[0:00] is Monday, August 17th, 2026.
[0:03] >> We start with the invocation uh with
[0:05] roll call.
[0:06] >> Okay.
[0:07] >> According to the agenda.
[0:08] >> Okay.
[0:09] >> Sword
[0:10] >> here.
[0:11] >> Almond
[0:12] >> here.
[0:12] >> Heler
[0:13] >> here.
[0:13] >> Rost
[0:14] >> here.
[0:14] >> Hson
[0:14] >> here.
[0:15] >> Homeberg
[0:15] >> here.
[0:16] >> Ibrahim
[0:16] >> here.
[0:17] >> Okay. Next is [clears throat] the
[0:18] invocation from Gateway Church of the
[0:20] Nazarene.
[0:25] » Pray.
[0:26] >> Lord, we thank you for who you are. We
[0:27] thank you for this incredibly beautiful
[0:29] day in August. And God, as we approach
[0:32] uh the end of summer and the uh the the
[0:35] consistent schedule of school being back
[0:38] in session, Lord, I just pray that you
[0:40] would um bring blessing and favor to
[0:42] those that work in our education
[0:43] department, our educational system. God,
[0:45] we pray uh for protection. We pray for
[0:47] our teachers, our leaders. um God that
[0:50] they would just continue to educate uh
[0:51] the youth of our city uh in a way that
[0:53] is honoring to you and is beneficial for
[0:56] um our society. Lord, I thank you for
[0:58] these leaders around this room. God, I
[1:00] pray that they would uh make wise
[1:02] decisions and God be discerning. God,
[1:04] would you give them um your blessing
[1:06] tonight? And as we uh move forward,
[1:08] Lord, we just pray that you would just
[1:09] continue to bless our great city um in
[1:12] which uh so many people reside. And God,
[1:15] we know there are many needs uh in a
[1:18] city of our size. So God, I just pray
[1:19] that you would give um strength to those
[1:22] that lead and have them lead lead uh
[1:24] lead us well. We love you. We praise
[1:26] you. It's in your name we pray.
[1:27] >> Amen.
[1:30] >> Would you join me in the pledge of
[1:31] allegiance?
[1:32] >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[1:34] United States of America and to the
[1:37] republic for which it stands. One nation
[1:40] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[1:43] justice for all.
[1:46] I feel not
[1:48] always
[1:49] feels
[1:50] >> funny. It does. Okay. First item on our
[1:53] agenda is the opportunity for community
[1:55] comments. Uh this item is reserved to
[1:57] receive comments from the community for
[1:59] concerns whether or not they're on the
[2:00] current agenda. Community is encouraged
[2:03] to speak before the mayor and city
[2:04] council. Asked to keep statements brief,
[2:06] time limited to no more than 3 minutes.
[2:08] Any questions are to be asked to the
[2:11] city staff, the council members, or the
[2:12] mayor prior to speaking to the full
[2:14] council. So that way concerns can be
[2:16] properly researched and perhaps answered
[2:18] away from the meeting. Comments are to
[2:20] be directed to the mayor and city
[2:22] council only. Uh for those who want to
[2:25] provide comment during the meeting,
[2:26] there is a yellow slip that's provided
[2:28] at the podium. Uh these are to be filled
[2:30] out ahead of time and then
[2:33] to the podium. And then we also ask that
[2:36] uh any side conversations be kept to a
[2:38] minimum. Uh thank you for helping us
[2:40] maintain a quiet atmosphere so that
[2:42] everyone in the meeting can follow the
[2:43] discussion. We have just one tonight.
[2:46] Rusty Ward, uh please come forward.
[2:56] » Thank you, Mayor.
[2:58] I understand block cameras are on the
[3:00] agenda or possibly on the agenda or in
[3:03] discussions at some point in certain
[3:06] circles.
[3:07] [clears throat] Like to address some of
[3:09] those concerns that uh people like me
[3:11] and others have. Um we'll call them um
[3:14] automated license plate readers, ALPRs,
[3:17] are becoming ubiquitous and our local
[3:20] law enforcement really wants them. The
[3:22] name is a bit of a misnomer. They
[3:24] function as vehicle recognition cameras,
[3:27] VRC's. They create a searchable database
[3:30] of any vehicle characteristic, only one
[3:32] of which is the license plate. They are
[3:35] also recording anything in its
[3:37] viewpoint, including pedestrians.
[3:39] They are a tool that has virtually no
[3:41] restrictions, regulations, or oversight.
[3:45] We need to prevent misuse and abuse of
[3:47] this tool. three main issues.
[3:50] Warrantless searches, departmental
[3:53] policies, and data retention.
[3:56] Searches are made at the discretion of
[3:58] the searching officer. There is no
[4:00] justification required to convince a
[4:03] disinterested judge to issue a warrant.
[4:11] I uh would like to go into
[4:15] the um negative publicity that the
[4:19] sheriff in uh Wello County has
[4:21] generated, but that's neither here nor
[4:22] there. Uh what I want to do is
[4:26] read a comment that I found online in
[4:29] another story about um these cameras,
[4:31] and it kind of sums it up very well.
[4:34] Traditional cameras installed since 9/11
[4:36] are closed circuit television, CCTV,
[4:40] feeds like uh local red light cameras
[4:43] that store data and isolated uh local
[4:45] municipal servers i.e. uh city
[4:49] departments and uh meetings like this.
[4:53] Uh they cannot easily be searched by any
[4:56] other city's video um or operators and
[5:00] files.
[5:02] Every flock camera deploys links into a
[5:04] unified cloud database. If a vehicle
[5:07] crosses state lines, its location can
[5:10] instantly be queried by cameras in other
[5:12] states via the integrated network,
[5:15] provided data sharing permissions are
[5:17] enabled.
[5:19] Furthermore, flock cameras are put on
[5:21] public property by a private company and
[5:24] then the information is sold to
[5:26] government entities and anyone else
[5:28] willing to pay for it. That's why they
[5:30] are so controversial.
[5:33] The state cannot violate your
[5:34] constitutionally protected rights. So
[5:37] this is an end around that pesky
[5:39] constitution.
[5:41] Cities and law enforcement agencies are
[5:43] installing FL cameras alongside existing
[5:46] traffic cameras because traditional
[5:48] highway infrastructure is technically
[5:51] incapable of generating actionable
[5:53] criminal leads in real time.
[5:56] The bottom line is flatout cameras are
[5:58] basically fingerprinting your car in
[6:01] real time as you drive and then
[6:04] recording all of your movements and
[6:06] selling that information.
[6:08] Uh there have been two elected
[6:11] officials. One is a US house rep in uh
[6:14] Indiana uh Marlon Studsman who was uh
[6:18] driving his wife's car home and had an
[6:21] officer follow him into his driveway.
[6:24] You bet. Uh, according to the officer,
[6:27] his registration had expired.
[6:30] Um, and I'll close with a quote from
[6:32] Benjamin Franklin.
[6:35] I don't think anybody in this room would
[6:36] like to compare intellects with him,
[6:39] including myself.
[6:43] Those who would give up essential
[6:45] liberty to purchase a little temporary
[6:47] safety, deserve neither liberty nor
[6:51] safety.
[6:54] Thank you.
[6:56] >> Thank you, Rosie.
[6:57] >> Thank you.
[7:01] Moving on. Uh we [snorts] next up is the
[7:04] consent agenda. These are all items that
[7:06] are routine in nature. Uh they're voted
[7:08] on in single uh motion and um I wanted
[7:12] to draw attention to item F, which is a
[7:14] motion appointing Ro Mich Relle Holly to
[7:17] the Arts and Culture Commission. Item H
[7:19] is a resolution rescheduling a public
[7:22] hearing on the vacation and sale of a
[7:24] 103.4 ft by 16 1/2 ft north south valley
[7:28] adj uh to 608 C Avenue West. Uh item J
[7:33] is a resolution scheduling a time for a
[7:35] public hearing on the proposition of
[7:37] entering into a lease and maintenance
[7:39] agreement for the copy machine for the
[7:40] police department. That's on September
[7:42] 8th. And item K is a resolution
[7:45] scheduling a public hearing for
[7:46] September 21st. Uh this is to consider
[7:49] levying a special assessment against
[7:51] private property for re uh weed cutting.
[7:54] We have a motion of support for the
[7:57] consent agenda.
[7:58] >> Moved.
[7:59] >> Second.
[8:00] >> Okay. Any discussion?
[8:04] Roll call, please.
[8:04] >> Almond,
[8:05] >> yes.
[8:06] >> Caliguri,
[8:06] >> yes.
[8:07] >> Dross,
[8:07] >> yes.
[8:08] >> Hmson,
[8:08] >> yes.
[8:09] >> Homeberg,
[8:09] >> yes.
[8:10] >> Ibrahim,
[8:10] >> yes.
[8:10] >> Ford,
[8:11] >> yes.
[8:12] >> Okay, that passes. Getting into the
[8:14] regular agenda. Uh item A is to consider
[8:17] well I guess I need to um
[8:20] need to mention the vacancies we have on
[8:22] our various boards and commissions. Uh
[8:24] the airport commission has one vacancy
[8:26] for a term ending in December of 2028.
[8:29] The building code board of appeals a
[8:31] vacancy for an ex official member. Uh
[8:33] planning and zoning commission has one
[8:35] vacancy for a term ending in April of
[8:37] 2027 and another vacancy for a term
[8:40] ending in April of 2030. Uh the Arts and
[8:43] Culture Commission, we have three
[8:44] vacancies, three for a term ending
[8:46] December 31st of 2026. And the Historic
[8:49] Preservation Commission, one vacancy,
[8:51] it's for a term ending in December of
[8:53] 2028.
[8:55] Getting into the regular agenda, first
[8:57] up is a consider a resolution levying a
[9:00] special assessment against private
[9:01] property for uh the cutting and removal
[9:03] of weeds by the city of Oscaloosa. Um
[9:07] and let's see here. Um, certified
[9:10] notices were sent to each property
[9:12] owner. A notice was published in the
[9:14] Oscaloosa Herald and if approved, the
[9:16] property owner has 30 days from time of
[9:18] filing with Mahask County Treasurer to
[9:20] pay for the weed cutting in the city
[9:21] clerk's office. After the 30 days, it's
[9:24] assessed to their property taxes with a
[9:26] payment schedule at 9% interest. So,
[9:28] I'll open the public hearing. Is there
[9:30] anyone who' like?
[9:36] Seeing none, I'll close the public
[9:37] hearing. Do I have a motion of support
[9:39] for uh this resolution?
[9:41] >> So move.
[9:44] >> Okay. Any discussion?
[9:45] >> So the north I know I know uh chief is
[9:48] on vacation. The railroad didn't we I
[9:51] thought we had maybe
[9:54] >> I'm not sure.
[9:56] >> We've had that one before. Correct.
[9:58] Isn't that
[9:58] >> I think that was
[9:59] >> Oh, that was okay. Okay.
[10:02] >> I just think of the same thing.
[10:03] >> Okay. Thank you.
[10:05] >> Okay.
[10:07] Any other comments?
[10:09] >> Roll call, please.
[10:10] >> Palerie,
[10:11] >> yes.
[10:11] >> Drossst,
[10:12] >> yes.
[10:12] >> Hermson,
[10:13] >> yes.
[10:13] >> Homeberg,
[10:14] >> yes.
[10:14] >> Ibrahim,
[10:15] >> yes.
[10:15] >> Sword,
[10:16] >> yes.
[10:16] >> Almond,
[10:17] >> yes.
[10:17] >> Okay, that passes. Item B, this is to
[10:20] consider a request for the vacation and
[10:22] sale of a 120 ft x 16 1/2 ft north south
[10:25] alley. It's adjacent to 1106 1st Avenue
[10:28] West.
[10:30] Uh, this the vacay request came from
[10:32] Dustin Lanfair, owner of the property
[10:34] located there. Uh the property owner has
[10:37] listed his reason for the request to
[10:39] vacate the alley adjacent to his
[10:41] property as to quote make private
[10:43] driveways for 11:06 and one excuse me
[10:46] 1110 1st Avenue West cut out speeding
[10:48] traffic and make the area safer for
[10:50] children unquote. Uh the alley was once
[10:53] attached and the he mentions as well the
[10:56] alley was once attached to 1106 property
[10:58] per contract. Uh the subject alley is
[11:02] located in an R2 zoning district.
[11:04] Planning and zoning considered the
[11:06] request at their meeting on August 4th. They did re recommend
[11:10] denying the alley vacate by a vote of
[11:13] one approving and four denying. Uh staff
[11:16] conducted a survey of the property
[11:18] owners and utility companies that have
[11:19] direct access to the alley. Uh 17
[11:23] neighboring neighbor property owners
[11:25] were surveyed. 12 responses received. Of
[11:28] those responses, five were opposed,
[11:30] stating they used the alley to access
[11:31] their properties. Five were not opposed
[11:34] and two were interested in purchasing
[11:36] their portion. So, at this time of
[11:38] writing the memo, three utility
[11:41] companies have responded and none of
[11:44] Yeah. none of which have infrastructure
[11:45] located through this alley uh that would
[11:47] require an access easement. And so, this
[11:50] does require a public hearing. So, I'll
[11:52] open the public hearing if anyone would
[11:54] like to speak to this.
[11:56] >> Yes, sir.
[11:57] Uh name and address please.
[12:00] >> Dustin
[12:02] West yeah the whole purpose of us want
[12:06] to purchase
[12:10] uh it's become a racetrack. That's kind
[12:13] of the thing
[12:15] trying to cut down on that. Uh
[12:19] they're at 11:05 Second Avenue West. We
[12:21] get a lot of traffic there. That's an
[12:23] abandoned house. They're going to 1023.
[12:27] Um
[12:28] I don't know what's going on there, but
[12:31] yeah, come through both ends of the the
[12:34] alley. Um for some reason, you know,
[12:37] it's a neighborhood, but it's it's a
[12:39] racetrack anymore. So, that's kind of
[12:42] our reason. We just like turn it into a
[12:44] private driveway
[12:46] uh between the two of us. So, that's
[12:50] kind of our thing.
[12:52] So,
[12:54] Thank you.
[13:01] » Anyone else?
[13:06] » Seeing none, I'll close the public
[13:08] hearing. Um, council members, do we have
[13:11] a motion?
[13:12] >> Moved.
[13:13] >> Has to
[13:16] purchase vacate.
[13:17] >> Vacate.
[13:18] >> Okay. So, uh, the the the recommendation
[13:21] is to deny.
[13:23] And so, is the motion to vacate or to
[13:26] deny?
[13:26] >> To deny. Sorry.
[13:28] >> Okay. So, that's our motion. Do we have
[13:31] a second?
[13:33] >> I'll second.
[13:34] >> Okay, that opens up the discussion.
[13:37] >> I guess the only thing I would question,
[13:39] Dustin, and I know the ER
[13:42] work too. um with having five opposed
[13:45] and five again I'm assuming quite a few
[13:47] people use the sally debt to right
[13:50] >> access their garage correct
[13:51] >> yeah when we were at planning and zoning
[13:54] 128 and 122 were there and and we were
[13:58] kind of the hot topic at at planning and
[14:00] zoning uh we was the longest discussion
[14:03] there uh yeah they were the two that showed up and talked kind of in
[14:08] length about that um their biggest thing
[14:11] was going from the other end. Uh the
[14:14] alley washes out quite a bit. Uh that's
[14:17] why they don't use that. Uh and then
[14:20] them backing a trailer in. Uh come from
[14:23] the other direction, they have a hard
[14:25] time getting their trailer in. So they
[14:26] come in from our our other way. Uh, and
[14:30] then they said in the winter, um, I
[14:33] guess kind of in the corner there where
[14:36] the alley meets, uh, South M, there's
[14:39] some ice buildup and whatnot. Um, so
[14:43] that was kind of their thing was why
[14:45] they didn't, you know,
[14:47] want to block off our end, I guess, is
[14:51] was their big reasons. Uh, you know,
[14:55] they didn't want it shut off. So,
[14:58] um, yeah.
[15:00] >> And the reason I'm to let you imposing
[15:03] because I see there was a lot of people
[15:04] that use that alley.
[15:06] >> I don't know the whole story,
[15:07] >> right?
[15:08] >> So,
[15:09] >> Yep.
[15:09] >> But you mentioned earlier was that
[15:11] people use it as a racetrack.
[15:12] >> Yeah, it's for some reason people come
[15:15] flying down through there. Uh, my garage
[15:18] has been hit twice and then my
[15:19] daughter's kind of there on the the
[15:22] corner. Uh I don't know if the pictures
[15:24] show it or not, but there's yellow uh
[15:26] kind of
[15:28] stakes out there or whatever markers. Um
[15:32] that's to keep cars away from her
[15:35] garage. Uh the alley kept creeping in.
[15:38] Yeah, there there's actually three of
[15:40] them. Uh it's kind of [cough] hard to
[15:42] see in the picture, but uh yeah, there
[15:44] you go. Um the alley kept creeping to
[15:47] her garage, and her garage has been hit
[15:49] as well. So that's the point of those.
[15:52] And that was kind of the reason why we
[15:55] wanted, you know, wanted that portion
[15:57] for the driveway and that sort of thing.
[15:59] So yeah,
[16:02] >> Murphy question just generally in the
[16:05] city alleys. Is there anything codewise
[16:08] or general practice of deadend alleys?
[16:11] Because I mean that that's what I
[16:16] » Yeah. Uh, so generally speaking, I if I remember correctly, the code calls
[16:22] for alleys to essentially all be one
[16:24] way. You're only supposed to navigate
[16:26] alley in a specific direction. I
[16:29] apologize. I don't recall if that's
[16:30] generally east west or north south
[16:32] specifically for each one, but I would
[16:35] say generally speaking, a dead end alley
[16:37] would contradictory to that part of the
[16:39] code. Um, this particular alley might
[16:42] may have a challenge depending on which
[16:45] directions that is, but either way, the rest of it is that one way.
[16:55] » Is there anything that we can do to slow
[16:57] the traffic down? I mean, there
[17:02] I I guess I'm trying to help. I'm trying
[17:04] to help both. Right.
[17:05] >> Cuz I I know like I said I've used that
[17:06] alley too cuz I've had in the back and
[17:08] there I just
[17:10] >> Yeah.
[17:10] >> And that was kind of the big thing in
[17:12] planning and zoning too, you know, was
[17:14] the neighbors that came. Uh that was
[17:16] their big issue too was, you know, the traffic coming through the the
[17:22] neighbors using it. Not a big deal. It's
[17:24] the you know the race cars coming
[17:28] through there. You know, that was the thing they had a problem with and
[17:32] >> and uh and that sort of thing. And then
[17:34] like I said with it washing out which we
[17:37] don't go down the other end of the
[17:39] alley. We
[17:41] maintain ours and we you know take the
[17:44] shortest path so we don't ever go
[17:46] through the other end. We we don't have
[17:47] any
[17:48] >> way alley access.
[17:52] I mean, I'm just trying to slow down the
[17:55] >> uh I'm not sure if uh it would be
[17:59] appropriate to put an alley access for
[18:01] residents only just because that's it is
[18:03] public right away. So, we can't really
[18:05] necessarily state that it's specifically
[18:07] for the residents. We could post a speed
[18:09] limit sign on it. The alleys do have a a
[18:12] speed limit throughout town by code. I
[18:14] believe it's 15 miles per hour, but I'd
[18:16] have to be sure about that. And
[18:19] sometimes posting a speed limit sign can
[18:21] help people have at least some idea of
[18:24] what speed they should be traveling. It
[18:26] could be that some people are traveling
[18:28] quickly because they just don't have any
[18:29] concept of this is the approximate speed
[18:32] I should be driving here. Um, as far as
[18:35] putting actual speed controls with it
[18:36] being gravel, it's it's pretty difficult
[18:38] to put any kind of speed bump or any any
[18:40] kind control like that on it. I can
[18:43] certainly try and do more research, but
[18:45] um the the short term, the easiest thing
[18:48] I could think of to do is is to post a
[18:51] speed limit on the alley, which
[18:52] typically we would do, but
[19:03] would close it off if you were able to
[19:07] purchase it,
[19:08] >> right? Uh we haven't talked a whole lot
[19:10] about it, but um so the property pin is
[19:15] just
[19:16] uh to the be the east of that stake
[19:19] right there. Uh we talked about, you
[19:22] know, putting a gate across there or
[19:23] something like that. I mean, we don't
[19:25] have a a definite,
[19:28] you know, plan for that, but um yeah, we
[19:32] talked something like that.
[19:34] >> Your thoughts were some kind of physical
[19:36] barrier, though? something like that. Uh
[19:38] we don't have you know a a set in stone
[19:42] plan you know for that. Um yeah um yeah
[19:50] so
[19:52] yeah and the utilities that you see
[19:54] there mediacom and uh uh whatever it is
[19:59] now it's quest whatever they go by lumen
[20:02] I think is is what it is or the
[20:04] utilities that are on the the poles
[20:06] there.
[20:09] [clears throat]
[20:10] Um, yeah.
[20:15] » The folks that are driving up and down
[20:17] the alley, are they all residents or
[20:20] >> not all of them? Um,
[20:22] >> related somehow to the folks that live
[20:24] there or any guesses?
[20:26] >> I I don't know. Um, one gentleman that I
[20:29] stopped, we were cleaning the garage
[20:31] out. It's probably been a couple months
[20:32] ago. Um I have no idea where he come
[20:36] from, but um I was fortunate enough to
[20:39] stop him and
[20:43] somewhat polite, you know. Um and I just
[20:46] told him, you know, this isn't a
[20:48] racetrack, you know, and and
[20:51] uh I have a six-year-old grandson, you
[20:53] know, and
[20:55] yeah, it's it's not a racetrack, you
[20:57] know. I don't want him getting hurt or
[20:59] anyone else uh for that matter. Um and he did, you know, we we have cameras
[21:07] on uh both houses and and we could see
[21:10] him coming through there and and that
[21:12] day I was fortunate enough to catch him.
[21:14] Uh and yeah, so um but no, not all of
[21:19] them are residents. Um
[21:22] some of the residents are pretty decent.
[21:24] Um, you know, the ones that came to the
[21:26] meeting, the planning zoning, uh,
[21:28] meeting,
[21:30] I don't have any problem with them.
[21:31] They're, you know, they go through,
[21:34] they're great. They're they're good. Um,
[21:37] couple of the other ones, yeah, they're
[21:40] not so great, you know. Uh, and yeah,
[21:43] then people I have no idea where they
[21:44] come from. Um, I lived there 22 years,
[21:48] so I kind of know, you know, you know
[21:50] your neighbors by now. you know, uh,
[21:52] what they drive and and you know, and
[21:55] stuff like that. So,
[21:57] >> I guess my only other thought you guys
[21:59] would be that narrow. So, if you were to
[22:02] shut it off,
[22:06] » right,
[22:10] » you're driving somebody. That's my only
[22:12] other
[22:13] >> concern if those people are accessing
[22:15] that alley for their
[22:16] >> Some of them have garages back there.
[22:18] >> Yeah.
[22:20] Except you're going to have to turn
[22:21] around. Not an idea. That's I mean I'm
[22:22] just
[22:24] >> I don't know if there really are
[22:25] garages.
[22:27] >> Yeah. Yeah. The ones with the garages
[22:29] are all, you know, down at the other end
[22:33] where the other access is and stuff like
[22:36] that. Our our garages, you know, face
[22:39] the other the other direction. But um
[22:43] yeah.
[22:47] I'm
[22:56] » curious just to see if maybe Ben or Sean
[22:59] has any extra perspective to share on on
[23:01] this. Not that you have to, but just if
[23:04] you do.
[23:06] >> The way [clears throat] that's designed,
[23:07] I mean, we're through there all the
[23:08] time. We don't necessarily use the
[23:10] gravel, but even just seeing how it's
[23:12] rounded like that, it almost begs for
[23:14] somebody to hit a little faster than
[23:17] normal but instead of a right angle.
[23:19] >> So, I don't know if it was originally
[23:20] like that or if it just evolved into
[23:22] that over time. As you said, you put the
[23:24] yellow posts up.
[23:26] >> So, that's funny you say that. Many
[23:28] years ago, that went straight on. Um, so
[23:33] there's another property owner that
[23:35] lives on down First Avenue. There's a
[23:36] duplex there. Originally that alley went
[23:39] straight through there and that got
[23:41] vacated many many years ago. Uh and then
[23:46] somewhere along the line then that made
[23:48] the turn there. But it was a a straight
[23:50] through alley at some point. Um I think
[23:54] own that duplex.
[23:55] >> I know what you're talking about.
[23:56] >> Yeah. Um, so that was a straight through
[23:58] uh there's part of a garage built on
[24:01] this uh thing now, but uh and part of my
[24:04] garage is is kind of where the old alley
[24:08] used to go. But uh yeah, so to your
[24:10] point, yeah, it used to go straight
[24:13] through years and years ago. So about
[24:15] where that maroon vehicle is, give or
[24:18] take a little bit, the alley used to go
[24:21] >> straight through.
[24:23] >> Yes. Yeah.
[24:24] >> Um, yeah, because if you look at the
[24:26] duplex property, it's got a weird
[24:29] >> Yeah.
[24:30] >> uh kind of little attachment that goes
[24:33] with it that used to be this uh alley
[24:36] years ago. Uh, and then it would dump
[24:39] out to South Eye.
[24:45] » And one of the things that I would add,
[24:46] and I I mentioned this at the meeting
[24:48] because there was some conversation by
[24:50] P&Z commissioners as well. Is there
[24:51] anything that we can do to try to help
[24:53] them in the situation that they're
[24:55] dealing with? Um, as as I had suggested,
[24:58] um, anything that they can do to narrow
[25:01] up that corridor to make it less
[25:03] comfortable for people to drive fast
[25:05] through there. And one of the biggest or
[25:07] most effective ways would be to park
[25:08] vehicles next to that route. Um,
[25:11] obviously you're putting your vehicle at
[25:12] risk if people are speeding, but that
[25:14] could be an opportunity if anybody needs
[25:15] some extra parking. You could go in the
[25:17] back or along that alley and maybe try
[25:19] to make it less comfortable. Um, but I
[25:22] think that's a great idea that Chief
[25:23] Bakey brought up. And I was thinking
[25:25] something similar as well with gravel
[25:27] alleys. They don't stay in place. They
[25:29] tend to
[25:31] >> and and they tend to get get out of the
[25:34] area that's actually platted for that.
[25:35] Maybe you could bring up the map as
[25:37] well. they tend to get out of the area
[25:38] that's platted and you can see that
[25:40] that's essentially a right angle, but
[25:43] there may have been some encroachment.
[25:44] So I I wonder if there could be an
[25:46] effort perhaps by the property owners to
[25:48] relocate, regrade, get that gravel back
[25:51] to within the platted right ofway
[25:53] itself, make it more of a right angle,
[25:55] and if that reducing that that curve or
[25:57] eliminating that curve could help people
[25:59] slow down as well.
[26:03] » Yeah. And
[26:04] >> make it make it more of a sharp like
[26:07] more of a sharp a sharp turn. And
[26:10] >> I don't know if you were joking or not.
[26:11] >> No, you can.
[26:12] >> So So he mentioned you could put
[26:13] boulders out there and I have
[26:16] >> you can up landscaping features
[26:19] >> or something that that could could help
[26:22] keep people away.
[26:24] >> Put a big guard rail.
[26:32] [laughter]
[26:34] >> Keep it on private property.
[26:36] on the other end by M Street. Those two
[26:39] houses on the end, I remember those were
[26:42] moved there.
[26:44] >> Yeah. So, the 1214 was moved there and
[26:47] 1212 was a habitat house. It was
[26:49] actually built.
[26:50] >> Yeah.
[26:51] >> I think we did some plumbing in that
[26:53] area, too. I think
[26:54] >> Yeah. Uh 1214 um I don't remember if the
[26:58] sewer or something went through there,
[26:59] but yeah. Um there was some it was moved
[27:03] uh more to the west.
[27:05] >> Yeah.
[27:08] U I think to make you know to make room
[27:10] to build
[27:11] >> why it's causing issues there at that
[27:13] >> that could be because those two lots set
[27:15] vacant for uh many many years
[27:21] » and then I think Mid American I think
[27:23] owns the that other vacant lot just to
[27:25] the south there I think. Yeah.
[27:31] Any further comments from council,
[27:33] questions,
[27:35] discussion?
[27:38] There's a motion to deny.
[27:40] >> Roll call, please.
[27:42] >> Yes.
[27:43] >> Hmson,
[27:44] >> yes.
[27:44] >> Holberg,
[27:45] >> yes.
[27:46] >> Ibrahim,
[27:47] >> yes.
[27:47] >> Thor,
[27:48] >> yes.
[27:49] >> Almond,
[27:50] >> yes.
[27:52] >> Okay, the denial passes.
[27:55] Item C, consider a resolution for the
[27:58] vacation and sale of a 240 foot by 16
[28:02] 1/2 ft north south and a 256 1/2x 16 1/2
[28:06] east west alleys uh in the fourth block
[28:09] of houses edition.
[28:12] Uh the vacay request came from Elliot
[28:14] and Kristen Sass. They're the owners of
[28:16] the property at 7074th Avenue East for
[28:19] the alleys that I mentioned. Uh property
[28:22] owners have listed the reason for the
[28:23] request to vacate the alleys adjacent to
[28:25] the property as quote acquisition would
[28:28] restrict access to legitimate users to
[28:31] improve safety and alley maintenance
[28:33] accountability. Ongoing safety concerns
[28:36] of excessive speeding and mistreatment
[28:37] from non neighboring users. Purchase
[28:40] preserves and guarantees full and
[28:41] continuous access and easement rights
[28:43] for the garage and drive associated with
[28:45] 709 property off of the north south
[28:48] alley.
[28:49] Uh subject alley is in an R2 district.
[28:52] Uh staff recommend the city also
[28:55] consider vacating and selling the
[28:56] remaining alleyways in that fourth block
[28:58] of houses addition uh to interested
[29:01] property owners.
[29:03] So PNZ considered this request at their
[29:05] meeting on August 4th recommended
[29:07] approving the alley vacate by five
[29:10] approved zero deny. Uh staff conducted a
[29:12] survey of the property owners and
[29:14] utility companies that have access to
[29:16] it. Seven of the property owners
[29:18] surveyed, six responded, three
[29:20] interested in buying adjacent sections
[29:22] of the alley, and the rest were not
[29:24] opposed. At the time of writing the
[29:26] memo, two utility companies responded,
[29:28] both having arterial, excuse me, aerial
[29:31] infrastructure on poles located.
[29:38] » And additionally, there's a private
[29:39] sewer service that runs through the west
[29:40] half of the east west alley. Uh, so I'll
[29:44] open the public hearing. Is there anyone
[29:45] who would like to speak to this?
[29:50] Seeing none, I'll close the public
[29:51] hearing. Uh, do we have a motion of
[29:53] support?
[29:55] So, move
[30:00] discussion.
[30:02] >> Can someone help me understand why
[30:04] [clears throat] this one was approved
[30:05] and the other one was not? Other than I
[30:08] know there's fewer property owners here.
[30:10] Are there more people willing to
[30:13] >> purchase their piece or
[30:15] >> is that what it amounts to?
[30:16] >> That's my read. More people are
[30:19] interested in buying portions of the
[30:20] alley.
[30:22] [clears throat]
[30:23] >> Nobody was opposed.
[30:24] >> Nobody opposed.
[30:25] >> Nobody.
[30:27] >> Right. Okay. That's what I thought too.
[30:28] I just want to make sure.
[30:30] So Andy, the other alley vacate and and
[30:33] this is my observation of how the city
[30:35] has handled alley vacates in general is
[30:38] that if selling the alley creates a
[30:40] situation someone has a rear garage or
[30:42] some other access that they need to
[30:44] their property that the alley provides
[30:45] that they can't get off of the street.
[30:47] That's the most common situation that
[30:50] we've denied alley vacates.
[30:51] [clears throat] So in in the previous
[30:53] instance because the city has the
[30:55] expectation that alleys are one way
[30:57] cutting off the end kind of makes the
[30:59] alley unusable. So in that situation it
[31:02] was creating several garages which
[31:04] didn't have access effectively. In this
[31:07] case all of the garages that are
[31:10] accessing from this alley would gain
[31:12] ownership of the land that they need to
[31:14] get access that garage. So they they'd
[31:16] be integrating what is essentially a
[31:18] driveway for them already into their
[31:20] property. Obviously, some of the other
[31:22] property owners may or may not be using
[31:24] the alley for through or for other
[31:26] purposes that that may affect their
[31:28] overall usage, but they would still have
[31:30] access to their garages.
[31:36] » Thank you.
[31:39] >> So, between 707 and 709, that be a they
[31:44] both share
[31:46] that section. Would that be a
[31:49] >> wait
[31:50] >> an issue though? Like
[31:52] >> so that that segment would be a little
[31:54] bit more of a challenge. Most likely
[31:55] there would need to be an access
[31:56] agreement and some kind of um it would
[31:59] be a shared driveway. Um
[32:03] so that eastern part that part may not
[32:08] be desirable to include in the alley
[32:09] vacate. Although again, technically
[32:12] speaking, it does kind of create a
[32:13] dead-end alley, but with it only serving
[32:15] two properties, that that may not be as
[32:17] large of a concern.
[32:20] >> Am I reading the right? That's the big
[32:23] requested area, though.
[32:25] >> The
[32:28] I'm sorry, I thought you were referring
[32:29] to the eastern part. You're talking
[32:32] about the southern part.
[32:34] >> Yes. 709,
[32:37] >> right? Uh, and I I believe the initial
[32:40] request said that they wanted to have
[32:41] that as a shared driveway, which we've
[32:43] done on an alley vacate at least once
[32:45] before. It is it is certainly a concern.
[32:49] It would be something that there would
[32:51] need to be an easement in place as we're
[32:52] selling it to to provide access to both
[32:55] properties. But if they're both
[32:56] agreeable to that situation, then
[33:00] it's something we've done.
[33:06] » [clears throat]
[33:08] >> The only other piece of that is
[33:12] two two
[33:15] um new
[33:17] property owners become owners, but there
[33:21] isn't anything really to restrict
[33:23] anybody else from coming into it, right?
[33:25] >> I mean, they can post it
[33:28] >> or something along those lines, but
[33:29] >> I I mean, it would be the same as any
[33:31] other private property where it would be
[33:32] up to them how they want I can relate to
[33:35] that. When I bought my house, the
[33:38] driveway was the easement from the
[33:40] owner. And when I bought the house, they
[33:42] asked me, "Do you want keep the easement
[33:44] there?" And I said, "No." So that piece
[33:46] went back to the original owner. I just
[33:49] moved my driveway over on my property.
[33:51] >> Mhm.
[33:51] >> And then what would happen here too if
[33:52] somebody bought 709?
[33:55] [clears throat] You know,
[33:56] >> that makes sense.
[33:57] >> And Sean, you're right. I didn't I just
[33:59] pulled up the application and it says
[34:01] purchase will preserve and guarantee
[34:02] full and continuous access and easement
[34:04] rights for the garage and drive
[34:05] associated with the 709 property
[34:08] >> and it's 707 that applied. So, so they
[34:12] have obviously talked about
[34:14] >> Kevin I was in favor [clears throat]
[34:23] other comments or questions
[34:27] we've got I want to clarify that the
[34:30] motion uh is it to follow the
[34:33] recommendation where staff is
[34:34] recommending approving the request and
[34:36] vacating the remaining alleyways. Yeah,
[34:38] my motion was to approve.
[34:40] >> Okay. And the second as well. Roll call,
[34:43] please.
[34:44] >> Hermson,
[34:44] >> yes.
[34:45] >> Holberg,
[34:45] >> yes.
[34:46] >> Ibrahim,
[34:46] >> yes.
[34:47] >> Sword,
[34:47] >> yes.
[34:48] >> Homeman,
[34:48] >> yes.
[34:48] >> Caligerie,
[34:49] >> yes.
[34:50] >> Dross,
[34:50] >> yes.
[34:51] >> Okay, that passes. Item D. This to
[34:54] consider approval of liquor license
[34:56] application. Um, so we've got a listing
[34:59] here. Five of them are Casey's uh that
[35:02] they are applying because of a change in
[35:05] officers. Uh item B in there is a new
[35:08] application for alcohol license at uh
[35:11] for 1775 Brewing Company uh also known
[35:14] as the 1775's Oscaloosa outpost. And
[35:19] then item C is a renewal application for
[35:21] a class C license.
[35:24] Uh do we have a motion of support?
[35:28] >> Okay.
[35:29] >> Any discussion?
[35:32] >> Roll call, please.
[35:33] >> Homeberg.
[35:34] >> Yes.
[35:34] >> Ibrahim.
[35:35] >> Yes. Thord,
[35:36] >> yes.
[35:37] >> Caligerie,
[35:38] >> yes.
[35:38] >> Dross,
[35:39] >> Stain.
[35:39] >> Hermson,
[35:40] >> yes.
[35:41] >> Okay, that passes. Item E is to consider
[35:44] a resolution authorizing an order
[35:46] agreement and integrated payments
[35:48] addendum with BSA Software LLC. This is
[35:51] for software services and uh that is for
[35:54] building permits and inspections. Uh the
[35:56] city's three-year contract with Cloud