[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

2026 August 17, City of Oskaloosa Iowa

Agenda

Transcript