businesses
[1:04:44] are are um still exist and those some
[1:04:47] who have not that are do not exist that
[1:04:50] a two-way conversion would make a
[1:04:52] difference in terms of traffic that is
[1:04:55] actual purchaser traffic. So
[1:04:58] the chamber at least several years ago
[1:05:00] in my understanding a number of business
[1:05:01] constituents had expressed strong desire
[1:05:04] for two-way conversion. Why it's taken
[1:05:06] the time it has taken, I'm not sure, but
[1:05:09] this is a meaningful step and that we're
[1:05:11] going to get again I I think we've done
[1:05:13] this before again get some cost
[1:05:15] estimates and um I'm sure we'll have
[1:05:18] further discussions but my experience in
[1:05:21] talking with various constituents
[1:05:23] downtown and business people around town
[1:05:26] around downtown that it it makes every
[1:05:29] makes all the sense to have this sort of
[1:05:30] thing implemented. I think part of I'll
[1:05:33] just mention I think part of the reason
[1:05:35] it's gone kind of silent for a while but
[1:05:38] now with the replacement of the street
[1:05:40] light at Burlington and Maine
[1:05:44] [snorts]
[1:05:45] it's come up for discussion you know
[1:05:47] okay is this we going to keep it as it
[1:05:49] is or are we going to plan ahead for
[1:05:51] that conversion so that you know this
[1:05:54] was the beginning of it
[1:05:55] >> just timing wise and then the next light
[1:05:59] of course is Burlington and Court so
[1:06:01] that has to be considered too. Is that a
[1:06:04] four-way light? Is it no light? So, I
[1:06:09] think that's where where we're starting
[1:06:11] the conversation again.
[1:06:12] >> I think we've got you we I think we'll
[1:06:13] find that's where we're going to have to
[1:06:14] reconstruct because the conversation's
[1:06:16] going back as far I know
[1:06:20] seven years 2019 and maybe before that.
[1:06:23] So there there's going to have to be a
[1:06:25] reconstruction of where we are and I'm
[1:06:26] not sure it's it's not there's not a
[1:06:29] consensus of where we are, but I I do
[1:06:31] think that there there's going to be a
[1:06:32] need there is going to be some more
[1:06:33] discussion. I and we'll see what these
[1:06:35] what the estimates bring back to us. But
[1:06:37] I do think you're going to find that at
[1:06:40] least the people who are most interested
[1:06:42] in revitalizing downtown, they they they
[1:06:45] did want this. I mean my my experience
[1:06:47] is that there is a unonymity of of
[1:06:51] opinion by the people who actually are
[1:06:54] you know the most qualified to have an
[1:06:56] informed opinion. This makes a huge
[1:06:58] difference and any one of us can go to a
[1:07:02] confident uh competent large language
[1:07:04] model and do our own research find out
[1:07:07] you know what is the impact of 2A versus
[1:07:10] one way. Um, and I think people I will
[1:07:14] tend to want to keep things the way they
[1:07:17] are just because that's the way we do as
[1:07:19] human beings. We, you know, we we get a
[1:07:22] little bit resistant to change. But what
[1:07:24] I would suggest, Matthew, for all of us
[1:07:26] is that if we hear people say, "Well,
[1:07:28] now we really want our one-way streets."
[1:07:32] Ask them why and then do a little bit of
[1:07:34] research. Go have coffee with them. Show
[1:07:37] them research. I think it's incumbent on
[1:07:39] us to
[1:07:41] not just get feedback from constituents,
[1:07:45] but if on a on a something that is as in
[1:07:48] my view vital to the vitality of
[1:07:51] downtown that we take a very proactive
[1:07:53] stance if in fact you know people come
[1:07:56] to us. Uh that's if no one has actually
[1:07:59] come to me arguing for for two-way
[1:08:01] streets. But if they did that's what I
[1:08:03] would handle it. I would go do some
[1:08:04] research and sit down and say, "Okay,
[1:08:07] >> sure." All right. Thank you.
[1:08:10] >> Any other comments,
[1:08:12] questions?
[1:08:13] >> No. Please call the role.
[1:08:14] >> Gandi,
[1:08:15] >> yes.
[1:08:15] >> Ferguson,
[1:08:16] >> yes.
[1:08:17] >> Thompson,
[1:08:17] >> yes.
[1:08:17] >> Two Hill,
[1:08:18] >> yes.
[1:08:18] >> Row,
[1:08:19] >> yes.
[1:08:20] >> Okay. We have a resolution uh
[1:08:22] consideration to resend resolution
[1:08:25] number 44.86, employment of personnel.
[1:08:29] um council just so you know we did offer
[1:08:31] the planning and zoning
[1:08:35] uh position to a candidate who then
[1:08:39] decided not to take it. So that's why we
[1:08:42] have these uh recisions
[1:08:45] and uh personnel is going to have to
[1:08:48] meet again and decide which direction to
[1:08:50] go forward after this. So first one
[1:08:53] again rescend the resolution number 4486
[1:08:56] employment of personnel.
[1:08:59] >> Move to rescend.
[1:09:00] >> Okay. Moved by Tuhill. Is there a
[1:09:02] second?
[1:09:03] >> Second.
[1:09:03] by Gandandy. Any discussion?
[1:09:06] >> Hearing none. Please call the role.
[1:09:08] >> Tuhill.
[1:09:08] >> Yes.
[1:09:09] >> Gandandy.
[1:09:09] >> Yes.
[1:09:10] >> Row.
[1:09:10] >> Yes.
[1:09:11] >> Ferguson.
[1:09:11] >> Yes.
[1:09:12] >> Thompson.
[1:09:12] >> Yes.
[1:09:13] >> Okay. Thank you. Approved unanimously.
[1:09:15] Uh, next resolution. Consideration to
[1:09:17] rescend resolution number 4487, the
[1:09:20] employment contract of the planning and
[1:09:22] zoning director.
[1:09:24] >> Move to resend resolution number 4487.
[1:09:27] >> Okay,
[1:09:28] >> second.
[1:09:29] >> Thank you. Moved and seconded to resend
[1:09:32] resolution 4487, employment contract of
[1:09:34] the planning and zoning director. Is
[1:09:36] there any discussion or questions? Not
[1:09:39] please call the role.
[1:09:40] >> Two Hill,
[1:09:40] >> yes.
[1:09:41] >> Gandandy,
[1:09:41] >> yes.
[1:09:42] >> Thompson,
[1:09:42] >> yes.
[1:09:42] >> Row,
[1:09:43] >> yes.
[1:09:43] >> Ferguson,
[1:09:44] >> yes.
[1:09:45] >> Thank you. Uh we have uh first reading
[1:09:48] of an ordinance consideration amendment
[1:09:50] to chapter 2.52 related to Fairfield
[1:09:53] Media Center. Uh we did hear about this
[1:09:55] at our last study session um that we are
[1:09:58] no longer uh public broadcasting on TV
[1:10:02] channel. It's all through the internet
[1:10:04] now. And to update that, we have these
[1:10:08] um updates on our actual ordinance that
[1:10:13] been presented here by Jason. And uh
[1:10:17] Jason, do you want to share anything
[1:10:20] specific? Do you want to come up here
[1:10:21] and
[1:10:23] maybe just go through it real quick for
[1:10:24] the public's interest?
[1:10:30] Uh as far as the document is concerned,
[1:10:32] [clears throat] I just went and did a
[1:10:34] review of the ordinance that was already
[1:10:37] uh up on the city website. Anything in
[1:10:40] yellow are the things that I changed. Uh
[1:10:42] there were several items that I ended up
[1:10:44] getting rid of just simply they didn't
[1:10:47] they no longer applied uh to the media
[1:10:50] center as far as what we do and h how we
[1:10:52] move forward. Um everything in the
[1:10:54] regular black text is is basically as is
[1:10:58] >> the way it was. So
[1:11:00] >> it's great.
[1:11:00] >> Okay.
[1:11:02] >> Thank you. Any questions for Jason?
[1:11:04] >> Nope.
[1:11:04] >> Okay. Uh this again is the first
[1:11:07] reading. So we'll go through three
[1:11:09] readings. Is that Oh, I mean you don't
[1:11:11] have a reason to
[1:11:13] >> I
[1:11:13] >> put this on a fast track, right?
[1:11:15] >> Yeah. No, no reason at all. So
[1:11:16] >> Okay. So this will be the first reading.
[1:11:18] Is there a motion to approve the first
[1:11:21] reading and move? Make a motion to
[1:11:22] approve the first reading.
[1:11:24] >> Moved by Ferguson.
[1:11:25] >> Second.
[1:11:26] by Gandandy. Any discussion
[1:11:29] hearing? None. Please call the role.
[1:11:31] >> Ferguson?
[1:11:31] >> Yes.
[1:11:32] >> Gandandy?
[1:11:32] >> Yes.
[1:11:33] >> To Hill?
[1:11:33] >> Yes.
[1:11:34] >> Thompson?
[1:11:35] >> Yes.
[1:11:35] >> Ro?
[1:11:36] >> Yes.
[1:11:37] >> Great. Thank you. Under the mayor's
[1:11:39] report, I have a couple things. Um,
[1:11:44] at last last study session we or maybe
[1:11:48] it was the council meeting, we did hear
[1:11:50] somebody from uh a tenant, if you will,
[1:11:53] at at MIU trailer court uh requesting
[1:11:56] the arbor committee come out there and
[1:11:58] look at trees. I did say I would call um
[1:12:02] Tom Brooks who does facilities
[1:12:04] management. I'm not sure if that's his
[1:12:06] right title at MIU. We did have a
[1:12:08] discussion. He is in discussion with
[1:12:11] Jeremy Brennan at this point. Uh they
[1:12:14] are not ready for the Arbor Committee to
[1:12:16] come out and uh do anything at this time
[1:12:20] and um I said well let me know if that
[1:12:22] changes. I did talk to Steve Tailor who
[1:12:24] is the chair of the Arbor Committee just
[1:12:27] to let him know that their services are
[1:12:29] not needed at this time and that I would
[1:12:31] let him know if I heard something
[1:12:32] different. So that's where that's at. Um
[1:12:35] and then Paul is went to the Iowa League
[1:12:38] of Cities and I think he wants to report
[1:12:40] on that and um so that's all I have. Go
[1:12:43] ahead Paul.
[1:12:44] >> Thank you mayor. I wanted to share a few
[1:12:46] takeaways from the Iowa League of Cities
[1:12:47] annual conference in Bentonorf I
[1:12:49] attended last week but rather than
[1:12:51] providing a broad conference report I
[1:12:52] want to focus on what I think is most
[1:12:54] relevant to Fairfield today. I attended
[1:12:56] several sessions covering municipal
[1:12:58] finance, urban renewal, downtown
[1:13:01] redevelopment, tax abatement programs,
[1:13:04] Smids, and the impact of Senate File
[1:13:06] 2472, as you know, which is having to do
[1:13:08] with property taxes. The consistent
[1:13:11] message from city leaders and bond
[1:13:12] attorneys, which we I listened to, and
[1:13:15] state of state officials, was that the
[1:13:17] communities that are most successful
[1:13:18] when they treat their downtown housing,
[1:13:20] historic preservation, and
[1:13:22] infrastructure as a single redevelopment
[1:13:24] strategy rather than separate
[1:13:25] initiatives. So, this directly impacts
[1:13:28] what we're working on now. And I'll I'll
[1:13:30] to refresh your memory, uh it directly
[1:13:33] impacts what we're doing. If you
[1:13:34] remember, council on August 10th,
[1:13:38] the council, you directed the economic
[1:13:40] development committee and a working
[1:13:42] group to evaluate a downtown
[1:13:45] revitalization subdist. We called it our
[1:13:47] historic sub area through an amendment.
[1:13:50] It turns out it's amendment to our urban
[1:13:51] revitalization plan. So all of Fairfield
[1:13:53] is an urban revitalization area, the
[1:13:56] entire city. So the the goal really was
[1:13:59] we thought to solve a problem or an
[1:14:02] issue with regard to uh a building
[1:14:04] downtown 51 East Broadway which is
[1:14:08] changed from rentals being the
[1:14:10] development to for sale condominiums and
[1:14:13] there had been an agreement uh some sort
[1:14:15] of agreement that the city was going to
[1:14:17] offer 10ear tax abatements to that
[1:14:18] developer and to those condo to those to that developer which now turns
[1:14:22] out to be condo purchasers not the
[1:14:24] developer. So, um, that's a short that's
[1:14:27] an issue, that's a problem. But it turns
[1:14:28] out that this really turns out to be an
[1:14:31] opportunity for the city. Uh, I believe
[1:14:34] because we we we don't have to just
[1:14:37] address that single project, but we can
[1:14:38] establish a long-term framework with
[1:14:40] this historic sub area. Um, five things
[1:14:43] we can accomplish based on my what I I I
[1:14:46] learned at these sessions. We can
[1:14:48] encourage upper story housing while pre
[1:14:51] preserving commercial storefronts. we
[1:14:54] can support future SMIDs financing
[1:14:56] options and protects downtown merchants.
[1:14:59] There is in the chapter of the code, I
[1:15:02] believe it's 386 and chapter 404, which
[1:15:05] are relevant state codes, there is a
[1:15:06] provision that if a property is in a
[1:15:08] historic district, even though it's a
[1:15:10] residential property, it can't be levied
[1:15:11] upon for a smid. So that gives some
[1:15:14] fairness to commercial business owners.
[1:15:16] Mhm.
[1:15:16] >> And that also there's a language that we
[1:15:19] need to be careful of because of the
[1:15:21] Senate's new 2472 tax property tax
[1:15:23] revision
[1:15:25] that certain things we need to do in
[1:15:26] order to offer that 10ear tax uh 10ear
[1:15:29] tax um tax abatement. Uh we can we need
[1:15:32] to do a certain thing in order to
[1:15:33] preserve the our city's right to levy on
[1:15:36] the increased value in that property in
[1:15:38] the years following. Also, the this this
[1:15:41] particular um plan amendment that we're
[1:15:43] going to be presenting to the council is
[1:15:45] going to be set up so we can preserve
[1:15:47] historic preservation goals are
[1:15:49] consistent with our fair first um Main
[1:15:52] Street Fairfields preservation
[1:15:54] guidelines and and um as I said earlier,
[1:15:58] it's going to be able to protect the
[1:16:00] city's revenue uh so we can participate
[1:16:03] in upcoming uh tax abatement cycles when
[1:16:05] the tax abatement properties go off tax
[1:16:07] abatement. So um
[1:16:10] what we're going to be doing our my my
[1:16:12] plan is what I this is going to be
[1:16:15] brought before council we'll be working
[1:16:16] with our bond council Oluni and they'll
[1:16:19] be preparing draft language for this
[1:16:21] historic sub area that we spoke about
[1:16:22] but it's going to incorporate some other
[1:16:24] uh some other things that we can use
[1:16:27] that I say can help further the other
[1:16:29] goals that further the other goals we
[1:16:30] have for the city. So on October 12th,
[1:16:34] um by that time hopefully we'll have
[1:16:35] this framework to review with the city,
[1:16:38] the draft plan amendment language, the
[1:16:41] boundary map for the historic area and
[1:16:43] the timeline for having this completed.
[1:16:45] If we're going to one thing that's very
[1:16:47] clear that if we're going to be able to
[1:16:49] offer this 10-year tax abatement
[1:16:51] beginning with the tax year 2028, which
[1:16:54] means valuation is made for those
[1:16:56] properties on January 1, 2027. We have
[1:16:59] to have this plan amendment passed by
[1:17:01] the end of this year, December 31st of
[1:17:04] this year. So, we have enough time. We
[1:17:06] don't have to rush, but we have to be
[1:17:08] deliberate about what we're going to do
[1:17:10] and and we're going to be. So, um this
[1:17:12] was what I learned from the from the um from the sessions I attended
[1:17:16] at the ILC and I'll be presenting
[1:17:19] further more further to the council at
[1:17:22] our next meeting on October 12th.
[1:17:23] >> Okay. Great. Thank you.
[1:17:25] >> I have question Paul. Yeah. Um you had
[1:17:28] mentioned that the entire city is
[1:17:30] covered under
[1:17:33] I don't
[1:17:33] >> I think the entire city is an urban
[1:17:35] revitalization district.
[1:17:36] >> The entire city is urban
[1:17:38] >> you know you know relative to the
[1:17:40] concern that I brought up you know in
[1:17:42] terms of not
[1:17:44] creating a disincentive for developers
[1:17:46] to develop condominium products projects
[1:17:49] particularly you know in in the core of
[1:17:52] the city. uh does does this address that
[1:17:55] at all or is is what we're going to be
[1:17:58] talking about just relative to the core
[1:18:01] downtown the nine blocks or whatever
[1:18:02] however we define it will that will that
[1:18:05] be able to be uh applied broadly across
[1:18:08] the whole city so let's say someone does
[1:18:10] want to put a condominium project
[1:18:13] >> well I think this particular plan
[1:18:16] amendment to our urban revitalization
[1:18:18] plan is going to deal with historic
[1:18:20] buildings
[1:18:21] >> okay And right now our contemplated
[1:18:24] boundary is for downtown.
[1:18:26] >> Yeah.
[1:18:27] >> Specific blocks downtown. Yeah. New
[1:18:29] buildings, new builds. I don't think
[1:18:31] this particular plan amendment is going
[1:18:32] to really contemplate that. That answers
[1:18:34] your question.
[1:18:35] >> Good.
[1:18:37] >> Yeah.
[1:18:37] >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Good
[1:18:39] information. We'll look forward to hear
[1:18:41] >> uh your report back future meetings. Uh
[1:18:44] city attorney report. John, do you have
[1:18:45] anything to
[1:18:46] >> Yes, I have a few things if you can
[1:18:48] tolerate me.
[1:18:49] >> Uh
[1:18:50] >> okay. You got 10 minutes. I got 10
[1:18:52] minutes. Okay. Uh first thing I don't
[1:18:56] have Holden Smith here tonight but I am
[1:18:59] intending to uh see if we can get
[1:19:01] personnel committee together with Holden
[1:19:04] present uh what he would like to do with
[1:19:08] uh the city as far as a memorandum of
[1:19:10] understanding like I have with the city
[1:19:13] as far as agreed work that will be done
[1:19:16] and other work that uh [snorts] will be
[1:19:19] extra if necessary. Uh but uh other than
[1:19:23] that, he is fully u admitted to the bar
[1:19:27] now. He's also under the wing of both
[1:19:29] types of protections. I've called IAP to
[1:19:32] let them know that we're going to have a
[1:19:33] new guy. I've also uh called my own
[1:19:37] private insurer Minnesota Mutual
[1:19:41] [clears throat] and he's where he's
[1:19:43] supposed to be as far as those things so
[1:19:45] that he can meet the standards that the
[1:19:48] council should have for a person to come
[1:19:50] on board and provide you advice.
[1:19:54] So sometime in the next two weeks if we
[1:19:57] can get that worked out with them. Okay,
[1:19:59] >> I'd like to see him sworn in.
[1:20:01] >> Okay. Um, so let's uh move that to
[1:20:04] personnel, a meeting with him and get those soon as we can.
[1:20:08] >> So is there a motion to uh move
[1:20:12] um for the personnel meeting our
[1:20:14] personnel committee to meet regarding
[1:20:16] Holden and being on board as a city
[1:20:18] attorney?
[1:20:20] >> So moved.
[1:20:21] >> Okay. Is there a second?
[1:20:22] >> Second.
[1:20:22] >> Okay. Should we also move regarding the
[1:20:25] planning and zoning director to have
[1:20:27] that reconsidered by personnel
[1:20:29] >> or that's something
[1:20:30] >> I think we can put that in the agenda
[1:20:31] the personnel meeting. I don't know we
[1:20:32] have to I don't think we have to make a
[1:20:33] motion or move it there already but it needs to be on there. Yes.
[1:20:37] >> Okay. Great. Okay. So, it's been moved
[1:20:39] and seconded to uh have the personnel
[1:20:42] meeting regarding Holden and uh his
[1:20:45] position. Uh any discussion or any
[1:20:48] questions? All those in favor say I.
[1:20:50] >> I. All those post same sign. And again
[1:20:52] with that meeting, let's put on the P
[1:20:54] and Z director position and discuss
[1:20:56] that. Okay, go ahead, John.
[1:20:58] >> Okay. Uh
[1:21:00] things that are happening around town
[1:21:02] that u we're looking at and taking a
[1:21:05] position on. Uh there is an act called
[1:21:08] the Native Americans Graves Protection
[1:21:11] and Repatriot
[1:21:13] Repatriotation
[1:21:15] Act. Um, it's at issue right now over at
[1:21:20] our museum. Uh, there's something that
[1:21:23] started when Stan Plum was assistant
[1:21:25] curator over there. It had to do with a
[1:21:28] skull from New Zealand. and Stan uh
[1:21:33] having a background in archaeology
[1:21:36] corresponded with somebody from New
[1:21:38] Zealand and they actually arranged to
[1:21:41] have it researched and now it's at a
[1:21:44] point where that skull is destined to be
[1:21:46] repatriated back to New Zealand and a
[1:21:49] tribe down there that believes it to be
[1:21:53] someone from their tribe. We do not have
[1:21:56] a provenence at our museum that shows
[1:21:59] how we came into possession of that
[1:22:02] particular skull. Now, that is a
[1:22:06] background under this act and I agree
[1:22:09] with the act. I worked with Lakota
[1:22:11] Nakota Dakota for three years and there
[1:22:14] are things that have been taken from
[1:22:17] tribes by grave robbery is what I would
[1:22:20] call it or vandalism and theft from uh
[1:22:24] museums such as the Jesuit Museum down
[1:22:26] at St. Francis on mission uh the Rosebud
[1:22:31] Reservation or the Pineriidge uh Museum
[1:22:34] that's out by Pine or Rapid City. Those
[1:22:38] are things that shouldn't happen and
[1:22:40] they're things that that act exists for.
[1:22:43] Our museum, I promise you, does not have
[1:22:48] things from the tribes that are subject
[1:22:51] to repatriation. We had two very devout
[1:22:56] curator um assistants, Ben Taylor and
[1:22:59] Doc Cells, for about 20 years. They did
[1:23:03] recipe box cards with a provenence on
[1:23:07] each thing that we have in our
[1:23:09] collections. Some of those things have
[1:23:11] been in that museum for a hundred years.
[1:23:14] They are some of them are Plains
[1:23:16] Indians, some of them are Southwest
[1:23:18] Indians. I know what they are, but I
[1:23:21] also know where they came from. And so
[1:23:23] does a lot of the live or the museum
[1:23:26] board. So does Jake. Uh, and right now
[1:23:30] we had an intern this summer. uh who
[1:23:33] was, I believe, prompted by a university
[1:23:36] professor to question some of this
[1:23:40] stuff. And one of the employees over at
[1:23:43] the museum and Jake are arguing daily
[1:23:45] practically about whether there's
[1:23:47] something else that should be
[1:23:48] repatriated. As far as I'm concerned, we
[1:23:52] should fight for each thing in our
[1:23:54] collections. Uh there is a provenence on
[1:23:57] them. Many of them came back from people
[1:23:59] in this community that either lived and
[1:24:01] worked uh with church groups on those
[1:24:04] reservations and brought them back and
[1:24:08] the providence is there for the last
[1:24:10] hundred years or more. Uh some of them
[1:24:13] are from missionaries that were actually
[1:24:16] out of the country and they're from
[1:24:18] tribes and things like that. But there
[1:24:20] is a good history on the things we have
[1:24:22] and they don't fall within the purview
[1:24:24] of that act. Uh but I've I've already
[1:24:28] expressed my opinions to the museum main
[1:24:31] board. Uh we did have a u assessment and
[1:24:37] valuation of a part of our collection by
[1:24:40] Jackson Auctioneers who deal in
[1:24:42] antiquities out of Cedar Falls about 20
[1:24:45] years ago when the uh new foundation was
[1:24:49] just getting off its feet. and they
[1:24:52] looked at a lot of our things and there
[1:24:54] was never any anything said or hinted
[1:24:58] that we had things that
[1:25:01] needed repatriation in any way. So, um,
[1:25:05] I just want the council to be aware if
[1:25:07] you hear something from somebody either
[1:25:09] on the museum foundation or the museum
[1:25:12] board about things being questioned over
[1:25:16] there that my position is going to be
[1:25:18] with them each time that if you think
[1:25:21] there's something that should be
[1:25:22] repatriated, you prove it because we've
[1:25:25] got information that's been indexed for
[1:25:29] years. Now we have a computer indexing
[1:25:31] system for the last 10 or 15 years and
[1:25:34] it's it's better than the cards but the
[1:25:37] cards are a good history. So u I want
[1:25:40] you to be aware of that. It's called the
[1:25:43] NAGPRA
[1:25:45] u federal law about repatriation of
[1:25:49] things that are Native American and we
[1:25:53] haven't violated it. And
[1:25:56] >> doesn't it talk a lot about the things
[1:25:58] that are actually stolen,
[1:25:59] >> right?
[1:26:00] >> It's not stuff that
[1:26:02] >> Yeah.
[1:26:02] >> we got in a in a good way.
[1:26:04] >> Yeah. I know from past experience when
[1:26:07] they were having the uprisings with the
[1:26:09] American Indian movement back in the
[1:26:11] early 70s. They did steal things. There
[1:26:16] were real artifacts from some of the u u
[1:26:21] plains Indian history that were taken
[1:26:24] from places that uh they were
[1:26:27] showpieces. Uh and some of them
[1:26:30] eventually were recovered. Some of them
[1:26:33] there were felony charges brought
[1:26:34] against people that took them. Some of
[1:26:36] them are very valuable. But that's not
[1:26:39] that I'm saying what we have upstairs in
[1:26:42] our museum isn't valuable, but it isn't
[1:26:45] from those thefts and it isn't from that
[1:26:48] background.
[1:26:49] >> Yeah.
[1:26:49] >> So, I want you to be aware of that. You
[1:26:52] probably hear some more sometime out of
[1:26:53] some of the museum people.
[1:26:56] >> Uh, second thing, uh, Penny Lane
[1:27:00] building. Um, a totally different
[1:27:02] subject, but Doug and I and uh, Holden
[1:27:05] were part of a walkth through of the
[1:27:08] second floor uh, a week and a half ago.
[1:27:12] Uh, yesterday afternoon there was a
[1:27:15] walkth through of the first floor. Um, I was not able to attend that. I was um
[1:27:22] away at some appointments, but I did
[1:27:24] talk with Holden who was there. Uh, he
[1:27:28] said that it's sort of like the second
[1:27:30] floor. Second floor is about 80% worked
[1:27:33] on to the point where you would be
[1:27:36] comfortable if those parts that are
[1:27:40] worked on were leased out again. There
[1:27:42] is one part of it that's got open
[1:27:45] ceilings, exposed floors that need to be
[1:27:47] redone. Uh some wall work that the wall
[1:27:51] is ripped away from the uh I guess the
[1:27:55] plaster L and so forth and there's
[1:27:57] visible insulation and things like that.
[1:28:00] I would say 20% of that second floor is
[1:28:04] still in process, but there's been a
[1:28:07] considerable amount of work done up
[1:28:09] there that you can see. Uh and it's good
[1:28:13] looking actually. I think would that be
[1:28:16] fair, Doug, that it's it's not bad
[1:28:19] looking. Uh the first floor similarly
[1:28:22] there are parts of it that uh from what
[1:28:26] I'm told by Holden uh they're equivalent
[1:28:29] to the second floor. U they don't have
[1:28:32] some of the problems as far as wiring
[1:28:34] that the second floor still got open
[1:28:36] outlets and things like that. But uh
[1:28:40] probably when um our uh code enforcement
[1:28:45] officer goes through Weston McKe's list
[1:28:48] of about 20 things up there, we were
[1:28:51] expecting at least a dozen of those
[1:28:53] things to have substantial work on them
[1:28:56] by the owner uh before we considered any
[1:28:59] tenants. Again, I think we're at a point
[1:29:01] where if we say get that norththeast
[1:29:06] corner, uh about 20% of the work in
[1:29:10] there up to standards with the other things on that floor and we'll
[1:29:16] probably sign off on you doing some
[1:29:18] tenants upstairs. Uh the first floor
[1:29:21] similarly, [snorts]
[1:29:23] uh the first floor uh seems to be in
[1:29:25] pretty good shape and could be used for
[1:29:27] some business places again.
[1:29:29] The basement isn't
[1:29:31] u and the basement that building has a
[1:29:36] um sandstone foundation I guess is the
[1:29:40] way I would say it seeps uh moisture
[1:29:44] gets in. There are places in the
[1:29:46] basement that there's water on the
[1:29:48] floor. Uh that's something that there
[1:29:50] are procedures you can use to seal the
[1:29:54] walls and there's procedures you can use
[1:29:56] to dehumidify the place but it's
[1:30:00] something that needs to be required
[1:30:03] probably more specifically in what we go
[1:30:05] back next October 15th we've got a
[1:30:08] review hearing up in the magistrate
[1:30:10] court on our infraction case about that
[1:30:14] which we have six or seven remedies
[1:30:15] under. I would expect that those things
[1:30:18] and [snorts] Adam Meltter describing
[1:30:21] them is probably going to put u the
[1:30:24] owner, Miss Welch, in a position where
[1:30:26] she either has some explanations about
[1:30:28] what else she's planning on getting done
[1:30:31] right now or we're going to have to tell
[1:30:34] her. I think that if you can't get it
[1:30:37] done in a certain amount of time, we
[1:30:39] don't want that building to digress to
[1:30:43] have something else happen. now that as
[1:30:46] much of it is looking like it's improved
[1:30:50] as is looking improved. So, um that
[1:30:53] would mean us saying to her, we have the
[1:30:56] authority under the civil infraction
[1:30:58] ordinance we have and that the state
[1:31:01] provides to say if you're not going to
[1:31:04] get it done by a certain time, we'll go
[1:31:06] in and finish the job in those areas
[1:31:08] where there's something remaining. And
[1:31:11] at that point, if we do it, it will be
[1:31:14] an expense to you. It will be a judgment
[1:31:17] against you. And we do want to make that
[1:31:20] building so that it's useful again. It's
[1:31:23] a dead spot on the corner of the square
[1:31:25] right now. And it doesn't need to be.
[1:31:27] There's there's a lot of potential in
[1:31:29] the inside of that building. Uh and I
[1:31:32] think you agree with me, don't you,
[1:31:34] Doug, that it's uh right now almost
[1:31:37] there?
[1:31:38] >> It's almost. Yeah. Yeah.
[1:31:39] >> Have we had a structural engineer look
[1:31:41] at that? Look at the basement.
[1:31:42] >> We didn't have a structural
[1:31:44] >> make sure that the that's not going to
[1:31:46] fall down.
[1:31:47] >> We had a professional engineer that's
[1:31:50] also an appraiser look at it.
[1:31:52] >> Inspector.
[1:31:53] >> Yeah. Well, I remember we had an
[1:31:54] appraiser, but I didn't know if we had a
[1:31:56] structural [snorts] engineer review.
[1:31:58] >> He's a certified engineering appraiser,
[1:32:00] I believe.
[1:32:01] >> I believe so.
[1:32:02] >> Okay.
[1:32:02] >> Yeah.
[1:32:03] >> Okay.
[1:32:03] >> So, yeah, we we we [clears throat] did
[1:32:06] that. Um I think Adam Meltchure um when
[1:32:09] we get around to the midocctober hearing
[1:32:12] we'll try to talk to you. That will be
[1:32:14] the same week as our next council
[1:32:16] meeting.
[1:32:16] >> Okay.
[1:32:17] >> Uh another thing is uh we had an
[1:32:22] incident out at the airport. Bob Lions
[1:32:25] is here with us tonight. Uh Bob, could
[1:32:29] you come up to the table a minute? I
[1:32:32] want to talk this over a little bit with
[1:32:33] the council. Um, it's a situation where
[1:32:37] Bob did nothing [snorts]
[1:32:39] but explain some FAA rules to an
[1:32:42] individual that was there with an
[1:32:43] ultralight plane. And he pulled his
[1:32:46] plane out at dusk. He had it trailered
[1:32:51] on the ground of a grass runway.
[1:32:54] Shouldn't have been out on the grass
[1:32:56] runway, but that happened. Bob addressed
[1:32:59] it with him, and the man got
[1:33:02] pretty in Bob's face. and then in Bob's
[1:33:06] uh other assistant to the u fixed base
[1:33:09] operator out there, Roger. Uh and the
[1:33:13] guy hasn't let go of this. He's uh uh
[1:33:16] right now he's on social media calling
[1:33:19] us a bunch of uh people that don't like
[1:33:23] flyers. Uh, and I I I don't enjoy social
[1:33:28] media that much, but this is somebody
[1:33:31] that I think we could swat like a bug if
[1:33:33] we had to. It's more of a situation
[1:33:36] where I'm not advocating swatting like a
[1:33:38] bug, but Bob, you feel there's a
[1:33:41] justification for a complaint to FAA,
[1:33:44] don't you?
[1:33:44] >> Yes. And I'm waiting on a call back from
[1:33:46] them. I've contacted them three
[1:33:48] different times. Wait, and they referred
[1:33:50] it to at Kansas City's Fisdo office.
[1:33:53] [snorts]
[1:33:54] So, I had an incident on Labor Day
[1:33:56] evening. I call the next day of a safety
[1:33:59] issue I felt was a safety issue. And
[1:34:01] I've uh a lot it's a very long story.
[1:34:04] It's it's complicated. It's John Doug
[1:34:08] knows and the mayor knows about it. If I
[1:34:11] sat here and talked about it's going to
[1:34:13] take a long time. So, the bottom line is
[1:34:16] I feel that we have a safety issue and
[1:34:19] I'm going to have a complaint with FA
[1:34:21] over it, an investigation. I've also
[1:34:23] contacted the TSA. I was threatened.
[1:34:27] I've got the chief of police involved
[1:34:30] and uh he won't let it go and I gave him
[1:34:34] every opportunity to fly his ultralite
[1:34:37] in a safe manner at the airport and he
[1:34:40] chooses not to do that. He's made
[1:34:42] demands that I give him an access gate
[1:34:45] key that he can go onto the airport
[1:34:49] property and do as he pleases and I
[1:34:52] won't allow it. He's he I have a witness
[1:34:55] that he parked Labor Day evening. He got
[1:34:57] through our gate
[1:34:59] um without my permission. He he found a
[1:35:04] uh local hanger tenant to let him in. He
[1:35:08] proceeded to drive across the ramp
[1:35:10] across the grass parked next to the an
[1:35:12] active runway and unload his ultralight
[1:35:17] fly it. And he called me the next day
[1:35:20] and told me that he wanted access to the
[1:35:22] airport with the gate key. I denied it
[1:35:25] and then now it snowballed. He won't let
[1:35:28] it go. He's demanding, he actually
[1:35:31] demanded that to Doug that he have
[1:35:34] access by the date on 911 at noon.
[1:35:37] Otherwise, we didn't know what he was
[1:35:39] going to do. Uh he's threatened twice.
[1:35:42] And um
[1:35:44] that that's the long story, the just of
[1:35:47] it. And um I will not let him on their
[1:35:50] property to do what he he pleases in an
[1:35:52] unsafe manner. I gave him every
[1:35:54] opportunity to during business hours to
[1:35:57] pull his truck inside the gate and I
[1:36:00] would cone it and he could go fly it. He said there's no way he can taxi his
[1:36:06] ultralight airplane to the grass runway
[1:36:08] to fly it and demanding a gate key and
[1:36:11] there's no way I'm going to allow it.
[1:36:13] That's that's the just of a long story.
[1:36:16] This has been discussed already with the
[1:36:18] commission, has
[1:36:19] >> it? Has we discussed it? And we're going
[1:36:20] to do we're going to propose a short paragraph to add to the
[1:36:27] ordinance. I've never had this happen in
[1:36:29] 31 years where somebody has wanted this
[1:36:33] kind of access to the airport.
[1:36:35] And um I have every [clears throat]
[1:36:37] right through the I've talked to the
[1:36:38] DOT, I've talked to FAA and TS. I have
[1:36:40] every right to m that's my job. I have
[1:36:43] to maintain safety at the airport. That
[1:36:45] was my number one thing I wanted to do
[1:36:48] when I came here 30 years ago is safety
[1:36:50] first. That's why we got a gate. We got
[1:36:53] cameras. This is really important to me
[1:36:55] that something bad doesn't happen in a
[1:36:58] plane crisis into a vehicle that's
[1:36:59] parked next to the runway because I let
[1:37:01] it happen. So, so this is if I if you
[1:37:05] have any questions, you can ask or Doug
[1:37:07] knows all about it.
[1:37:09] John knows about it. So, I'm just
[1:37:12] continuing forward with it.
[1:37:14] We have a file with this gentleman's
[1:37:17] communications.
[1:37:19] We have responses to it. Now he's after
[1:37:24] Freedom of Information Act request of
[1:37:27] about three pages, about 60 or 70 pieces
[1:37:31] of information he wants from us, which I
[1:37:33] consider personally harassment.
[1:37:36] uh once we tell him what we can and
[1:37:39] can't do. Um we'll if he wants to play
[1:37:44] that game, I don't want this to be a
[1:37:46] game, but he'll find out what else can
[1:37:50] be discovered. U and if FAA gets
[1:37:53] involved, uh we'll imple,
[1:37:59] you know, if he's going to throw those
[1:38:00] kinds of stones, there's bigger rocks
[1:38:03] that can be thrown.
[1:38:05] So, uh, as far as, uh, Bob, I see
[1:38:09] nothing that has been done to this man
[1:38:14] except us try to be polite with him and
[1:38:16] explain safety. And, u same way with
[1:38:21] Roger, uh, and the same way with the
[1:38:23] commission. Uh but if if you run into
[1:38:26] some social media about what's going on
[1:38:28] out at our airport, the guy makes it
[1:38:31] sound like we have just discriminated
[1:38:33] all over the place against him, that we
[1:38:36] in some way uh have made it clear to him
[1:38:40] that we don't like people coming and
[1:38:42] flying in our area. Uh and that uh he's
[1:38:46] a victim. And my impression is I think I heard the word the other day that
[1:38:53] narcissism fits everything I've
[1:38:56] described. U and he definitely that but
[1:39:00] he's also pushing the envelope as far as
[1:39:02] he can at this point.
[1:39:04] >> John, I got a question. Um are threats
[1:39:07] something beyond civil infractions?
[1:39:11] >> Is there is there an element of
[1:39:13] criminal? Uh
[1:39:14] >> this has also been talked over with the
[1:39:16] county attorney's office. And I've
[1:39:17] talked to [snorts] the chief over it and
[1:39:20] we actually had a meeting with this Mr.
[1:39:21] Diaz and it didn't go well. I I had to
[1:39:25] cut it off and leave because he his
[1:39:27] demands I wasn't going to give in to his
[1:39:29] demands and um I have I have every right
[1:39:33] to protect the airport and I will and
[1:39:35] I'm glad I got John and everybody on
[1:39:37] board. It's really important that we
[1:39:39] protect our airport and not allow
[1:39:41] anybody that feels that they can get a
[1:39:44] gate key to roam the airport. and uh we
[1:39:48] don't want an accident to happen at the
[1:39:49] airport. He has threatened me over the
[1:39:52] phone. He said that he you're looking
[1:39:55] for a fight. I'm not looking for a
[1:39:56] fight. When I was talking to the chief
[1:39:59] and him briefly,
[1:40:02] he said it looks like you want to go
[1:40:04] toe-to-toe,
[1:40:06] fight toe to toe. And I said, "I'm I I
[1:40:08] told the chief and it's on body cam that
[1:40:11] he's threatening me again and I don't
[1:40:14] want to go toe-to-toe." and I turned and
[1:40:16] I left at that point. And um I had
[1:40:19] reported it to the TSA and it's been
[1:40:23] referred to a federal marshall and I
[1:40:26] will and I've talked to the FA numerous
[1:40:29] time waiting on a call tomorrow on going
[1:40:31] forward with the complaint against him.
[1:40:34] >> You're you're talking about the the
[1:40:35] grass runway too and I'm not as probably
[1:40:38] knowledgeable in this at all, but it's
[1:40:39] not just a secondary runway. It's
[1:40:41] perpendicular to the main runway, right?
[1:40:42] So sometimes on wind conditions, that
[1:40:44] one is the one that you need to use. So
[1:40:46] if there's a vehicle parked on it,
[1:40:47] that's
[1:40:48] >> Yeah. It was parked right next to it. I
[1:40:50] have a witness that that
[1:40:51] >> that was flying that seen it there for
[1:40:53] over an hour.
[1:40:54] >> Parked right next to the active grass
[1:40:56] runway.
[1:40:57] >> Yeah. Okay.
[1:40:58] >> For general purposes, it's a nice
[1:41:01] amenity. I've had friends that have bone
[1:41:05] uh over the years flown gliders in there
[1:41:09] as well as the ultral lights
[1:41:11] >> and it's just perfect for those those
[1:41:13] types of planes.
[1:41:14] >> He's making it like I'm not allowing him
[1:41:17] to fly and that is not the case at all.
[1:41:19] >> That's not the case at all.
[1:41:20] >> No, I've given him every opportunity. I
[1:41:22] told him to rent a hanger. I'd let him
[1:41:24] through the gate. He there is there is
[1:41:27] only one way with him and that's gate
[1:41:29] access to the airport to do as he
[1:41:31] pleases.
[1:41:32] >> Yeah,
[1:41:33] >> that's it. That's his demand.
[1:41:35] >> We appreciate your steadfastness, Bob,
[1:41:38] and you have our full support. So
[1:41:40] hopefully this will be resolved.
[1:41:41] >> I hope soon because it's not good.
[1:41:44] >> Yeah.
[1:41:44] >> Thank you.
[1:41:45] for coming tonight.
[1:41:46] >> Thank you.
[1:41:48] >> Couple other things about a minute each.
[1:41:51] Uh, one is that, uh, I was over at board
[1:41:55] of supervisors this morning for a little
[1:41:57] bit. Uh, we are in the process of
[1:42:01] getting, uh, a resolution by the board
[1:42:04] to approve the Sunrise Trail subdivision
[1:42:07] right now as a rural subdivision,
[1:42:10] pending the annexation
[1:42:12] coming soon. Um, as a city annexation.
[1:42:18] Uh, and that annexation, my
[1:42:21] understanding is the Libertyville Road.
[1:42:23] I've talked to Melanie about this a few
[1:42:26] times. Uh, and she's talked to Aaylor's
[1:42:28] a few times. the city development board
[1:42:31] is trying to [snorts] um I'm going to
[1:42:35] call it squeeze us as far as things that
[1:42:39] we had in the past where we had a few
[1:42:41] places in town going down towards the
[1:42:44] south that were islands not a next
[1:42:48] >> [snorts]
[1:42:48] >> uh couple of them along south Maine
[1:42:51] couple of them down right west of
[1:42:53] Casey's uh and those things have turned
[1:42:58] into situations where they were more
[1:43:00] willing to annex
[1:43:02] u in the more recent years. Uh but along
[1:43:06] Libertyville Road, there's I believe 28
[1:43:08] different sites. Uh the substantial
[1:43:12] majority of them, a couple short of 80%
[1:43:15] have signed pre-anexation agreements.
[1:43:18] They got water and sewer at the city
[1:43:20] rate. There's a few of them that haven't
[1:43:23] signed. Becca, I'm assuming they pay the
[1:43:27] uh higher rates, but at those at this
[1:43:30] point, they're the reason that
[1:43:32] Libertyville Road isn't next already.
[1:43:36] That's what's hanging fire right now
[1:43:38] with the city development board. City
[1:43:40] Development Board instead of letting us
[1:43:43] do a standalone annexation on the
[1:43:45] Sunrise Trail, uh, with one principal
[1:43:49] owner signing off on it, uh, they want
[1:43:53] the Libertyville Road annexations all
[1:43:56] done with no islands and [clears throat]
[1:43:58] they want the Mazden Barn property as
[1:44:01] part of the annexation also, which I
[1:44:04] don't think is going to be a problem in
[1:44:05] the end on this, but uh, right now the
[1:44:08] city development board is asking for a
[1:44:12] lot more than I think couldn't be
[1:44:14] accomplished in two separate annexation
[1:44:17] proceedings and one of them if it needs
[1:44:20] to be could be involuntary the other one
[1:44:22] voluntary but we've got 31 to 35 lots of
[1:44:27] developable ground right now that could
[1:44:29] be annexed about 3 months ago or
[1:44:31] actually about two years ago except the
[1:44:34] city development board u is holding out
[1:44:38] so at this point. We want to get that
[1:44:40] done. Melanie says Aaylor is working on
[1:44:43] some other things with them in De Moines
[1:44:45] to try to get the development board to
[1:44:48] say yes on everything. Uh but in the
[1:44:51] meantime, one way or another, Sunrise
[1:44:53] Trail is going to have an approved
[1:44:54] subdivision and be able to sell lots.
[1:44:57] Nevertheless, we have an urban renewal
[1:45:00] district down there in revitalization
[1:45:02] plan on file and we want to get that
[1:45:05] done yet this year. So, uh, there are
[1:45:09] some consequences if we don't. That's
[1:45:11] the other thing that city development
[1:45:13] board, uh, has to recognize at some
[1:45:17] point that they're going to shoot this
[1:45:19] whole concept of orderly development in
[1:45:22] the foot if they keep us from doing what
[1:45:25] we want in our urban renewal plan and
[1:45:27] revitalization
[1:45:29] plan. So, at some point, uh, I know I
[1:45:32] was talking to Melanie and as far as
[1:45:35] Aaylor's attitude about it, there may be
[1:45:37] a time when we have to shame the city
[1:45:40] development board into getting this
[1:45:43] thing done, but that's where we are with
[1:45:45] that. Uh, and I think the board of
[1:45:48] supervisors is more than willing to help
[1:45:51] us if that's what it takes as far as a
[1:45:54] resolution where they do something to
[1:45:56] approve the subdivision under their
[1:45:59] rural standards. Our standards are
[1:46:02] higher than their standards, frankly,
[1:46:04] but uh, doesn't make any difference if
[1:46:07] they approve it as a rural subdivision
[1:46:09] while we've got it approved as a
[1:46:11] subdivision also. under our rules, it
[1:46:14] should be ready for sale. So, that being
[1:46:18] what it is, the only other thing is that
[1:46:21] there was a crowd over there this
[1:46:23] morning about dogs and um they were
[1:46:28] talking about our ordinance
[1:46:31] uh and someone caused them to believe
[1:46:34] that the city allows people to have at
[1:46:37] least eight dogs. And they started
[1:46:40] talking about some people's dogs here in
[1:46:42] town. I told him, I said, "I know that
[1:46:44] we amended our animal control ordinance
[1:46:47] so that you can have four animals. We
[1:46:49] have a case right now where we're having
[1:46:51] the judge review it where some people
[1:46:54] had 36 animals. We definitely do not
[1:46:58] allow large numbers of animals like that
[1:47:01] anymore."
[1:47:02] Uh but some of the folks there in the
[1:47:05] group were speaking in terms of well
[1:47:08] what can we do to get rid of them? Uh
[1:47:12] and they were talking about and the
[1:47:14] assistant county attorney was there
[1:47:16] talking with them also. But u you what
[1:47:19] does it take to shoot them etc. And uh
[1:47:23] at that point that was talked down and
[1:47:26] we just tried to explain we have animal
[1:47:30] control ordinances. All of the towns do
[1:47:34] and it usually requires a peace officer
[1:47:37] being present if you're contemplating
[1:47:40] anything where the animals dangerous
[1:47:42] enough to put out of its misery. Uh I I
[1:47:46] tell you that because I expected some of
[1:47:50] them were going to be here tonight to
[1:47:52] talk to you. Uh they basically told the
[1:47:55] board of supervisors that that was their
[1:47:57] plan. So
[1:47:58] >> well and we do know we at least some of
[1:48:01] us have seen the discussion on Facebook
[1:48:04] and um we have done research over the
[1:48:08] last year and more so recently
[1:48:11] >> uh about other shelters.
[1:48:14] >> Um you know it used to be that the vet
[1:48:16] clinic would take these dogs for
[1:48:18] temporary if the police picked them up
[1:48:20] temporarily till somebody picked up
[1:48:22] their dog. We don't have access to that
[1:48:24] anymore. Noah's Arc doesn't do that.
[1:48:27] Heavenly Pet Sanctuary doesn't do that.
[1:48:29] That's a whole can of worms for the city
[1:48:31] to pay for some shelter.
[1:48:33] >> You [snorts] have to come get your dogs
[1:48:35] and you got to staff it and it's a huge
[1:48:37] budget item and uh right now it's just
[1:48:41] not feasible to do.
[1:48:42] >> Yeah, there's
[1:48:43] >> there's not a place in another town for
[1:48:45] us to take these animals. So, um you
[1:48:49] know, we just have to you know, people
[1:48:52] need to be responsible with their dogs.
[1:48:55] That's I can't you can't say it any
[1:48:57] other way than that. So
[1:48:58] >> what sanctions do we have beyond the
[1:49:00] fairly modest fines we're talking about?
[1:49:04] We what what have other cities our size
[1:49:07] done to resolve that problem?
[1:49:11] >> Well, some cities do have their own
[1:49:14] facility
[1:49:15] >> pound like a dog pound.
[1:49:16] >> Yeah. But if you talk to them who did
[1:49:19] you just talk to Kia?
[1:49:21] >> Yeah. You know, it's an it's a you know,
[1:49:24] it's like a boat,
[1:49:25] >> you know.
[1:49:26] >> Yeah. We we we've talked to the money.
[1:49:29] >> It's the endless money pit.
[1:49:31] >> And there are shelters. Municipalities
[1:49:34] often will reserve
[1:49:37] a kennel for the city and they have that
[1:49:41] resource in their city. We call we
[1:49:44] called clear up to De Moine. We're still looking. They're they're
[1:49:48] either full, they're not taking them. We
[1:49:51] have to figure something out. We're drafting a plan. It's going to
[1:49:55] cost us some money, but you know, John
[1:49:58] had talked about the 32 36 dogs.
[1:50:02] >> Yeah. 36.
[1:50:02] >> And they had the Animal Rescue League
[1:50:06] come in and that bill was north of
[1:50:09] $40,000
[1:50:10] to have those dogs removed. And then of
[1:50:13] course they're going after the
[1:50:16] individuals to collect those funds to
[1:50:18] recover that money. you know, the city
[1:50:21] itself can also be in that situation.
[1:50:23] So, yeah, we kind of run down these we do our best to solve these these
[1:50:30] issues, but we we absolutely need help
[1:50:32] because there's only so many funding
[1:50:34] streams that we can and we end up
[1:50:36] shifting one project to the next, one
[1:50:39] crisis to the next. it would be we do
[1:50:42] whatever we can to plan
[1:50:45] but sometimes we are reactive and I've
[1:50:50] realized you know I've been here going
[1:50:52] on four years now and this particular
[1:50:55] situation happens about once a year
[1:50:57] other than that we have a stray here and
[1:50:59] there the owner is found it gets picked
[1:51:01] up but then we have a pack of dogs we
[1:51:03] have 36 dogs or at one point in time
[1:51:06] there was there was an issue with horses
[1:51:09] that the county had to deal Yeah.
[1:51:11] >> And you know, so we do have these
[1:51:13] issues, but it's hard for us enough to
[1:51:17] deal with certain crisis, but this
[1:51:19] becomes a crisis and you know, we do
[1:51:21] what we can to come in and save the day,
[1:51:23] but we'll have a plan.
[1:51:25] >> Is there anything that we can do to
[1:51:27] recruit citizens uh to help monitor
[1:51:30] this? Uh it seems to me that peer
[1:51:33] pressure would also be something that we could employ to to help people
[1:51:39] be more responsible. And there are if
[1:51:42] you look on social media, there are some
[1:51:44] individuals in town that actually do
[1:51:46] step in and help. But some of the
[1:51:48] comments that I wrote read on social
[1:51:50] media is I've helped and I've helped and
[1:51:52] I'm helped and I'm burned out. I need
[1:51:54] somebody else to help me. So, it's just
[1:51:56] they they get one person to do it and
[1:51:58] they do it over and over and over again
[1:52:00] and then again volunteer fatigue. They get to the point to where they
[1:52:05] can't either afford it or they don't
[1:52:06] have time. They have personal lives and
[1:52:08] it's always somebody else they're trying
[1:52:10] to help and you know that's the issue.
[1:52:14] >> Are just go ahead clarity uh um are they
[1:52:17] trying to help someone who is
[1:52:19] [clears throat] not following the rules?
[1:52:21] Yeah, this particular situation right
[1:52:23] now is is that, you know, trying to not
[1:52:25] only find these dogs, but then to rehome
[1:52:28] them and they do it often. And, you
[1:52:31] know, we have people that we, again, I'm
[1:52:34] going to revert back to the the 32 dogs
[1:52:38] that those individuals, those dogs were
[1:52:40] seized, but they still have that need to
[1:52:42] have an animal. And then they just have
[1:52:44] more and more and more animals and they
[1:52:46] just collect them and they go right back
[1:52:48] into the situation. Then
[1:52:50] >> what kind of sanctions do we have for
[1:52:52] repeat offenders? What what do we have
[1:52:55] any teeth in our ordinances uh to make
[1:52:58] it
[1:52:58] >> we we can issue fines but that that
[1:53:01] particular instance uh we were in court
[1:53:03] for a year and a half, two years
[1:53:05] >> and we they agreed to have the animals
[1:53:08] removed. The yard where the animals were
[1:53:11] kept was supposed to be restored this
[1:53:15] summer. I mean, they were supposed to um
[1:53:19] basically bulldoze it out,
[1:53:22] replace the top soil. It stinks. Uh but
[1:53:27] that hasn't been done. And the people
[1:53:30] moved to Oscaloosa that were the main
[1:53:33] violators.
[1:53:34] >> Uh Iowa Animal Rescue League up in De
[1:53:37] Moines uh took a bunch of the dogs as
[1:53:40] you mentioned. Uh most of the problems
[1:53:43] in southeast Iowa,
[1:53:46] you can't find a solution for more than
[1:53:48] one or two animal at a time. Uh there is
[1:53:52] a place called Blue Star Refuge down at
[1:53:54] Bloomfield. You can get one or two
[1:53:57] incorageable dogs in there at a time.
[1:54:00] There's another one down at Fort
[1:54:02] Madison, one or two animals at a time.
[1:54:05] That doesn't solve a problem like this
[1:54:07] where you need a basically a cattle
[1:54:11] truck to get that many animals moved at
[1:54:14] one time. So, uh it's it's not a good
[1:54:19] scenario. We have, I believe, one of the
[1:54:22] most humane and complete animal control
[1:54:25] ordinances. It's like nine pages long.
[1:54:28] It's got an animal control review board.
[1:54:31] Uh it's got methods for uh impounding
[1:54:35] animals. It's got methods for
[1:54:37] identifying dangerous animals. Uh it's
[1:54:40] all there. But if somebody's going to uh
[1:54:44] say that they're going to cooperate and
[1:54:47] then they don't and then they move on
[1:54:50] you then they turn up with a bunch of
[1:54:52] animals again. Uh here we go.
[1:54:55] >> That didn't solve the problem. And and
[1:54:58] to sum this up is you have two different
[1:55:02] sides of the spectrum when it comes to
[1:55:04] this opinion. You have one side of the
[1:55:07] opinion that says, you know, destroy the
[1:55:09] animals. Get rid of them. Don't care.
[1:55:12] Get them out of here. They're a danger.
[1:55:13] Then you have the other side that says,
[1:55:15] don't touch those animals. They need
[1:55:17] help. They, you know, it's not the
[1:55:19] animals fault. And I get both sides. And
[1:55:23] so I can tell you from experience that,
[1:55:26] you know, shelters and no kill shelters,
[1:55:29] they get full and they get expensive
[1:55:32] quickly and you have to have the
[1:55:34] resources. You know, some shelters, you
[1:55:37] know, they they depend on donated foods,
[1:55:40] dog food, and and volunteers to run
[1:55:43] them, those sorts of things. And if
[1:55:45] there's some sort of miniature version
[1:55:47] of that that we can we can look at. And
[1:55:50] I've been talking to um our our
[1:55:54] community resource officer and we're
[1:55:56] coming up with a plan. We'll probably
[1:55:58] introduce something uh to Ways and Means
[1:56:01] for the budget cycle, but this is going
[1:56:03] to take time. But we've been doing our
[1:56:05] research and trying to figure out what
[1:56:07] the best way is that that gets the job
[1:56:10] done, but is the least impactful. Is
[1:56:13] that helpful?
[1:56:14] >> Thanks.
[1:56:15] >> Let's move on. I don't want to talk
[1:56:17] about dogs. be responsible owners.
[1:56:20] >> Yeah, that's everything I have now.
[1:56:22] >> Cool. Anyway,
[1:56:24] >> enough
[1:56:25] >> committee. We don't have any committee
[1:56:26] and board reports. Uh, administrator
[1:56:28] department reports. There is a project
[1:56:30] report from Melanie. She's not here. So,
[1:56:31] if you have any questions, I guess you
[1:56:33] can
[1:56:35] >> Marcus, you going to say something about
[1:56:37] project report?
[1:56:37] >> I'm not here to answer there's any other
[1:56:39] questions on any of our projects.
[1:56:41] >> Yeah. Anybody have any questions? Well,
[1:56:43] I note that the survey as far as Maine
[1:56:46] and Burlington safety improvements, the
[1:56:48] survey and preliminary plans have been
[1:56:49] completed.
[1:56:50] >> Yes. Uh, and we plan to bid that this
[1:56:52] fall. So, and yeah, we should be in
[1:56:56] construction next year.
[1:56:57] >> So, it's good. Thank you.
[1:57:00] >> Right.
[1:57:01] >> Let's move on to the SID administrator
[1:57:02] report.
[1:57:04] >> I think we've discussed 90% of it.
[1:57:07] >> Okay. We've already talked about it.
[1:57:10] Any questions? Huh? Sidewalks. Oh,
[1:57:13] right. I'll turn that back over to Bob.
[1:57:15] [snorts]
[1:57:16] >> All right. Well, um I'm happy to say
[1:57:19] that uh I think we only have two
[1:57:23] stretches that are not under agreement.
[1:57:27] And so my goal is to have all the
[1:57:29] sidewalks finished by the end of
[1:57:32] October. I got agreement uh on from
[1:57:35] Chris Cuffner. We're going to replace
[1:57:38] the entire sidewalk. Asian fa is
[1:57:41] awesome. So that entire sidewalk will be
[1:57:43] replaced. You'll [clears throat] go by
[1:57:46] Cafe Paradiso. There's a beautiful pad
[1:57:49] there and there's going to be a very
[1:57:51] pretty railing. And um we tore up in
[1:57:54] front of John's office today.
[1:57:55] >> I couldn't get anybody in my office
[1:57:57] today.
[1:57:58] >> Yeah, I know. They're coming in the side
[1:58:00] door.
[1:58:01] >> There's some pain. There's some pain.
[1:58:03] Um, but I'm getting a lot of really good
[1:58:07] comments and I'll I'll relay one story
[1:58:11] because it demonstrates the seriousness
[1:58:14] of this and
[1:58:17] um I have some thoughts. So, I'll I'll
[1:58:19] share those very briefly. Um, gentleman
[1:58:22] called me last week and said, "Are you
[1:58:24] the guy who's doing the sidewalks?" I
[1:58:25] said, "Well, I'm part of the team that's
[1:58:27] doing the sidewalks." He said, "Well, I
[1:58:30] fell down a while ago in front of Lenote
[1:58:33] and broke my hip. I haven't taken any
[1:58:36] action in the city." I said, "Well,
[1:58:39] that's, you know,
[1:58:41] dearly noted." Uh, but I
[1:58:47] it
[1:58:48] it's great that we're getting this done
[1:58:51] and I think this is as important as a
[1:58:54] metaphor than it is for sidewalks.
[1:58:57] You know, um, I'd like us to think as a
[1:59:02] governing body and as individuals, uh,
[1:59:06] what what what can we do to not tolerate
[1:59:10] things that degrade our city? my car and
[1:59:12] I I went and sprayed him with uh
[1:59:15] vinegar. That block between the uh
[1:59:18] Chinese restaurant, Fifth Street and
[1:59:20] Sixth Street. Took us eight hours
[1:59:23] between us to remove the weeds in the
[1:59:26] rain. And those weeds were bothering I
[1:59:30] mean, I'm as guilty as anyone. Those
[1:59:31] weeds were bothering me for years. But
[1:59:34] it looks fantastic now. And it didn't
[1:59:37] look fantastic before. people came into
[1:59:39] the city and there was this chunk of
[1:59:42] derelict, you know, area. And so I just
[1:59:48] love to
[1:59:51] for us to think about, you know, where
[1:59:53] are the things that, you know, the
[1:59:54] sidewalks could have been fixed years
[1:59:56] ago, but it was difficult. But
[1:59:59] when we had the will to fix the
[2:00:01] sidewalks, the sidewalks got fixed. So,
[2:00:04] you know, um I would just hope that we
[2:00:08] could use this in a way maybe even in
[2:00:11] terms of the uh the the you know,
[2:00:14] buildings. We'll we'll have the report
[2:00:16] from ISU, but I'd like us to tackle
[2:00:20] these things that that significantly
[2:00:22] degrade our town in ways that are not
[2:00:25] necessarily always the conventional ways
[2:00:28] of doing it. So that but it's it's it's
[2:00:32] a delight to see this happening and it's
[2:00:35] a delight to hear people's uh response.
[2:00:38] So I appreciate everyone kind of
[2:00:41] thinking good thoughts about this being
[2:00:44] completed and we have flat beautiful
[2:00:46] sidewalks. As I've told people, we don't
[2:00:48] have new pants, but we got very neat
[2:00:50] patches and they're washed and they're
[2:00:52] ironed. So that's that's that's what I
[2:00:55] want. the two top legislative priorities
[2:00:58] that the Iowa League of Cities mentioned
[2:01:01] and they're they're an advocacy advocacy
[2:01:02] group for cities. Two top priorities,
[2:01:04] property tax cleanup, that's confusing.
[2:01:06] And they the incoming president ILOC
[2:01:10] who was a former state representative
[2:01:13] challenged
[2:01:14] um any everyone present to find 15
[2:01:16] legislators who could un who could
[2:01:18] explain to you the property tax laws. He
[2:01:22] says you wouldn't find 15. And if you
[2:01:23] find 15, I'm going to give you an award
[2:01:24] and I have time to come up with that
[2:01:26] award because it's going to take you
[2:01:27] time to find 15. So that's a that's a
[2:01:29] top priority for in terms of legislative
[2:01:32] u legislative agenda for the LOC. The
[2:01:35] second was sidewalk liability reform. So
[2:01:40] we have of course this Supreme Court
[2:01:43] decision in 2025, John's well aware of
[2:01:45] it, that establishes while the property
[2:01:47] owner is responsible for maintaining the
[2:01:49] sidewalk, the city is in fact liable if
[2:01:51] somebody is injured. that's a concern.
[2:01:53] >> So, that's something that hopefully we
[2:01:54] get some more clarity on this coming
[2:01:56] legislative session. So, I I commend
[2:01:59] what you're doing. Uh but, you know,
[2:02:01] it's it's will
[2:02:06] money,
[2:02:07] >> right? That has to come from somewhere.
[2:02:09] >> We have we have the will and the
[2:02:13] property owners, the building owners
[2:02:14] have come up with the money. And where
[2:02:17] they have not come up with the money, I
[2:02:19] have raised money and I will raise
[2:02:21] further money. There is one piece that
[2:02:24] is not accounted for and that is fixing
[2:02:27] curb and gutters beyond the budget that
[2:02:30] Joe is going to be handling. And I'm
[2:02:33] guessing that in order to fix all the
[2:02:35] cur all the broken curbs and gutters,
[2:02:37] the little pieces and the bigger pieces,
[2:02:40] probably another $10,000.
[2:02:42] So, um, that's something that I'll have
[2:02:46] in a much more quantitative way. I'll
[2:02:48] have an exact linear footage and if we,
[2:02:54] you know, if if we can find some budget
[2:02:56] to do that, it'd be great. If not, I
[2:02:58] will,
[2:02:59] >> you know, I can always be put in the
[2:03:01] budget cycle for next year.
[2:03:02] >> Well, for next year or or we can find
[2:03:05] that that gets directed towards one of
[2:03:06] the nonprofits that so the city's not
[2:03:08] picking and choosing whose curbs they're
[2:03:10] fixing and who they're not.
[2:03:12] um property main street. Yeah, property
[2:03:15] committee was supposed to address that.
[2:03:17] >> Yeah. And and I'm
[2:03:19] head of the property committee. The um I I think that if the city is unable to
[2:03:26] do that, then I think that it's
[2:03:29] reasonable that I can uh find private
[2:03:31] citizens. So,
[2:03:32] >> okay,
[2:03:33] >> great.
[2:03:34] >> Your honor.
[2:03:34] >> Yes. uh Paul's point about the Supreme
[2:03:38] Court ruling putting liability on uh
[2:03:43] cities
[2:03:44] uh for our sidewalks. Um,
[2:03:49] if you have a chance to talk to somebody
[2:03:51] that's a candidate for Senate or House
[2:03:53] of Representatives,
[2:03:56] if you could address it as
[2:04:00] the court has given the legislature
[2:04:04] a great opportunity to straighten out
[2:04:07] something as far as liabilities. Right
[2:04:10] now, the statute says that you're not
[2:04:13] liable. The city's not liable for
[2:04:16] somebody that slips and falls in the
[2:04:19] winter. Ice and snow
[2:04:22] um make a sidewalk the adjacent owner's
[2:04:27] responsibility
[2:04:28] and the city doesn't get that
[2:04:34] consequence when somebody slips and
[2:04:37] falls. Uh, everybody that uh has a
[2:04:40] residence or has a business makes sure
[2:04:43] they salt their sidewalks, make sure
[2:04:46] they shovel them. Uh, it's just pretty
[2:04:50] much done automatically because people
[2:04:53] know that could happen to them as far as
[2:04:55] liability.
[2:04:57] That ought to be the way it's handled on
[2:05:00] the other two seasons of the year
[2:05:03] besides
[2:05:04] cold and colder uh season. So, um, it's
[2:05:10] something that the legislature could
[2:05:12] fix, uh, with one part of the code
[2:05:14] that's right next to the, uh, ice and
[2:05:17] snow um, excuse, so to speak. It's a
[2:05:22] legal affirmative defense. It could just
[2:05:25] as easily be that way for the rest of
[2:05:28] the year, also.
[2:05:29] >> But it is rice and snow. That's good to
[2:05:30] know.
[2:05:31] >> Yeah. Yeah. And that that would help
[2:05:33] because right now we don't have any
[2:05:35] there's not enough teeth in the thing to
[2:05:39] induce a building owner to
[2:05:41] [clears throat]
[2:05:42] make sure that their sidewalk isn't
[2:05:43] dangerous. But fortunately, we're very
[2:05:46] close to not having dangerous sidewalks,
[2:05:48] at least downtown.
[2:05:52] >> Okay.
[2:05:54] Thank you for all that commenting.
[2:05:57] [laughter]
[2:06:00] » You're you're welcome. You're welcome.
[2:06:02] >> All righty.
[2:06:04] >> How I would take a motion to adjurnn.
[2:06:05] [laughter]
[2:06:07] [clears throat]
[2:06:08] >> It's been moved to adjourn public to
[2:06:10] speak on this topic.
[2:06:11] >> Not tonight.
[2:06:12] >> Let's do it next week. Okay.
[2:06:14] >> You mean two weeks?
[2:06:16] >> Two weeks. Yeah. Two weeks.
[2:06:18] >> And uh I'll I'll take a second. Is
[2:06:21] somebody got a second? All right. It's
[2:06:23] been moved and second to adjurnn. All
[2:06:24] those in favor say I. All those opposed,
[2:06:27] same sign. Great. Thank you.
[2:06:29] >> Thank you. meeting.
[2:06:30] >> Thank you, brother.