[0:00] Call to me in order. Please join me for

[0:02] the pledge of allegiance.

[0:07] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[0:09] United States of America and to the

[0:11] republic for which it stands, one nation

[0:15] under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[0:18] justice for all.

[0:25] » Okay, welcome everybody. This is our

[0:27] city council meeting for Monday, August

[0:29] the 10th, 2026.

[0:31] Start with a roll call, please.

[0:33] >> Weber?

[0:34] >> Yes.

[0:34] >> Anna?

[0:35] >> Yes.

[0:35] >> Moore?

[0:36] >> Yes.

[0:36] >> Crusader?

[0:37] >> Here.

[0:38] >> Manor is excused. O'Laughlin?

[0:40] >> Yes.

[0:41] >> Appleby?

[0:42] >> Here.

[0:43] >> Next we move to item number three. I

[0:45] need a motion to approve the agenda as

[0:47] presented.

[0:48] >> So moved.

[0:49] >> Second.

[0:49] >> I have a motion and a second. All in

[0:50] favor?

[0:51] >> Aye.

[0:52] >> Opposed?

[0:53] Passes 6-0.

[0:55] Next we move to public comment.

[0:58] Uh Mr. Hertzberg, would you like to come

[1:00] forward?

[1:01] >> Yes.

[1:05] » Just before you start, and just so you

[1:07] are aware, it's it's limited to 5

[1:09] minutes. I'll try not to cut you off in

[1:10] the middle of something, but when I get

[1:11] close, I'll let you know that you're

[1:12] close.

[1:13] >> Not a problem. Thank you.

[1:14] >> Okay, thank you.

[1:14] >> is John Hertzberg. I'm here representing

[1:16] my uncle, Roger Tempest. I know he has

[1:19] communicated with several of you last

[1:20] night or in the past in trying to

[1:22] discuss

[1:23] his

[1:25] non-willingness to be annexed into the

[1:27] city. He has no wish to be part of the

[1:29] city limits.

[1:30] He understands there's an annexation

[1:32] discussion of it, but however the vote

[1:34] goes, he would like to propose he is not

[1:36] annexed, and however he would go against

[1:38] that.

[1:39] So he asked that I come here to

[1:41] represent him and to listen to what is

[1:42] being said and to speak on his behalf.

[1:45] Are there any questions?

[1:47] >> Is there anything to read about that you were looking at?

[1:49] >> We can't do that.

[1:50] >> [clears throat]

[1:50] >> This is public comment.

[1:51] >> Sure.

[1:53] >> Uh we're not allowed to go back and

[1:54] forth during public comment.

[1:55] >> Not a problem.

[1:56] >> It's not on the agenda, otherwise.

[1:58] >> All right.

[1:59] >> Thank you Thank you for coming in. I

[2:00] appreciate it.

[2:00] >> Thank you.

[2:01] >> It is on the agenda.

[2:02] >> And how do

[2:03] >> but you can't You can't discuss it

[2:04] during the public comment. You get to do

[2:05] it when that item comes up.

[2:07] >> All right.

[2:07] >> Next, we move to item number five. Um

[2:10] this is the proc- the poppy

[2:11] proclamation,

[2:13] um which I'll now read.

[2:15] Whereas America is the land of freedom

[2:17] preserved and protected willingly and

[2:19] freely by citizen soldiers. Whereas

[2:21] millions who have answered the call to

[2:23] arms have died in the field of battle.

[2:25] Whereas a nation at peace must be

[2:27] reminded of the price of war and the

[2:29] debt owed to those who have died in war.

[2:31] Whereas the red poppy has been

[2:32] designated a symbol of sacrifice of

[2:34] lives in all wars. And

[2:37] whereas the VFW Ladies Auxiliary Post

[2:40] 2440 has pledged to remind America

[2:43] annually of this debt through the

[2:45] distribution of the the memorial flower.

[2:47] Therefore, I, Brad Blackorby, Mayor of

[2:49] Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa, do

[2:50] hereby proclaim August 27th to the 29th,

[2:53] 2026 as Poppy Days, and ask that all

[2:56] citizens pay

[2:58] a tribute to those that have made the

[2:59] ultimate sacrifice in the name of

[3:01] freedom by wearing and displaying the

[3:03] memorial poppy on these days.

[3:05] And I'm going to sign this now on this

[3:07] day

[3:09] as the mayor.

[3:12] Today is the is August the 10th.

[3:16] Did you want to get a picture first or

[3:23] Do you want one copy of this, by the

[3:24] way?

[3:25] >> Um that's fine.

[3:27] >> No. Yes or no?

[3:28] >> If you have it next year.

[3:31] » I have to sign another one. That's all.

[3:35] I think I can probably arrange that.

[3:37] What days is it going to be?

[3:38] >> The 27th through the 29th.

[3:44] » Why don't you give me a call if you want

[3:45] me to do any hours? I'll try to help you

[3:46] out.

[3:50] » So nice of you to offer.

[4:26] » Sure.

[4:32] I don't have any cash with me right now.

[4:33] >> Yeah, me either.

[4:34] >> I'll pay. Be careful. We don't want you

[4:36] standing around not doing anything.

[4:39] You're welcome.

[4:40] Yeah, that's right. That's right.

[4:50] That's free without having to do it

[4:51] lectures all bundled up.

[4:58] Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

[5:01] I'm trying to get cash right here.

[5:09] Mhm, thank you.

[5:14] Do I give him

[5:16] Okay, just give me a call.

[5:18] All right, okay.

[5:21] Thanks.

[5:22] Okay, let's move to item number six,

[5:25] which is the oath of officer, Officer

[5:27] Brock Barnhart. Do you want to come up

[5:29] meet me at the podium, please?

[5:34] » Hi.

[5:37] » Welcome.

[5:37] >> Yeah.

[5:40] » Welcome again.

[5:45] This one.

[5:48] Go slowly and then you just read it

[5:50] back.

[5:53] I thought

[5:55] about my heart.

[5:56] >> I solemnly swear that I will support the

[5:57] Constitution of the United States.

[5:59] >> I will solemnly swear that I will

[6:00] support the Constitution of the United

[6:01] States.

[6:02] >> And the Constitution of the state of

[6:03] Iowa.

[6:03] >> And the Constitution of the state of

[6:05] Iowa.

[6:05] >> And that I will faithfully and

[6:06] impartially

[6:07] >> And that I will faithfully and

[6:08] impartially

[6:08] >> to the best of my ability

[6:10] >> discharge all duties of the position of

[6:12] patrol officer

[6:13] >> discharge all duties of the position

[6:15] >> of patrol officer

[6:16] >> in the city of Independence

[6:18] >> as now and here here and after required

[6:19] by law.

[6:20] >> as now and here after required by law.

[6:22] >> Okay.

[6:23] >> So, I need you to sign up here for me.

[6:25] I'm going to put the

[6:26] 10th day

[6:28] August

[6:31] I just need you to sign and

[6:41] » Hm? Sorry.

[6:42] >> That'll be fine.

[6:43] >> [laughter]

[6:46] » And then if you

[6:50] » I apologize.

[6:51] Did you have any questions for me?

[6:52] >> Yes.

[6:53] >> Do you want me to give you

[6:54] >> I can send another one for you.

[6:56] >> No.

[6:56] I got one already.

[6:58] >> Why do you have any questions for

[7:05] » [applause]

[7:08] » Thanks. Thank you.

[7:11] >> Oh, well.

[7:14] » Thank you.

[7:14] >> Yeah. Welcome.

[7:16] >> Welcome.

[7:16] >> Thank you.

[7:27] » Okay, let's move to item number seven.

[7:32] Uh I need a motion to accept and approve

[7:34] the consent agenda as follows.

[7:36] The minutes of the July 27, 2026 regular

[7:39] meeting. The Pat's Tap Class C retail

[7:42] alcohol license renewal that includes

[7:44] outdoor service and living quarters

[7:48] with tentative effective date of

[7:49] September 1, 2026 through August 31,

[7:52] 2027.

[7:53] A request to hunt within city limits

[7:56] from Keith Donnelly

[7:57] for the October 1, 2026 to October to

[8:01] sorry to January 10, 2027 bow hunting

[8:03] season.

[8:04] A request to hunt within city limits

[8:07] from Christopher Meyer

[8:09] for October 1, 2026 to January 10, 2027

[8:13] bow hunting season.

[8:14] Request to hunt within city limits from

[8:17] is it Corrine?

[8:19] Meyer

[8:20] for the October 1, 2026 to January 10,

[8:23] 2027 bow hunting season.

[8:25] Excuse me and special event application

[8:28] for Buchanan County tourism

[8:30] for the Independence mural celebration

[8:32] to be held on Tuesday, August the 25th

[8:33] of 2026. Do I have a motion?

[8:35] >> So moved.

[8:36] >> I have a second.

[8:37] >> Second.

[8:38] >> All in favor?

[8:39] >> Aye.

[8:40] >> Opposed? Passes 6-0.

[8:42] Next we move to item number eight.

[8:45] I need a motion to approve the claims

[8:46] for payment.

[8:47] >> So moved.

[8:49] >> I have a

[8:50] >> Second.

[8:50] >> I have a motion and a second. All in

[8:51] favor?

[8:52] >> Aye.

[8:53] >> Opposed? Passes 6-0. Next we move to

[8:56] item number nine which is a bank

[8:57] reconciliation. This is for information

[8:59] only. Does anybody have any questions or

[9:00] comments with this?

[9:01] >> Yeah, I had one question on page 47.

[9:04] >> Hold on one second.

[9:12] Okay.

[9:13] >> The Oakwood Cemetery.

[9:15] So that's showing $566.16

[9:21] and then 19,131.80.

[9:23] So is our spending money

[9:26] 19,000?

[9:29] » Not necessarily.

[9:32] I mean that's I'd have to look back

[9:35] because this only captures certain

[9:37] things. I'd have to look back at the

[9:39] donation spreadsheet

[9:41] and what you guys have what the city

[9:43] hall has received for donations.

[9:45] >> So, can I get a record of that? How much

[9:47] is in there so we know what we have for

[9:49] spending because

[9:51] we want to come up with some

[9:52] we want to start buying some stones.

[9:54] >> In order to spend, you'd have to talk

[9:56] with

[9:57] Bob Beatty for the spending authority

[9:59] because it may not have been budgeted.

[10:02] So, just because you see that $19,000

[10:05] does not mean you can necessarily spend

[10:06] that $19,000.

[10:08] >> But we can also do that through a

[10:09] budget. We can also do that through a

[10:10] budget amendment if there's something

[10:11] that you guys want to use donated money

[10:13] to pay for.

[10:14] >> But we'd like to know how much it is

[10:15] because we're going to reach out and try

[10:16] to

[10:17] start purchasing some some stones and

[10:20] we want to know how many of those we can

[10:21] purchase.

[10:23] Because the more we buy,

[10:25] hopefully the price we can get down a

[10:26] little bit.

[10:27] >> Sure. We can

[10:29] So, we can provide that for you.

[10:30] >> Thanks.

[10:31] >> Okay. Moving to item number 10, and

[10:34] that's revenue and expenses to date.

[10:35] Again, this is information only. Do any

[10:37] of you have any questions with regard to

[10:38] that?

[10:40] Okay, hearing none, we'll move to item

[10:42] number 11.

[10:43] Um this is a second reading of the

[10:45] ordinance amendment to code section

[10:47] 1.155 fines and fees um schedule.

[10:51] Um

[10:52] this was a this was first um read on

[10:54] July the 27th.

[10:56] So, I need a motion to approve the

[10:58] second reading of an ordinance that

[10:59] amends provisions pertaining to section

[11:01] 1.15 fines and fees schedule.

[11:04] >> So moved.

[11:04] >> Second.

[11:05] >> I have a motion and a second. Is there

[11:06] further discussion regarding this?

[11:10] Hearing none, this will be a roll call

[11:11] vote.

[11:12] >> Hannah.

[11:12] >> Yes.

[11:13] >> Moore.

[11:14] >> Yes.

[11:14] >> Prichard.

[11:15] >> Yes.

[11:16] >> O'Laughlin.

[11:17] >> Yes.

[11:17] >> Appleby.

[11:18] >> No.

[11:19] >> Weber.

[11:19] >> Yes.

[11:20] >> So, that passes 5-1. Um I'm going to um

[11:24] unless I'm going to assume that if I

[11:26] asked if you for shortened um suspending the statutory time that

[11:31] you would you would not agree to that.

[11:33] Is that right?

[11:34] >> Correct.

[11:35] >> Okay. I don't want to waste the time

[11:36] doing it because because without

[11:38] Council Member um

[11:40] Manor here, we would need six out of six

[11:42] and since you're going to vote no on it,

[11:43] there's no point in doing that. So,

[11:45] we're not going to we're going to forego

[11:46] that.

[11:47] Okay, thank you.

[11:49] Um next we'll move to item number 12,

[11:51] which is a first reading

[11:53] of an ordinance um amendment to chapter

[11:55] 69 parking regulations. I need a motion

[11:58] to approve the first reading of an

[12:00] ordinance amending the provisions to

[12:01] chapter 69 parking regulations.

[12:04] >> So moved.

[12:05] >> Can I get a second as well?

[12:06] >> Second.

[12:07] >> Okay, we talked about this at the August

[12:09] 3rd um work session.

[12:12] Um there are two issues here. One is um

[12:15] creating a no parking area on the east

[12:18] side of 5th Avenue Northeast

[12:20] um from the

[12:23] from 5th Avenue Northeast um and 2nd

[12:26] Street intersection as you come toward

[12:29] First Street.

[12:31] And this the the second part of it is

[12:35] to create a no parking area on both

[12:36] sides of the street on 17th Street

[12:39] Southeast.

[12:41] Um and that would be

[12:46] Is there a time limit on that? I forgot.

[12:48] >> Yeah, yeah, there is. So, the one for 5th Avenue I want to

[12:52] back up. The one for 5th Avenue starts

[12:54] from the south curve of 2nd Street

[12:55] Northeast and extends 50 ft to the

[12:57] south. That is to encompass that first

[12:59] parking stall that we discussed during

[13:00] the work session for that um it would be

[13:03] the

[13:04] southeast corner of that intersection.

[13:06] That first stall that would be a no

[13:07] parking area.

[13:09] Uh the other piece of this ordinance is

[13:10] 17th Street Southeast both sides starts

[13:12] from the west curve of what is locally

[13:14] known as what wastewater treatment road

[13:16] extends 1,000 ft to the west and that

[13:19] parking prohibition expires on July 1 of

[13:22] '27 absent prior action from the

[13:24] council.

[13:27] » Okay, can we separate these two out

[13:29] because I don't

[13:31] >> They're both

[13:31] >> with one and not the other.

[13:33] >> They're both part of that one ordinance.

[13:34] >> So, can we change that so it's not

[13:39] >> It's required.

[13:39] >> It wasn't like this when we

[13:41] >> The reason that we put them together is

[13:43] because they're both within chapter 69

[13:44] parking regulations of the county.

[13:45] >> I get why you would might do that, but

[13:47] they're two different roads, two

[13:49] different situations, and they should be

[13:51] separate.

[13:53] >> I would say it's up to the council what

[13:54] they would like us to do.

[13:58] » Is there Is there one of these in

[13:59] particular that that you're opposed to

[14:01] versus the other one?

[14:02] >> Yeah, the one I told you on the courthouse and the quick start.

[14:08] >> I believe at this point we could just

[14:09] move forward voting and see how we go

[14:10] with that.

[14:11] >> We can take care of it at a later

[14:12] >> That is exactly what I was going to

[14:14] suggest. See how the vote turns out, and

[14:16] if the vote it does not pass, then we

[14:18] can look at separating and and bringing

[14:20] it up at another time.

[14:23] >> Okay, so if you're not in favor of both

[14:24] sections of it, she would vote no then.

[14:26] >> Yeah, I'm a

[14:27] >> Okay, we'll have a roll call vote then.

[14:29] >> O'Loughlin

[14:30] >> Yes.

[14:31] >> Appleby

[14:32] >> No.

[14:32] >> Weber

[14:33] >> Yes.

[14:33] >> Anna

[14:34] >> Yes.

[14:34] >> Moore

[14:35] >> Yes.

[14:35] >> Rumsauer

[14:36] >> Yes.

[14:38] Okay, that passes 5-1 then.

[14:42] All right, we'll move to item number

[14:44] Oh, wait a minute.

[14:47] I'm going to forego the again the

[14:48] suspending rule because I we already

[14:51] know the answer to to that. So,

[14:53] we'll move to item number 13, which is a

[14:56] first reading of an ordinance uh

[14:58] amendment to section 66.03, which is the

[15:01] load limits upon certain streets.

[15:04] Um motion to approve first reading of an

[15:06] ordinance that amends the provisions of

[15:07] chapter 66.03

[15:09] load limits upon certain streets. Do I

[15:12] have a motion?

[15:13] >> I moved.

[15:13] >> Second.

[15:14] >> I have a motion and a second. Um we

[15:16] talked about this again at the work

[15:17] session on August 3rd.

[15:19] Um

[15:20] this is to um

[15:22] revise the 6-ton weight limit

[15:25] from the area of the wastewater

[15:28] treatment plant back 620 ft. The

[15:31] original coded section ordinance section

[15:33] says 1250 ft.

[15:35] So, we'd be reducing that that

[15:38] weight restriction

[15:41] from 600 from 1250 ft to 620 ft.

[15:45] >> I got a motion already, right?

[15:47] >> I'll second that.

[15:47] >> Okay. So, discussion with regard to this

[15:50] further discussion since we talked about

[15:51] it already.

[15:51] >> of a moot point. There's no scales out

[15:53] there. How would we

[15:55] >> So, the way that that would work from an

[15:56] enforcement perspective is if the police

[15:58] department sees a vehicle that they

[15:59] believe is in excess of 6 tons, they

[16:01] could stop and ticket that vehicle.

[16:03] >> D O D can they can affect a license.

[16:06] So, that would be camera.

[16:11] » Is there further discussion with regard

[16:14] to this?

[16:15] >> We are departing from

[16:21] » No, if there's no further discussion

[16:22] then um, this will be a roll call vote.

[16:24] >> Hannah.

[16:25] >> Yes.

[16:25] >> Moore.

[16:26] >> Yes.

[16:26] >> Presider.

[16:27] >> Yes.

[16:28] >> Maynor, Ursin, and Mine. O'Loughlin.

[16:30] >> Yes.

[16:31] >> Appleby.

[16:31] >> Yes.

[16:32] >> Weber.

[16:32] >> Yes.

[16:33] >> Okay. Would Would any of you oppose um,

[16:38] suspending the statutory rules so that

[16:39] this can be heard today as opposed to in

[16:41] two further sessions?

[16:43] >> Yeah, I would oppose that.

[16:44] >> Okay, we won't go through that.

[16:47] Move to item number 14 then and this is

[16:49] a first reading of an ordinance

[16:51] amendment to chapter Excuse me, it's to

[16:53] section 60 section 24

[16:56] .04 airport board powers and duties. I'm

[16:59] in a motion to approve the first reading

[17:01] of an ordinance amending the provisions

[17:03] of chapter Sorry, of section 24.04

[17:07] uh, airport board powers and duties. Do

[17:09] I have a motion?

[17:10] >> So moved.

[17:11] >> Second.

[17:11] >> The motion and the second. We talked

[17:13] about this at the August 3rd work

[17:14] session. What we're What we're proposing

[17:17] here

[17:18] what an admin is proposing is is that we

[17:21] remove the

[17:23] subpart four from this particular

[17:26] ordinance

[17:27] to put us in a position where we're

[17:29] actually do the code section is then

[17:31] consistent with what our actual practice

[17:33] is.

[17:35] Um

[17:37] I have a motion and a second on this

[17:39] already.

[17:40] Um

[17:40] Is there

[17:41] further discussion on on this topic?

[17:47] Hearing none, this will be a roll call

[17:49] vote then.

[17:49] >> O'Laughlin

[17:50] >> Yes.

[17:51] >> Appleby

[17:51] >> Yes.

[17:52] >> Weber

[17:52] >> Yes.

[17:53] >> Anna

[17:54] >> Yes.

[17:54] >> Moore

[17:55] >> Yes.

[17:55] >> Prichard

[17:56] >> Yes.

[17:57] >> Okay,

[17:58] passes six to zero. Again, would anybody

[18:01] then uh

[18:02] >> I I would make a motion to

[18:06] do third and final reading.

[18:07] >> Second.

[18:11] » Okay, this would require all six of you

[18:13] to um

[18:14] Well, hold

[18:15] >> So, the motion that they made was to do

[18:16] the third and final reading. The motion

[18:17] needs to be suspended.

[18:18] >> And and suspend the second and and do

[18:20] the third and final reading.

[18:22] >> They have to be two separate things. So,

[18:23] you have to first suspend the statutory

[18:25] rule

[18:26] >> we'll first we'll first

[18:27] >> Okay, so then so the motion that's in

[18:29] front of you is to um

[18:31] >> [snorts]

[18:32] >> suspend the statutory rule requiring

[18:35] that an ordinance be considered and

[18:36] voted on for passage at two council

[18:38] meetings prior to the meeting in which

[18:39] it's finally passed. So, I have a motion

[18:42] and a second with regard to that.

[18:44] Um, this would because

[18:46] Council member Maynor's not here, it

[18:47] would take all six of you in order to do

[18:49] that. So, this is a roll call vote.

[18:51] >> Appleby, no. Weber

[18:53] >> Yes.

[18:54] >> Anna

[18:54] >> Yes.

[18:55] >> Moore

[18:55] >> Yes.

[18:56] >> Prichard

[18:56] >> Yes.

[18:57] >> O'Laughlin

[18:58] >> Yes.

[18:58] >> Okay, so that fails.

[19:00] Um,

[19:01] move to item number 15 which is a first

[19:04] reading of an ordinance.

[19:07] This is the right one.

[19:08] >> Yep, it's the code.

[19:09] >> Um

[19:10] >> Chapter 150

[19:10] >> Okay, so I need a I need a motion to

[19:12] approve the first reading of an

[19:13] ordinance amending the provisions to

[19:15] chapter 155 International Building Code.

[19:19] >> So moved.

[19:19] >> Second.

[19:20] >> I have a motion and a second. Um we

[19:22] talked about this at the work session.

[19:24] Um as everybody is probably aware, um

[19:32] the code sections

[19:33] all of the next

[19:35] I don't know, approximately 10 different

[19:39] ordin- uh ordinances all deal with with

[19:41] issues that

[19:43] were not in compliance with the our our

[19:46] ordinances are different than what the

[19:49] um

[19:51] International Building Code or the

[19:53] Uniform Planning Plumbing Code or the

[19:55] International Mechanical Code. Um so in

[19:59] order to keep our rating with the city

[20:01] that we have,

[20:03] um we need to amend amends our

[20:07] ordinances so that it's consistent with

[20:09] what

[20:09] those those require.

[20:11] >> So we currently have version 2018 of all

[20:13] of these codes and we need to upgrade

[20:15] those update those to version 20

[20:17] >> 2024.

[20:18] >> Thank you, Matt. I couldn't remember if

[20:19] it was one or four that we went to.

[20:21] 24 um in order to keep our rating with the Insurance Services

[20:26] um group. The the rating that we

[20:28] previously had was a class four and they

[20:31] would have derated us to a class nine if

[20:33] we did not do this.

[20:34] >> Mhm.

[20:35] >> So we want to try to, you know, keep our

[20:37] citizens cost down as much as we can by

[20:39] making sure that their insurance rates

[20:40] stay as low as they can. This is one way

[20:42] that we can facilitate that.

[20:44] >> And and we do need to do all these one

[20:46] at a time?

[20:46] >> We need to do these

[20:47] >> There's no way we can lump them

[20:48] together.

[20:49] >> They're all different chapters of the

[20:49] code, so they all have to be

[20:51] >> And it's something that's pretty much

[20:52] mandatory we need to do to keep our

[20:54] rating, as you said, so

[20:56] >> And we also had during the work session

[20:57] there was discussion about um fence

[20:59] permits and then the 10-ft setback

[21:02] requirement for water discharges. The

[21:03] fence permits we put we as the council

[21:05] asked us to do during the work session,

[21:07] that has been put back in, so fences

[21:08] will still be permitted the same as they

[21:10] are today.

[21:11] And then the 10-back 10-ft setback

[21:12] required for water discharges, we've

[21:14] added excluding roof drainage from that.

[21:16] So, if it's a gutter, for example, that doesn't apply to that.

[21:20] >> And if there's other questions regarding

[21:21] each one of these as we go along, we can

[21:23] certainly discuss that. But is there

[21:24] discussion with regard to the um

[21:27] uh the amending with regard to the

[21:29] international building code.

[21:32] If there's no discussion regarding that,

[21:34] this will be a roll

[21:35] >> call vote.

[21:35] >> Hannah

[21:36] >> Yes.

[21:37] >> Moore

[21:38] >> Yes.

[21:39] >> Fursider

[21:40] >> Yes.

[21:41] >> O'Laughlin

[21:42] >> Yes.

[21:42] >> Appleby

[21:43] >> Yes.

[21:43] >> Weber

[21:44] >> Yes.

[21:44] >> That passes 6-0. Now, is there anybody

[21:47] that would object to suspending the

[21:48] statutory rule to allow this to be

[21:50] considered and voted on for passage

[21:52] um

[21:53] at the present time without waiting for

[21:55] the two council meetings?

[21:56] >> I would object.

[21:57] >> You Okay, so there's no point in doing

[21:59] that then. Um would that would that

[22:01] Rather than having to ask this question

[22:02] each time, will your answer be the same

[22:04] for

[22:05] >> always be the answer.

[22:05] >> Okay, very good. Thank you.

[22:07] Okay, so that that's passed 6-0. We next

[22:10] move to item number 16, which

[22:11] >> I didn't say always. There'd be an

[22:12] exception if there was some sense of

[22:14] urgency for a need, but there's not.

[22:16] >> Understood.

[22:18] Okay, item number 16, a motion to

[22:21] approve the first reading of an

[22:22] ordinance amending the provisions to

[22:23] chapter 156 of the uniform plumbing

[22:26] code.

[22:27] >> So moved.

[22:28] >> Second.

[22:29] >> The motion and a second. Is there

[22:30] discussion regarding this particular

[22:32] code section?

[22:34] Hearing none, this will be a roll call

[22:35] vote also.

[22:36] >> O'Laughlin

[22:37] >> Yes.

[22:37] >> Appleby

[22:38] >> Yes.

[22:39] >> Weber

[22:39] >> Yes.

[22:40] >> Hannah

[22:40] >> Yes.

[22:41] >> Moore

[22:41] >> Yes.

[22:42] >> Fursider

[22:43] >> Yay.

[22:43] >> That also passes 6-0. Next we move to

[22:45] item number 17. This is a motion to

[22:48] approve the first reading of an

[22:49] ordinance amending provisions to chapter

[22:51] 157 international mechanical code.

[22:54] >> So moved.

[22:56] >> Second.

[22:56] >> The motion and a second. Anybody have

[22:58] any further discussion regarding this

[22:59] particular code section?

[23:01] Hearing none, this would also be a roll

[23:02] call vote.

[23:03] >> Hannah

[23:04] >> Yes.

[23:05] >> Moore

[23:05] >> Yes.

[23:06] >> Presider

[23:07] >> Yes.

[23:07] >> Laughlin

[23:08] >> Yes.

[23:08] >> Applebee

[23:09] >> Yes.

[23:09] >> Weber

[23:10] >> Yes.

[23:10] >> It also passes 6-0. Next

[23:12] >> Question, Mayor.

[23:13] >> Yes.

[23:14] >> Um in regards to this, it was brought

[23:16] up, you know, that

[23:18] since nothing is urgent, my question I

[23:21] would have

[23:23] is

[23:25] has our insurance company allowed us

[23:27] like a 60-day grace, a 30- or 60-day

[23:29] grace window or not because if they have

[23:32] not allowed us that, then it is urgent.

[23:34] >> From the March 24th or the March 24th

[23:37] letter that they sent us, they told us

[23:38] they would give us up to 6 months if we

[23:40] were working through the red through the

[23:41] process.

[23:41] >> Okay.

[23:42] >> They asked us for an update, I want to

[23:44] say at the beginning of July,

[23:46] roughly around there, and I emailed them

[23:48] back with the schedule of what it would

[23:49] take if it went through [clears throat]

[23:50] all three readings at three consecutive

[23:52] council meetings, and we got no response

[23:54] back to that. So, I'm going to assume

[23:55] that no response is acceptance and that

[23:57] they're okay with that.

[23:58] >> Okay, because I mean that could make a

[24:00] difference on voting.

[24:01] >> It could, yes, but I think you're fine

[24:03] if you if the council goes that way.

[24:05] It's

[24:05] >> So, if this was March

[24:06] >> If this was March that the that the

[24:08] letter came and gave us 6 months,

[24:10] September would be up. So,

[24:11] >> Which for the beginning of September

[24:12] would be the third and final reading.

[24:13] >> Got you. Okay, sounds good.

[24:15] Okay, let's move to item number

[24:17] >> We're going to make it by about 7 days,

[24:18] I think, by the time that's done.

[24:20] >> Okay. Um I'm on number 18. Number 18, um

[24:24] motion to

[24:25] first reading of an ordinance amending

[24:26] the provisions to chapter 158 of the

[24:29] International Fuel Gas Code.

[24:31] >> So moved. Second.

[24:32] >> Have a motion and a second. Is there

[24:33] further discussion regarding this?

[24:35] Hearing none, that's a roll call vote.

[24:37] >> Laughlin

[24:37] >> Yes.

[24:38] >> Applebee

[24:39] >> Yes.

[24:39] >> Weber

[24:40] >> Yes.

[24:40] >> Hannah

[24:41] >> Yes.

[24:41] >> Moore

[24:42] >> Yes.

[24:42] >> Presider

[24:43] >> Yes.

[24:43] >> It also passes 6-0. Next, we'll move to

[24:46] item number 19. Um I need a motion to

[24:48] approve the first reading of an

[24:49] ordinance amending provisions of chapter

[24:51] 159 of the International Fire Code.

[24:55] >> So moved.

[24:56] >> Second.

[24:56] >> Have a motion and a second. Any

[24:57] discussion with regard to this? Hearing

[24:59] none, this will be a roll call vote

[25:00] also.

[25:02] >> Anna?

[25:03] >> Yes.

[25:03] >> Moore?

[25:04] >> Yes.

[25:04] >> Presider?

[25:05] >> Yes.

[25:05] >> O'Laughlin?

[25:06] >> Yes.

[25:07] >> Appleby?

[25:07] >> Yes.

[25:07] >> Weber?

[25:08] >> Yes.

[25:08] >> It also passes 6-0. Next we move to item

[25:10] number 20.

[25:12] Need a motion to approve the first

[25:13] reading of an ordinance amending the

[25:14] provisions of chapter 161

[25:17] of the National Electric Code.

[25:19] >> So moved.

[25:19] >> Second.

[25:20] >> Have a motion and a second. Any

[25:21] discussion regarding this? Hearing none,

[25:23] roll roll call vote, please.

[25:25] >> O'Laughlin?

[25:25] >> Yes.

[25:26] >> Appleby?

[25:26] >> Yes.

[25:27] >> Weber?

[25:28] >> Yes.

[25:28] >> Anna?

[25:28] >> Yes.

[25:29] >> Moore?

[25:30] >> Yes.

[25:30] >> Presider?

[25:31] >> Yes.

[25:31] >> It also passes 6-0. Next we move to item

[25:33] number 21. Need a motion to approve the

[25:36] first reading of an ordinance amending

[25:37] the provisions to chapter 160

[25:41] 162 of the International Residential

[25:44] Code.

[25:45] >> So moved.

[25:46] >> Second.

[25:46] >> Have a motion and a second. Is there any

[25:48] discussion regarding this? Hearing none,

[25:50] this will be a roll call vote.

[25:51] >> Anna?

[25:52] >> Yes.

[25:52] >> Moore?

[25:53] >> Yes.

[25:53] >> Presider?

[25:54] >> Yes.

[25:54] >> O'Laughlin?

[25:55] >> Yes.

[25:55] >> Appleby?

[25:56] >> Yes.

[25:56] >> Weber?

[25:57] >> Yes.

[25:57] >> It passes 6-0 also.

[25:59] Next we move to item number 22. This is

[26:02] a motion to approve the first reading of

[26:04] an ordinance amending the provisions to

[26:05] chapter 163 of the International

[26:07] Property Maintenance Code.

[26:09] >> So moved.

[26:10] >> Second.

[26:11] >> Have a motion and a second. If there's

[26:13] no Is there any further discussion? If

[26:15] none, this is a roll call vote.

[26:18] >> O'Laughlin?

[26:18] >> Yes.

[26:19] >> Appleby?

[26:20] >> Yes.

[26:20] >> Weber?

[26:21] >> Yes.

[26:21] >> Anna?

[26:22] >> Yes.

[26:22] >> Moore?

[26:23] >> Yes.

[26:23] >> Presider?

[26:24] >> Yes.

[26:24] >> It also passes 6-0.

[26:26] Next we move to item number 23.

[26:29] I need a motion to approve a first

[26:31] reading of an ordinance

[26:33] amending the provisions of chapter 164

[26:35] of the International Existing Building

[26:37] Code.

[26:38] >> So moved.

[26:38] >> Second.

[26:39] >> Have a motion and a second. If there's

[26:40] any no further discussion, this will be

[26:42] a roll call vote also.

[26:44] >> Anna?

[26:44] >> Yes.

[26:45] >> Moore?

[26:45] >> Yes.

[26:46] >> Presider?

[26:46] >> Yes.

[26:47] >> O'Laughlin?

[26:47] >> Yes.

[26:48] >> Appleby?

[26:48] >> Yes.

[26:49] >> Weber?

[26:49] >> Yes.

[26:50] >> It also passes 6-0. Moved item number 24

[26:54] motion to approve the first reading of

[26:56] an ordinance amending the provisions to

[26:58] chapter 165 of the International Energy

[27:00] Conservation Code.

[27:02] >> So moved.

[27:03] >> Second.

[27:04] >> The motion is second. If there's no

[27:05] further discussion, we'll move to a roll

[27:06] call vote.

[27:07] >> O'Loughlin

[27:08] >> Yes.

[27:08] >> Appleby

[27:09] >> Yes.

[27:09] >> Weber

[27:10] >> Yes.

[27:11] >> Yianna

[27:11] >> Yes.

[27:12] >> Moore

[27:12] >> Yes.

[27:13] >> Presider

[27:13] >> Yes.

[27:14] >> Also passes 6-0. Moved item number 20

[27:17] five. I need a motion to approve in the

[27:19] first reading of an ordinance amending

[27:21] the provisions to chapter 1 66 of the

[27:24] International Swimming Pool and Spa

[27:25] Code.

[27:26] >> So moved.

[27:27] >> Second.

[27:28] >> The motion I have a motion and a second.

[27:30] If there's no further discussion, this

[27:31] would also be a roll call vote.

[27:33] >> Yianna

[27:33] >> Yes.

[27:34] >> Moore

[27:34] >> Yes.

[27:35] >> Presider

[27:35] >> Yes.

[27:36] >> O'Loughlin

[27:36] >> Yes.

[27:37] >> Appleby

[27:37] >> Yes.

[27:38] >> Weber

[27:38] >> Yes.

[27:39] >> That also passes 6-0. Next we move to

[27:42] item number 26.

[27:45] Pursuant to the agenda, I'll now convene

[27:47] a public hearing on the proposal to

[27:49] enter into a sewer revenue loan and

[27:51] disbursement agreement.

[27:54] >> So moved.

[27:55] >> We're we're in we're now in public

[28:00] comment. Public public hearing. Sorry,

[28:02] public hearing.

[28:03] >> I did not receive any comments on this.

[28:07] >> Okay, since there's no further comments

[28:09] in writing or or verbally with regard to

[28:11] this, we'll move forward with um

[28:15] closing the public hearing at this time.

[28:18] >> So moved.

[28:19] >> So next we move to item number 27.

[28:22] This is a motion to approve and

[28:24] authorize the mayor to sign a resolution

[28:27] taking additional action on the proposal

[28:29] to enter into the sewer revenue loan and

[28:31] disbursement agreement. Do need a

[28:33] motion.

[28:34] >> So moved.

[28:34] >> Second.

[28:35] >> I have a motion and a second.

[28:37] Further discussion with regard to this?

[28:40] is one of the steps necessary with

[28:41] regard to the funding of the

[28:44] wastewater treatment plant.

[28:46] Hearing none, this would be a roll call

[28:48] vote.

[28:48] >> Sorry, what are you on?

[28:50] >> I am on item number 27.

[28:52] >> 27.

[28:52] >> Okay.

[28:56] » [clears throat]

[28:56] >> This is a roll call vote.

[28:58] >> O'Laughlin?

[28:58] >> Yes.

[28:59] >> Appleby?

[29:00] >> No.

[29:00] >> Weber?

[29:01] >> Yes.

[29:01] >> Anna?

[29:02] >> Yes.

[29:03] >> Moore?

[29:03] >> Yes.

[29:04] >> Presider?

[29:05] >> Yes.

[29:05] >> That passes 5-1.

[29:07] Um, next we move to resolutions, um,

[29:09] item number 28.

[29:10] I need a motion to approve and authorize

[29:12] the mayor to sign a resolution approving

[29:15] a standardized extra duty police

[29:17] services agreement template and

[29:19] authorizing the city manager to execute

[29:21] these agreements as needed.

[29:23] >> So moved.

[29:23] >> Second.

[29:25] >> Okay, we talked about this at the August

[29:26] 3rd work session and, um,

[29:29] actually we had officer Bowes at the

[29:31] time come up and discuss it as well.

[29:33] Um, does anybody have any

[29:35] um further discussion with regard

[29:39] to this?

[29:41] Hearing none, this will be a roll call

[29:42] vote.

[29:43] >> Appleby?

[29:44] >> Yes.

[29:45] >> Weber?

[29:45] >> Yes.

[29:46] >> Anna?

[29:46] >> Yes.

[29:47] >> Moore?

[29:47] >> Yes.

[29:48] >> Presider?

[29:49] >> Yes.

[29:49] >> O'Laughlin?

[29:50] >> Yes.

[29:51] That passes 6-0.

[29:53] Um, next to move to item number 29.

[29:57] Um, I need a motion to authorize the

[29:59] mayor to sign a resolution

[30:01] establishing a time and place for a

[30:03] public hearing on August the 24th of

[30:05] 2026 at 5:30 p.m. for the consideration

[30:08] of a rezoning request

[30:10] from R2 residential to C1 commercial

[30:12] within the city of Independence,

[30:14] Buchanan County, Iowa.

[30:15] >> So moved.

[30:17] >> Second.

[30:17] >> I have a motion and a second. We talked

[30:18] about this, no, we didn't talk about

[30:20] this. This, um, was

[30:23] the this came before the planning and

[30:24] zoning hearing

[30:26] on August the 4th by by a vote of

[30:28] 5-nothing they recommended to the

[30:31] Tuesday, uh

[30:32] council that this that they consider

[30:33] this, but, um

[30:35] this the process here is, um, we we have

[30:37] to set a public hearing first before we

[30:39] can have further discussion or further

[30:41] action taken upon it.

[30:42] So, we've got the date um, that. Is

[30:44] there further discussion with regard to

[30:46] the setting of the date for a public

[30:47] hearing?

[30:48] >> Why are we doing

[30:49] >> for the senior center property.

[30:51] >> Yeah, why are we doing this for this

[30:51] county though?

[30:53] >> It's not county. The city It's in the

[30:54] city limits.

[30:55] >> I know.

[30:55] >> So, our zoning applies to it. The county

[30:57] has requested it because they want to do

[30:59] something different with the side edge.

[31:00] And in order to do that, they need to

[31:02] meet this this this zoning district

[31:04] meets better works better for them.

[31:07] And it fits within their being that it's

[31:08] a senior center and a commercial

[31:10] somewhat of a commercial use.

[31:12] So, we'll we'll have further discussion

[31:14] on this once we complete the public

[31:16] hearing itself.

[31:18] Is there a

[31:19] Do I have a motion and a second? This

[31:21] will be a roll call vote then.

[31:22] >> Weber?

[31:23] >> Yes.

[31:23] >> Hannah?

[31:24] >> Yes.

[31:24] >> Moore?

[31:25] >> Yes.

[31:25] >> Crusader?

[31:26] >> Yes.

[31:27] >> O'Laughlin?

[31:27] >> Yes.

[31:28] >> Appleby?

[31:28] >> Yes.

[31:29] >> It passes 6-0. Next, we move to item

[31:31] number 30.

[31:32] I need a motion to approve and authorize

[31:34] the mayor to sign a resolution approving

[31:36] the lot combination agreement and to add

[31:38] the recording fees to the previously

[31:40] approved claims listing.

[31:42] >> So moved.

[31:43] >> Second.

[31:44] >> Okay, again, this is something that went

[31:46] before planning and zoning on August the

[31:47] 4th. It's a Planning and Zoning voted

[31:50] 5-0 to

[31:51] request that um

[31:53] council consider this and approve it.

[31:56] Um

[32:00] Yeah, go ahead, Matt.

[32:01] >> So, this is a combination of two pieces

[32:03] of property that the county owns.

[32:04] There's a on the

[32:06] northeast corner of the senior center,

[32:08] there's a wing that goes there by to the

[32:10] east that actually crosses a lot line

[32:12] and goes onto a separate piece of

[32:13] property. So, this combination agreement

[32:15] brings both of them together and makes

[32:17] it one piece of property so that the

[32:19] so that they're in compliance with our requirements.

[32:24] >> Further discussion regarding that.

[32:27] Hearing none, this is a roll call vote.

[32:29] >> Hannah?

[32:30] >> Yes.

[32:31] >> Moore?

[32:31] >> Yes.

[32:32] >> Crusader?

[32:32] >> Yes.

[32:33] >> O'Laughlin?

[32:34] >> Yes.

[32:34] >> Appleby?

[32:35] >> Yes.

[32:35] >> Weber?

[32:36] >> Yes.

[32:36] >> And that passes 6-0.

[32:38] I'm actually moving to item number 31. I

[32:40] need a motion to approve and authorize

[32:42] the mayor sign a resolution that

[32:44] approves the plat of survey.

[32:47] >> So moved.

[32:48] >> Second.

[32:49] >> I have a motion and a second. Again,

[32:50] this is something that planning and

[32:51] zoning on August 4th voted 5-0 to

[32:54] recommend it um

[32:55] to be sent to council council for

[32:57] approval.

[32:58] Um William Downs owns a piece of

[33:02] property.

[33:04] Um

[33:06] and there's a small portion of the

[33:08] neighboring property which

[33:11] according to the

[33:12] plat of survey is

[33:15] um not on his property even though he's

[33:17] been taking care of it. Is that correct?

[33:19] >> I can give you that.

[33:20] >> Yes, this is a little piece. It's It's a

[33:22] row of shrubs that he's been maintaining

[33:25] for the last 20 years and they

[33:27] due to another situation with the fence

[33:29] going up on there

[33:30] his neighbors they did a plat of they

[33:32] had a survey done found out that that

[33:35] piece that he thought was his all this

[33:36] time was not his.

[33:38] So, he had he hired Crawford to actually

[33:41] do the plat of survey have in front of

[33:43] you. It will create a a new parcel. And

[33:47] then it just straightens out who owns

[33:49] what.

[33:50] >> And then and the neighbor is in favor of

[33:52] this.

[33:52] >> Miss McGraw she she

[33:55] agreed to sell him this new parcel.

[33:58] Um it was approved by planning and

[33:59] zoning contingent on this being approved

[34:02] and the deed being transferred to Mr.

[34:04] Downs.

[34:05] >> And also on the lot combination

[34:07] agreement bringing them back together.

[34:08] >> Yes, and also he also

[34:11] which you don't have tonight in your

[34:12] packets because you can't have but there

[34:14] is a lot combination already in place

[34:17] that's went through planning and zoning

[34:19] under those contingencies. So, once we

[34:21] have the deed in place and Mr. Downs

[34:23] owns that property then we'll bring the

[34:25] lot combination agreement to you all to

[34:28] >> to finalize it.

[34:29] >> Yep.

[34:31] >> Further discussion.

[34:33] >> Thanks, Pat.

[34:34] >> Hearing none, this will be a roll call

[34:35] vote.

[34:35] >> Moore?

[34:36] >> Yes.

[34:37] >> Prichard?

[34:38] >> Yes.

[34:38] >> O'Laughlin?

[34:39] >> Yes.

[34:39] >> Appleby?

[34:40] >> Yes.

[34:40] >> Weber?

[34:41] >> Yes.

[34:41] >> Anna?

[34:42] >> Yes.

[34:43] >> This passes 6-0. Next, we'll move to

[34:45] item number 32. I'll need a motion to

[34:47] approve and authorize the mayor to sign

[34:49] a resolution preliminarily approving a

[34:51] pre-annexation agreement and application

[34:54] for voluntary annexation, preliminarily

[34:56] approving the annexation of the city and

[34:59] the Tempest parcels and setting the

[35:00] public hearing for October 12th, 2026 at

[35:03] 5:30 p.m. Need a motion first.

[35:08] >> This is just set the hearing on it?

[35:09] >> Yeah, well, the the the way that the the

[35:11] It's a combination of things, but it

[35:14] really what this resolution does is it

[35:15] tells the staff to continue moving

[35:17] forward with the process. And then it

[35:18] establishes a public hearing. There are

[35:20] notices that need to happen.

[35:22] Consultations with Buchanan County and

[35:23] the school district need to take place.

[35:25] There's several different entities that

[35:26] need to be notified about it, and then

[35:28] there's a public hearing that has to be

[35:29] held all before the city council can

[35:30] make a final decision on whether or not

[35:32] to annex this property.

[35:34] So, you're not voting to annex the

[35:35] property. All you're doing is voting to

[35:37] allow the process to continue and and

[35:40] allow the the public

[35:41] >> To move forward.

[35:42] >> To continue the process, right?

[35:44] >> With a With a yay vote on this, will we

[35:46] be be voting to accept the

[35:49] pre-annexation agreement?

[35:50] >> No.

[35:50] >> Okay.

[35:51] >> You'd be You'd be voting to Well, you'd

[35:53] be voting to preliminarily approve it

[35:56] pending the other pending further

[35:57] discussion and a public hearing.

[35:59] >> My suggestion would be if there's

[36:00] modifications you'd like to make to the

[36:01] pre-annexation agreement, now is the

[36:03] time to discuss those.

[36:04] >> I would say that the uh

[36:06] cattle, goats

[36:08] pasturing

[36:09] is is out. I mean, they want to be in

[36:11] the city limits.

[36:11] >> One second. One second, Mike.

[36:13] >> Do I have it Did I get a motion?

[36:14] >> I don't have a motion or

[36:15] >> I don't think a motion

[36:16] >> had a motion

[36:16] >> Was there a second, yeah?

[36:17] >> I I will I will make the motion to get

[36:19] the ball rolling for discussion.

[36:21] >> Second.

[36:22] >> Okay, we've got a motion and a second.

[36:23] Go ahead, Mike, now.

[36:25] >> I would like to see uh

[36:27] the pasturing of cattle and goats out of

[36:29] there since they want to be within the

[36:32] city limits and our by code, that's not

[36:34] allowed.

[36:37] » I agree with Mike and I think that in

[36:38] addition to what Mike said, I think that

[36:40] there should be an annual request as all

[36:42] of the residents do with anything in the

[36:43] city as far as bow hunting is concerned.

[36:45] >> Yeah.

[36:46] >> Go ahead. I This is non

[36:48] um

[36:49] voluntary. It's involuntary as part of

[36:51] it. So, we shouldn't be labeling it as a

[36:54] as one bird.

[36:55] >> The city attorney is the one who drafted

[36:57] these documents and this is a voluntary

[36:59] annexation with a 20 with a less than

[37:01] 20% involuntary annexation.

[37:03] >> So, it's voluntary then.

[37:05] >> That is not an involuntary annexation.

[37:06] under state

[37:08] code is where the entire property is

[37:10] involuntary.

[37:11] >> Okay. So, under that is not

[37:13] >> Semantics a little bit

[37:14] >> So, the

[37:16] developer for this area is also the

[37:18] person who's writing this up for this

[37:20] area.

[37:20] >> No. No, Doug Doug is the one who wrote

[37:22] it up, our city attorney.

[37:24] >> Is the city

[37:24] >> Zanetti is the developer who is also

[37:26] reviewing it on the behalf of his you

[37:29] know, on on behalf of his

[37:30] >> And then it's also where mayor of her

[37:33] town works is the one that wants to

[37:34] develop.

[37:35] >> I'm sorry?

[37:36] >> Is that where you work? Is where he

[37:37] wants the person that owns this wants to

[37:39] develop it?

[37:40] >> I do not I I I from time to time I will

[37:43] handle the project for Robert Zanetti.

[37:45] I'm not an employee of Robert Zanetti

[37:47] and I'm not

[37:48] I'm I'm not handling this and I don't

[37:49] I'm not handling anything about this on his behalf or even on behalf of the

[37:53] city. I'm just presenting it to him.

[37:56] >> You may I make a comment on that, mayor?

[37:58] >> Yep.

[37:59] >> And the mayor has no yes or no vote

[38:02] whatsoever. So, therefore

[38:05] it there is no conflict of interest

[38:07] because he has no voting power.

[38:09] >> He's a mayor.

[38:09] >> No, he's he's he's no conflict at at

[38:12] all. Matt Matt's handling this. He just

[38:14] has to bring it up.

[38:16] But he there he has no voting power

[38:18] whatsoever. So, therefore there is no

[38:19] conflict. And if there was a conflict

[38:22] and he had voting power, then that

[38:24] person would just remove themselves and

[38:26] excuse themselves. They would abstain.

[38:28] They would abstain from voting.

[38:30] >> And I can't abstain from something that

[38:31] I don't have a vote.

[38:32] >> This is phase one of forcing him to

[38:35] >> I don't think we should move forward

[38:36] with this. This guy was not in the city

[38:38] limits when this was developed around

[38:40] him. And he did a we did him wrong many

[38:43] years ago.

[38:44] Uh so, we

[38:45] >> How did we do that?

[38:47] >> When they developed this area, they

[38:48] actually

[38:50] took the water well away from him, his

[38:52] own property. So, for that reason, we

[38:54] actually approved him to have water

[38:56] unlimited for life as a restitution.

[38:59] Now, this is just a gentleman's

[39:01] agreement. Now, because he's part of our

[39:03] city, he's getting annexed in against

[39:05] his will.

[39:06] So, he did us a favor not suing us years

[39:09] ago. I think it's time to return the

[39:11] favor and not do this to him. He doesn't

[39:13] want to be part of the city. He didn't

[39:15] ask to have it developed around him. He

[39:16] said, "Okay, you want to do your thing

[39:18] and develop over here. Just leave me out

[39:20] of it." Then that didn't turn out that

[39:22] way. Now, he's getting surrounded by us,

[39:24] and now we're going to make his property

[39:26] part of our city.

[39:28] >> He's 87 years old, and he doesn't want

[39:29] to be annexed in.

[39:30] >> It's not right. He did us a favor not

[39:32] suing our city, and now we need to

[39:33] return the favor.

[39:35] >> Can isn't there something Matt where you

[39:38] can't have an island?

[39:39] >> City development board will not approve

[39:41] an annexation that creates an island.

[39:43] So, if you do not want to move forward

[39:45] with this because Mr. Teppas's property

[39:47] will be part of that, then that also

[39:49] means that Mr. Heddy's property will not

[39:51] be annexed into the city and cannot be

[39:53] annexed into the city.

[39:57] » And if he's going

[39:57] >> could have very well have gone against

[39:59] our city, and he got a gentleman's

[40:01] agreement just to not do us wrong.

[40:03] >> Okay, you

[40:03] >> We need to return the favor. That's the

[40:05] answer.

[40:06] >> You're repeating yourself, so let's

[40:08] >> I can.

[40:09] >> You can You can, but I can also call you

[40:11] out of order as well.

[40:13] You know, I have no problem with you

[40:15] speaking. I have no problem with you

[40:16] speaking. Just don't keep repeating

[40:18] yourself over and over and over. We got

[40:20] the We got the message.

[40:21] >> I'll remember that.

[40:22] >> I'll remember too.

[40:23] >> Okay.

[40:24] >> Trust me.

[40:28] Um

[40:29] Mike, in answer to your to your thing,

[40:32] um

[40:33] the reason that that it's set up the way

[40:35] that it's set up, I understand, okay?

[40:38] I'm I'm just trying to explain it to you

[40:39] the reason why it's in the annexation

[40:43] agreement is because they're not going

[40:45] to be able to do all of this at one

[40:47] time.

[40:48] So, if you take the part of it that's

[40:50] farthest away that's currently That's

[40:52] the current use for it. So, you're not changing the use. The current

[40:55] use has those things in it. There's

[40:58] nothing that you're adding You're giving

[40:59] that that they don't already have while

[41:01] they're in the county.

[41:03] But

[41:04] >> if they're annexing to the city, they're no longer A1.

[41:08] >> I understand that, but

[41:09] >> They They will come in as A1.

[41:11] >> They'll come in, but they have They have

[41:12] to accept the

[41:13] >> Uh that was part of the pre-annexation

[41:15] agreement was that the zoning applied

[41:16] would be A1 when they come into the

[41:18] city, and then at some point in the near

[41:20] future when he wants to develop, he

[41:21] would have to come in and rezone

[41:22] whichever piece he's developing. And

[41:24] then that piece would no longer be

[41:25] allowed to have animals or

[41:27] >> And And he's erecting on it without

[41:29] permission.

[41:29] >> I would move that we don't allow the A1

[41:32] uh

[41:33] status.

[41:34] >> There's a motion and a second on the

[41:35] table right now that would need to be

[41:37] voted on, and then if somebody else

[41:38] would like to make a subsequent motion

[41:40] saying they want to make modifications

[41:41] to the pre-annexation agreement, you

[41:43] could do that.

[41:44] >> The The reason why

[41:46] um the the group that's that's asking to

[41:49] be annexed in wants to do it the way

[41:50] that they're they're they're proposing

[41:52] it is because because it's not going to

[41:54] happen for several years. They want to

[41:57] continue to get the the income that they

[41:59] have from the rental of of that for the use of by

[42:04] the people that own the animals.

[42:05] >> Okay.

[42:06] >> So, if But

[42:07] >> with the limited size of that pasture,

[42:09] and I've

[42:10] rented pasture you in the past.

[42:13] There's not that much income from that.

[42:15] >> Well, that was his rationale for why he wanted

[42:18] it in there.

[42:19] >> I would respectfully disagree and

[42:22] decline.

[42:23] >> Okay, I understand. I'm just I wanted

[42:25] you to have the facts. That's all.

[42:26] >> Well, I knew the impetus behind it.

[42:30] >> Okay.

[42:31] >> Did you have something you want to read?

[42:33] >> Uh

[42:34] No, I was just thinking it might be

[42:36] a little bit more complicated because of

[42:38] the zoning side of things.

[42:40] There's any any uh land that's annexed

[42:43] then must become A1. So, to your point,

[42:45] I don't think you could just

[42:47] have a have a motion

[42:49] have a vote.

[42:50] >> The city city attorney would disagree

[42:51] with you. He has stated that when you do

[42:53] a pre-annexation agreement, you can

[42:54] specify what level of zoning you would

[42:56] like to have. As long as the city

[42:58] council agrees to that, it can come in

[42:59] as a different zoning district.

[43:00] >> Well, perfectly. So, I'm just coming up

[43:02] >> But it's But this is coming in as A1,

[43:04] which is what a regular annexation would

[43:06] do anyway without that being in the

[43:07] pre-annexation agreement.

[43:08] >> Okay.

[43:09] >> Why would

[43:10] I don't understand. Why would

[43:12] if he wants to make it residential, why

[43:14] would it come in as A1 and not R?

[43:17] >> Because it would become residential once

[43:19] he was ready to build.

[43:21] He would only be agricultural until such

[43:22] time as he's ready to build. He would

[43:24] only be the residential

[43:24] >> get all the benefits of the residential

[43:27] classification

[43:29] while still having the ag designation.

[43:31] >> So, he's got two So, he's got two

[43:33] distinct

[43:33] >> two parcels

[43:34] >> parcels. One of the parcels he's going

[43:35] to be work on immediately with the

[43:37] That'll be That would be residential.

[43:39] So, that parcel would be zoned resident

[43:42] the R1.

[43:43] >> He would likely take the 40 acres that

[43:44] were that's being part of this

[43:45] discussion and split that.

[43:48] Part of it that would be annexed and

[43:49] part of it would or not annexed part of

[43:50] it would be rezoned at that time. And

[43:53] also preliminary plat for development,

[43:54] all of those different things that have

[43:56] to occur. This is just the first step in

[43:58] the process. And this again really is

[44:00] just telling the the staff whether you

[44:02] want us to continue moving forward with

[44:03] this or not.

[44:05] Cuz there's a lot more steps to this.

[44:07] >> John, do you have something to read?

[44:09] >> No, here.

[44:11] >> Didn't you have a question for me

[44:12] earlier?

[44:13] For John or for what?

[44:15] >> No, John he's already

[44:17] >> He He wanted to talk when he was up

[44:19] earlier.

[44:21] >> Mike, I have a comment. You had asked

[44:22] you had had a question.

[44:23] >> just asked if he he had something he was

[44:25] possibly going to read, but

[44:26] >> He did

[44:27] >> So did

[44:28] >> What I said earlier.

[44:30] >> Okay.

[44:31] so is there further discussion

[44:33] with regard to the motion that's

[44:34] pending?

[44:34] >> Yeah.

[44:35] Um in in regards to the animal part I I

[44:38] have a

[44:39] I have mixed emotion on this as far as

[44:41] the animal part. If if it goes forward

[44:44] and gets annexed in

[44:47] as A1 agricultural

[44:50] however

[44:51] once this

[44:53] once if that happens nothing can be

[44:55] built as far as residential goes on

[44:58] there

[44:59] until it becomes residential zoning. And

[45:02] at that time then the animal part would

[45:03] fall out because then you would not have

[45:06] residential. However, I see Mike's

[45:09] point and Mr. Passaro's point

[45:11] on allowing animals within city limits.

[45:15] But this is dealing with

[45:17] it's not like it's already in the city

[45:19] limits at this time. So it's kind of a a

[45:22] gray area.

[45:23] >> Um realistically it is within the city

[45:25] limits. It's just not zoned that way.

[45:27] >> It Yeah, it's not zoned that way and but

[45:30] the city gets no money off of it at this time. We don't get any money out

[45:34] of that.

[45:34] >> The county does cuz it's

[45:35] >> The county does not the city.

[45:37] >> in the city limits, right?

[45:37] >> So it's so it is not it is not in the

[45:39] city limits at this time.

[45:42] >> surrounded by the city limits.

[45:43] >> So we're taking taxes from the county.

[45:47] >> I'm sorry.

[45:48] >> We're taking taxes from the county cuz

[45:49] right now he's paying taxes to the

[45:50] county and

[45:51] >> He will still pay taxes to the county.

[45:53] It'll just be a different rate.

[45:57] » Cuz he would pay it

[45:57] >> So I'm an urban rate

[45:59] >> It's kind of a gray area right now for

[46:01] me on that.

[46:03] >> When you guys said that there was an

[46:04] intention the intention I completely

[46:05] understand you don't just develop the

[46:06] entire thing. There's two parcels in

[46:08] question is the east parcel or the west

[46:10] parcel that would be

[46:11] >> The eastern parcel is the one that we're

[46:12] talking about tonight as part of the

[46:14] annexation.

[46:14] >> And with that has it been indicated that

[46:18] So that portion there would be the first

[46:19] to be developed as well.

[46:21] >> A portion of it of some sort. We don't

[46:22] have That's That's a question Mr. Eddy

[46:24] would have to answer as far as what it

[46:26] is he wants to develop of that piece.

[46:28] >> So would that create an island as well?

[46:31] >> No. Not if it's annexed. If you annex

[46:34] the entire 40 acres in, no. Because then

[46:36] it can still remain agricultural because

[46:38] we're we're getting two things

[46:39] convoluted here. Annexation is one

[46:41] thing, zoning is another thing.

[46:42] >> Right.

[46:43] >> So the annexation just brings it into

[46:45] the city. Then the zoning has to come

[46:47] into play whenever he decides which

[46:49] property or how much of the property he

[46:50] wants to develop. He could do 5 acres of

[46:52] it, he could do all 40. It's just up to

[46:54] him on what he decides he wants to

[46:55] develop.

[46:56] >> And at that time then he has to come to

[46:58] the city council for getting the zoning

[47:00] change.

[47:01] >> Right. And a preliminary plat approval

[47:03] and all

[47:03] >> Preliminary plat approval and all that

[47:05] other stuff that takes

[47:07] a year or so to get all that

[47:08] accomplished.

[47:09] >> All of those different development pieces, yes.

[47:12] >> So the eastern 40 acres would are what

[47:15] we're

[47:16] >> That's what's in this annexation this

[47:17] evening, yes.

[47:18] >> So what about the western part then

[47:19] where the homestead is?

[47:21] And the eastern part That would remain

[47:23] in county?

[47:23] >> The eastern part is where the homestead

[47:25] is at. The western part is the empty

[47:26] field.

[47:27] >> Excuse me, yeah.

[47:27] >> Yeah, the western part would remain in

[47:29] county at this point.

[47:30] It would be it's He has plans to do that

[47:32] at the in the future. He's just not

[47:34] doing that right now because when we

[47:35] bring that one in, then that also

[47:38] encompasses because it creates them

[47:39] another island which then means Best Buy

[47:41] and the other resident that's up there

[47:42] and plus the school district where the

[47:44] stadium is at. All of that's got to come

[47:45] in when that piece comes in.

[47:47] That's a bigger lift than

[47:49] what this one is and so he chose to

[47:50] start with just this piece.

[47:53] >> So as I read the agreement, it's a

[47:56] voluntary annexation if

[47:59] we agree to go against our current

[48:02] ordinances for livestock and hunting.

[48:05] But, if we choose to

[48:08] not allow those two things, then that

[48:09] would nullify this agreement that we're

[48:11] voting on.

[48:12] >> We would not be able to agree We

[48:13] wouldn't be able to Well, no.

[48:16] You can No, you could approve You could

[48:18] do a motion to approve the annexation

[48:20] subject to removal of those two items

[48:22] from the pre-annexation agreement

[48:24] because the pre-annexation agreement is

[48:25] yet another piece of this that is not

[48:28] It's It's just an agreement between the

[48:29] developer and the and the city about

[48:31] what he's going to do with this

[48:32] property.

[48:33] >> Got you.

[48:34] >> So, you could do that if you want to.

[48:37] >> I I don't like the fact that that's put

[48:38] in the pre-annexation agreement when we

[48:40] have two ordinances on hand right now

[48:42] that don't necessarily limit livestock,

[48:45] so yes, but hunting can still be done.

[48:48] We just did it tonight where we had

[48:49] three individuals who asked for

[48:50] permission and were granted it.

[48:52] >> On the consent agenda even.

[48:54] >> Yeah, on the consent agenda even.

[48:57] So, I don't [clears throat] know why we

[48:58] would tie that privilege into

[49:01] an annexation agreement.

[49:05] That's all I have to say on this one.

[49:06] >> for this body to decide, for sure.

[49:10] » I would make a motion that we strike

[49:12] >> Hold on, I can't I can't take another

[49:13] motion. There's already one motion on

[49:14] the floor.

[49:15] >> Okay, yep, I understand.

[49:18] So, further discussion on this one. So,

[49:21] >> Yes, call the question.

[49:23] >> Two options are you either go to the

[49:24] vote or they

[49:25] >> If there's no discussion,

[49:27] I call the question if there's no more

[49:28] discussion.

[49:29] >> Okay, so question, do you want to um

[49:32] the original motion was your motion,

[49:33] right, Ralph?

[49:34] So, you can withdraw your motion

[49:37] or we can vote on it.

[49:38] >> Let's see Let's see how the vote goes

[49:40] and we can

[49:41] come back at it on a different motion.

[49:44] >> Okay, so it's it's a It is a um

[49:47] roll call vote and and what you're

[49:49] voting on is to to preliminarily approve

[49:53] the pre-annexation agreement

[49:56] and to set the public hearing for

[49:58] further discussion on this for October

[50:00] the 12th of 2026. That's the motion in

[50:02] front of you.

[50:04] Okay?

[50:04] Roll call.

[50:05] >> Persauder.

[50:06] >> No.

[50:07] >> Manor or Zapson, O'Loughlin.

[50:09] >> No.

[50:10] >> Appleby.

[50:11] >> No.

[50:11] >> Weber.

[50:13] >> No.

[50:13] >> Anna.

[50:14] >> No.

[50:15] >> Moore.

[50:15] >> No.

[50:16] >> Okay, so that motion fails.

[50:18] >> [snorts]

[50:19] >> Um

[50:21] » So now Mike can make his motion if he'd

[50:23] like to.

[50:23] >> Mhm. You have another motion, Mike?

[50:25] >> I do. I make motion that we accept it

[50:29] contingent upon striking the

[50:31] um

[50:34] pasturing of cattle and goats and bow

[50:36] hunting

[50:38] >> from the pre-annexation agreement.

[50:39] >> Correct.

[50:42] » Can I add to Mike's motion?

[50:44] And require annual permission for bow

[50:47] hunting on that piece as well that's

[50:48] inside the city limits. Should it be

[50:52] » So Mike's is that a verbal okay? Cuz

[50:55] shaking your head don't count.

[50:56] >> Yeah. Yes, I do. I I agree with that.

[50:59] >> Okay, do you have the motion in

[51:00] something?

[51:02] >> So I want to make it clear. We're going

[51:03] to strike items 3C,

[51:05] which is the pasturing of cattle and or

[51:07] goats so long as the subject property is

[51:08] owned agricultural upon applicant's

[51:10] successful rezoning, blah blah blah. We

[51:11] would strike that entire section, that

[51:13] entire paragraph. It would also strike

[51:15] section 3D, which is the for bow hunting

[51:18] purposes piece. So both of those would

[51:21] be removed from the pre-annexation

[51:22] agreement. So the pre-annexation

[51:24] agreement use of an annexed parcel would

[51:26] be for enrollment in the FSA CRP program

[51:29] or for agricultural row cropping

[51:30] purposes. Only those two items.

[51:33] Just want to make sure we're clear about

[51:34] what's being taken out.

[51:36] >> So we'd still be going after us to take

[51:38] voluntarily.

[51:39] >> Yep. It would still be an 80/20

[51:41] annexation, yes. Where Mr. Tevis's

[51:43] property would be brought in with it.

[51:45] >> Man, would you guys do this to your dad

[51:47] or your grandpa?

[51:49] >> Or you don't think this is a conflict of

[51:50] interest that our mayor works there?

[51:53] >> I don't have a conflict of interest.

[51:56] I'm not an employee. I don't even have

[51:57] an open file that

[51:58] >> Did you even disclose that though to the

[52:00] city council?

[52:01] >> Everybody here knows I that it that that

[52:04] previously I helped I assisted the um

[52:06] the Robert Sinnett firm. I've never been

[52:08] an employee. I've only been an

[52:09] independent contractor who helped them

[52:11] with specific projects.

[52:12] >> And you did earlier in this meeting.

[52:15] >> I did what?

[52:15] >> No, I said that information. He didn't

[52:18] disclose it.

[52:18] >> No, he did. He did say it.

[52:21] >> Who owns this land besides Brian Eddy?

[52:23] >> He's got another partner um but I don't

[52:25] remember his name.

[52:26] >> Chad Runnebaum.

[52:29] » It must be an M.

[52:33] I don't I don't know the name. I don't

[52:34] know. I don't know.

[52:36] >> There's a Amy Sloan as successor

[52:39] trustee.

[52:42] And Chad Runnebaum and Brian Eddy. Those

[52:45] are the three that I know of that are

[52:46] involved in it. Those are the three that

[52:47] signed the documents.

[52:50] >> Okay, so I've got we've got a motion

[52:51] that Mike's made. Is there a second to

[52:53] Mike's motion?

[52:54] >> Second.

[52:55] >> Okay, further discussion with regard to

[52:56] that motion then.

[53:00] Okay, this is this again is only to set

[53:02] the hearing with these adjustments. It

[53:06] doesn't mean it's going to happen or

[53:07] anything at this time. Actually, it's

[53:10] only to move forward and have a have a

[53:12] hearing.

[53:13] >> The direction staff to continue moving

[53:14] forward which means then we need to meet

[53:15] with Buchanan County. We need to meet

[53:16] with the school district to have those conversations with them. We've got

[53:20] notices that we have to send out. It

[53:21] puts a lot of things in motion to set up

[53:24] the city council's ability to then have

[53:25] a final vote, a final decision on

[53:27] whether or not to move forward with

[53:28] this.

[53:28] >> And that's why I exactly asked questions

[53:31] so you could define it more clearly for

[53:32] everybody to understand.

[53:33] >> And the October 12th meeting will be the

[53:35] public hearing aspect of it and then it

[53:37] subsequently after that would be the

[53:40] final decision for the council to

[53:41] decide.

[53:41] >> Do we know if

[53:43] Besco and whoever else has in that one

[53:47] guy who lives out there, are they

[53:48] willing to sign a volunteer?

[53:50] >> That's a separate

[53:53] >> Far as I know, Deb, that guy is not.

[53:55] He's not volunteering.

[53:57] >> Because they could I'm just thinking

[53:58] they could start building from that way.

[53:59] >> I don't know anything, frankly, cuz I

[54:01] can tell you from what I understand, no.

[54:03] I think there's like one guy, he's not

[54:04] volunteering, and then like the Besco, I

[54:06] don't know. Cuz last I knew you were

[54:08] talking to him.

[54:09] >> The other part

[54:10] >> didn't get a response, right?

[54:11] >> talking about Besco anymore right now.

[54:13] I've had several conversations with

[54:14] Besco.

[54:15] >> Did you did talk to the owner or

[54:17] whatever, cuz I knew you reached out to

[54:19] him.

[54:19] >> I've had several conversations with him,

[54:20] but that's not part of the discussion

[54:21] for for the motion.

[54:23] This motion is on the other parcel. This

[54:25] isn't on the motion that involves Besco.

[54:27] >> But I'm just wondering if for Brian and

[54:28] I said starting to build

[54:30] by Roger's place, I think starting at

[54:31] the other end and and leave Roger alone

[54:33] for a while.

[54:34] >> Still creates an island.

[54:36] >> If he so I I can walk through that with

[54:38] you. So if Brian decided to annex the

[54:40] western 40 acres

[54:42] >> If you do If you do this one here, it's

[54:43] going to block it off and this will be

[54:45] an entire island.

[54:46] >> He would be required to bring everything

[54:47] else in.

[54:49] The city development board would say you

[54:50] can't create an island. You have to

[54:52] annex You have to bring all of this.

[54:55] The The other part of this that that

[54:56] Matt did not mention is is that this

[54:58] would then the pre-annexation agreement

[55:00] that was signed by

[55:02] the partnership itself would then have

[55:05] to be um

[55:06] re- um

[55:09] re-prepared again with with the

[55:11] corrections with those things stricken.

[55:13] They would have to agree to those those

[55:16] changes that council is is proposing

[55:18] here. Otherwise, there is no annexation

[55:20] agreement in order to go forward at all.

[55:22] >> You're saying Brian Eddy's got to agree

[55:24] to it.

[55:24] >> He's got to agree to these changes that

[55:25] >> Yeah, but that doesn't change Roger's

[55:27] situation.

[55:28] >> If he doesn't agree to this,

[55:30] then it's just squashed. It

[55:32] >> It stops It stops everything.

[55:34] >> And how does the resident benefit from

[55:36] this?

[55:38] >> Which resident?

[55:40] » Our involuntary resident, Mr.

[55:42] >> But you can make the argument that

[55:43] Roger's already been getting the benefit

[55:45] of living next to the city for the last

[55:46] 10 years cuz we clear the street in

[55:48] front of him, we maintain the street in

[55:49] front of him that he uses to access his

[55:50] home.

[55:51] >> In what way would he benefit from the

[55:53] annexation?

[55:56] » I can't say that there is a direct

[55:57] benefit from the annexation. I would

[55:59] again say that he's already gotten the

[56:01] benefit because the city takes care of

[56:02] the street, we clear the street, we do

[56:04] everything in front of the property that

[56:05] he uses that he uses to access his

[56:07] property.

[56:07] >> The benefit would be he'd have to pay

[56:08] more taxes.

[56:12] But

[56:13] I got to really can't afford it.

[56:14] >> You mentioned that you want to mention

[56:15] the road and the taxes and all that

[56:17] stuff. That's the question.

[56:18] >> Yes.

[56:18] >> Yeah.

[56:19] Come on up.

[56:20] >> Yeah. Here is you discussing getting the

[56:22] benefits

[56:23] of that one road that goes by that

[56:25] house, correct?

[56:26] >> I'm just explaining your point. You made

[56:27] it. It's a paved road, correct? Did he

[56:29] ask for that road to be paved?

[56:32] >> No.

[56:33] >> I was not asking him anything he

[56:34] requested he had the road already. Is

[56:36] there anything you've seen there he

[56:37] requires that road

[56:39] to be plowed, snow plowed? Does he have

[56:42] a requirement for that?

[56:44] >> Well, another benefit is with that road

[56:46] in front of him,

[56:47] it was a former article road, didn't

[56:48] cost him anything.

[56:51] >> It was a dead end, actually.

[56:53] >> Yeah.

[56:53] >> I'm just explaining the reason that I

[56:55] said what I said was because that is how

[56:57] the city development board looks at

[56:58] these things when they look at whether

[56:59] or not to include properties that are

[57:01] surrounded by cities.

[57:02] >> I understand. But you said he increased

[57:04] he got benefits he got increased traffic

[57:08] because it was a dead end. He didn't

[57:09] require that before.

[57:12] I mean, I you say benefit

[57:14] and we've heard that several times. I

[57:15] just want to make a point of it. It's

[57:17] not a benefit that he asked for. It's

[57:20] not something he considers a benefit.

[57:22] You may call it a benefit in your eyes,

[57:24] but it is not a benefit to him.

[57:25] >> I'm not calling it a benefit in my eyes

[57:26] at all. I have a lot of empathy with

[57:28] Roger.

[57:28] >> Sorry, what did you mean then when you

[57:30] said just a second ago benefit?

[57:31] >> how the city development board will look

[57:33] at this. That's all I'm explaining.

[57:35] >> Okay. And so what city development like

[57:38] >> a state level board that has to that

[57:39] oversees annexations for cities across

[57:41] the state of Iowa.

[57:42] >> Okay. So if

[57:43] >> to review that.

[57:43] >> with the annexation and evaluation of

[57:46] it, the board would see it as as that

[57:48] what you're trying to say?

[57:48] >> Yes.

[57:49] >> Okay.

[57:50] >> Thank you.

[57:52] So um

[57:53] Did

[57:55] You want to mention that

[57:57] >> We can't hear you.

[58:00] >> Uh it's explained in the pre-annexation

[58:01] agreement. There is a roll in on the

[58:03] property taxes, which is what we're

[58:04] allowed to do by law.

[58:06] >> for him.

[58:07] >> For Roger specifically.

[58:09] Yes, that that um

[58:11] brings it in so that Roger pays

[58:13] his taxes would escalate over 5 years.

[58:15] It's not a day one you have to pay all

[58:17] of the taxes due to the city.

[58:19] Um that is within the annexation

[58:22] agreement.

[58:23] I can't remember exactly where it's at.

[58:24] >> No, it's probably because it'd be

[58:25] illegal right to tax him that high.

[58:27] >> it's prorated over a period of time,

[58:29] correct?

[58:30] Hold on. It's the city's choice whether

[58:33] you bring everybody in day one and they

[58:35] have to pay everything or whether you

[58:36] allow up to 5 years for those taxes to

[58:38] roll on over 5 years. In an effort to

[58:40] try to help Mr. Tempest, the way that

[58:42] this was structured was so that it rolls

[58:43] on over 5 years so that he doesn't have

[58:45] to pay all these taxes on day one.

[58:47] >> Okay.

[58:47] >> To give him time to adjust to it. So the

[58:50] way that it's written is for the first

[58:51] and second years he pays 25%. The

[58:53] document says 75, that's because it's telling you how much is being not

[58:58] charged. So for the first and second

[59:00] years he would pay 25% of the regular

[59:01] taxes. Third and fourth he would pay

[59:03] 40%, fifth and sixth he would pay 55%,

[59:08] seventh and eighth he would pay 70%,

[59:10] ninth and tenth he would pay

[59:15] that is when he would be actually paying

[59:16] >> And how much does the the

[59:18] valuation cost to him from going from

[59:21] that to

[59:22] in dollars and per year at this rate

[59:25] >> for you.

[59:26] >> Matt, when you were

[59:27] >> I don't have those numbers for you

[59:28] tonight.

[59:28] >> Okay.

[59:29] >> Matt, when you were using those numbers,

[59:30] were you talking years or every 6

[59:32] months?

[59:33] >> This is how it's written in the

[59:34] document. It's 2 years, first and second

[59:36] years.

[59:37] >> So, it's 12 years before 12 years before

[59:39] he pays 100%?

[59:41] >> It's 10 as it's written.

[59:42] >> In the 11th year

[59:43] >> 11th year he would pay 100%.

[59:44] >> 11th year he doesn't.

[59:46] >> Right.

[59:47] >> [snorts]

[59:47] >> Cuz I was thinking it was five, but he's

[59:49] the mayor of the city attorney has

[59:51] written this document as

[59:53] through 10 years.

[59:57] » Okay. So,

[59:58] >> Um

[59:59] Do you want to read Mike's motion?

[1:00:03] » Okay. So, what I

[1:00:07] am attempting to do is to accept the

[1:00:10] pre-annexation

[1:00:11] a

[1:00:13] agreement striking

[1:00:16] the animal portion and the hunting

[1:00:18] requirement.

[1:00:20] >> 3C

[1:00:20] >> I'm assuming the rest of it stays the

[1:00:22] same?

[1:00:22] >> It should say preliminarily approved.

[1:00:25] >> Not

[1:00:25] >> I

[1:00:26] >> Yeah, approving it. Yeah.

[1:00:27] >> I'm writing on the back of my paper. I

[1:00:29] don't have what was originally done.

[1:00:31] >> And Suzy, just for ease, it's striking

[1:00:33] 3C and 3D

[1:00:36] from the

[1:00:37] provided agreement.

[1:00:38] >> From the previous

[1:00:39] >> And that can be done just tonight just

[1:00:41] at the

[1:00:41] >> The council can make the motion that

[1:00:42] way, then it goes back to Mr. Eddie and

[1:00:44] his group to determine whether or not

[1:00:45] they want to accept that.

[1:00:47] They can either resign the agreement

[1:00:48] with those two pieces of them removed

[1:00:49] and we move forward or we stop and they

[1:00:52] come back to discuss what they want to

[1:00:53] do.

[1:00:55] And then depending upon the response

[1:00:57] from them

[1:00:58] and whatever else that this is working

[1:01:00] on in the meantime, then that would have

[1:01:02] to take place before the October 12th

[1:01:05] um public hearing, all of the that that

[1:01:06] other paperwork and other things would

[1:01:08] take place because of there's nothing

[1:01:10] that's being

[1:01:11] by night

[1:01:12] in terms of approval. It's just a a

[1:01:14] preliminary just so that the paperwork

[1:01:16] can be processed

[1:01:17] >> Right.

[1:01:18] >> until you reach the point where the

[1:01:19] public hearing takes place. We're

[1:01:21] They make you jump through a lot of

[1:01:23] hurdles in order to happen and we have

[1:01:24] to follow each and every one of them

[1:01:26] specifically.

[1:01:27] >> And that's why there's a lot of hurdles

[1:01:28] for you to jump through so you make sure

[1:01:30] you do it correctly. Absolutely.

[1:01:32] >> You don't want to get halfway through it

[1:01:33] and then and then have it fail and then

[1:01:35] fail.

[1:01:36] >> I forgot all about that.

[1:01:38] >> All right. So

[1:01:40] everybody understands what the motion is

[1:01:42] at this point in time. Anybody have any

[1:01:44] questions about the motion itself that

[1:01:46] you're going to be voting on?

[1:01:48] Okay. Go ahead.

[1:01:49] >> Um call the roll then.

[1:01:50] >> Weber.

[1:01:52] >> Yes.

[1:01:53] >> Anna.

[1:01:53] >> No.

[1:01:54] >> Moore.

[1:01:55] >> Yes.

[1:01:56] >> Rosedahl.

[1:01:56] >> Yes.

[1:01:57] >> O'Laughlin.

[1:01:58] >> Yes.

[1:01:59] >> Appleby.

[1:02:00] >> No.

[1:02:01] >> It passes 6 to 2.

[1:02:04] >> [clears throat]

[1:02:04] >> Sorry.

[1:02:04] >> 4 to 2.

[1:02:06] coming up to total 6. How about

[1:02:09] that?

[1:02:10] All right. So um

[1:02:13] » So it passes 4 to 2?

[1:02:15] >> Mhm. Passes 4 to 2. So the next steps on

[1:02:17] this just

[1:02:18] >> it pass when the other things would fail

[1:02:20] on the hearing aspect?

[1:02:21] >> How would Cuz the majority voted in

[1:02:23] favor.

[1:02:24] >> Okay.

[1:02:24] >> Four people voted for it, two voted

[1:02:26] against. It's a simple majority.

[1:02:28] >> Okay.

[1:02:28] >> If you're thinking about the second

[1:02:30] reading aspect, that requires a super

[1:02:32] majority which means six out of the

[1:02:33] seven board members have to vote

[1:02:35] positive

[1:02:37] whether they're present or not.

[1:02:38] >> Okay.

[1:02:38] >> So if one is not present, then everybody

[1:02:40] who's present has to vote in favor of

[1:02:42] >> Okay.

[1:02:42] >> Cuz the non non-present person is

[1:02:44] considered a no vote.

[1:02:47] >> Okay.

[1:02:47] >> Correct. For the super majority.

[1:02:49] >> On the super majority.

[1:02:50] >> Okay.

[1:02:51] >> Moving on then to item number 33.

[1:02:54] Um motion to authorize the city

[1:02:56] >> If I could real quick, I just want to

[1:02:57] make sure that everybody's clear on next

[1:02:58] steps on this then. Because the motion

[1:03:00] approved

[1:03:01] passed 4 to 2,

[1:03:03] staff will continue moving forward. We

[1:03:05] will go back to Brian Eddy and say this

[1:03:07] is this is what the council said. You

[1:03:09] basically have the choice. You either

[1:03:11] accept this and we move on or you don't

[1:03:13] and then we got to go back to the you

[1:03:14] would have to have a discussion with

[1:03:15] council about what could be done related

[1:03:17] to that, if that's what he wants to do.

[1:03:19] But I'll reach out to him tomorrow to

[1:03:20] have that discussion.

[1:03:22] >> The other thing that could happen is is

[1:03:23] that there could be further negotiation

[1:03:25] with regard to that. And if there was

[1:03:26] further negotiation, then it would come

[1:03:27] have to come back to council before it

[1:03:29] could actually be

[1:03:30] >> Right.

[1:03:30] >> Cuz council has to preliminarily approve

[1:03:32] it before we can get the public hearing.

[1:03:34] >> Correct.

[1:03:35] >> All right.

[1:03:36] Item number 33 was is a motion to

[1:03:39] authorize the city manager to dispose of

[1:03:41] the surplus

[1:03:42] K9 kennel

[1:03:44] and deposit any generated proceeds into

[1:03:46] the K9 fund for for future room for

[1:03:49] future use.

[1:03:51] I need a motion.

[1:03:52] >> So moved.

[1:03:53] >> Second.

[1:03:54] >> A motion and a second. Okay, Matt, do

[1:03:55] you want to cover that or

[1:03:59] questions?

[1:03:59] >> What's that kennel worth?

[1:04:01] >> We don't know.

[1:04:02] To be honest.

[1:04:03] >> Whatever somebody wants to pay.

[1:04:05] >> When we say when we say kennel

[1:04:08] I want to make it clear, too. Feel free

[1:04:09] to come up, Chief. I When we say kennel

[1:04:12] a lot of people's connotation of that

[1:04:14] word is going to be like a little 42 by

[1:04:16] 36 inch That That's not what I'm talking

[1:04:18] about. This is an actual building that's

[1:04:21] probably a 10 by 10 building that half

[1:04:23] of it is the kennel

[1:04:25] Half of it's the run. Right. So it's a

[1:04:27] it's sizable. That's the reason why

[1:04:29] we're asking for the city council to

[1:04:30] approve disposing of it.

[1:04:32] >> must be able to move pretty easy?

[1:04:33] >> It takes a flatbed truck. Yes.

[1:04:35] >> I I Looking back to when we purchased

[1:04:38] that, it was like around $4,800.

[1:04:41] And then you take that and then you take

[1:04:42] adding into heating and cooling into it.

[1:04:45] But like

[1:04:46] Matt said, ultimately the worth value is

[1:04:48] what someone's going to pay for it. It's

[1:04:49] you know, it's a used kennel or a used

[1:04:52] building now at this point that's had

[1:04:53] another animal in it. It's just a matter

[1:04:55] of if it's going to work for somebody

[1:04:56] else's property and the way that they

[1:04:58] have things set up to have that work for

[1:05:00] them.

[1:05:01] >> What height is it?

[1:05:02] >> I couldn't tell you. It's six I mean,

[1:05:04] you could walk inside of it.

[1:05:05] >> Yeah, it's it's a pretty big

[1:05:06] >> It's like a [clears throat] You can

[1:05:07] think of it like a garden shed.

[1:05:08] >> it be used as a shed?

[1:05:10] >> And they have to have forklifts. They

[1:05:11] have to have forklifts to lift it up on

[1:05:13] flatbed or to drag it off.

[1:05:15] Or or you can drag it off flatbed.

[1:05:19] >> Um the thought process here was if the

[1:05:21] council approves us disposing of the

[1:05:22] property, then we would list it on a

[1:05:23] site like um like we did with some of

[1:05:25] the parks and rec stuff. And then some

[1:05:27] of the street department.

[1:05:29] It was at a treatment plant and I know

[1:05:30] Brad and and Travis had talked about

[1:05:32] moving it to the street department to

[1:05:34] store it there.

[1:05:35] >> What?

[1:05:37] >> Is it still at the treatment plant? So,

[1:05:38] but the thought process was to move it

[1:05:40] to the streets department to get it out

[1:05:41] of the way of the construction projects.

[1:05:42] >> So, when the somebody brings a dog into

[1:05:44] the city, where's where them dogs going

[1:05:46] now?

[1:05:46] >> That's that's the city pound, which is

[1:05:48] the streets department. There's a bay of the streets department

[1:05:52] building that is what it operates as the

[1:05:54] city pound.

[1:05:55] >> It was constructed for that purpose and

[1:05:56] we have that.

[1:05:57] >> So, we'll still be doing that.

[1:05:58] >> And that's safe and everything else and

[1:05:59] we're up to code on that.

[1:06:00] >> This was only bought for housing the

[1:06:02] canine when we had the police canine.

[1:06:04] And it was actually at the officer's

[1:06:05] house when that was happening.

[1:06:08] Sir.

[1:06:09] >> Do you have a certain date

[1:06:11] that you're going to have it open until

[1:06:14] and then it goes to the highest bidder?

[1:06:16] That is how such a date

[1:06:17] >> That's how the auction would work, yes.

[1:06:19] We would function we it would function

[1:06:20] that way.

[1:06:21] >> Okay.

[1:06:22] >> Just for clarification.

[1:06:23] >> I can't remember the name of the company

[1:06:24] that we used when we did the

[1:06:26] Gov Deals?

[1:06:28] >> Yeah, could have been.

[1:06:28] >> Gov Deals I think is the is the website

[1:06:30] that we used when we did the stuff for the parks and rec department. So, we

[1:06:34] would use the same site to to house this

[1:06:35] one and do this auction.

[1:06:37] >> And you would be looking at that

[1:06:40] mid-September as a close date or

[1:06:42] something? Well, I mean what do you have

[1:06:44] in mind?

[1:06:44] >> Whenever we can get to it, depending on

[1:06:46] what the council tells us to do tonight.

[1:06:48] >> Okay.

[1:06:50] >> As soon as possible. I mean I'd want to

[1:06:51] get it done as soon as we can.

[1:06:53] >> Right.

[1:06:55] >> Thanks.

[1:06:55] >> Thank you, Chief.

[1:06:56] >> Okay, so further discussion with regard

[1:06:58] to this.

[1:07:00] Hearing none, roll call vote.

[1:07:01] >> O'Laughlin?

[1:07:02] >> Yes.

[1:07:03] >> Appleby?

[1:07:03] >> Yes.

[1:07:04] >> Weber?

[1:07:04] >> Yes.

[1:07:05] >> Anna?

[1:07:05] >> Yes.

[1:07:06] >> Moore?

[1:07:06] >> Yes.

[1:07:07] >> Gorsuch?

[1:07:07] >> Yes.

[1:07:08] >> It passes 6-0. Next, we move on item

[1:07:10] number 34.

[1:07:12] Need a motion to approve the commercial

[1:07:13] restoration rehab grant application with

[1:07:16] Wapsie Realty

[1:07:18] uh in the amount of $3,000

[1:07:21] 842.13

[1:07:23] cents.

[1:07:24] >> So moved.

[1:07:25] >> Second.

[1:07:26] >> Motion a second. Okay, so the the

[1:07:28] um

[1:07:30] as you recall, um

[1:07:32] Heather Federspiel had submitted

[1:07:34] this previously to us for the the brick

[1:07:37] work out for the brick work outside.

[1:07:39] Um that has not yet been done. The work

[1:07:42] has [clears throat] not yet been done.

[1:07:43] The um so we haven't paid for anything, we

[1:07:47] haven't done anything. So what she wants

[1:07:48] to do now is she wants to also replace

[1:07:50] the windows.

[1:07:53] Um and by um

[1:07:54] this is um

[1:07:56] I guess the first one is is many is many

[1:07:58] franks that we're that we're dealing

[1:08:00] with. So we're

[1:08:02] so what she's trying to do is um

[1:08:07] the question is is this a new one such

[1:08:09] that she can't do it or is this one that

[1:08:11] she's just is she's she's just um adding in a a second one. Um she's increasing the second one, which

[1:08:19] is still within the limits that we have.

[1:08:21] So So this isn't exceeding the limits of what we have for

[1:08:25] um the restoration funds. Uh rehab it's merely um

[1:08:30] adding something new to what was

[1:08:32] originally submitted. Does that Matt, is

[1:08:34] that

[1:08:36] >> It's basically piggybacking two

[1:08:38] storefronts on the same building. Two

[1:08:40] projects, right?

[1:08:41] >> There's two separate projects. This will

[1:08:43] be two separate applications for the

[1:08:45] same building. So in all you'd have four projects for lack of a better way

[1:08:50] of putting it with two pieces of

[1:08:51] property.

[1:08:52] What I would say is that I think when

[1:08:53] you read the the policy that's been put

[1:08:56] in place, the commercial rehab policy,

[1:08:58] it does state in there that they can

[1:08:59] only have one every 12 months, and I

[1:09:00] want to say

[1:09:02] then again but at the same time, this is

[1:09:04] the council's decision. The council can

[1:09:05] do what the council wants to do.

[1:09:07] >> Has she done two of them already?

[1:09:09] >> She applied for them, but they have not

[1:09:10] been paid. That's the mayor's point is

[1:09:12] that they have not been paid. She has

[1:09:13] not started the work. She's only applied

[1:09:15] and been approved for the first part of

[1:09:17] it. So, there's a lot There's a couple

[1:09:18] of other ways you can look at it.

[1:09:21] >> Sorry, do you know why she waited or

[1:09:24] >> Pardon me?

[1:09:24] >> I I don't know why she waited to do

[1:09:26] this. I don't know I mean I think when

[1:09:28] she initially was looking at it, she was

[1:09:29] looking at the exterior of the building

[1:09:30] and the the tuckpointing was the

[1:09:32] priority and then as she got into kind

[1:09:33] of looking at that further, decided that

[1:09:35] she should do the windows as well.

[1:09:37] It happens. I mean, you do a remodeling

[1:09:39] project and it grows. Every remodeling

[1:09:41] project I've ever done in my life has

[1:09:42] grown. So, I never It never is what I

[1:09:45] thought it would

[1:09:45] >> We want to look at nicer than the

[1:09:46] original one and then we're adding a new

[1:09:48] one.

[1:09:48] >> Right.

[1:09:49] >> Okay.

[1:09:49] >> Yeah. We're We're adding to the original

[1:09:51] one when we [music]

[1:09:52] >> But not today with our discussion, they

[1:09:54] said we had to have five properties to

[1:09:55] do that. Does that

[1:09:56] >> Oh, no. That's a whole different thing.

[1:09:57] This is the one that city runs.

[1:09:59] >> Okay.

[1:09:59] >> What you were thinking about was the

[1:10:00] community development block grant stuff

[1:10:02] that we did where we had the facades.

[1:10:04] That was a whole different thing. That

[1:10:05] had fed money in it and a whole bunch of

[1:10:07] different pieces to it. This is purely a

[1:10:10] city of Independence grant program.

[1:10:12] >> See, we can't do the like we did for the the

[1:10:16] restoration of all the ones up on the up

[1:10:18] on the

[1:10:19] >> From the second From Second Avenue to

[1:10:21] the east.

[1:10:21] >> Because Because right at Second Avenue

[1:10:23] is where the flood plane comes in.

[1:10:25] >> Right.

[1:10:25] >> So, we can't get a grant from the state

[1:10:27] or the federal or anybody else to do

[1:10:29] these. So, the only way we're ever going

[1:10:30] to get these fixed is if the homeowner

[1:10:32] does it themselves or if we get involved

[1:10:35] if the city does the the commercial

[1:10:37] restoration rehab grant, which we have

[1:10:39] the money available for.

[1:10:41] So, the question is, do you want to

[1:10:43] um

[1:10:44] approve this for the 38-42-13

[1:10:47] to allow her to do both?

[1:10:49] >> We're not out nothing and then she does

[1:10:51] it

[1:10:52] if we approve it.

[1:10:53] >> If it's within guidelines. Right. If she

[1:10:55] doesn't do it, we don't pay. her.

[1:10:56] >> Yeah, so.

[1:10:57] We want downtown to look nicer, so I'd

[1:10:59] make a motion that we approve it.

[1:11:01] >> I already have a motion.

[1:11:02] >> We already have a We already have the

[1:11:03] motion.

[1:11:05] Okay, so then

[1:11:05] >> I'm behind.

[1:11:07] >> Okay, so is there further discussion on

[1:11:08] this?

[1:11:10] Okay, then then this will be a roll call

[1:11:11] vote then.

[1:11:12] >> Appleby? Yes.

[1:11:13] >> Weber?

[1:11:14] >> Yes.

[1:11:14] >> Hanna?

[1:11:15] >> Yes.

[1:11:16] >> Moore?

[1:11:16] >> Yes.

[1:11:16] >> Fasbender?

[1:11:17] >> Yes.

[1:11:18] >> McLaughlin?

[1:11:18] >> Yes.

[1:11:19] >> That passes 6-0.

[1:11:21] Um item number 35 is the the second

[1:11:24] building. This one's the one at 121

[1:11:27] First

[1:11:28] East, which is um

[1:11:32] the Isn't it the the gymnasium one

[1:11:34] that's next door to the

[1:11:35] >> dance

[1:11:36] >> Yeah.

[1:11:37] >> dance gymnastics

[1:11:38] >> Yeah, the dance. Yeah.

[1:11:39] >> Okay, so did I get it Did I do the

[1:11:41] motion already?

[1:11:41] >> You don't have a motion.

[1:11:42] >> Okay.

[1:11:42] >> I'll make that motion we approve it.

[1:11:43] >> Second.

[1:11:46] » Okay, so

[1:11:47] >> Literally same situation as the other

[1:11:48] one.

[1:11:50] >> Except this is $5,000 and the other one

[1:11:52] was the 384213.

[1:11:54] >> Yeah, cuz it's the the

[1:11:56] one with the side limit of $5,000 kicks

[1:11:58] in because of the value of the work.

[1:12:03] » So is there further discussion regarding

[1:12:04] this one then?

[1:12:07] Hearing none, this will be a roll call

[1:12:08] vote also.

[1:12:09] >> Weber?

[1:12:10] >> Yes.

[1:12:10] >> Hanna?

[1:12:11] >> Yes.

[1:12:11] >> Moore?

[1:12:12] >> Yes.

[1:12:13] >> Fasbender?

[1:12:13] >> Yes.

[1:12:14] >> McLaughlin?

[1:12:14] >> Yes.

[1:12:15] >> Appleby?

[1:12:15] >> Yes.

[1:12:16] >> Passes 6-0. Next we move to reports on

[1:12:18] item number 36 is the um the police

[1:12:21] department monthly report. Does anybody

[1:12:23] have any questions regarding that

[1:12:25] report?

[1:12:29] Okay, hearing none um

[1:12:31] then we would move to item number 37,

[1:12:33] which is the fire department monthly

[1:12:35] report. Anybody have any questions

[1:12:36] regarding that report?

[1:12:41] Okay, hearing none, item number 38 then

[1:12:43] is the building department monthly

[1:12:44] report. Any questions

[1:12:45] regarding that report?

[1:12:49] Okay, hearing none, then item number 39

[1:12:51] is the ILPT report. Anybody have any

[1:12:53] questions regarding that?

[1:12:57] Okay, let's move to item number 40 then,

[1:12:59] which is council member council members.

[1:13:01] Brett, do you have something to start

[1:13:02] with?

[1:13:03] >> I have nothing there.

[1:13:04] >> Okay. Deb, is there anything else you

[1:13:06] have?

[1:13:06] >> The only thing I was going to ask was

[1:13:07] that lead summit meeting they're having

[1:13:09] out at the Heart of the Lakes on 21st

[1:13:11] and 22nd of October. Is that going to be

[1:13:13] a Zoom thing that we can zoom in on, do

[1:13:15] you know?

[1:13:16] >> I don't I don't know. We'll tell you

[1:13:18] tomorrow or yeah, or I can reach out to

[1:13:20] her on your behalf or whatever.

[1:13:21] >> No, I can do that. Okay, thank you.

[1:13:22] >> Okay.

[1:13:23] That's it.

[1:13:25] >> Uh

[1:13:25] nothing.

[1:13:27] >> Okay.

[1:13:28] Right.

[1:13:28] >> Nothing from me, Mayor.

[1:13:30] >> Like

[1:13:31] Thanks to the chamber for a nice golf

[1:13:33] outing. We enjoyed it. Uh we didn't do

[1:13:36] the best, but we had a lot of fun.

[1:13:38] >> Natural talent.

[1:13:39] >> have high expectations for you guys.

[1:13:41] >> Travis carried us.

[1:13:42] >> Yeah, he did. We'll just say that.

[1:13:43] Travis carried us.

[1:13:45] >> We're in flip-flops the whole time also.

[1:13:47] >> Of course, yeah.

[1:13:48] >> Listen.

[1:13:49] >> Uh yeah, I'd like to say that we had a a

[1:13:51] really big storm and as always the city

[1:13:55] is impressive with things that they do.

[1:13:58] And we prove it when things like a storm

[1:14:00] come along and knock down powerlines and

[1:14:02] trees all over the city. Out in full

[1:14:04] force, cleaned up, looked good.

[1:14:06] Residents came out, cleaned up their

[1:14:08] stuff. I got to say it's this is why

[1:14:11] this is the town is so great.

[1:14:12] And they prove it and these those

[1:14:15] wasn't great, but you know, and I feel

[1:14:17] bad for all the neighbors and

[1:14:19] a lot of

[1:14:20] places that still have to clean up and

[1:14:22] have damages done and lost their trees,

[1:14:24] of course, and

[1:14:26] storms and sheds and whatnot, but

[1:14:30] as a whole I'm impressive of the town

[1:14:32] and happy with the response.

[1:14:36] >> Okay, thanks.

[1:14:37] Um Matt.

[1:14:38] >> Um kind of what Councilwoman Apple we

[1:14:41] just talked about. Thank you to the

[1:14:42] crews who helped with the storm clean up

[1:14:44] Friday night. Um streets department,

[1:14:45] police department, fire department,

[1:14:47] parks and Recreation Department was hard

[1:14:49] at it this morning working on our parks,

[1:14:51] cleaning those up, River View and

[1:14:52] different areas. I O P T of course and

[1:14:54] all of the work that they did with their power lines and communication

[1:14:58] lines, all the different things that

[1:14:59] they did Friday night. Um, it's a lot of

[1:15:01] work but as Councilwoman Appleby talked

[1:15:03] about and

[1:15:04] I was out driving around with my wife

[1:15:06] Friday night after the storm after

[1:15:07] everything went through trying to just

[1:15:09] pull things off the road, make sure

[1:15:10] roads were open as I was able to and

[1:15:12] it was very impressive to see as soon as

[1:15:14] the rain stopped there was people out

[1:15:15] with chainsaws cleaning up. So, very

[1:15:18] impressive to see and and makes you proud to be from from Iowa

[1:15:22] when you see stuff like that happen.

[1:15:24] Um, related to the tree dump, Brad does

[1:15:26] have a plan for working through uh the

[1:15:30] excessive amounts of uh debris that we

[1:15:32] have there. Um, he's going to some of

[1:15:35] the stuff left will be relocated to the

[1:15:36] south side of the creek that's there and

[1:15:38] temporarily while we until we can get

[1:15:40] the grinding crews in to get things

[1:15:41] cleaned up. So, but uh he's well aware

[1:15:43] of that and they're doing a great job. I

[1:15:45] know they were out there, I think it was

[1:15:47] him actually that was out there Saturday

[1:15:48] and I think he was out there Sunday

[1:15:49] also.

[1:15:50] >> there Sunday too.

[1:15:51] >> Um, pushing trees up and trying to make

[1:15:52] sure that as residents are bringing

[1:15:54] things in that's pushed back so that

[1:15:56] they have a place to to dump things.

[1:15:57] >> And a lot of people appreciate that cuz

[1:15:58] they couldn't have got in there without

[1:15:59] him being out there.

[1:16:00] >> Yeah, I think if he wasn't out there it

[1:16:01] would be very hard for people to get in

[1:16:03] there and and dump stuff. So, to that

[1:16:05] end I would ask anybody that's watching

[1:16:07] to make sure that you dump the the

[1:16:08] smaller stuff on, you know, where it's

[1:16:09] supposed to. There's signs out there

[1:16:11] that indicate where you need to put

[1:16:12] things at. Um, try to follow those, it

[1:16:14] helps our guys stay on top of it.

[1:16:16] Um, we had a really good tour today with

[1:16:18] Cating Properties. Um, they looked at

[1:16:20] Independence for a possible future

[1:16:22] workforce housing project. Nothing was

[1:16:24] committed to or anything like that

[1:16:25] today. Obviously anything that happens

[1:16:27] like that the council would be involved

[1:16:29] in those decisions. Um,

[1:16:31] but Independence I felt like that it

[1:16:32] really showed very nicely to a potential

[1:16:35] company to come in and uh

[1:16:37] potentially develop some areas for

[1:16:39] workforce housing. Obviously with the

[1:16:40] amount of uh additional jobs that we

[1:16:42] have coming with Prease and with Gator

[1:16:43] and those different different companies

[1:16:45] that are expanding that we're really

[1:16:46] happy to see

[1:16:47] there is going to be a need for

[1:16:49] additional housing.

[1:16:50] >> Did you plan that schedule?

[1:16:52] >> I did. I

[1:16:53] >> Did a good job.

[1:16:53] >> did that agenda together. Thank you.

[1:16:55] >> Good to see the amount of things on that

[1:16:56] plan.

[1:16:57] >> We spent a lot of time driving We spent

[1:16:58] a fair amount of time I would say

[1:16:59] driving around looking at property that

[1:17:01] could potentially be developed as well

[1:17:03] as this afternoon we spent some time

[1:17:04] driving around looking at all the

[1:17:05] recreational facilities that we have.

[1:17:08] And if you've ever taken a moment and

[1:17:10] actually driven around and looking at

[1:17:11] everything for the city for a city our

[1:17:12] size we have a lot of of amenities in

[1:17:15] town.

[1:17:16] >> We do.

[1:17:16] >> So

[1:17:17] very very good to see.

[1:17:18] >> That's exactly what they were saying.

[1:17:20] How how impressive they were were with

[1:17:22] the town itself.

[1:17:24] Also the lunch the luncheon meeting that

[1:17:26] we had

[1:17:28] where we had people from Prease and we

[1:17:29] had people from

[1:17:31] um

[1:17:31] >> Gator both and they explained their plans. They explained how many

[1:17:35] potential new employees they're going to

[1:17:37] have. I mean it was and they did an

[1:17:39] excellent job and um

[1:17:42] school district did an excellent job as

[1:17:43] well. Wade talked about the the work

[1:17:45] that the hospital was doing and and the

[1:17:48] additional

[1:17:49] employees that were they were going to

[1:17:50] have there. I mean it

[1:17:52] from the sound of things I you know they

[1:17:53] can't put too many numbers on things but

[1:17:55] it sounds like there's a tremendous

[1:17:57] amount of new

[1:17:59] um

[1:18:00] employees that are going to be hired in

[1:18:01] the city within a relatively short time

[1:18:03] period and it's it's very impressive.

[1:18:05] >> There's a lot of growth happening and

[1:18:06] we're very happy to see that. So.

[1:18:08] >> And one one comment quite a few of them

[1:18:10] made

[1:18:11] was they can't believe how much

[1:18:13] Independence has to offer and all of our

[1:18:16] parks and all of our facilities for a

[1:18:19] town of this size. They said this seems

[1:18:22] you know couple of them made a comment

[1:18:23] they said it seems like a town of more 9

[1:18:25] or 10,000 with everything that you have

[1:18:27] here.

[1:18:29] Which is pretty impressive.

[1:18:32] >> I don't know if you would uh

[1:18:34] I forgot. I've had people calling me up

[1:18:36] and asking so is Independence not going

[1:18:38] to have a

[1:18:40] ambulance service anymore and I tried to

[1:18:41] explain to it so if you

[1:18:43] give a brief overview to the public that

[1:18:45] we're not going to suspend that

[1:18:46] ambulance service because

[1:18:48] >> I have one more thing before you do that

[1:18:49] though. I'm just that's okay. I just

[1:18:51] wanted to let the council know I'll be

[1:18:52] out of the office on Wednesday. I've got

[1:18:54] some personal appointments I've got to

[1:18:55] deal with so

[1:18:56] >> That's it.

[1:18:57] >> Yeah, when the when the voters voted to

[1:19:00] approve the proposition to allow the

[1:19:03] a county run

[1:19:05] ambulance service that is how that was um

[1:19:10] county then

[1:19:11] made arrangements to obtain a obtained a

[1:19:14] um

[1:19:15] one ambulance right now. They've got

[1:19:16] other ones. They got a director that's

[1:19:18] been hired. They've got um

[1:19:21] uh people that they're they're

[1:19:22] interviewing for positions. Um the current contract with AMR expires on

[1:19:28] October 31st

[1:19:29] and all all the information we have from

[1:19:32] the county is is that they will be fully

[1:19:33] up and running um handling the entire

[1:19:35] county uh effective November 1st.

[1:19:38] >> Thank you. That

[1:19:39] should put some minds at ease.

[1:19:43] >> Need a motion to adjourn then.

[1:19:44] >> So moved.

[1:19:45] >> Second.

[1:19:46] >> All in favor.

[1:19:46] >> Aye.

[1:19:47] >> Stands adjourned.

City Council Meeting

Transcript