[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.

City of Fairfield - Study Session & City Council 9.28.26

Transcript