Call to me in order. Please join me for
the pledge of allegiance.
» I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
» Okay, welcome everybody. This is our
city council meeting for Monday, August
the 10th, 2026.
Start with a roll call, please.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Crusader?
>> Here.
>> Manor is excused. O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Here.
>> Next we move to item number three. I
need a motion to approve the agenda as
presented.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second. All in
favor?
>> Aye.
>> Opposed?
Passes 6-0.
Next we move to public comment.
Uh Mr. Hertzberg, would you like to come
forward?
>> Yes.
» Just before you start, and just so you
are aware, it's it's limited to 5
minutes. I'll try not to cut you off in
the middle of something, but when I get
close, I'll let you know that you're
close.
>> Not a problem. Thank you.
>> Okay, thank you.
>> is John Hertzberg. I'm here representing
my uncle, Roger Tempest. I know he has
communicated with several of you last
night or in the past in trying to
discuss
his
non-willingness to be annexed into the
city. He has no wish to be part of the
city limits.
He understands there's an annexation
discussion of it, but however the vote
goes, he would like to propose he is not
annexed, and however he would go against
that.
So he asked that I come here to
represent him and to listen to what is
being said and to speak on his behalf.
Are there any questions?
>> Is there anything to read about that you were looking at?
>> We can't do that.
>> [clears throat]
>> This is public comment.
>> Sure.
>> Uh we're not allowed to go back and
forth during public comment.
>> Not a problem.
>> It's not on the agenda, otherwise.
>> All right.
>> Thank you Thank you for coming in. I
appreciate it.
>> Thank you.
>> It is on the agenda.
>> And how do
>> but you can't You can't discuss it
during the public comment. You get to do
it when that item comes up.
>> All right.
>> Next, we move to item number five. Um
this is the proc- the poppy
proclamation,
um which I'll now read.
Whereas America is the land of freedom
preserved and protected willingly and
freely by citizen soldiers. Whereas
millions who have answered the call to
arms have died in the field of battle.
Whereas a nation at peace must be
reminded of the price of war and the
debt owed to those who have died in war.
Whereas the red poppy has been
designated a symbol of sacrifice of
lives in all wars. And
whereas the VFW Ladies Auxiliary Post
2440 has pledged to remind America
annually of this debt through the
distribution of the the memorial flower.
Therefore, I, Brad Blackorby, Mayor of
Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa, do
hereby proclaim August 27th to the 29th,
2026 as Poppy Days, and ask that all
citizens pay
a tribute to those that have made the
ultimate sacrifice in the name of
freedom by wearing and displaying the
memorial poppy on these days.
And I'm going to sign this now on this
day
as the mayor.
Today is the is August the 10th.
Did you want to get a picture first or
Do you want one copy of this, by the
way?
>> Um that's fine.
>> No. Yes or no?
>> If you have it next year.
» I have to sign another one. That's all.
I think I can probably arrange that.
What days is it going to be?
>> The 27th through the 29th.
» Why don't you give me a call if you want
me to do any hours? I'll try to help you
out.
» So nice of you to offer.
» Sure.
I don't have any cash with me right now.
>> Yeah, me either.
>> I'll pay. Be careful. We don't want you
standing around not doing anything.
You're welcome.
Yeah, that's right. That's right.
That's free without having to do it
lectures all bundled up.
Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
I'm trying to get cash right here.
Mhm, thank you.
Do I give him
Okay, just give me a call.
All right, okay.
Thanks.
Okay, let's move to item number six,
which is the oath of officer, Officer
Brock Barnhart. Do you want to come up
meet me at the podium, please?
» Hi.
» Welcome.
>> Yeah.
» Welcome again.
This one.
Go slowly and then you just read it
back.
I thought
about my heart.
>> I solemnly swear that I will support the
Constitution of the United States.
>> I will solemnly swear that I will
support the Constitution of the United
States.
>> And the Constitution of the state of
Iowa.
>> And the Constitution of the state of
Iowa.
>> And that I will faithfully and
impartially
>> And that I will faithfully and
impartially
>> to the best of my ability
>> discharge all duties of the position of
patrol officer
>> discharge all duties of the position
>> of patrol officer
>> in the city of Independence
>> as now and here here and after required
by law.
>> as now and here after required by law.
>> Okay.
>> So, I need you to sign up here for me.
I'm going to put the
10th day
August
I just need you to sign and
» Hm? Sorry.
>> That'll be fine.
>> [laughter]
» And then if you
» I apologize.
Did you have any questions for me?
>> Yes.
>> Do you want me to give you
>> I can send another one for you.
>> No.
I got one already.
>> Why do you have any questions for
» [applause]
» Thanks. Thank you.
>> Oh, well.
» Thank you.
>> Yeah. Welcome.
>> Welcome.
>> Thank you.
» Okay, let's move to item number seven.
Uh I need a motion to accept and approve
the consent agenda as follows.
The minutes of the July 27, 2026 regular
meeting. The Pat's Tap Class C retail
alcohol license renewal that includes
outdoor service and living quarters
with tentative effective date of
September 1, 2026 through August 31,
2027.
A request to hunt within city limits
from Keith Donnelly
for the October 1, 2026 to October to
sorry to January 10, 2027 bow hunting
season.
A request to hunt within city limits
from Christopher Meyer
for October 1, 2026 to January 10, 2027
bow hunting season.
Request to hunt within city limits from
is it Corrine?
Meyer
for the October 1, 2026 to January 10,
2027 bow hunting season.
Excuse me and special event application
for Buchanan County tourism
for the Independence mural celebration
to be held on Tuesday, August the 25th
of 2026. Do I have a motion?
>> So moved.
>> I have a second.
>> Second.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> Opposed? Passes 6-0.
Next we move to item number eight.
I need a motion to approve the claims
for payment.
>> So moved.
>> I have a
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second. All in
favor?
>> Aye.
>> Opposed? Passes 6-0. Next we move to
item number nine which is a bank
reconciliation. This is for information
only. Does anybody have any questions or
comments with this?
>> Yeah, I had one question on page 47.
>> Hold on one second.
Okay.
>> The Oakwood Cemetery.
So that's showing $566.16
and then 19,131.80.
So is our spending money
19,000?
» Not necessarily.
I mean that's I'd have to look back
because this only captures certain
things. I'd have to look back at the
donation spreadsheet
and what you guys have what the city
hall has received for donations.
>> So, can I get a record of that? How much
is in there so we know what we have for
spending because
we want to come up with some
we want to start buying some stones.
>> In order to spend, you'd have to talk
with
Bob Beatty for the spending authority
because it may not have been budgeted.
So, just because you see that $19,000
does not mean you can necessarily spend
that $19,000.
>> But we can also do that through a
budget. We can also do that through a
budget amendment if there's something
that you guys want to use donated money
to pay for.
>> But we'd like to know how much it is
because we're going to reach out and try
to
start purchasing some some stones and
we want to know how many of those we can
purchase.
Because the more we buy,
hopefully the price we can get down a
little bit.
>> Sure. We can
So, we can provide that for you.
>> Thanks.
>> Okay. Moving to item number 10, and
that's revenue and expenses to date.
Again, this is information only. Do any
of you have any questions with regard to
that?
Okay, hearing none, we'll move to item
number 11.
Um this is a second reading of the
ordinance amendment to code section
1.155 fines and fees um schedule.
Um
this was a this was first um read on
July the 27th.
So, I need a motion to approve the
second reading of an ordinance that
amends provisions pertaining to section
1.15 fines and fees schedule.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second. Is there
further discussion regarding this?
Hearing none, this will be a roll call
vote.
>> Hannah.
>> Yes.
>> Moore.
>> Yes.
>> Prichard.
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin.
>> Yes.
>> Appleby.
>> No.
>> Weber.
>> Yes.
>> So, that passes 5-1. Um I'm going to um
unless I'm going to assume that if I
asked if you for shortened um suspending the statutory time that
you would you would not agree to that.
Is that right?
>> Correct.
>> Okay. I don't want to waste the time
doing it because because without
Council Member um
Manor here, we would need six out of six
and since you're going to vote no on it,
there's no point in doing that. So,
we're not going to we're going to forego
that.
Okay, thank you.
Um next we'll move to item number 12,
which is a first reading
of an ordinance um amendment to chapter
69 parking regulations. I need a motion
to approve the first reading of an
ordinance amending the provisions to
chapter 69 parking regulations.
>> So moved.
>> Can I get a second as well?
>> Second.
>> Okay, we talked about this at the August
3rd um work session.
Um there are two issues here. One is um
creating a no parking area on the east
side of 5th Avenue Northeast
um from the
from 5th Avenue Northeast um and 2nd
Street intersection as you come toward
First Street.
And this the the second part of it is
to create a no parking area on both
sides of the street on 17th Street
Southeast.
Um and that would be
Is there a time limit on that? I forgot.
>> Yeah, yeah, there is. So, the one for 5th Avenue I want to
back up. The one for 5th Avenue starts
from the south curve of 2nd Street
Northeast and extends 50 ft to the
south. That is to encompass that first
parking stall that we discussed during
the work session for that um it would be
the
southeast corner of that intersection.
That first stall that would be a no
parking area.
Uh the other piece of this ordinance is
17th Street Southeast both sides starts
from the west curve of what is locally
known as what wastewater treatment road
extends 1,000 ft to the west and that
parking prohibition expires on July 1 of
'27 absent prior action from the
council.
» Okay, can we separate these two out
because I don't
>> They're both
>> with one and not the other.
>> They're both part of that one ordinance.
>> So, can we change that so it's not
>> It's required.
>> It wasn't like this when we
>> The reason that we put them together is
because they're both within chapter 69
parking regulations of the county.
>> I get why you would might do that, but
they're two different roads, two
different situations, and they should be
separate.
>> I would say it's up to the council what
they would like us to do.
» Is there Is there one of these in
particular that that you're opposed to
versus the other one?
>> Yeah, the one I told you on the courthouse and the quick start.
>> I believe at this point we could just
move forward voting and see how we go
with that.
>> We can take care of it at a later
>> That is exactly what I was going to
suggest. See how the vote turns out, and
if the vote it does not pass, then we
can look at separating and and bringing
it up at another time.
>> Okay, so if you're not in favor of both
sections of it, she would vote no then.
>> Yeah, I'm a
>> Okay, we'll have a roll call vote then.
>> O'Loughlin
>> Yes.
>> Appleby
>> No.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> Anna
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Rumsauer
>> Yes.
Okay, that passes 5-1 then.
All right, we'll move to item number
Oh, wait a minute.
I'm going to forego the again the
suspending rule because I we already
know the answer to to that. So,
we'll move to item number 13, which is a
first reading of an ordinance uh
amendment to section 66.03, which is the
load limits upon certain streets.
Um motion to approve first reading of an
ordinance that amends the provisions of
chapter 66.03
load limits upon certain streets. Do I
have a motion?
>> I moved.
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second. Um we
talked about this again at the work
session on August 3rd.
Um
this is to um
revise the 6-ton weight limit
from the area of the wastewater
treatment plant back 620 ft. The
original coded section ordinance section
says 1250 ft.
So, we'd be reducing that that
weight restriction
from 600 from 1250 ft to 620 ft.
>> I got a motion already, right?
>> I'll second that.
>> Okay. So, discussion with regard to this
further discussion since we talked about
it already.
>> of a moot point. There's no scales out
there. How would we
>> So, the way that that would work from an
enforcement perspective is if the police
department sees a vehicle that they
believe is in excess of 6 tons, they
could stop and ticket that vehicle.
>> D O D can they can affect a license.
So, that would be camera.
» Is there further discussion with regard
to this?
>> We are departing from
» No, if there's no further discussion
then um, this will be a roll call vote.
>> Hannah.
>> Yes.
>> Moore.
>> Yes.
>> Presider.
>> Yes.
>> Maynor, Ursin, and Mine. O'Loughlin.
>> Yes.
>> Appleby.
>> Yes.
>> Weber.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Would Would any of you oppose um,
suspending the statutory rules so that
this can be heard today as opposed to in
two further sessions?
>> Yeah, I would oppose that.
>> Okay, we won't go through that.
Move to item number 14 then and this is
a first reading of an ordinance
amendment to chapter Excuse me, it's to
section 60 section 24
.04 airport board powers and duties. I'm
in a motion to approve the first reading
of an ordinance amending the provisions
of chapter Sorry, of section 24.04
uh, airport board powers and duties. Do
I have a motion?
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> The motion and the second. We talked
about this at the August 3rd work
session. What we're What we're proposing
here
what an admin is proposing is is that we
remove the
subpart four from this particular
ordinance
to put us in a position where we're
actually do the code section is then
consistent with what our actual practice
is.
Um
I have a motion and a second on this
already.
Um
Is there
further discussion on on this topic?
Hearing none, this will be a roll call
vote then.
>> O'Laughlin
>> Yes.
>> Appleby
>> Yes.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> Anna
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Prichard
>> Yes.
>> Okay,
passes six to zero. Again, would anybody
then uh
>> I I would make a motion to
do third and final reading.
>> Second.
» Okay, this would require all six of you
to um
Well, hold
>> So, the motion that they made was to do
the third and final reading. The motion
needs to be suspended.
>> And and suspend the second and and do
the third and final reading.
>> They have to be two separate things. So,
you have to first suspend the statutory
rule
>> we'll first we'll first
>> Okay, so then so the motion that's in
front of you is to um
>> [snorts]
>> suspend the statutory rule requiring
that an ordinance be considered and
voted on for passage at two council
meetings prior to the meeting in which
it's finally passed. So, I have a motion
and a second with regard to that.
Um, this would because
Council member Maynor's not here, it
would take all six of you in order to do
that. So, this is a roll call vote.
>> Appleby, no. Weber
>> Yes.
>> Anna
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Prichard
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin
>> Yes.
>> Okay, so that fails.
Um,
move to item number 15 which is a first
reading of an ordinance.
This is the right one.
>> Yep, it's the code.
>> Um
>> Chapter 150
>> Okay, so I need a I need a motion to
approve the first reading of an
ordinance amending the provisions to
chapter 155 International Building Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second. Um we
talked about this at the work session.
Um as everybody is probably aware, um
the code sections
all of the next
I don't know, approximately 10 different
ordin- uh ordinances all deal with with
issues that
were not in compliance with the our our
ordinances are different than what the
um
International Building Code or the
Uniform Planning Plumbing Code or the
International Mechanical Code. Um so in
order to keep our rating with the city
that we have,
um we need to amend amends our
ordinances so that it's consistent with
what
those those require.
>> So we currently have version 2018 of all
of these codes and we need to upgrade
those update those to version 20
>> 2024.
>> Thank you, Matt. I couldn't remember if
it was one or four that we went to.
24 um in order to keep our rating with the Insurance Services
um group. The the rating that we
previously had was a class four and they
would have derated us to a class nine if
we did not do this.
>> Mhm.
>> So we want to try to, you know, keep our
citizens cost down as much as we can by
making sure that their insurance rates
stay as low as they can. This is one way
that we can facilitate that.
>> And and we do need to do all these one
at a time?
>> We need to do these
>> There's no way we can lump them
together.
>> They're all different chapters of the
code, so they all have to be
>> And it's something that's pretty much
mandatory we need to do to keep our
rating, as you said, so
>> And we also had during the work session
there was discussion about um fence
permits and then the 10-ft setback
requirement for water discharges. The
fence permits we put we as the council
asked us to do during the work session,
that has been put back in, so fences
will still be permitted the same as they
are today.
And then the 10-back 10-ft setback
required for water discharges, we've
added excluding roof drainage from that.
So, if it's a gutter, for example, that doesn't apply to that.
>> And if there's other questions regarding
each one of these as we go along, we can
certainly discuss that. But is there
discussion with regard to the um
uh the amending with regard to the
international building code.
If there's no discussion regarding that,
this will be a roll
>> call vote.
>> Hannah
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Fursider
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin
>> Yes.
>> Appleby
>> Yes.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> That passes 6-0. Now, is there anybody
that would object to suspending the
statutory rule to allow this to be
considered and voted on for passage
um
at the present time without waiting for
the two council meetings?
>> I would object.
>> You Okay, so there's no point in doing
that then. Um would that would that
Rather than having to ask this question
each time, will your answer be the same
for
>> always be the answer.
>> Okay, very good. Thank you.
Okay, so that that's passed 6-0. We next
move to item number 16, which
>> I didn't say always. There'd be an
exception if there was some sense of
urgency for a need, but there's not.
>> Understood.
Okay, item number 16, a motion to
approve the first reading of an
ordinance amending the provisions to
chapter 156 of the uniform plumbing
code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> The motion and a second. Is there
discussion regarding this particular
code section?
Hearing none, this will be a roll call
vote also.
>> O'Laughlin
>> Yes.
>> Appleby
>> Yes.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> Hannah
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Fursider
>> Yay.
>> That also passes 6-0. Next we move to
item number 17. This is a motion to
approve the first reading of an
ordinance amending provisions to chapter
157 international mechanical code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> The motion and a second. Anybody have
any further discussion regarding this
particular code section?
Hearing none, this would also be a roll
call vote.
>> Hannah
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Presider
>> Yes.
>> Laughlin
>> Yes.
>> Applebee
>> Yes.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> It also passes 6-0. Next
>> Question, Mayor.
>> Yes.
>> Um in regards to this, it was brought
up, you know, that
since nothing is urgent, my question I
would have
is
has our insurance company allowed us
like a 60-day grace, a 30- or 60-day
grace window or not because if they have
not allowed us that, then it is urgent.
>> From the March 24th or the March 24th
letter that they sent us, they told us
they would give us up to 6 months if we
were working through the red through the
process.
>> Okay.
>> They asked us for an update, I want to
say at the beginning of July,
roughly around there, and I emailed them
back with the schedule of what it would
take if it went through [clears throat]
all three readings at three consecutive
council meetings, and we got no response
back to that. So, I'm going to assume
that no response is acceptance and that
they're okay with that.
>> Okay, because I mean that could make a
difference on voting.
>> It could, yes, but I think you're fine
if you if the council goes that way.
It's
>> So, if this was March
>> If this was March that the that the
letter came and gave us 6 months,
September would be up. So,
>> Which for the beginning of September
would be the third and final reading.
>> Got you. Okay, sounds good.
Okay, let's move to item number
>> We're going to make it by about 7 days,
I think, by the time that's done.
>> Okay. Um I'm on number 18. Number 18, um
motion to
first reading of an ordinance amending
the provisions to chapter 158 of the
International Fuel Gas Code.
>> So moved. Second.
>> Have a motion and a second. Is there
further discussion regarding this?
Hearing none, that's a roll call vote.
>> Laughlin
>> Yes.
>> Applebee
>> Yes.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> Hannah
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Presider
>> Yes.
>> It also passes 6-0. Next, we'll move to
item number 19. Um I need a motion to
approve the first reading of an
ordinance amending provisions of chapter
159 of the International Fire Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Have a motion and a second. Any
discussion with regard to this? Hearing
none, this will be a roll call vote
also.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Presider?
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> It also passes 6-0. Next we move to item
number 20.
Need a motion to approve the first
reading of an ordinance amending the
provisions of chapter 161
of the National Electric Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Have a motion and a second. Any
discussion regarding this? Hearing none,
roll roll call vote, please.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Presider?
>> Yes.
>> It also passes 6-0. Next we move to item
number 21. Need a motion to approve the
first reading of an ordinance amending
the provisions to chapter 160
162 of the International Residential
Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Have a motion and a second. Is there any
discussion regarding this? Hearing none,
this will be a roll call vote.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Presider?
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> It passes 6-0 also.
Next we move to item number 22. This is
a motion to approve the first reading of
an ordinance amending the provisions to
chapter 163 of the International
Property Maintenance Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Have a motion and a second. If there's
no Is there any further discussion? If
none, this is a roll call vote.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Presider?
>> Yes.
>> It also passes 6-0.
Next we move to item number 23.
I need a motion to approve a first
reading of an ordinance
amending the provisions of chapter 164
of the International Existing Building
Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Have a motion and a second. If there's
any no further discussion, this will be
a roll call vote also.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Presider?
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> It also passes 6-0. Moved item number 24
motion to approve the first reading of
an ordinance amending the provisions to
chapter 165 of the International Energy
Conservation Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> The motion is second. If there's no
further discussion, we'll move to a roll
call vote.
>> O'Loughlin
>> Yes.
>> Appleby
>> Yes.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> Yianna
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Presider
>> Yes.
>> Also passes 6-0. Moved item number 20
five. I need a motion to approve in the
first reading of an ordinance amending
the provisions to chapter 1 66 of the
International Swimming Pool and Spa
Code.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> The motion I have a motion and a second.
If there's no further discussion, this
would also be a roll call vote.
>> Yianna
>> Yes.
>> Moore
>> Yes.
>> Presider
>> Yes.
>> O'Loughlin
>> Yes.
>> Appleby
>> Yes.
>> Weber
>> Yes.
>> That also passes 6-0. Next we move to
item number 26.
Pursuant to the agenda, I'll now convene
a public hearing on the proposal to
enter into a sewer revenue loan and
disbursement agreement.
>> So moved.
>> We're we're in we're now in public
comment. Public public hearing. Sorry,
public hearing.
>> I did not receive any comments on this.
>> Okay, since there's no further comments
in writing or or verbally with regard to
this, we'll move forward with um
closing the public hearing at this time.
>> So moved.
>> So next we move to item number 27.
This is a motion to approve and
authorize the mayor to sign a resolution
taking additional action on the proposal
to enter into the sewer revenue loan and
disbursement agreement. Do need a
motion.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second.
Further discussion with regard to this?
is one of the steps necessary with
regard to the funding of the
wastewater treatment plant.
Hearing none, this would be a roll call
vote.
>> Sorry, what are you on?
>> I am on item number 27.
>> 27.
>> Okay.
» [clears throat]
>> This is a roll call vote.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> No.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Presider?
>> Yes.
>> That passes 5-1.
Um, next we move to resolutions, um,
item number 28.
I need a motion to approve and authorize
the mayor to sign a resolution approving
a standardized extra duty police
services agreement template and
authorizing the city manager to execute
these agreements as needed.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Okay, we talked about this at the August
3rd work session and, um,
actually we had officer Bowes at the
time come up and discuss it as well.
Um, does anybody have any
um further discussion with regard
to this?
Hearing none, this will be a roll call
vote.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Presider?
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
That passes 6-0.
Um, next to move to item number 29.
Um, I need a motion to authorize the
mayor to sign a resolution
establishing a time and place for a
public hearing on August the 24th of
2026 at 5:30 p.m. for the consideration
of a rezoning request
from R2 residential to C1 commercial
within the city of Independence,
Buchanan County, Iowa.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second. We talked
about this, no, we didn't talk about
this. This, um, was
the this came before the planning and
zoning hearing
on August the 4th by by a vote of
5-nothing they recommended to the
Tuesday, uh
council that this that they consider
this, but, um
this the process here is, um, we we have
to set a public hearing first before we
can have further discussion or further
action taken upon it.
So, we've got the date um, that. Is
there further discussion with regard to
the setting of the date for a public
hearing?
>> Why are we doing
>> for the senior center property.
>> Yeah, why are we doing this for this
county though?
>> It's not county. The city It's in the
city limits.
>> I know.
>> So, our zoning applies to it. The county
has requested it because they want to do
something different with the side edge.
And in order to do that, they need to
meet this this this zoning district
meets better works better for them.
And it fits within their being that it's
a senior center and a commercial
somewhat of a commercial use.
So, we'll we'll have further discussion
on this once we complete the public
hearing itself.
Is there a
Do I have a motion and a second? This
will be a roll call vote then.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Hannah?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Crusader?
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> It passes 6-0. Next, we move to item
number 30.
I need a motion to approve and authorize
the mayor to sign a resolution approving
the lot combination agreement and to add
the recording fees to the previously
approved claims listing.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Okay, again, this is something that went
before planning and zoning on August the
4th. It's a Planning and Zoning voted
5-0 to
request that um
council consider this and approve it.
Um
Yeah, go ahead, Matt.
>> So, this is a combination of two pieces
of property that the county owns.
There's a on the
northeast corner of the senior center,
there's a wing that goes there by to the
east that actually crosses a lot line
and goes onto a separate piece of
property. So, this combination agreement
brings both of them together and makes
it one piece of property so that the
so that they're in compliance with our requirements.
>> Further discussion regarding that.
Hearing none, this is a roll call vote.
>> Hannah?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Crusader?
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> And that passes 6-0.
I'm actually moving to item number 31. I
need a motion to approve and authorize
the mayor sign a resolution that
approves the plat of survey.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second. Again,
this is something that planning and
zoning on August 4th voted 5-0 to
recommend it um
to be sent to council council for
approval.
Um William Downs owns a piece of
property.
Um
and there's a small portion of the
neighboring property which
according to the
plat of survey is
um not on his property even though he's
been taking care of it. Is that correct?
>> I can give you that.
>> Yes, this is a little piece. It's It's a
row of shrubs that he's been maintaining
for the last 20 years and they
due to another situation with the fence
going up on there
his neighbors they did a plat of they
had a survey done found out that that
piece that he thought was his all this
time was not his.
So, he had he hired Crawford to actually
do the plat of survey have in front of
you. It will create a a new parcel. And
then it just straightens out who owns
what.
>> And then and the neighbor is in favor of
this.
>> Miss McGraw she she
agreed to sell him this new parcel.
Um it was approved by planning and
zoning contingent on this being approved
and the deed being transferred to Mr.
Downs.
>> And also on the lot combination
agreement bringing them back together.
>> Yes, and also he also
which you don't have tonight in your
packets because you can't have but there
is a lot combination already in place
that's went through planning and zoning
under those contingencies. So, once we
have the deed in place and Mr. Downs
owns that property then we'll bring the
lot combination agreement to you all to
>> to finalize it.
>> Yep.
>> Further discussion.
>> Thanks, Pat.
>> Hearing none, this will be a roll call
vote.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Prichard?
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> This passes 6-0. Next, we'll move to
item number 32. I'll need a motion to
approve and authorize the mayor to sign
a resolution preliminarily approving a
pre-annexation agreement and application
for voluntary annexation, preliminarily
approving the annexation of the city and
the Tempest parcels and setting the
public hearing for October 12th, 2026 at
5:30 p.m. Need a motion first.
>> This is just set the hearing on it?
>> Yeah, well, the the the way that the the
It's a combination of things, but it
really what this resolution does is it
tells the staff to continue moving
forward with the process. And then it
establishes a public hearing. There are
notices that need to happen.
Consultations with Buchanan County and
the school district need to take place.
There's several different entities that
need to be notified about it, and then
there's a public hearing that has to be
held all before the city council can
make a final decision on whether or not
to annex this property.
So, you're not voting to annex the
property. All you're doing is voting to
allow the process to continue and and
allow the the public
>> To move forward.
>> To continue the process, right?
>> With a With a yay vote on this, will we
be be voting to accept the
pre-annexation agreement?
>> No.
>> Okay.
>> You'd be You'd be voting to Well, you'd
be voting to preliminarily approve it
pending the other pending further
discussion and a public hearing.
>> My suggestion would be if there's
modifications you'd like to make to the
pre-annexation agreement, now is the
time to discuss those.
>> I would say that the uh
cattle, goats
pasturing
is is out. I mean, they want to be in
the city limits.
>> One second. One second, Mike.
>> Do I have it Did I get a motion?
>> I don't have a motion or
>> I don't think a motion
>> had a motion
>> Was there a second, yeah?
>> I I will I will make the motion to get
the ball rolling for discussion.
>> Second.
>> Okay, we've got a motion and a second.
Go ahead, Mike, now.
>> I would like to see uh
the pasturing of cattle and goats out of
there since they want to be within the
city limits and our by code, that's not
allowed.
» I agree with Mike and I think that in
addition to what Mike said, I think that
there should be an annual request as all
of the residents do with anything in the
city as far as bow hunting is concerned.
>> Yeah.
>> Go ahead. I This is non
um
voluntary. It's involuntary as part of
it. So, we shouldn't be labeling it as a
as one bird.
>> The city attorney is the one who drafted
these documents and this is a voluntary
annexation with a 20 with a less than
20% involuntary annexation.
>> So, it's voluntary then.
>> That is not an involuntary annexation.
under state
code is where the entire property is
involuntary.
>> Okay. So, under that is not
>> Semantics a little bit
>> So, the
developer for this area is also the
person who's writing this up for this
area.
>> No. No, Doug Doug is the one who wrote
it up, our city attorney.
>> Is the city
>> Zanetti is the developer who is also
reviewing it on the behalf of his you
know, on on behalf of his
>> And then it's also where mayor of her
town works is the one that wants to
develop.
>> I'm sorry?
>> Is that where you work? Is where he
wants the person that owns this wants to
develop it?
>> I do not I I I from time to time I will
handle the project for Robert Zanetti.
I'm not an employee of Robert Zanetti
and I'm not
I'm I'm not handling this and I don't
I'm not handling anything about this on his behalf or even on behalf of the
city. I'm just presenting it to him.
>> You may I make a comment on that, mayor?
>> Yep.
>> And the mayor has no yes or no vote
whatsoever. So, therefore
it there is no conflict of interest
because he has no voting power.
>> He's a mayor.
>> No, he's he's he's no conflict at at
all. Matt Matt's handling this. He just
has to bring it up.
But he there he has no voting power
whatsoever. So, therefore there is no
conflict. And if there was a conflict
and he had voting power, then that
person would just remove themselves and
excuse themselves. They would abstain.
They would abstain from voting.
>> And I can't abstain from something that
I don't have a vote.
>> This is phase one of forcing him to
>> I don't think we should move forward
with this. This guy was not in the city
limits when this was developed around
him. And he did a we did him wrong many
years ago.
Uh so, we
>> How did we do that?
>> When they developed this area, they
actually
took the water well away from him, his
own property. So, for that reason, we
actually approved him to have water
unlimited for life as a restitution.
Now, this is just a gentleman's
agreement. Now, because he's part of our
city, he's getting annexed in against
his will.
So, he did us a favor not suing us years
ago. I think it's time to return the
favor and not do this to him. He doesn't
want to be part of the city. He didn't
ask to have it developed around him. He
said, "Okay, you want to do your thing
and develop over here. Just leave me out
of it." Then that didn't turn out that
way. Now, he's getting surrounded by us,
and now we're going to make his property
part of our city.
>> He's 87 years old, and he doesn't want
to be annexed in.
>> It's not right. He did us a favor not
suing our city, and now we need to
return the favor.
>> Can isn't there something Matt where you
can't have an island?
>> City development board will not approve
an annexation that creates an island.
So, if you do not want to move forward
with this because Mr. Teppas's property
will be part of that, then that also
means that Mr. Heddy's property will not
be annexed into the city and cannot be
annexed into the city.
» And if he's going
>> could have very well have gone against
our city, and he got a gentleman's
agreement just to not do us wrong.
>> Okay, you
>> We need to return the favor. That's the
answer.
>> You're repeating yourself, so let's
>> I can.
>> You can You can, but I can also call you
out of order as well.
You know, I have no problem with you
speaking. I have no problem with you
speaking. Just don't keep repeating
yourself over and over and over. We got
the We got the message.
>> I'll remember that.
>> I'll remember too.
>> Okay.
>> Trust me.
Um
Mike, in answer to your to your thing,
um
the reason that that it's set up the way
that it's set up, I understand, okay?
I'm I'm just trying to explain it to you
the reason why it's in the annexation
agreement is because they're not going
to be able to do all of this at one
time.
So, if you take the part of it that's
farthest away that's currently That's
the current use for it. So, you're not changing the use. The current
use has those things in it. There's
nothing that you're adding You're giving
that that they don't already have while
they're in the county.
But
>> if they're annexing to the city, they're no longer A1.
>> I understand that, but
>> They They will come in as A1.
>> They'll come in, but they have They have
to accept the
>> Uh that was part of the pre-annexation
agreement was that the zoning applied
would be A1 when they come into the
city, and then at some point in the near
future when he wants to develop, he
would have to come in and rezone
whichever piece he's developing. And
then that piece would no longer be
allowed to have animals or
>> And And he's erecting on it without
permission.
>> I would move that we don't allow the A1
uh
status.
>> There's a motion and a second on the
table right now that would need to be
voted on, and then if somebody else
would like to make a subsequent motion
saying they want to make modifications
to the pre-annexation agreement, you
could do that.
>> The The reason why
um the the group that's that's asking to
be annexed in wants to do it the way
that they're they're they're proposing
it is because because it's not going to
happen for several years. They want to
continue to get the the income that they
have from the rental of of that for the use of by
the people that own the animals.
>> Okay.
>> So, if But
>> with the limited size of that pasture,
and I've
rented pasture you in the past.
There's not that much income from that.
>> Well, that was his rationale for why he wanted
it in there.
>> I would respectfully disagree and
decline.
>> Okay, I understand. I'm just I wanted
you to have the facts. That's all.
>> Well, I knew the impetus behind it.
>> Okay.
>> Did you have something you want to read?
>> Uh
No, I was just thinking it might be
a little bit more complicated because of
the zoning side of things.
There's any any uh land that's annexed
then must become A1. So, to your point,
I don't think you could just
have a have a motion
have a vote.
>> The city city attorney would disagree
with you. He has stated that when you do
a pre-annexation agreement, you can
specify what level of zoning you would
like to have. As long as the city
council agrees to that, it can come in
as a different zoning district.
>> Well, perfectly. So, I'm just coming up
>> But it's But this is coming in as A1,
which is what a regular annexation would
do anyway without that being in the
pre-annexation agreement.
>> Okay.
>> Why would
I don't understand. Why would
if he wants to make it residential, why
would it come in as A1 and not R?
>> Because it would become residential once
he was ready to build.
He would only be agricultural until such
time as he's ready to build. He would
only be the residential
>> get all the benefits of the residential
classification
while still having the ag designation.
>> So, he's got two So, he's got two
distinct
>> two parcels
>> parcels. One of the parcels he's going
to be work on immediately with the
That'll be That would be residential.
So, that parcel would be zoned resident
the R1.
>> He would likely take the 40 acres that
were that's being part of this
discussion and split that.
Part of it that would be annexed and
part of it would or not annexed part of
it would be rezoned at that time. And
also preliminary plat for development,
all of those different things that have
to occur. This is just the first step in
the process. And this again really is
just telling the the staff whether you
want us to continue moving forward with
this or not.
Cuz there's a lot more steps to this.
>> John, do you have something to read?
>> No, here.
>> Didn't you have a question for me
earlier?
For John or for what?
>> No, John he's already
>> He He wanted to talk when he was up
earlier.
>> Mike, I have a comment. You had asked
you had had a question.
>> just asked if he he had something he was
possibly going to read, but
>> He did
>> So did
>> What I said earlier.
>> Okay.
so is there further discussion
with regard to the motion that's
pending?
>> Yeah.
Um in in regards to the animal part I I
have a
I have mixed emotion on this as far as
the animal part. If if it goes forward
and gets annexed in
as A1 agricultural
however
once this
once if that happens nothing can be
built as far as residential goes on
there
until it becomes residential zoning. And
at that time then the animal part would
fall out because then you would not have
residential. However, I see Mike's
point and Mr. Passaro's point
on allowing animals within city limits.
But this is dealing with
it's not like it's already in the city
limits at this time. So it's kind of a a
gray area.
>> Um realistically it is within the city
limits. It's just not zoned that way.
>> It Yeah, it's not zoned that way and but
the city gets no money off of it at this time. We don't get any money out
of that.
>> The county does cuz it's
>> The county does not the city.
>> in the city limits, right?
>> So it's so it is not it is not in the
city limits at this time.
>> surrounded by the city limits.
>> So we're taking taxes from the county.
>> I'm sorry.
>> We're taking taxes from the county cuz
right now he's paying taxes to the
county and
>> He will still pay taxes to the county.
It'll just be a different rate.
» Cuz he would pay it
>> So I'm an urban rate
>> It's kind of a gray area right now for
me on that.
>> When you guys said that there was an
intention the intention I completely
understand you don't just develop the
entire thing. There's two parcels in
question is the east parcel or the west
parcel that would be
>> The eastern parcel is the one that we're
talking about tonight as part of the
annexation.
>> And with that has it been indicated that
So that portion there would be the first
to be developed as well.
>> A portion of it of some sort. We don't
have That's That's a question Mr. Eddy
would have to answer as far as what it
is he wants to develop of that piece.
>> So would that create an island as well?
>> No. Not if it's annexed. If you annex
the entire 40 acres in, no. Because then
it can still remain agricultural because
we're we're getting two things
convoluted here. Annexation is one
thing, zoning is another thing.
>> Right.
>> So the annexation just brings it into
the city. Then the zoning has to come
into play whenever he decides which
property or how much of the property he
wants to develop. He could do 5 acres of
it, he could do all 40. It's just up to
him on what he decides he wants to
develop.
>> And at that time then he has to come to
the city council for getting the zoning
change.
>> Right. And a preliminary plat approval
and all
>> Preliminary plat approval and all that
other stuff that takes
a year or so to get all that
accomplished.
>> All of those different development pieces, yes.
>> So the eastern 40 acres would are what
we're
>> That's what's in this annexation this
evening, yes.
>> So what about the western part then
where the homestead is?
And the eastern part That would remain
in county?
>> The eastern part is where the homestead
is at. The western part is the empty
field.
>> Excuse me, yeah.
>> Yeah, the western part would remain in
county at this point.
It would be it's He has plans to do that
at the in the future. He's just not
doing that right now because when we
bring that one in, then that also
encompasses because it creates them
another island which then means Best Buy
and the other resident that's up there
and plus the school district where the
stadium is at. All of that's got to come
in when that piece comes in.
That's a bigger lift than
what this one is and so he chose to
start with just this piece.
>> So as I read the agreement, it's a
voluntary annexation if
we agree to go against our current
ordinances for livestock and hunting.
But, if we choose to
not allow those two things, then that
would nullify this agreement that we're
voting on.
>> We would not be able to agree We
wouldn't be able to Well, no.
You can No, you could approve You could
do a motion to approve the annexation
subject to removal of those two items
from the pre-annexation agreement
because the pre-annexation agreement is
yet another piece of this that is not
It's It's just an agreement between the
developer and the and the city about
what he's going to do with this
property.
>> Got you.
>> So, you could do that if you want to.
>> I I don't like the fact that that's put
in the pre-annexation agreement when we
have two ordinances on hand right now
that don't necessarily limit livestock,
so yes, but hunting can still be done.
We just did it tonight where we had
three individuals who asked for
permission and were granted it.
>> On the consent agenda even.
>> Yeah, on the consent agenda even.
So, I don't [clears throat] know why we
would tie that privilege into
an annexation agreement.
That's all I have to say on this one.
>> for this body to decide, for sure.
» I would make a motion that we strike
>> Hold on, I can't I can't take another
motion. There's already one motion on
the floor.
>> Okay, yep, I understand.
So, further discussion on this one. So,
>> Yes, call the question.
>> Two options are you either go to the
vote or they
>> If there's no discussion,
I call the question if there's no more
discussion.
>> Okay, so question, do you want to um
the original motion was your motion,
right, Ralph?
So, you can withdraw your motion
or we can vote on it.
>> Let's see Let's see how the vote goes
and we can
come back at it on a different motion.
>> Okay, so it's it's a It is a um
roll call vote and and what you're
voting on is to to preliminarily approve
the pre-annexation agreement
and to set the public hearing for
further discussion on this for October
the 12th of 2026. That's the motion in
front of you.
Okay?
Roll call.
>> Persauder.
>> No.
>> Manor or Zapson, O'Loughlin.
>> No.
>> Appleby.
>> No.
>> Weber.
>> No.
>> Anna.
>> No.
>> Moore.
>> No.
>> Okay, so that motion fails.
>> [snorts]
>> Um
» So now Mike can make his motion if he'd
like to.
>> Mhm. You have another motion, Mike?
>> I do. I make motion that we accept it
contingent upon striking the
um
pasturing of cattle and goats and bow
hunting
>> from the pre-annexation agreement.
>> Correct.
» Can I add to Mike's motion?
And require annual permission for bow
hunting on that piece as well that's
inside the city limits. Should it be
» So Mike's is that a verbal okay? Cuz
shaking your head don't count.
>> Yeah. Yes, I do. I I agree with that.
>> Okay, do you have the motion in
something?
>> So I want to make it clear. We're going
to strike items 3C,
which is the pasturing of cattle and or
goats so long as the subject property is
owned agricultural upon applicant's
successful rezoning, blah blah blah. We
would strike that entire section, that
entire paragraph. It would also strike
section 3D, which is the for bow hunting
purposes piece. So both of those would
be removed from the pre-annexation
agreement. So the pre-annexation
agreement use of an annexed parcel would
be for enrollment in the FSA CRP program
or for agricultural row cropping
purposes. Only those two items.
Just want to make sure we're clear about
what's being taken out.
>> So we'd still be going after us to take
voluntarily.
>> Yep. It would still be an 80/20
annexation, yes. Where Mr. Tevis's
property would be brought in with it.
>> Man, would you guys do this to your dad
or your grandpa?
>> Or you don't think this is a conflict of
interest that our mayor works there?
>> I don't have a conflict of interest.
I'm not an employee. I don't even have
an open file that
>> Did you even disclose that though to the
city council?
>> Everybody here knows I that it that that
previously I helped I assisted the um
the Robert Sinnett firm. I've never been
an employee. I've only been an
independent contractor who helped them
with specific projects.
>> And you did earlier in this meeting.
>> I did what?
>> No, I said that information. He didn't
disclose it.
>> No, he did. He did say it.
>> Who owns this land besides Brian Eddy?
>> He's got another partner um but I don't
remember his name.
>> Chad Runnebaum.
» It must be an M.
I don't I don't know the name. I don't
know. I don't know.
>> There's a Amy Sloan as successor
trustee.
And Chad Runnebaum and Brian Eddy. Those
are the three that I know of that are
involved in it. Those are the three that
signed the documents.
>> Okay, so I've got we've got a motion
that Mike's made. Is there a second to
Mike's motion?
>> Second.
>> Okay, further discussion with regard to
that motion then.
Okay, this is this again is only to set
the hearing with these adjustments. It
doesn't mean it's going to happen or
anything at this time. Actually, it's
only to move forward and have a have a
hearing.
>> The direction staff to continue moving
forward which means then we need to meet
with Buchanan County. We need to meet
with the school district to have those conversations with them. We've got
notices that we have to send out. It
puts a lot of things in motion to set up
the city council's ability to then have
a final vote, a final decision on
whether or not to move forward with
this.
>> And that's why I exactly asked questions
so you could define it more clearly for
everybody to understand.
>> And the October 12th meeting will be the
public hearing aspect of it and then it
subsequently after that would be the
final decision for the council to
decide.
>> Do we know if
Besco and whoever else has in that one
guy who lives out there, are they
willing to sign a volunteer?
>> That's a separate
>> Far as I know, Deb, that guy is not.
He's not volunteering.
>> Because they could I'm just thinking
they could start building from that way.
>> I don't know anything, frankly, cuz I
can tell you from what I understand, no.
I think there's like one guy, he's not
volunteering, and then like the Besco, I
don't know. Cuz last I knew you were
talking to him.
>> The other part
>> didn't get a response, right?
>> talking about Besco anymore right now.
I've had several conversations with
Besco.
>> Did you did talk to the owner or
whatever, cuz I knew you reached out to
him.
>> I've had several conversations with him,
but that's not part of the discussion
for for the motion.
This motion is on the other parcel. This
isn't on the motion that involves Besco.
>> But I'm just wondering if for Brian and
I said starting to build
by Roger's place, I think starting at
the other end and and leave Roger alone
for a while.
>> Still creates an island.
>> If he so I I can walk through that with
you. So if Brian decided to annex the
western 40 acres
>> If you do If you do this one here, it's
going to block it off and this will be
an entire island.
>> He would be required to bring everything
else in.
The city development board would say you
can't create an island. You have to
annex You have to bring all of this.
The The other part of this that that
Matt did not mention is is that this
would then the pre-annexation agreement
that was signed by
the partnership itself would then have
to be um
re- um
re-prepared again with with the
corrections with those things stricken.
They would have to agree to those those
changes that council is is proposing
here. Otherwise, there is no annexation
agreement in order to go forward at all.
>> You're saying Brian Eddy's got to agree
to it.
>> He's got to agree to these changes that
>> Yeah, but that doesn't change Roger's
situation.
>> If he doesn't agree to this,
then it's just squashed. It
>> It stops It stops everything.
>> And how does the resident benefit from
this?
>> Which resident?
» Our involuntary resident, Mr.
>> But you can make the argument that
Roger's already been getting the benefit
of living next to the city for the last
10 years cuz we clear the street in
front of him, we maintain the street in
front of him that he uses to access his
home.
>> In what way would he benefit from the
annexation?
» I can't say that there is a direct
benefit from the annexation. I would
again say that he's already gotten the
benefit because the city takes care of
the street, we clear the street, we do
everything in front of the property that
he uses that he uses to access his
property.
>> The benefit would be he'd have to pay
more taxes.
But
I got to really can't afford it.
>> You mentioned that you want to mention
the road and the taxes and all that
stuff. That's the question.
>> Yes.
>> Yeah.
Come on up.
>> Yeah. Here is you discussing getting the
benefits
of that one road that goes by that
house, correct?
>> I'm just explaining your point. You made
it. It's a paved road, correct? Did he
ask for that road to be paved?
>> No.
>> I was not asking him anything he
requested he had the road already. Is
there anything you've seen there he
requires that road
to be plowed, snow plowed? Does he have
a requirement for that?
>> Well, another benefit is with that road
in front of him,
it was a former article road, didn't
cost him anything.
>> It was a dead end, actually.
>> Yeah.
>> I'm just explaining the reason that I
said what I said was because that is how
the city development board looks at
these things when they look at whether
or not to include properties that are
surrounded by cities.
>> I understand. But you said he increased
he got benefits he got increased traffic
because it was a dead end. He didn't
require that before.
I mean, I you say benefit
and we've heard that several times. I
just want to make a point of it. It's
not a benefit that he asked for. It's
not something he considers a benefit.
You may call it a benefit in your eyes,
but it is not a benefit to him.
>> I'm not calling it a benefit in my eyes
at all. I have a lot of empathy with
Roger.
>> Sorry, what did you mean then when you
said just a second ago benefit?
>> how the city development board will look
at this. That's all I'm explaining.
>> Okay. And so what city development like
>> a state level board that has to that
oversees annexations for cities across
the state of Iowa.
>> Okay. So if
>> to review that.
>> with the annexation and evaluation of
it, the board would see it as as that
what you're trying to say?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Thank you.
So um
Did
You want to mention that
>> We can't hear you.
>> Uh it's explained in the pre-annexation
agreement. There is a roll in on the
property taxes, which is what we're
allowed to do by law.
>> for him.
>> For Roger specifically.
Yes, that that um
brings it in so that Roger pays
his taxes would escalate over 5 years.
It's not a day one you have to pay all
of the taxes due to the city.
Um that is within the annexation
agreement.
I can't remember exactly where it's at.
>> No, it's probably because it'd be
illegal right to tax him that high.
>> it's prorated over a period of time,
correct?
Hold on. It's the city's choice whether
you bring everybody in day one and they
have to pay everything or whether you
allow up to 5 years for those taxes to
roll on over 5 years. In an effort to
try to help Mr. Tempest, the way that
this was structured was so that it rolls
on over 5 years so that he doesn't have
to pay all these taxes on day one.
>> Okay.
>> To give him time to adjust to it. So the
way that it's written is for the first
and second years he pays 25%. The
document says 75, that's because it's telling you how much is being not
charged. So for the first and second
years he would pay 25% of the regular
taxes. Third and fourth he would pay
40%, fifth and sixth he would pay 55%,
seventh and eighth he would pay 70%,
ninth and tenth he would pay
that is when he would be actually paying
>> And how much does the the
valuation cost to him from going from
that to
in dollars and per year at this rate
>> for you.
>> Matt, when you were
>> I don't have those numbers for you
tonight.
>> Okay.
>> Matt, when you were using those numbers,
were you talking years or every 6
months?
>> This is how it's written in the
document. It's 2 years, first and second
years.
>> So, it's 12 years before 12 years before
he pays 100%?
>> It's 10 as it's written.
>> In the 11th year
>> 11th year he would pay 100%.
>> 11th year he doesn't.
>> Right.
>> [snorts]
>> Cuz I was thinking it was five, but he's
the mayor of the city attorney has
written this document as
through 10 years.
» Okay. So,
>> Um
Do you want to read Mike's motion?
» Okay. So, what I
am attempting to do is to accept the
pre-annexation
a
agreement striking
the animal portion and the hunting
requirement.
>> 3C
>> I'm assuming the rest of it stays the
same?
>> It should say preliminarily approved.
>> Not
>> I
>> Yeah, approving it. Yeah.
>> I'm writing on the back of my paper. I
don't have what was originally done.
>> And Suzy, just for ease, it's striking
3C and 3D
from the
provided agreement.
>> From the previous
>> And that can be done just tonight just
at the
>> The council can make the motion that
way, then it goes back to Mr. Eddie and
his group to determine whether or not
they want to accept that.
They can either resign the agreement
with those two pieces of them removed
and we move forward or we stop and they
come back to discuss what they want to
do.
And then depending upon the response
from them
and whatever else that this is working
on in the meantime, then that would have
to take place before the October 12th
um public hearing, all of the that that
other paperwork and other things would
take place because of there's nothing
that's being
by night
in terms of approval. It's just a a
preliminary just so that the paperwork
can be processed
>> Right.
>> until you reach the point where the
public hearing takes place. We're
They make you jump through a lot of
hurdles in order to happen and we have
to follow each and every one of them
specifically.
>> And that's why there's a lot of hurdles
for you to jump through so you make sure
you do it correctly. Absolutely.
>> You don't want to get halfway through it
and then and then have it fail and then
fail.
>> I forgot all about that.
>> All right. So
everybody understands what the motion is
at this point in time. Anybody have any
questions about the motion itself that
you're going to be voting on?
Okay. Go ahead.
>> Um call the roll then.
>> Weber.
>> Yes.
>> Anna.
>> No.
>> Moore.
>> Yes.
>> Rosedahl.
>> Yes.
>> O'Laughlin.
>> Yes.
>> Appleby.
>> No.
>> It passes 6 to 2.
>> [clears throat]
>> Sorry.
>> 4 to 2.
coming up to total 6. How about
that?
All right. So um
» So it passes 4 to 2?
>> Mhm. Passes 4 to 2. So the next steps on
this just
>> it pass when the other things would fail
on the hearing aspect?
>> How would Cuz the majority voted in
favor.
>> Okay.
>> Four people voted for it, two voted
against. It's a simple majority.
>> Okay.
>> If you're thinking about the second
reading aspect, that requires a super
majority which means six out of the
seven board members have to vote
positive
whether they're present or not.
>> Okay.
>> So if one is not present, then everybody
who's present has to vote in favor of
>> Okay.
>> Cuz the non non-present person is
considered a no vote.
>> Okay.
>> Correct. For the super majority.
>> On the super majority.
>> Okay.
>> Moving on then to item number 33.
Um motion to authorize the city
>> If I could real quick, I just want to
make sure that everybody's clear on next
steps on this then. Because the motion
approved
passed 4 to 2,
staff will continue moving forward. We
will go back to Brian Eddy and say this
is this is what the council said. You
basically have the choice. You either
accept this and we move on or you don't
and then we got to go back to the you
would have to have a discussion with
council about what could be done related
to that, if that's what he wants to do.
But I'll reach out to him tomorrow to
have that discussion.
>> The other thing that could happen is is
that there could be further negotiation
with regard to that. And if there was
further negotiation, then it would come
have to come back to council before it
could actually be
>> Right.
>> Cuz council has to preliminarily approve
it before we can get the public hearing.
>> Correct.
>> All right.
Item number 33 was is a motion to
authorize the city manager to dispose of
the surplus
K9 kennel
and deposit any generated proceeds into
the K9 fund for for future room for
future use.
I need a motion.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> A motion and a second. Okay, Matt, do
you want to cover that or
questions?
>> What's that kennel worth?
>> We don't know.
To be honest.
>> Whatever somebody wants to pay.
>> When we say when we say kennel
I want to make it clear, too. Feel free
to come up, Chief. I When we say kennel
a lot of people's connotation of that
word is going to be like a little 42 by
36 inch That That's not what I'm talking
about. This is an actual building that's
probably a 10 by 10 building that half
of it is the kennel
Half of it's the run. Right. So it's a
it's sizable. That's the reason why
we're asking for the city council to
approve disposing of it.
>> must be able to move pretty easy?
>> It takes a flatbed truck. Yes.
>> I I Looking back to when we purchased
that, it was like around $4,800.
And then you take that and then you take
adding into heating and cooling into it.
But like
Matt said, ultimately the worth value is
what someone's going to pay for it. It's
you know, it's a used kennel or a used
building now at this point that's had
another animal in it. It's just a matter
of if it's going to work for somebody
else's property and the way that they
have things set up to have that work for
them.
>> What height is it?
>> I couldn't tell you. It's six I mean,
you could walk inside of it.
>> Yeah, it's it's a pretty big
>> It's like a [clears throat] You can
think of it like a garden shed.
>> it be used as a shed?
>> And they have to have forklifts. They
have to have forklifts to lift it up on
flatbed or to drag it off.
Or or you can drag it off flatbed.
>> Um the thought process here was if the
council approves us disposing of the
property, then we would list it on a
site like um like we did with some of
the parks and rec stuff. And then some
of the street department.
It was at a treatment plant and I know
Brad and and Travis had talked about
moving it to the street department to
store it there.
>> What?
>> Is it still at the treatment plant? So,
but the thought process was to move it
to the streets department to get it out
of the way of the construction projects.
>> So, when the somebody brings a dog into
the city, where's where them dogs going
now?
>> That's that's the city pound, which is
the streets department. There's a bay of the streets department
building that is what it operates as the
city pound.
>> It was constructed for that purpose and
we have that.
>> So, we'll still be doing that.
>> And that's safe and everything else and
we're up to code on that.
>> This was only bought for housing the
canine when we had the police canine.
And it was actually at the officer's
house when that was happening.
Sir.
>> Do you have a certain date
that you're going to have it open until
and then it goes to the highest bidder?
That is how such a date
>> That's how the auction would work, yes.
We would function we it would function
that way.
>> Okay.
>> Just for clarification.
>> I can't remember the name of the company
that we used when we did the
Gov Deals?
>> Yeah, could have been.
>> Gov Deals I think is the is the website
that we used when we did the stuff for the parks and rec department. So, we
would use the same site to to house this
one and do this auction.
>> And you would be looking at that
mid-September as a close date or
something? Well, I mean what do you have
in mind?
>> Whenever we can get to it, depending on
what the council tells us to do tonight.
>> Okay.
>> As soon as possible. I mean I'd want to
get it done as soon as we can.
>> Right.
>> Thanks.
>> Thank you, Chief.
>> Okay, so further discussion with regard
to this.
Hearing none, roll call vote.
>> O'Laughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Anna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Gorsuch?
>> Yes.
>> It passes 6-0. Next, we move on item
number 34.
Need a motion to approve the commercial
restoration rehab grant application with
Wapsie Realty
uh in the amount of $3,000
842.13
cents.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Motion a second. Okay, so the the
um
as you recall, um
Heather Federspiel had submitted
this previously to us for the the brick
work out for the brick work outside.
Um that has not yet been done. The work
has [clears throat] not yet been done.
The um so we haven't paid for anything, we
haven't done anything. So what she wants
to do now is she wants to also replace
the windows.
Um and by um
this is um
I guess the first one is is many is many
franks that we're that we're dealing
with. So we're
so what she's trying to do is um
the question is is this a new one such
that she can't do it or is this one that
she's just is she's she's just um adding in a a second one. Um she's increasing the second one, which
is still within the limits that we have.
So So this isn't exceeding the limits of what we have for
um the restoration funds. Uh rehab it's merely um
adding something new to what was
originally submitted. Does that Matt, is
that
>> It's basically piggybacking two
storefronts on the same building. Two
projects, right?
>> There's two separate projects. This will
be two separate applications for the
same building. So in all you'd have four projects for lack of a better way
of putting it with two pieces of
property.
What I would say is that I think when
you read the the policy that's been put
in place, the commercial rehab policy,
it does state in there that they can
only have one every 12 months, and I
want to say
then again but at the same time, this is
the council's decision. The council can
do what the council wants to do.
>> Has she done two of them already?
>> She applied for them, but they have not
been paid. That's the mayor's point is
that they have not been paid. She has
not started the work. She's only applied
and been approved for the first part of
it. So, there's a lot There's a couple
of other ways you can look at it.
>> Sorry, do you know why she waited or
>> Pardon me?
>> I I don't know why she waited to do
this. I don't know I mean I think when
she initially was looking at it, she was
looking at the exterior of the building
and the the tuckpointing was the
priority and then as she got into kind
of looking at that further, decided that
she should do the windows as well.
It happens. I mean, you do a remodeling
project and it grows. Every remodeling
project I've ever done in my life has
grown. So, I never It never is what I
thought it would
>> We want to look at nicer than the
original one and then we're adding a new
one.
>> Right.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. We're We're adding to the original
one when we [music]
>> But not today with our discussion, they
said we had to have five properties to
do that. Does that
>> Oh, no. That's a whole different thing.
This is the one that city runs.
>> Okay.
>> What you were thinking about was the
community development block grant stuff
that we did where we had the facades.
That was a whole different thing. That
had fed money in it and a whole bunch of
different pieces to it. This is purely a
city of Independence grant program.
>> See, we can't do the like we did for the the
restoration of all the ones up on the up
on the
>> From the second From Second Avenue to
the east.
>> Because Because right at Second Avenue
is where the flood plane comes in.
>> Right.
>> So, we can't get a grant from the state
or the federal or anybody else to do
these. So, the only way we're ever going
to get these fixed is if the homeowner
does it themselves or if we get involved
if the city does the the commercial
restoration rehab grant, which we have
the money available for.
So, the question is, do you want to
um
approve this for the 38-42-13
to allow her to do both?
>> We're not out nothing and then she does
it
if we approve it.
>> If it's within guidelines. Right. If she
doesn't do it, we don't pay. her.
>> Yeah, so.
We want downtown to look nicer, so I'd
make a motion that we approve it.
>> I already have a motion.
>> We already have a We already have the
motion.
Okay, so then
>> I'm behind.
>> Okay, so is there further discussion on
this?
Okay, then then this will be a roll call
vote then.
>> Appleby? Yes.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Hanna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Fasbender?
>> Yes.
>> McLaughlin?
>> Yes.
>> That passes 6-0.
Um item number 35 is the the second
building. This one's the one at 121
First
East, which is um
the Isn't it the the gymnasium one
that's next door to the
>> dance
>> Yeah.
>> dance gymnastics
>> Yeah, the dance. Yeah.
>> Okay, so did I get it Did I do the
motion already?
>> You don't have a motion.
>> Okay.
>> I'll make that motion we approve it.
>> Second.
» Okay, so
>> Literally same situation as the other
one.
>> Except this is $5,000 and the other one
was the 384213.
>> Yeah, cuz it's the the
one with the side limit of $5,000 kicks
in because of the value of the work.
» So is there further discussion regarding
this one then?
Hearing none, this will be a roll call
vote also.
>> Weber?
>> Yes.
>> Hanna?
>> Yes.
>> Moore?
>> Yes.
>> Fasbender?
>> Yes.
>> McLaughlin?
>> Yes.
>> Appleby?
>> Yes.
>> Passes 6-0. Next we move to reports on
item number 36 is the um the police
department monthly report. Does anybody
have any questions regarding that
report?
Okay, hearing none um
then we would move to item number 37,
which is the fire department monthly
report. Anybody have any questions
regarding that report?
Okay, hearing none, item number 38 then
is the building department monthly
report. Any questions
regarding that report?
Okay, hearing none, then item number 39
is the ILPT report. Anybody have any
questions regarding that?
Okay, let's move to item number 40 then,
which is council member council members.
Brett, do you have something to start
with?
>> I have nothing there.
>> Okay. Deb, is there anything else you
have?
>> The only thing I was going to ask was
that lead summit meeting they're having
out at the Heart of the Lakes on 21st
and 22nd of October. Is that going to be
a Zoom thing that we can zoom in on, do
you know?
>> I don't I don't know. We'll tell you
tomorrow or yeah, or I can reach out to
her on your behalf or whatever.
>> No, I can do that. Okay, thank you.
>> Okay.
That's it.
>> Uh
nothing.
>> Okay.
Right.
>> Nothing from me, Mayor.
>> Like
Thanks to the chamber for a nice golf
outing. We enjoyed it. Uh we didn't do
the best, but we had a lot of fun.
>> Natural talent.
>> have high expectations for you guys.
>> Travis carried us.
>> Yeah, he did. We'll just say that.
Travis carried us.
>> We're in flip-flops the whole time also.
>> Of course, yeah.
>> Listen.
>> Uh yeah, I'd like to say that we had a a
really big storm and as always the city
is impressive with things that they do.
And we prove it when things like a storm
come along and knock down powerlines and
trees all over the city. Out in full
force, cleaned up, looked good.
Residents came out, cleaned up their
stuff. I got to say it's this is why
this is the town is so great.
And they prove it and these those
wasn't great, but you know, and I feel
bad for all the neighbors and
a lot of
places that still have to clean up and
have damages done and lost their trees,
of course, and
storms and sheds and whatnot, but
as a whole I'm impressive of the town
and happy with the response.
>> Okay, thanks.
Um Matt.
>> Um kind of what Councilwoman Apple we
just talked about. Thank you to the
crews who helped with the storm clean up
Friday night. Um streets department,
police department, fire department,
parks and Recreation Department was hard
at it this morning working on our parks,
cleaning those up, River View and
different areas. I O P T of course and
all of the work that they did with their power lines and communication
lines, all the different things that
they did Friday night. Um, it's a lot of
work but as Councilwoman Appleby talked
about and
I was out driving around with my wife
Friday night after the storm after
everything went through trying to just
pull things off the road, make sure
roads were open as I was able to and
it was very impressive to see as soon as
the rain stopped there was people out
with chainsaws cleaning up. So, very
impressive to see and and makes you proud to be from from Iowa
when you see stuff like that happen.
Um, related to the tree dump, Brad does
have a plan for working through uh the
excessive amounts of uh debris that we
have there. Um, he's going to some of
the stuff left will be relocated to the
south side of the creek that's there and
temporarily while we until we can get
the grinding crews in to get things
cleaned up. So, but uh he's well aware
of that and they're doing a great job. I
know they were out there, I think it was
him actually that was out there Saturday
and I think he was out there Sunday
also.
>> there Sunday too.
>> Um, pushing trees up and trying to make
sure that as residents are bringing
things in that's pushed back so that
they have a place to to dump things.
>> And a lot of people appreciate that cuz
they couldn't have got in there without
him being out there.
>> Yeah, I think if he wasn't out there it
would be very hard for people to get in
there and and dump stuff. So, to that
end I would ask anybody that's watching
to make sure that you dump the the
smaller stuff on, you know, where it's
supposed to. There's signs out there
that indicate where you need to put
things at. Um, try to follow those, it
helps our guys stay on top of it.
Um, we had a really good tour today with
Cating Properties. Um, they looked at
Independence for a possible future
workforce housing project. Nothing was
committed to or anything like that
today. Obviously anything that happens
like that the council would be involved
in those decisions. Um,
but Independence I felt like that it
really showed very nicely to a potential
company to come in and uh
potentially develop some areas for
workforce housing. Obviously with the
amount of uh additional jobs that we
have coming with Prease and with Gator
and those different different companies
that are expanding that we're really
happy to see
there is going to be a need for
additional housing.
>> Did you plan that schedule?
>> I did. I
>> Did a good job.
>> did that agenda together. Thank you.
>> Good to see the amount of things on that
plan.
>> We spent a lot of time driving We spent
a fair amount of time I would say
driving around looking at property that
could potentially be developed as well
as this afternoon we spent some time
driving around looking at all the
recreational facilities that we have.
And if you've ever taken a moment and
actually driven around and looking at
everything for the city for a city our
size we have a lot of of amenities in
town.
>> We do.
>> So
very very good to see.
>> That's exactly what they were saying.
How how impressive they were were with
the town itself.
Also the lunch the luncheon meeting that
we had
where we had people from Prease and we
had people from
um
>> Gator both and they explained their plans. They explained how many
potential new employees they're going to
have. I mean it was and they did an
excellent job and um
school district did an excellent job as
well. Wade talked about the the work
that the hospital was doing and and the
additional
employees that were they were going to
have there. I mean it
from the sound of things I you know they
can't put too many numbers on things but
it sounds like there's a tremendous
amount of new
um
employees that are going to be hired in
the city within a relatively short time
period and it's it's very impressive.
>> There's a lot of growth happening and
we're very happy to see that. So.
>> And one one comment quite a few of them
made
was they can't believe how much
Independence has to offer and all of our
parks and all of our facilities for a
town of this size. They said this seems
you know couple of them made a comment
they said it seems like a town of more 9
or 10,000 with everything that you have
here.
Which is pretty impressive.
>> I don't know if you would uh
I forgot. I've had people calling me up
and asking so is Independence not going
to have a
ambulance service anymore and I tried to
explain to it so if you
give a brief overview to the public that
we're not going to suspend that
ambulance service because
>> I have one more thing before you do that
though. I'm just that's okay. I just
wanted to let the council know I'll be
out of the office on Wednesday. I've got
some personal appointments I've got to
deal with so
>> That's it.
>> Yeah, when the when the voters voted to
approve the proposition to allow the
a county run
ambulance service that is how that was um
county then
made arrangements to obtain a obtained a
um
one ambulance right now. They've got
other ones. They got a director that's
been hired. They've got um
uh people that they're they're
interviewing for positions. Um the current contract with AMR expires on
October 31st
and all all the information we have from
the county is is that they will be fully
up and running um handling the entire
county uh effective November 1st.
>> Thank you. That
should put some minds at ease.
>> Need a motion to adjourn then.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> All in favor.
>> Aye.
>> Stands adjourned.