[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.