[0:00] Please. Mayor Randy Burke here. Commissioner Ken Gaspar here.

[0:03] Commissioner Darren Indino here. Please rise as you're able for the pledge of

[0:06] allegiance. [clears throat]

[0:10] » I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[0:16] republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[0:23] justice for all. Okay, before we get to the approval

[0:29] agenda, there's a uh Mickey, take you want to amend the agenda.

[0:33] » I do. I want to amend the agenda. I've got some uh road improvement updates. Uh

[0:38] some I got last evening, yesterday evening. So, I want to bring council up

[0:43] to that and then just some other uh road improvement projects. So, like to amend

[0:48] the agenda to cover road improvement projects.

[0:52] » So, add item K. >> Yes.

[0:55] Do I have any motions to the amendment? >> I move that we add item K to discuss

[1:01] road improvements to the agenda. >> Second.

[1:04] » Call the role. >> Commissioner Darren Indina.

[1:08] » I. >> Mayor Randy Burke.

[1:09] » Yes. >> Commissioner Ken Gaspar. [clears throat]

[1:10] » I move that we approve the agenda.

[1:14] » Second. >> Call the role.

[1:17] » Commissioner Darren Andina. >> Hi.

[1:19] » Commissioner Ken Gaspar. >> I.

[1:21] » Mayor Randy Burke. I [snorts] Oh, I said I

[1:26] Okay, let's move on to regular business. Uh we're we're going to vote on two

[1:30] things today. Reading consideration of bill number 9203. Staff.

[1:35] » Yes, this was uh we talked about this in the work session last month and then at

[1:40] our regular council meeting, the wrong special use permit was placed in the

[1:44] packet. So, this is the corrected [snorts] uh resolution. This deals with

[1:50] the seating at Great Davees on Broadway and the placing of tables. Um council

[1:56] was given photos. This is the area that it will go into and um this is u AI

[2:05] generated but this is the concept that great Daves is is looking at. So, uh,

[2:12] the packet's been corrected [clears throat] and, um, staff has, uh,

[2:16] is recommending that we, uh, approve the special use permit.

[2:20] » Have any motions on the bill 9203? >> Do we approve bill number 9203?

[2:27] » No second. >> Okay. Any [clears throat] discussion? I

[2:30] think we've already been through all this before.

[2:33] » So, it's just a we're correcting error that we would have voted on on the last

[2:37] city council meeting. >> Okay. Call the roll. Mayor Randy Burke.

[2:41] » Yes. >> Commissioner Ken Gaspar.

[2:42] » Hi. >> Commissioner Darren Nina.

[2:44] » Hi. >> All right. Reading and consideration of

[2:48] bill number 9204. Staff. >> Yes. This past weekend, uh, council

[2:52] approved the open container for the smoke and sound. Uh, we didn't have any

[2:57] issues related to open container. Um, council had said that, uh, there may be

[3:04] future events that we'd need to come back and and look at that. There is one

[3:08] this weekend that would like to be considered for open container. I've

[3:12] changed this from a special use permit to a special event permit. Uh the reason

[3:18] for that is this is a one-time event and it would um allow for uh open containers

[3:25] to be permitted. Um Brier House would be serving. closure of the streets would be

[3:32] from Broadway North to um Bond Street. And actually, I think they're going to

[3:38] close it at the alleyway there, but uh we're This says Bond. Um the time frame

[3:44] of this would be 5:30 to 8:30. Uh same procedures that we saw at Smoke and

[3:49] Sound. There would be a special cup and then uh with wristbands contained in

[3:54] that block party area. Um this is a cancer awareness event. They're going to

[3:59] have uh block party kind of style out there

[4:03] with music, cornhole, some other games. And so it's just a permit to allow open

[4:09] containers. >> Do business

[4:13] » Okay. Which I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Me, too. Do businesses who require the

[4:17] request of this permit have to have a permit [snorts] in place to be viewed?

[4:21] Is it like it has to have a >> Yeah, I I print off a hard copy permit

[4:27] and uh they have to have it on display or available. It doesn't have to be on

[4:30] display, but it has to be available for >> to show.

[4:34] » Thank you. >> Okay. Related to this uh is we just did

[4:38] this down [clears throat] event. Uh it's important we capture

[4:43] those lessons learned. From what I can tell, it would went pretty well. I

[4:46] appreciate the police presence down there. Okay. Um, don't bring your M

[4:51] wraps down here. Okay. Don't scare the folks away. Uh, so it's when are we

[4:57] going to capture those lessons learned >> that is or is we've already had a

[5:02] meeting. >> Okay. So, we've already had a meeting.

[5:04] We capture lessons learned. Uh, and we it's going to it should help us in

[5:09] future events. But I would tell you from everything that I've heard and seen, I

[5:13] appreciate the emails from you uh Dave Compton. uh from everything I've seen it

[5:18] w it was done very well. Okay. So my appreciation to uh to the public safety

[5:24] folks uh for putting that together. They comp put put a great plan together for

[5:28] that. So I think we can this event based on the experience is relatively low

[5:34] risk. [clears throat]

[5:36] Any other comments before we entertain motions?

[5:42] » I'll move that we approve bill number 9204. Second. Call the role.

[5:46] » Mayor Randy Burke. >> Yes.

[5:48] » Commissioner Ken uh Ken Gasmar, excuse me.

[5:50] » Hi. >> Commissioner Darren Indina.

[5:52] » Hi. [clears throat]

[5:55] » Okay. Presentation and discussion. Monet Main Street facade grants presented by

[6:00] Monet Main Street. >> Yeah.

[6:01] » Bob, you want to come join us at the table here?

[6:05] » Bob Burgerer is here to represent Monet Main Street. Uh this was a request that

[6:09] we received from Monet Main Street. And the letter that Bob sent is in the

[6:14] packet. Yeah, just briefly, I have my uh hat on as Main Street's vice president,

[6:19] and the city has uh has given us $25,000 uh for uh it's been designated for grant

[6:27] matching and I want to give you just a very quick update. Uh we have hired a

[6:32] grant uh writer uh Borealis Consulting does has been doing some work for Aurora

[6:39] um Aurora's downtown program and uh she has uh she helped us put together we had

[6:46] a $1,000 grant for our flower pots. Uh they're working on a farmers market uh

[6:53] grant right now as well as uh exploring some arts grants with some of the stuff

[6:59] that Nikki is doing in murals. And that work is being coordinated by Cassie

[7:04] Branch and Scott Thrasher. Uh we do want to uh to tell the city that we're using

[7:09] our own operating funds to pay the grant writer. We're not using any of this

[7:14] 25,000 because that was set up to be used as uh grant matching funds. What we

[7:20] would like to ask the board's permission for is um like Ken, you're aware in the

[7:26] past we've had facade grants for years and years. 2012 we started that. Since

[7:31] 2012 to now, we've had eight of those facade matching grants. Typically, we

[7:37] ask someone down in in the uh the Broadway footprint to spend money first,

[7:45] have permission for the grant, and once the project is complete and inspected,

[7:50] they are paid a matching grant. In the past, those have been dollar fordoll for

[7:55] uh firsttime uh people that applied for it. And as we started to get repeat

[8:01] people interested in it, we had $1 for every $2 spent. Excuse me. So, what we

[8:06] would like, we haven't done this for a number of years because we had the silo

[8:10] hanging over our head. We had the dog bark hanging over our head. What we'd

[8:14] like to do is ask the the council's approval to use up to $10,000 of that

[8:20] $25,000 uh for a 2026 facade grant program. And

[8:25] you have, I think you have in your packet the the type of cover letter that

[8:31] goes out to the community uh telling them what it is. And and and

[8:36] we've highlighted the main street intends towards several matching grants

[8:41] up to $2,000 for exterior repairs and or improvements to enhance the social,

[8:47] cultural, and environmental well-being of historic downtown Monet. Essentially,

[8:51] that's the outside of your building. that that's the drive by that you see.

[8:55] We've extended that in the past sometimes to roof work as well.

[9:00] » Can you give me an example right now that's down there just so I kind of get

[9:04] in my head what it kind of looks like. >> What a example facade. So you said it's

[9:10] been a while since you've done it. Do we have a facade in place?

[9:13] » Um that >> Yeah. Um good question. just roughly

[9:20] we've spent over $50,000 of matching grants over over this number of years.

[9:25] Um the

[9:28] » I think I think an example of the past was [clears throat] one of the property

[9:31] owners added an awning to their building and so the cost of that awning let let's

[9:36] use just use example round numbers was $4,000. They paid the $4,000 and they

[9:41] would receive the $2,000 reimbursement >> from Main Street. So it could be

[9:45] painting, it could be windows, could be >> All right. But it sounds like it's also

[9:49] it's also say the awning. It is also consistent with the horse historical

[9:53] aspect of downtown. >> That's correct. Uh we've done a lot of

[9:56] painting like uh Randle Mazery and Randall's building down there. There's

[10:01] been a facade grant on that for some of the paint work that's been done.

[10:05] Um, uh,

[10:09] HHR, uh, the the 400 block building. There's

[10:13] been a facade grant on on on that corner right now where the bookstore is. This

[10:17] is a number of years ago. There's Okay. There's one down there.

[10:21] » Uh, the the front of what's now Great Davees that that's had some work done on

[10:26] it over the years as well, too. So, >> all right. So, and and again, there's an

[10:32] application. The application has to be approved in writing and the money has to

[10:38] be spent by the owner. Re receipts, a reasonable amount of receipts shown,

[10:43] inspected by a member of Mon at Main Street. And and then there's a dollar

[10:47] for-doll matching for firsttime users. Uh one uh a dollar for every two spent

[10:52] for repeats. We try to encourage we try to encourage first-time users

[10:58] » for up to 2,000. the maximum that we would the matching portion would be

[11:03] $2,000 maximum per project. So we would have roughly five projects. And what

[11:09] what happens if you if you look at the history, people ask for a grant, then

[11:14] they don't spend quite as much. So the match is not so much. We we had

[11:18] basically $68,000 worth of grants awarded. We we paid out 53.

[11:24] [clears throat] Sometimes people are a little

[11:26] optimistic, their project's approved, and they don't go ahead with it. We try

[11:30] to ask that this be done in six months. >> Thank you.

[11:34] » Right now, we we hope to with your approval, we'll we'll put this out and

[11:39] try to make awards in the month of October.

[11:43] » Sounds like the facade's going to go a long way with inexpensively to improving

[11:47] the uh appearance. >> It encourages first of all investment by

[11:51] the property owner. they have skin skin in the game

[11:55] » and it's the drive by appeal that that's the the things we're looking for.

[11:59] » Okay. And that's probably what uh when we did the windshield tour that was

[12:04] probably one of those things. >> Mhm.

[12:06] » Okay. So it would be consistent what we with the windshield tour that we had

[12:11] folks from out of town. U the staff took them around. Uh so it's consistent with

[12:16] that. >> Yeah. And and that's our specific

[12:19] approach. But al also I I want to tell the council we do appreciate the 25,000

[12:24] and we're actively working on other types of of matching grants using that

[12:29] that money. >> Good. I like that. Good.

[12:33] » Any other questions? >> Commissioners, anything?

[12:37] » I'll just say that [clears throat] thank you for the update. that fact that

[12:41] you are uh pursuing a grant writer uh because coming into this meeting I I was

[12:48] not in favor of the request because I felt that the those dollars would be

[12:52] better spent for the long term of obtaining grants [clears throat] that

[12:56] would have a bigger impact. Um but if you are pursuing that then um the the

[13:02] the facade grant program I think is a is a great one. It does provide that

[13:05] incentive. it does put skin in the game for those property owners to be able to

[13:09] improve the properties that that we have in on Broadway. So, um, no, I I thank

[13:16] you for the update and and >> I do want to repeat because we thought

[13:20] it was important. We're not spending that money to pay the grant writer. We

[13:23] use our own operating funds to pay the grant writer.

[13:26] » Yeah. To me, the dollars are funible, right? It's it's what if you're using

[13:30] the the the dollars from the 25,000 aotment from the city to pay the grant

[13:36] writer or using operating funds to pay the facade grants to me it's six one

[13:40] half dozen the other but um >> is there a possibility I'm sorry is

[13:44] there a possibility there'll be unspent funds of the 10,000

[13:49] » that we unspent >> yeah that you won't use it all

[13:52] » uh there's 10 yeah there's a good possibility like we will approve four or

[13:56] five projects and there's always somebody that goes, I didn't have the

[13:59] money to start. You didn't have the money to start. You don't get you don't

[14:03] get any matching or or they don't spend as much is

[14:06] » that's the key. >> It's not it's not a blanket. You approve

[14:10] 2,000, >> you know, pay me 2,000. We ask to see a

[14:14] reasonable amount of receipts. >> Thank you.

[14:16] » Okay. >> It's always been me in the past. I I've

[14:19] inspected all the projects. So, there's a [clears throat] process to

[14:23] this because we have an agreement in place with the $25,000 that will have to

[14:28] be amended. Uh that'll have to go to council October 8th. If if council wants

[14:34] to pursue this, if you're in favor of pursuing uh the what we're discussing

[14:39] today, that would be reviewed by the city attorney and you all would just

[14:43] vote to amend that agreement to allow this to take place because the facade

[14:49] that the agreement was was [clears throat] based on grant writing.

[14:52] » Yeah, I agree with that. And so, let me ask this. Is it as simple as

[14:58] you just making an accounting adjustment? Is the $25,000 in a separate

[15:02] » checking account? >> It is.

[15:04] » It's not mixed funds. >> I think for this to be clean though,

[15:07] it's we got to go back to council and have their approval.

[15:11] » No, I understand. I'm I'm just saying is it a situation? Could it be an

[15:14] accounting entry where instead of the grant writer being paid from your

[15:19] operating funds? >> No, [snorts] never mind. I just answered

[15:24] my own question. Yeah, >> yeah. Well, I think the experience with

[15:28] uh putting the roof on the the silo, we looked at $60,000 and we're able to 27.

[15:34] So, what that tells me is that this is a responsible partnership that minimizes

[15:39] the impact on the taxpayers and this would be something that we continue on.

[15:43] So, >> could they could they

[15:45] » and there were other expenses. It was a $42,000

[15:49] » over overall Yeah. expenses. >> Yeah. Thanks for correcting me. I was on

[15:52] a roll there. >> Yeah. I I just want to make sure. Or

[15:55] could they could could Monet Main Street reimburse the operating account from the

[16:01] I'll always say the grant account if they pay the grant writer already

[16:07] using operating funds >> which is not a significant expense but I

[16:11] can't tell you how much yet? [clears throat and cough]

[16:13] » I understand. Um but could could the grant fund reimburse the operating fund

[16:20] for the grant writing expense? Not according to the agreement that you all

[16:24] passed. >> Well, because it was grant writing.

[16:27] » Yeah, that's what I was saying. It's it's restricted. But what they've done

[16:30] is they place it in an account and they haven't touched it.

[16:34] » Mhm. >> Based on the agreement that they signed.

[16:36] So, we have to amend the agreement before we start moving funds around. And

[16:42] Yeah. >> Okay. Any objections for putting this a

[16:46] resolution on the 8th October council meeting first reading? No,

[16:51] [clears throat] it's this will be a resolution.

[16:55] » I have no objections. >> No, no objections. Sorry.

[16:58] » Okay, then we'll put it on the agenda for 8

[17:02] October agenda. >> Would would you like us to withhold

[17:07] uh the request for applications until this this next activity?

[17:12] » Yes. >> Okay.

[17:13] » Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah, unless we find or something

[17:17] like that. Unless there's >> uh but it's it's conditional. We don't

[17:21] find any snags legal and we update the agenda. Uh it sounds like it's it's a

[17:26] go. >> Okay.

[17:27] » All right. >> Thank you.

[17:36] » All right. The next item, open burning ordinance staff.

[17:42] » I think the supplemental >> Oh, I'm sorry. We missed one

[17:45] supplemental agreement for Chapel Drive presented by own engineering. So Skip is

[17:50] here to represent the city and then we have several representatives from own.

[17:54] So we'll let you stay there. I don't know who needs to go first.

[18:00] » I cannot live. My bad.

[18:05] » Good morning everybody. We appreciate you guys uh giving us some time to talk

[18:09] about this. Um, as you all know, there's a large project on Gap Drive that's

[18:14] about to go underway hopefully here by the end of the year. Um, own um,

[18:19] formerly Anderson Engineering has been working on this project since about

[18:22] 2021. Um, and we are requesting for a

[18:26] supplemental agreement and our construction engineering service fees.

[18:31] Um, those fees were derived prior around the conception of the

[18:37] project in 2021. Um over the last 5 years um the project has increased in

[18:43] scope. There's been a lot of moving parts. Um and we've been working with

[18:47] the city over the last few years to make sure we get this to an appropriate place

[18:51] where you guys can you know make a safer crossing over the railroad there and um

[18:57] um the city with help from BNSF to get grants to help fund for the construction

[19:02] of the project. Um in the initial contract um the way we had set it up was

[19:08] you know an edi educated guess on what it would take to encompass all the

[19:12] inspection responsibilities as the years have gone on and with the project

[19:17] becoming more and more complex. Um there's a lot of moving parts that are

[19:20] going to be going on out there. There's a railroad, there's all the utilities,

[19:24] [clears throat] there's roadway improvements, um a large bridge, um all

[19:28] the above. And what we have done over the last few months is really taken a

[19:35] holistic approach in looking at what we think the total cost would be for us to

[19:41] make sure the project moves smoothly and gets constructed to our plans and

[19:45] specifications and make sure the city has um a great project at the end of

[19:50] everything. Um in the handouts that we've provided, we have some resumes of

[19:55] our core team that will be involved with it. In addition, um there's the

[20:00] supplemental agreement with feed proposal at the back that kind of breaks

[20:04] down our hours on our estimates. We've estimated the project is going to take

[20:08] about 15 months. So that's what our hours are based on. Um and with all

[20:15] that, um we essentially broke it down into four phases. We have construction

[20:21] admin, which is all the administrative side of things. um reviewing payrolls,

[20:27] um supplement or not supplementals, subcontractor, um some certified

[20:32] payrolls, um all the submitts and uh making sure we have reimbursements and

[20:38] everything set out that you guys can send to the Federal Rail Administration

[20:43] to make sure you guys get um reimbursed for your cost um that they have

[20:49] committed to you guys. Um the second phase is the general construction

[20:53] inspection services. Uh we've estimated about 30 hours a week of being on site

[20:58] to overview construction and critical tasks to make sure things are, you know,

[21:03] in the right place and they're following all the rules.

[21:07] Third item is survey and staking. There we have that as a quality assurance for

[21:12] contractors survey and staking to make sure it conforms with the plans, make

[21:15] sure everything aligns with where it's supposed to be. And then the last item

[21:19] is material testing. We're going to do all the tests inhouse and in the top

[21:24] there's a list of what our anticipated expenses for those tests are. Um the

[21:29] number of tests is subject to change depending on the situation and um what

[21:34] we see is fit for you know at the time. Um this is all just a general estimate

[21:41] conforming with mod standards on what we would need to provide to make sure that

[21:47] we are assuring that the the materials and the the products are where they need

[21:52] to be. So, in total, our original construction engineering contract amount

[21:59] was for $369,100, and we're asking for a $455,950

[22:05] supplemental, >> not to exceed.

[22:09] » Not to exceed. >> It's a It's a Is it cost plus?

[22:14] » Yes, cost plus. >> So, it's it's one of those where

[22:19] you you get build for the services we provide. It's not a that's a gold

[22:23] number. So So the if I look right the the inspection

[22:29] hours nearly tripled. >> So what what did you miss badly the

[22:34] first time then? >> So I think the the initial project when

[22:39] we set it up was very minimal critical inspection. Um just a lot of times on

[22:47] these bridge projects, LPA, local public agencies, it's

[22:52] a lot of it is we're out there for a handful of times to, you know, check

[22:56] driving piles, check concrete, check rebar, and we're in and out. with this

[23:01] um and with Sprinkle Associates um stepping away from a lot of the

[23:05] day-to-day stuff, we feel like we will need to be more present on the

[23:10] day-to-day stuff, making sure we have diaries and logs of what's going on. So,

[23:14] that increases our time rather than a typical, you know, 10% of the time out

[23:19] there. We're going to be out there 80 90% just to make sure things are going

[23:24] smoothly. >> Where's your inspection staff coming out

[23:27] of? Um the majority of it will be coming out of our Carthage office. Um which is

[23:32] just a short hop, skip, and a jump. Um and then our material testing will be

[23:36] coming out of Springfield. Okay. and talking with Kevin, um he kind of

[23:43] intends to monitor the hours and and the work and and you know, if he feels like

[23:49] there's maybe they don't need to be there, he intends to kind of watch over

[23:55] that is kind of the the talk I had with him.

[23:58] » All right. I guess what I'm trying to understand, you've been you all have

[24:01] been working on this project for a while, right?

[24:03] » Yes. Okay. So, why are these costs unforeseeable? I you know I kind of kind

[24:10] of understand but help me someone help me understand why for so there's a

[24:16] couple components with that first is initial concept is never perfect um I

[24:22] think the extense and the complexity of the projects has grown over time there's

[24:28] a lot more utility coordination that was involved there's a lot more moving parts

[24:34] there's widenings of roadways all the new driveways for all the new facilities

[24:39] that will be constructed along Chapel Drive and dealing with a lot of those

[24:43] aspects of just the >> so we're doing we're doing driveway you

[24:47] know along Chapel Drive >> the extents of the project is from

[24:51] business 60 to enterprise >> rightway

[24:56] » okay and then some of this is Kevin was subcontracted to do quite a bit of work

[25:02] on this and that has been pulled out Kevin no longer um is is doing that.

[25:08] That's they're calculating all that amount in now that for what they have to

[25:13] do. >> So is there I'm assuming net savings

[25:15] then. So the expense that would have been paid to Kevin is just now being

[25:19] transferred to own. >> Not necessary.

[25:22] » Not necessarily. >> Not necessarily.

[25:23] » No, it's quite a bit more. >> Yes.

[25:26] » Well, I get that. But there [clears throat] won't be an additional

[25:29] expense being paid to sprinkle Associates, right? other than just what

[25:33] we're paying him as city engineers for you know

[25:35] » for other projects [clears throat] >> and you know he he will probably have

[25:39] some quality assurance on this project >> I don't think he plans to be as involved

[25:43] as it initially was planned he just general oversight now um less than what

[25:49] he was planning >> do we know what that delta is at all or

[25:53] » I don't know off the top >> I I yeah it's probably an unfair

[25:56] question but >> and then talking with Kevin I mean he

[25:59] feels like this is kind of like absolute worst case scenario numbers that they're

[26:06] shooting high so they don't have to come back for another supplemental at some

[26:11] point. >> I mean the the intention is that this is

[26:17] » um break the glass kind of [clears throat]

[26:20] » I understand that language. Yeah. >> Well, I guess the question I have to

[26:25] [clears throat] ask and and I don't know if you guys have the answer but Okay.

[26:28] So, we just put out a bid and, you know, we're moving forward with the project.

[26:33] Now, we have to spend another $455,000. [clears throat]

[26:37] What is it? What what's out there in the future that's going to cause the the

[26:41] increase this? Now, remember, I used to work in shipyards. I [clears throat]

[26:44] dealt with with construction before. I understand there there is there is some

[26:49] unforeseeables, but this right here, I I I'm trying to look

[26:55] for some kind of certainty the car the costs aren't going to go up.

[26:59] Well, there's there's always the possibility of change orders in

[27:02] construction. So, >> I understand that.

[27:04] » We can't Yeah. Guarantee that. >> But that's something we can't foresee,

[27:07] » right? No. >> Okay. You can't foresee that. And looks

[27:11] like something's happened here. And this first time I'm hearing of it that we're

[27:17] we we've got to change gears and pay more engineering costs.

[27:22] » Yeah. I think it comes down to what I'm seeing is it's a whole lot more robust

[27:28] inspection than what was initially set up.

[27:31] » Yeah. Is that driven what's that what's driving all those increases?

[27:34] » Anything that you take over the railroad there's there's uh restrictions and

[27:41] inches can matter cuz if you don't have enough clearance then you we got to make

[27:46] sure everything's inspected right the first time. Am [clears throat] I saying

[27:51] that correctly or in a Yeah. Okay. >> And again, this is worst case scenario

[27:57] like they've got to be there every bit of these hours and that will will not

[28:00] should not be the case. But there will be days out there where maybe somebody

[28:05] runs down, they're here for an hour, gets what's going on, heads back. You

[28:08] know, they don't have to sit there and watch them put dirt in all day. Yeah.

[28:15] » [clears throat] >> How does this fall within our

[28:18] say budgeted reserves? >> I mean, we should I'm looking at Sandra.

[28:29] » Well, it's going to strain it, but >> we discussed it with the city engineer

[28:34] and we feel like >> Oh, what I'm saying is our reserves

[28:37] cover it. >> Yeah,

[28:38] » our reserves will be fine. >> Okay.

[28:40] And we're still, you know, collecting off the use tax for this project as

[28:44] well, >> right?

[28:45] » On completion, right? >> It will have an impact on the next

[28:49] project we're looking at the connector roads between 37 and

[28:53] » it could. Yeah. I mean, >> may delay that.

[28:56] » Yeah. >> Not prevent it, but delay.

[28:59] » Does that project come out to use tax as well?

[29:01] » No. >> No, it does not.

[29:03] » It can't. It should just be a separate project on

[29:07] its own. All right. Now, we're not going to have

[29:11] See, since we're not putting a bridge there, we're just putting a road, we're

[29:14] not going to have the same sort of inspection criteria, I'm assuming.

[29:19] » Not to this level. >> A lot less complicated.

[29:21] » Yeah. No railroad. [laughter] >> Okay. So, it ensures we do it right the

[29:25] first time. >> Yes.

[29:28] » Hopefully, this is our last overpass for the city of Monafar

[29:34] » unless we really have expansions. Okay, neutron float. Let's go. Yeah.

[29:42] » Okay. Well, I'm not happy about this, but uh do we have any other options?

[29:48] » Other funding sources? Is there any other grants?

[29:51] » Not if we want to get that grant money. >> Yeah.

[29:53] » Yeah, I think you're right. [clears throat]

[29:56] » Okay. So, this will be presented to council at the October regular council

[30:00] meeting for approval. >> Okay. Uh, let's Is it a resolution

[30:06] or I think it's a contract? It's an ordinance. Correct.

[30:09] » Yeah. But we may be able to go back to the original ordinance that we passed. I

[30:13] need to clarify that with legal. >> Okay. But we will vote on something.

[30:17] » Yes. >> Uh on AD

[30:20] would either be a first reading or resolution.

[30:23] » Correct. And uh even if it's an ordinance or if it's an ordinance not

[30:28] even it but if it's an ordinance on a double reading

[30:32] » no I don't have an objection to be an ordinance

[30:34] » but I still like to have more time to review the situation. Uh that's

[30:38] certainly that that's certainly uh available to you.

[30:41] » And and while we've got them in the room, does council want representatives

[30:45] from Owns there they even >> for further questions?

[30:50] » I think so. The public may have some questions.

[30:54] We'll need to have a good idea. >> All right.

[31:01] » And I think Kevin Sprinkle is planning on being at that meeting as well. Good

[31:05] idea. >> Yeah.

[31:08] All right. Any questions, discussion from the council?

[31:13] » All right. Thank you all very much.

[31:20] » Kevin,

[31:26] all located across the street from city hall.

[31:30] » This group who is >> Sam the lady right there.

[31:33] » The young lady. >> Sam.

[31:35] » Mhm. Okay, Samantha. >> Thank you.

[31:38] » All right. Thank you.

[31:47] » Okay. Now, let's go to discussion of open burning ordinance.

[31:51] » Chief Pennington. >> Yeah.

[31:55] » Mayor, commissioners, city ministers, thank you for having me again.

[32:00] » Uh, this has been a um a hot topic. Uh, >> [laughter]

[32:05] » Um, we've had some reach out from citizens. I know the mayor sat in on a

[32:10] few of these meetings on bird ordinance. I'm going to pass out the ordinance that

[32:14] we have now. Um, if you read it, it doesn't really make sense to fire,

[32:20] police, or the citizens we have here. Um,

[32:27] it's basically telling our citizens that they can burn trash from 6:00 a.m. to

[32:32] 10:00 a.m. uh between the months of May, June, July, August, and September. Uh,

[32:39] it's very confusing. I've had people reach out. I know Murray's had people

[32:43] reach out to him on Facebook. I think we need to do away with this

[32:48] city ordinance. I know that I have put in place for discussion for a new city

[32:54] ordinance for you members to discuss. Um, basically I took

[33:02] this new city ordinance that for discussion. I reached out to other

[33:07] departments around us that are sisters agencies and basically put this

[33:13] together. I know uh talking to the citizens over

[33:19] email, over telephone calls, over the events that they see me at, uh there's

[33:23] six items that they they would like to see changed. Uh and those six items are

[33:28] here on your new uh city ordinance. Um basically, you know, uh I took this new

[33:38] city ordinance. I ran it through uh Chief Camp as well. uh his officers are

[33:42] having a hard time hard time uh writing citations

[33:48] because they don't really have anything that's black and white. Is that correct?

[33:52] » That's correct. >> So, um it's kind of hard to write, you

[33:57] know, somebody illegal burning when you know you're telling them that they can

[34:02] » they can right >> in in the in the old city ordinance. So,

[34:05] my recommendation is to do away with this city ordinance that we have and put

[34:10] this new one into place once you guys review it with legal and yourselves

[34:15] cuz there's only two places that have a burn ordinance. That's the solid waste

[34:21] one. And then in the fire department ordinance,

[34:24] uh it's highlighted is um weeds houses

[34:31] and all that. So, yep. Right there.

[34:38] And uh any questions that you uh have for me?

[34:43] Um permits and requests to burn should be something that um people come to the

[34:49] city for. So, we are alerted that there's going to be a burn

[34:54] on property instead of just free burning at any given time in any given minute.

[34:57] So, anything that is over a 3x3x two, um, they would have to fill out a

[35:06] burn permit. Talking to other agencies around me that are my size of my

[35:11] department, my city, >> it's it's a free permit.

[35:16] » Okay. >> All it is is like somebody like Mike

[35:19] Derves here that sets up a website form that they can fill out online. uh it

[35:25] kicks it to my email or Chief Still Wagon's email so the inspector can go

[35:30] out and make sure they're within the the city ordinance.

[35:34] » Who's the inspector? >> Uh Chief Still Wagon.

[35:37] » Okay. So, we have one person doing all of this

[35:40] » or we can designate somebody an officer. >> Generally, it was someone to be able to

[35:44] apply consistently. >> Correct.

[35:48] » And I see we've got a fee schedule on here which the other one doesn't. Is

[35:51] that correct? >> That's correct.

[35:57] talking to other agencies as well and other citizens. Uh we don't have like

[36:03] number six, we don't have anything in our ordinance that says we have to abide

[36:08] by the Missouri Department of Natural Resource. So like Amazon when they were

[36:13] clearing that lot, you know, or Skippy Coler over here on Myrtle, you know,

[36:18] this is where this kind of dived from and it just seems like it needs to be

[36:23] put at the top of the list. >> Yeah.

[36:26] » Yeah. Because [clears throat] in our existing code, excuse me, when it's

[36:29] defining trash, [clears throat] excuse me, it lists out many specific

[36:34] items, but in there's also the word garbage, which that's very loosely

[36:39] defined as well. And and you know, it doesn't say in it that you're not able

[36:43] to to burn plastics or, you know, styrofoams or anything like that that

[36:48] might have toxic fumes emit from them. >> Correct. And, you know, after the April

[36:52] 29th storm that we had come through, >> Mhm. You had citizens going around

[36:56] cleaning up their yard debris. Well, in the old city ordinance said they're not

[37:00] allowed to do that. >> Yeah.

[37:02] » It says that they can't do tree trimmings tree trimmings or anything

[37:05] like that or brush. >> Yeah.

[37:10] » If they do burn plastic or styrofoam like Commissioner Gasp talking about, is

[37:15] that public safety issue? that is a public safety issue and then therefore

[37:19] we can get uh our our police department involved where they can write citations

[37:24] if need be. >> Yeah.

[37:26] » Okay. Do we mention things like that in here? I'm not seeing.

[37:29] » Yes, sir. >> Where is it?

[37:31] » It's underneath uh >> He's on this one, I think.

[37:35] » Yes, that's what I was looking for. It's underneath uh number one.

[37:39] » Yeah, I thought I see

[37:44] number one and number two. mayor. >> Okay.

[37:49] » Basically telling you what you can and can't burn.

[37:52] » And this >> and number three. Number three.

[37:54] » This might be nitpicky on my part, but >> we we say in in the in the proposed

[38:01] um code [clears throat] that a pile must not be larger than 3 feet in diameter or

[38:07] 2 feet in height. Do we want to specify singular per

[38:13] property owner? meaning that they don't have 15 piles of

[38:19] » property. So, that was brought up. >> Okay.

[38:21] » If they have a large pile, can they break it up in the individual? Well, I'm

[38:25] okay with that as long as it's a small pile.

[38:27] » Cuz it's more controlled. >> Yes, it's more controlled.

[38:29] » Yeah. >> Okay.

[38:31] » Uh because Danny Bond's really good at doing that when he does land clearing

[38:34] [laughter] because DNR says you have to have so

[38:37] many cubic feet. Well, he's pretty good at splitting that up so it's

[38:40] uncontrolled environment. Plus, he has mach machinery there to to assist with

[38:44] this, >> right? Okay.

[38:46] » All right. This is something new that we haven't done before, right?

[38:48] » That's correct, sir. >> Okay. So, how are we going to roll it

[38:51] out? We don't have to answer that question here. I mean, that may be one,

[38:55] but what you don't want is to put a new ordinance on the sentence and go out

[38:59] there and start having them $500 fines. >> Correct.

[39:02] » So, is there a warning system? And I guess it's a a question for you for

[39:08] either >> between the first reading and the second

[39:11] reading. We could do a campaign that says this is coming. The council's had

[39:16] one reading that it will go before council and and there will be a um a

[39:22] time for public to speak to it at >> Okay. But at the second reading this is

[39:26] in effect. >> Yeah.

[39:27] » Yeah. 10 days after. >> And going back to the warning mayor,

[39:32] usually it's the second revisit the property the second time.

[39:36] » What I propose based on the finalized ordinance is we'll defer to the fire the

[39:42] highest ranking fire official and if they say that this is beyond way beyond

[39:46] the scope then we'll some issue if not then we'll do an educational campaign

[39:51] with a warning. >> Yeah. Very smart.

[39:53] » So between the first reading and passage there would actually be 40 days.

[40:00] » Okay. So that would give us time to get warning if necessary.

[40:05] » That's correct. >> Am I understanding this correctly that

[40:08] what you had handed here the section 205.120

[40:11] with the fee listed that's existing code.

[40:14] » That's existing code. >> Yeah. So there's no change. We're just

[40:17] going to enforce differently. >> Mhm. So the one the two things that I

[40:22] would recommend taking out is the one that's highlighted

[40:25] » and then the the the one right here. >> Correct. and just make one city

[40:30] ordinance so people can follow. >> Right.

[40:33] » All the rest of this remains. >> Correct.

[40:36] » And correct me if I'm wrong, it's been a while since my firefighting days, but uh

[40:41] the diameter and the and the height you can put out with a portable

[40:45] extinguisher. Correct. >> Correct. And we list in here what things

[40:48] they need to have on site for a fire. Um, and the reason why we went 3 by3 by

[40:54] two is because that's your regular fire pit that you would buy at

[40:59] Walmart, >> which I appreciate that all that

[41:02] language being in there as well as far as propane.

[41:04] » And I didn't come up with that. That's just what the sister agencies use. So,

[41:07] » that's great. >> If it's working, you know why

[41:10] » I I have a question that's related. When we do a burn ban like we did this

[41:14] summer, looks like we're probably going to do it next summer as well. Uh, do we

[41:18] have problems with people doing fires? >> So, our biggest issue that we have found

[41:24] out, uh, we've had maybe four or five contacts since the burn ban, which is

[41:29] still in effect for now, um, is the language barrier. Uh, I think I talked

[41:34] to Mike about this. We're going to have to come up with something uh, that has

[41:39] the different languages that we have inside the city. So, I don't know if

[41:43] Mike you can reach out or find out what kind of language we have in this city uh

[41:47] and can put that out because >> 26.

[41:49] » Yeah. >> 30 26. [laughter]

[41:53] » I mean that that's the only thing that we have uh come in contact with. Other

[41:58] than that, it's been >> it's folks who burn who don't understand

[42:02] what a burn. >> Yes, sir.

[42:03] » Because of the language error. Is that correct?

[42:05] » Yes, sir. >> And the other thing also I'm glad you

[42:07] brought that up, Mayor. The other thing is is there's nothing in place of the

[42:11] old city ordinances that says the fire chief can place a burn ban. So in the

[42:16] new one, it says the fire chief may issue a burn ban within the city of

[42:21] Monet. >> Are burn bans issued by the county?

[42:24] » No. Uh well, it can be >> they can be

[42:27] » county commissioners, >> but we this gives us the option to do

[42:30] one inside Monet. Correct. >> That's correct.

[42:33] » All right. >> Interesting.

[42:35] » Does the public have alternatives to burning? Like can they pay a fee and

[42:38] have their trash dispersed and picked up by the city at this time for a fee? That

[42:43] would be a Dave D question. >> Yeah,

[42:45] » I get that. But >> it is out there. That's the point.

[42:48] » It's free. >> Well,

[42:50] » okay. >> First of all collection,

[42:55] » but monitoring Facebook, getting my phone calls, my emails, people coming to

[42:59] me at these events, uh, they just want black and white. Fire wants black and

[43:04] white. Yeah, PD needs black and white. So this is I think going to be perfect.

[43:09] » Yeah, the existing code is extremely ambiguous.

[43:13] » Very gray. >> I did not realize it was on

[43:16] » and I believe the mayor, commissioners, Mickey's even mentioned this before.

[43:20] There's things that that are in the city ordinance that shouldn't be in city

[43:22] ordinance. >> Um there's things that have been here

[43:25] since 96, 1920, you know, that don't really need to be in there.

[43:30] » 1920s. Really? >> Yeah. I've got some city ordinances in

[43:33] here that's been established since 1920. >> Yeah, we're still getting over World War

[43:38] I. Okay. So,

[43:42] that's all I have. You got any more questions?

[43:45] » And I think it's an improvement, but communication to the public is going to

[43:49] be key here. >> So, we'll plan a first reading on

[43:53] October. >> What else do you need from it?

[43:57] » Any objections from this? No.

[44:02] » We'll be with the city attorney and clean this all up.

[44:05] » Yeah. Okay. >> You need that.

[44:06] » I got >> All right. Thank you for your time.

[44:09] » All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Chief.

[44:10] » This proposal is to repeal two section.

[44:14] » Yes. >> Yes.

[44:16] » Okay.

[44:19] » All right. Thank you, Chief. >> You're welcome.

[44:21] » All right. Uh, next item is proposal for sanitary

[44:26] sewer extensions [clears throat] along Highway 3. Staff, this is Skip.

[44:39] This is a proposal for uh Kevin and I were working on um with the new

[44:45] connector road going in. Uh this would do the design work and everything for a

[44:50] new sewer connection up for the potential fire station, getting it

[44:54] across the road. And at the same time, while we're getting it all done, we

[44:58] would go ahead and get the engineering, get everything set up to go for the the

[45:01] piece that is part of the agreement with Pete with extending sewer uh to the west

[45:07] um from the Methodist property across the highway.

[45:10] » Who's Keith? >> Pete.

[45:12] » Pete. Okay, I know Pete. Thank you.

[45:19] » So, it's a pretty simple one. Yeah. >> Okay.

[45:22] » Yeah. Ba basically just getting the work done now and getting it out of the way

[45:26] so once the connector road's done we're not digging back across it to put a

[45:29] sewer line in. >> Okay.

[45:32] » Staff did uh discuss a portion of this funding uh could be covered by the use

[45:39] tax because it's public safety. It's for future development of fire station 3.

[45:45] And we know that the agreement, the land agreement is if it doesn't become a fire

[45:49] station, it goes back to the current land owner. So I think we have enough um

[45:57] documentation to say this is for public safety.

[46:01] » That's relatively low cost. >> Yeah. [snorts]

[46:05] » For just for the engineering. Yeah. >> So this is So we're looking at a

[46:09] resolution. >> I think we can do this by resolution on

[46:13] October 8th. Okay. Any objections from the uh

[46:18] commissioners? >> Nope.

[46:20] » Okay. So, look at it once.

[46:23] » Thank you.

[46:29] » Okay. Item G, clarifications and changes to section 400.065

[46:34] Monet Core Conservation District. Staff.

[46:42] » Good morning. Uh so the Monet Core Conservation the

[46:48] MCC district this is a uh a district if you if the there is a map in the packet.

[46:54] This is roughly a district that was uh talked about and discussed extensively

[46:59] with the planning and zoning commission um and is currently in effect. The

[47:02] legislation was passed a few months ago. Roughly this is from Sycamore Street in

[47:06] Honeysuckle South, 13th Street in Kyler to the west, US Highway 60 north, and

[47:12] Eisenhower Street to the east. Um, in that original legislation was provision

[47:18] for you, you're all familiar with the legacy lot overlay. Uh that overlay

[47:22] district was intended to allow for smaller lot frontages specifically

[47:27] without needing variances uh to allow that as a permitted and to permitted use

[47:33] and to turn those lots into permitted conforming uh lots. That was originally

[47:38] placed in this legislation, but it was removed. And there is uh some discussion

[47:42] there's been some discussion with other developers that it would be a good idea

[47:46] to extend those lot frontage um uh conditions of the LLO to the B1 and B2

[47:55] zoning classification that was contained in the Monet Core Conservation District.

[47:59] » Fresh my memor on B1 and B2. >> B1 is the lowest tier of multifamily

[48:04] zoning in the MCCD. that is one principal structure per lot and very low

[48:10] uh very low um lot area size limits per dwelling per square footage of of

[48:18] dwelling unit. It also has significant height restrictions. It limits all those

[48:21] structures to one story or less >> conservation.

[48:25] » Exactly. Uh as as you mentioned, Mr. [music] mayor. The idea being that um

[48:30] the whole point of this legislation was to preserve the single family character

[48:34] of the homes and the neighborhoods that are in that district. Uh the B2 was a

[48:38] slightly larger or a more dense classification. B2 allowed for multiple

[48:45] multifamily structures. For instance, more than one duplex on a lot that would

[48:50] qualify. still same height restrictions, but the idea being that with this

[48:54] change, which would change it to 30 feet of frontage of lot frontage that would

[49:00] be allowed within this district. Um, that is the principal change that we're

[49:04] asking for and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

[49:12] » My question just been reviewed by uh planning and zoning.

[49:17] just recently discussed and planning and zoning did uh make a recommendation to

[49:21] approve these changes to this legislation.

[49:23] » Okay. So that's an if there's no objections October 8th. Okay.

[49:31] » All right. Next item proposed replat for lot one of the hy manor subdivision.

[49:37] » Yes. So um this is the location where the seven brew is going on US60. Um,

[49:42] SevenBrew has asked or petitioned my office to subdivide this lot into two.

[49:48] Uh, basically you would have the seven brew which would be on the lefthand lot

[49:53] and the subdivide it effectively cut it right down the middle and then they

[49:57] intend to u sell andor use the lot next door for further potential development.

[50:03] Um, effectively uh as you know our minor subdivision process there are several

[50:08] restrictions. uh their request does not run a foul of any of our minor

[50:12] subdivision exclusions or restrictions. Uh this is a costneutral proposal to the

[50:18] city. Um and it is the recommendation of the community development department to

[50:22] allow um this minor subdivision and it will be on the agenda next month

[50:28] » recommended by planning and zoning. >> Uh yes.

[50:32] » What cannot be allowed to go in that right hand portion of the um

[50:36] » actually set on the right side of this image. Correct.

[50:40] » North. >> I'm sorry. You are correct. Yes. Thank

[50:42] you. Uh, yes, they are on the right side. The left side would be the empty

[50:47] lot. >> Thank you.

[50:48] » You bet. >> Um, your to your question, Darren. Yes,

[50:52] sir. >> So, the zoning for this, I believe, is

[50:55] commercial. Um, so effectively any and all commercial uses as currently listed

[51:02] under our permitted uses in the zoning CL in the zoning code uh would be

[51:06] allowed on that lot to include all of those uses, but obviously uh the large

[51:11] number of uses that are surrounding that area. All on the north and south side of

[51:15] 7 Brew are pretty much retail retail commercial uses. Thank you.

[51:21] » Okay. I see you have parking spaces. Is that

[51:25] what those lines are? No, no, those are those are for the movie theater behind

[51:29] it. [laughter] >> Yeah, that's Yeah, movie theater and

[51:32] then uh got plaza. >> Okay. Any any objections from uh the

[51:40] commissioner? >> No.

[51:41] » Any objections to a first and second reading?

[51:47] » Okay. first and second reading uh on 8th

[51:51] October.

[51:56] [clears throat] Okay, moving on. Removal of section

[51:59] 405.060 from Mo City of Monat code staff. Yes.

[52:05] Uh it was brought to the attention of the community development department

[52:09] from city council that there is a provision in our code 405.060 060 which

[52:15] allows the planning and zoning commission to issue variances. Um that

[52:20] is uh in opposition to state statute. Um it was the advice of council that that

[52:26] provision be removed from the code. Um obviously the only statutory body in

[52:32] Missouri that can actually issue variances is a board of adjustment. Um

[52:36] long story short, we believe that to be an artifact of the code, but it is

[52:40] advised by council that that be removed. Um, and that's it. It it was uh

[52:45] discussed at the planning and zoning commission earlier this month and it was

[52:49] recommended that it be removed by it can only be removed by the city council. Uh,

[52:53] but this would be on the agenda for next month as well to remove that artifact

[52:57] from the code. >> Legal council has uh recommended a

[53:01] double reading on this because it is >> going against state statute.

[53:06] » Yep. >> Yeah. And I'm assuming that

[53:08] [clears throat] language in the in the the governing documents of the board of

[53:12] adjustment has the same or better language. Uh yes, at the so there is a a

[53:18] whole section of the code which covers the formation and the running of the

[53:22] board of adjustment. Um it is considerably lengthier than this. The

[53:26] main principle though that I'm getting at is that it is the planning and zoning

[53:29] commission has a power statutory power in our code to do something that they

[53:34] are not allowed to do by state. >> No, I understand that. Yeah, I'm just

[53:36] making sure that this language was also covered in the court of adjustments

[53:40] language. >> Yeah.

[53:42] » Okay. >> And this in no way takes away from

[53:48] future variances at all. I mean, you'll have another body.

[53:53] » We have a board of adjustment. It is actually uh it has uh enough members to

[53:57] meet a quorum and that is the board that's required by state law to they're

[54:01] the only ones that are allowed by state law to issue variances or to consider

[54:05] appeals. >> But we're not losing the ability.

[54:08] » Nope. >> Okay.

[54:11] » No, it's just the final judication has got to go to a court. If the board

[54:15] adjustments, votes it down, they can they have to go to circuit court.

[54:19] Correct. uh the appeals after the judicial if if

[54:24] there goes to a judicial matter yet. >> Okay.

[54:28] » All right. Any questions? >> Any any objections to first and second

[54:34] reading? >> I don't have any.

[54:36] » Yep. I think we need to get this done. All right. First and second reading next

[54:40] uh city council meeting.

[54:44] All right. Next item is uh discussion of updating city bond amounts.

[54:50] our new city clerk is going to take the lead on this one.

[54:54] » So, it uh came to my attention as part of me [clears throat] beginning the new

[54:58] role as city clerk that I need to be bonded per state law. And um it also

[55:04] came to attention that we do not have an ordinance that sets the amount of the

[55:09] bond specifically even though by ordinance we are required to have a set

[55:13] amount. Um I was not able to locate the last amount that we was passed by

[55:18] ordinance and it does specifically say that from time to time the council you

[55:23] can decide what this amount should be within uh reason we'll say I reached out

[55:28] to an insurance provider to start this whole process and that kind of was what

[55:32] led to this. Um her recommendations were that they're typically either $10,000 or

[55:37] $25,000 amounts. Um, it is up to you all to decide what that amount is and it is

[55:44] highly recommended that you pass this because we cannot get our bonds without

[55:48] that amount. >> That's a lower amount than I was

[55:51] expecting. >> I would recommend um so both of us need

[55:55] to be bonded which >> not bonded either.

[55:58] » I have not been bonded since I've been here and so I would recommend the

[56:02] 25,000. That's that's pretty standard of where I've been at.

[56:06] » Okay. So, chief, if you arrest, we got $25,000 or we can get him out of jail

[56:12] with. Is that what this is for? >> Not not exactly what

[56:17] » there's a bone, right? >> It is.

[56:19] » Yes. >> So, so if he makes make mistake, there's

[56:24] what? Some liability relief there. >> Hence my thinking that that amount is a

[56:30] very small amount. >> Yeah.

[56:31] » Yeah. >> Well, I I agree. [clears throat]

[56:34] Certainly, we don't want to do 10. The 25,000 is seems like the norm and I

[56:38] think we got to start with that. >> And I I'll say again, council, this is

[56:45] of urgency. So I know we don't like to do double readings, but this really

[56:50] needs to be a double reading. >> It's a risk we don't need.

[56:53] » Yeah. >> All right. Uh so any objections to first

[56:57] and second reading next uh city council meeting?

[57:03] If I may, are we we're deciding on the 25,000 amount?

[57:06] » Yes. >> Yes.

[57:07] » That'll be in the ordinance. >> Yes.

[57:09] » Yeah. >> And so they'll vote on it that night.

[57:12] Yeah. >> Yeah. They're giving us directive. Thank

[57:15] you.

[57:19] » Okay. Next item. Uh this road improvement [clears throat] plans. Go.

[57:23] » Yes. So, uh, our city engineer met, uh, with council in August and walked you

[57:28] through a pricing spreadsheet, um, and we had, um, looked at a couple

[57:35] of projects that we want to move forward on. We found out, um, yesterday that

[57:41] we're ready to do the Broadway project. So, that's really what I want to focus

[57:46] on first. The Broadway project is a piggyback project

[57:52] which will allow for cost savings with Blevens Asphalt who has the contract for

[57:58] the Highway 60 MDOT improvement project from uh 37 and 60. They've gone west

[58:05] moving west and so they they have this they have that project but if we piggy

[58:10] back off that there's a there's a cost savings to the city. It's also super

[58:15] paved, which is really good asphalt. >> And this is

[58:21] what's the extent of this project physically?

[58:24] » Um, resurfacing >> on the east. It's from the east side of

[58:28] first street all the way to 13th and

[58:33] significant improvement. >> Is it just a resurface or milling fill?

[58:37] » Milling fill. >> Okay.

[58:40] » I see that now. [clears throat] So, some of the the millenfill

[58:46] um city engineer wanted me to make sure

[58:50] that people are aware the depth of the millingfill will be based on there's

[58:56] there's bricks underneath some of Broadway, so we don't want to disturb

[59:00] those. Uh the project is estimated to be $350,000.

[59:07] that will include um the mill and fill striping, road closures,

[59:15] everything associated with it. >> The original project was looking at some

[59:19] of the side streets. We're we're now only going curb to [clears throat] curb

[59:24] down Broadway in what is shown on the map.

[59:30] So, this is a two-phase um project

[59:34] to be covered in four days. They would like to start the project

[59:39] Monday, October 5th, and conclude by Thursday, October 8th.

[59:48] » I think it was initially supposed to be at night, but Vicki, they moved it

[59:51] daytime now. >> That's correct.

[59:53] » Yeah. >> Daytime save money.

[59:56] » Yeah. From my understand didn't want to do it at night.

[1:00:00] » Yeah. We originally asked that you do it over weekend. That was not acceptable.

[1:00:06] So this is a Monday through Thursday. So uh with it this is a budgeted project

[1:00:14] but um so we don't need to have approval because it's within the budget. There

[1:00:19] are a couple of things that we want to make adjustments to to the the budget.

[1:00:24] One is the um road improvement at Jeremy and Kyler.

[1:00:30] Um, talking with the city engineer, that project was to be a mill and fill

[1:00:36] based on a piggyback just like we're doing here. However, there's a dip in in

[1:00:43] Jeremy, I think it is. >> Oh, Jerome Lane.

[1:00:44] » Jerome Jerome. Sorry, I got the wrong >> There's a massive dip. Yeah.

[1:00:48] » Okay. Jerome Lane. Um, but what we'd like to do is go ahead and fix the dip

[1:00:56] before we do the the millonfill because according to our city engineer, if we

[1:01:01] just do the milling field, we're going to have the same problem as 100%.

[1:01:05] » Yeah. >> So, we're going to revamp that project.

[1:01:10] He's working on that. He's not able to be here today, but he's working on that

[1:01:13] project. >> It's possible as you fill that dip, it

[1:01:17] solves the problem. Yeah. trying to smooth the road up enough

[1:01:20] » on the surface. >> Yeah.

[1:01:21] » Is it not undermining underneath? He >> But but I'm talking about you fill he

[1:01:26] fix the D. >> He's talked about

[1:01:29] » base rock addition concrete across there. Yeah.

[1:01:33] » Got it. Okay. >> Concrete overlay.

[1:01:36] » Um we did have a cost savings at Cleveland and 9inth. MDOT covered that.

[1:01:44] We didn't think that was in their scope of work, but they included it. So that

[1:01:48] project's completed. Um, so we just wanted to update you on

[1:01:53] that because this will start. I I wanted to make it public knowledge because we

[1:01:58] need to begin to notify businesses. >> Uh, Mike has a a a plan put in place to

[1:02:07] notify businesses that that road will be closed. Public safety needs to know that

[1:02:12] that road have road closure. People will still have access to Front Street and

[1:02:18] they can still go through Bruner's and then Chief they'll have to make a Uturn

[1:02:24] after they go through Bruner's drive-thru. So they're going to be going

[1:02:27] a wrong way on a oneway >> as a temporary.

[1:02:31] » Absolutely. >> Um

[1:02:32] » and they're still open to foot traffic. >> Yes. Yeah. Foot traffic. All the side

[1:02:36] streets because we're not doing work on the side streets. The side streets will

[1:02:39] be closed. Uh they can pull up to a side street and do any they can still be

[1:02:44] patrons to any of the businesses along Broadway.

[1:02:47] » Yeah. Municipal parking behind the chamber.

[1:02:49] » Correct. >> By roies.

[1:02:51] » Correct. >> Are we going to close down Broadway

[1:02:54] completely in any point? >> Yes.

[1:02:56] » Yeah. During this 4 day per section will be closed. Yeah.

[1:03:01] » Okay. >> So it brings me to the the parking lot

[1:03:03] at the old Monet [clears throat] Times building that was deeded over to the

[1:03:06] Monet Main Street. Have Have we received that deed back?

[1:03:11] Not to my knowledge. I'll have to check on

[1:03:13] » Okay. Yeah, we need to get that deed back and I think we need to to discuss

[1:03:17] repairing. >> Actually, I need to check on that. I'm

[1:03:20] not sure it was ever sent off. I think we may still hold that.

[1:03:23] » Oh, okay. >> I just

[1:03:25] » So then you probably need to pencil that in. I'm not with any time frame, but

[1:03:29] just put it back on the list to get that repaired.

[1:03:33] » Okay. I I don't have any questions. It's a It's a small duration project. Yes.

[1:03:39] » So, but it'll be it won't be a long time for inconvenience for folks downtown.

[1:03:44] » Correct. >> Save us money. They're already down

[1:03:46] there. Why not pay you back home? >> Okay.

[1:03:49] » One of the bigger impacts are going to be on

[1:03:52] I think like a Sherman Williams or Dollar General down there. Well, I'd say

[1:03:56] Sherman Williams. Dollar General has access from 9inth Street.

[1:04:00] » Yeah. >> All right. We'll see.

[1:04:01] » Yeah. We'll notify all those buildings or those businesses.

[1:04:04] » So, we're going to start the notification process now.

[1:04:07] » Yes. Okay. Yeah. Uh the other item that is a road

[1:04:12] improvement that council had asked me to check with John Bachelor. He's he's the

[1:04:17] design person for the intersection at Broadway and Central. We had asked John

[1:04:24] to join this meeting today. He was unavailable. We've asked him to join the

[1:04:28] October meeting. He's unavailable. So, we're going to wait till November to

[1:04:34] even really it's it's not going to he still has to do some other work. So, the

[1:04:39] November is not going to really he's going to have more information in

[1:04:43] November than he does today. I'll say it that way.

[1:04:46] » And just for this Senate section you said right there,

[1:04:49] » Broadway and Central. >> Mhm. Yeah.

[1:04:51] » Yeah. We're still, you know, we had the focus group. They've completed their

[1:04:55] work. There were 11 options out of that. They narrowed it down to six. Council's

[1:05:00] narrowed that down to three. We just need to revisit. And John has a a

[1:05:06] timeline that we need to get back on. He's still pursuing the timeline. He's

[1:05:11] gathering information. Those are the two items that I had to

[1:05:15] amend the agenda. >> So, going back to the Jerome Lane, is

[1:05:18] there a time frame on that one yet? So now if we can get it if we can get the

[1:05:24] dip fixed this year then we would put it back in for next year's

[1:05:29] » okay >> to the for the milling

[1:05:31] » because that impacts those businesses heavily traffic

[1:05:35] » but we don't have a time frame of when we're going to repair that.

[1:05:38] » We're going to try and do it in this year's budget.

[1:05:39] » Okay. Very good. >> May I ask a question?

[1:05:45] » Um on Jerome um Ken >> Yep. is is I mean I've been over the dip

[1:05:51] is is the pro I mean if they fix the dip and and concrete that does the road

[1:05:55] still need to be overlaid in >> I don't think so. No I I think with the

[1:06:00] regular chip and seal schedule would would be fine. It's just that my my

[1:06:05] concern is in talking to Dave Dunn some time ago it seems like that's probably

[1:06:10] sewer related. >> Yeah. And so that that's my concern is

[1:06:13] that is there going to be any uh compromising of the sewer line that's

[1:06:19] there with continued traffic. I mean I I drive that every

[1:06:23] day, multiple times a day, and I I don't even straddle that area, I am far on the

[1:06:28] right, and when there's a truck there forcing me to go through that area. I'm

[1:06:34] saying some words under my breath. >> It was just a question. I know with

[1:06:37] budget being tight, it was just a >> I I get it. I just every day I look at

[1:06:41] it and I I just I mean thankfully it has not

[1:06:45] » Yeah. >> has not uh been undermined. So

[1:06:48] » yeah, we've got another spot I think on dairy that is a constant spot. Yeah.

[1:06:53] » Yeah. Okay. So this is for information and

[1:06:58] doesn't sound like any objectives to your plan,

[1:07:00] » right? So, okay. Just wanted you to be aware because we are going to get

[1:07:04] comments about closing down Broadway for 4 days,

[1:07:08] » but it's two sections, two days, and then two days. So,

[1:07:13] » I think we're doing I think the plan is we're doing everything to prevent

[1:07:17] individuals from >> Okay. All right. Let's see.

[1:07:22] [clears throat] Informational see council comments. Commissioners,

[1:07:28] » I don't have any council comments. I do. I have one item. Um it's going to

[1:07:32] involve Chief Camp, I think. Um, at our last board of education meeting, uh,

[1:07:40] uh, Shay Snodgrass, who's an SRO, talked about the impact of ebikes, uh, kids

[1:07:46] riding ebikes at the middle school and high school campuses and, um, the

[1:07:54] narrow or near misses of accidents occurring because the the issue. Okay.

[1:08:00] So, MODOT put the sign on Cleveland to cause traffic to slow down. Um,

[1:08:09] not all motorists are obeying that that traffic sign.

[1:08:14] It was a MDOT approved sign, yellow flashing lights. There was a discussion

[1:08:19] of maybe red and blue lights would be more visible and more alerting to

[1:08:23] motorists. Uh, but that that was declined by MDOT. So, we have to to we

[1:08:28] have to stay with the the yellow lights. And please jump in if I'm misstating

[1:08:32] that. Um, but there there are there are kids I I'll say kids and under under 15

[1:08:41] years old um that are riding ebikes throughout the city, but more

[1:08:47] concentrated than the middle school, high school.

[1:08:49] » Is that illegal? >> Campus?

[1:08:51] » No, it's legal. >> Yeah, it's legal. But um that's the

[1:08:55] question is is what what might be able to be done? What what should be done? Is

[1:09:02] it is it more of an education to to parents to to students? Uh because the

[1:09:08] the concern is growing as the volume the number of students with ebikes is

[1:09:13] growing. I drove up from city hall yesterday up Fifth Street and there was

[1:09:18] a youngster on an ebike at cuz they'll go up to 20 miles per hour. So,

[1:09:25] [clears throat and cough] >> I'll let you speak to it and then I'll

[1:09:27] speak to it from Sister C's perspective. >> Um I'm not super educated on the ebikes.

[1:09:33] The issues that we've had in the past is that um there's different

[1:09:37] classifications. >> Yeah. And some of them require each

[1:09:41] classification allows a little bit more. >> The manufacturers of these bikes do not

[1:09:46] stamp them with the classification. So unless you have the box that it came in,

[1:09:50] it's pretty hard to determine what you can from an enforcement standpoint what

[1:09:54] you can and cannot do. >> Right.

[1:09:56] » Um and Vicki probably touched on this here in a second, but there are cities

[1:10:00] who have enacted legislation to further restrict the use of ebikes. I think we

[1:10:07] would fully support that. It's been oh the last three years now that they've

[1:10:12] become exceedingly popular and I think they will continue to be

[1:10:15] » the restriction would be under a certain age.

[1:10:18] » Well potentially yeah regardless of classification

[1:10:22] » correct >> um

[1:10:22] » okay >> but [clears throat] see what others have

[1:10:26] done have been vetted and so on and so forth.

[1:10:27] » Yeah and that's the only reason why I raise it is just to get the conversation

[1:10:30] started. I don't have any recommendations at this point. This is a

[1:10:35] hot topic among city administrators because um SIMCOG just did a study, a

[1:10:41] crash study. I asked about ebikes at that crash study and they said, "Well,

[1:10:46] they don't categorize them in any category." So, they're not a motorcycle.

[1:10:51] They're not they're just a bicycle. Um so, most of the cities are passing

[1:10:57] ordinances to restrict it off sidewalks, certain areas, those kinds of things.

[1:11:02] What I would recommend to council is let chief and I work on some data points and

[1:11:08] we'll bring it back to council in the October meeting. We can get some sample

[1:11:13] ordinances. He can work with his colleagues, see what they're doing in

[1:11:17] their cities. Uh it is an issue. We've got uh several groups that collectively

[1:11:24] ride around town. Sometimes they're on the sidewalks. Uh sometimes they're not.

[1:11:29] Uh there's a group that rides from u the center center of the city all the way

[1:11:35] out to South Park um multiple times. >> I've seen them on the golf course.

[1:11:40] » Yes. >> So I think the ebikes is something we

[1:11:44] need to address and kind of get ahead of it. But if you'll allow Chief Camp and I

[1:11:49] to work through >> Absolutely. And that that's what I told

[1:11:52] officer Snodgrass um was that that I would raise it here so that we could do

[1:11:57] something [clears throat] with with that matter.

[1:12:01] » He had some really good materials that he shared with me that talked about the

[1:12:05] classifications of of the bikes and such.

[1:12:07] » It's a month long enough to have that discussion. So [clears throat and cough]

[1:12:09] at the next work session >> yeah I think we can at least gather

[1:12:13] information and then start the dial. >> So at least discussion we can ask more

[1:12:17] questions. >> Yes.

[1:12:18] » Okay. Yeah, that I I mean I think that so let's put that on the next work

[1:12:22] session. >> Okay. Thank you. That's all I have.

[1:12:26] » Commissioner Deina, >> I have nothing. No, sir.

[1:12:29] » Um the charter commission. I have been talking with citizens about the charter

[1:12:34] commission. So I'm bling the page. Uh what people are confused about is they

[1:12:40] think this charter commission is our next council, all 13 of them. So when if

[1:12:46] we're a commission form of government and then we're electing charter

[1:12:50] commissioners, you can see how that may be confusing. So what I would like to

[1:12:54] do, and Mike and I have already talked about this, you and I have not,

[1:12:58] [clears throat] is refer to it in our public as a

[1:13:01] charter committee with the understanding so everyone understands, we set it out

[1:13:06] there, but the when you start talking about commissioners and okay, is it

[1:13:10] these guys? Okay, we're electing more commissioners. Let's refer to it as a

[1:13:14] committee with one task and one task only. I think that probably be a better

[1:13:19] way to communicate it. Uh and uh see we we've got a meeting tonight on that.

[1:13:26] Correct. >> This afternoon at 2:00.

[1:13:28] » This afternoon. >> That's the last uh scheduled charter.

[1:13:33] » 2:00. >> Yeah.

[1:13:34] » Okay. Uh KY3, when are they going to run the interview?

[1:13:38] » They did this morning. Yeah. >> So the So that's already gonna Okay,

[1:13:41] good. All right. I don't Nice work with

[1:13:46] everyone. I like the staff work, working together, working as teams. It's paying

[1:13:50] dividends. I don't have anything else. So,

[1:13:56] » umformational items. >> Me, Andrew, Doug, uh Tessa Bunch.

[1:14:02] That's it. >> Okay. Next regular city council meeting

[1:14:06] is Thursday, October 8th. We we're already building a pretty sizable agenda

[1:14:10] for that one right here at the city annex. And the our next work session

[1:14:16] will be Thursday, October 22nd at 9:30 a.m. here in this room. I have a motion

[1:14:21] to go into close session. My motion we go into close session. Uh we'll convene

[1:14:25] in close session pursuing section 6.0.021.

[1:14:29] Um in attendance, please. Um Doug Poss Tessa, who's not in the room, she

[1:14:34] » she'll be here at 11:00. >> Okay. and our city clerk and our city

[1:14:37] administrator. >> And I would just ask that um because of

[1:14:41] the technology that we need for this room that we would hold close session in

[1:14:47] here. Any of the public that wants to stay or staff if you'll use the small

[1:14:51] conference room. >> Second call roll.

[1:14:57] » Mayor Renburg. >> Yes.

[1:14:58] » Commissioner Gina. Hi. >> Commissioner Ken Gaspar. Hi. All right.

September 24, 2026 City Council Work Session

Transcript