[00:00:01]
WE'RE GOING TO START WITH A PROCLAMATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS DAY.
CITY COUNCIL BLUFFS OFFICE MAYOR PROCLAMATION, WHEREAS HUMAN RIGHTS DAY IS OBSERVED ANNUALLY ON DECEMBER 10 TO COMMEMORATE THE ADOPTION OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS BY THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN 1948.
WHEREAS THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFF AFFIRMS THE INHERENT DIGNITY AND EQUAL RIGHTS OF ALL PEOPLE.
RECOGNIZES THAT THE STRENGTH OF OUR COMMUNITY DEPENDS ON ENSURING FAIRNESS, INCLUSION, AND OPPORTUNITY FOR EVERY RESIDENT.
WHEREAS THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFF IS COMMITTED TO FOSTERING AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE ALL PROTECTED INDIVIDUALS ARE TREATED WITH RESPECT.
HAVE EQUITABLE ACCESS TO HOUSING, EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND PUBLIC LIFE.
WHEREAS HUMAN RIGHTS DAY PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO REFLECT ON THE PROGRESS MADE, ACKNOWLEDGE THE WORK STILL AHEAD.
CELEBRATE THE RESIDENTS ORGANIZATIONS AND PUBLIC SERVICE SERVANTS WHO WORK EACH DAY TO UPHOLD HUMAN RIGHTS AND CIVIL RIGHTS IN THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFF.
THEREFORE, I'M MATT WALSH MAYOR OF THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFF DO HEREBY PROCLAIM DECEMBER 10 OF 2025 AS HUMAN RIGHTS DAY.
ALL RESIDENTS TO JOIN IN RECOGNIZING THIS DAY BY RENEWING OUR SHARED COMMITMENT TO THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS.
WITH THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFF, I DO HEREBY PROCLAIM.
>> JUST PUSH THE BUTTON TO TURN THE MICROPHONE ON.
WE TURN THE MICROPHONE ON, PERFECT.
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION, WE APPRECIATE THE PROCLAMATION AND THE DESIGNATION OF DECEMBER 10.
WHICH IS INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED AS HUMAN RIGHTS DAY, THANK YOU, MAYOR.
WE'RE GOING TO START OFF THE STUDY SESSION WITH THE REVIEW OF THE AGENDA.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? NO, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ABOUT ORDINANCE FOR SECOND CONSIDERATION.
WE'RE GOING TO FLIP THOSE AROUND, SO WE'RE DOING THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER, AND I KNOW YOU ASK TO BE HERE, AND YOU GOT QUESTIONS ON.
>> I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS ON BOTH A AND B, AND THEY KIND OF GO TOGETHER.
I GUESS WE'RE DOING THE ENDOWMENT FIRST, WE SWITCH THEM.
>> YES, WE MAKE SURE WE GET THE ENDOWMENT IN PLACE BEFORE WE DO THE OTHER.
>> THE THE SPIRIT TO ME, OF THE ENDOWMENT WHEN WE BROUGHT IT UP.
I WENT BACK AND WATCHED THE FEBRUARY 8 AND THE FEBRUARY 21 MEETINGS.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ENDOWMENT WAS TO BASICALLY MAKE IT A NEUTRAL COST TO THE TAXPAYERS.
WHERE WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST INVESTMENT, AND THEN THE CITY TAKES OVER AND IT'S AT A HUGE COST.
WHETHER THAT'S SPRINKLERS AND A MEDIAN OR WHATEVER THAT MAY BE THERE OR THE PAVILION.
WE PUT THE PAVILION IN, AND THEN WE'VE HAD SIGNIFICANT COST.
THE PARKING GARAGE, ANOTHER EXAMPLE.
>> I DON'T HAVE ANY COSTS ON THE PARKING GARAGE.
THE SPIRIT TO ME WAS, THIS WOULD BE AT NO COST TO THE TAXPAYER.
WHEN I GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT IN SECTION 2.2, IT SAYS SITE FURNISHINGS, BENCHES, BIKE RACKS, TRASH RECEPTACLES, WATER FOUNTAINS, TYPICALLY MAINTAINED BY AND REPLACED BY PARK STAFF ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE ENDOWMENT.
I DON'T REMEMBER IT BEING THAT WAY, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE.
I THINK THAT HAVING THOSE THINGS EXCLUDED WAS NOT THE SPIRIT OF WHY WE ASKED FOR THE ENDOWMENT MONEY.
>> I WOULD DISAGREE A LITTLE BIT.
THE ENDOWMENT IS FOR MAJOR MAINTENANCE WORK, THE CITY HAD AGREED THAT WE WOULD ASSIGN A CITY PARKS WORKER TO THAT AREA TO DO THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE.
THEN SOME OF THE MAINTENANCE WILL BE DONE BY
[00:05:03]
THE VENDOR ON THEIR PROPERTY THAT THEY MANAGED, BUT THE INTENT OF THE ENDOWMENT WAS NOT TO WEAN IT DOWN BY PAYING FOR SOMEBODY TO DUMP THE TRASH AND CLEAN THE BENCHES.WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A PARKS EMPLOYEE DO THAT.
IT'S EXACTLY AS YOU SAID, FOR MAJOR EXPENSE AND THEN TYPICALLY HOW THESE ENDOWMENTS WORK IS THERE IS NO MAJOR EXPENSE IN THE FIRST FEW YEARS.
I THINK ALSO TALKING ABOUT MAYBE PURCHASING A WARRANTY FOR THE FIRST THREE OR FOUR YEARS.
THE CORPUS OF THE ENDOWMENT GROWS, AND THEN IF WE WERE TO HAVE A MAJOR EXPENSE.
THEN THAT BACK STOPS THE TAXPAYER, NOT THE DUMPING OF THE TRASH IN THE POLISHING OF THE BENCHES.
>> WELL, AND WE ALSO HAVE, AGAIN, THIS IS HOW I THOUGHT THE ENDOWMENT WAS FOR EVERYTHING.
THAT'S A STRUGGLE FOR ME, WITH THE $50 MILLION INVESTMENT.
THEY WANTED TO LOOK NICE, WE WANTED TO LOOK NICE, WE WANTED TO BE SUCCESSFUL.
ANOTHER QUESTION WAS OR MY QUESTION IS, HAS THE ENDOWMENT ALREADY BEEN FUNDED? IS IT ACCRUING THE INTEREST NOW? I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT ALSO.
I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THE MEETING.
>> ENDOWMENT DOES NOT EXIST TODAY BECAUSE YOU ARE APPROVING IT TONIGHT.
>> I THOUGHT WE TALKED ABOUT, AND I COULD BE WRONG.
JOE AND I WERE THE ONES HERE AND YOU.
I DON'T THINK THIS COUNCIL, BESIDES ME AND JOE HAS SEEN THE MOU OR THE ENDOWMENT AGREEMENT UNTIL NOW.
THEN I THOUGHT WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEING LOADED IN 2021, SO WE HAD SOME GROWTH BY THE TIME IT WAS DONE.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS EVER THE UNDERSTANDING.
I DON'T THINK THEY HAD THE MONEY IN 2021.
THEY WERE OUT RAISING THE MONEY IN 2021.
THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO WAY TO FUND IT.
>> ARE WE ADDING STAFF THEN? FOR PARK?
>> BEFORE VINCENT LEFT, WE ADDED A PARKS 3 MAINTENANCE WORKER AT TO GRADE 19, AND THAT WAS FOR THIS PROJECT IN THE DESCRIPTION FOR THE PARKS 3.
>> IT'S JOB WAS TO DO WHAT ROGER SAYING THAT THE ENDOWMENT SHOULD DO.
>> CORRECT, BUT IN THAT WHEN WE APPROVED THAT POSITION, IT WAS IT'S GOT FIRST AVENUE, IT'S GOT RIVER'S EDGE.
IT'S GOT THIS NEW PROJECT, AND IT ALSO HAS VALLEY VIEW DOG PARK.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE THOUGH.
>> I JUST SPOKE WITH ZACH, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID.
>> ONE GUY'S NOT GOING TO UNDERSTAND [OVERLAPPING]
>> 40 HOURS WORTH OF THE DUMPING TRASH. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?
>> THAT'S WHAT IT SAID IN THE PARKS 3, CORRECT?
>> I KNOW THIS WAS VINCENT'S PROJECT, SO I HATE TO PUT YOU ON THE SPACE ZACH.
>> NO WORRIES, IT'S BEEN A BIT SINCE I LOOKED AT IT.
I DO BELIEVE THAT WHEN IT CAME TO COUNSEL IN, I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN JUNE, I SUPPOSE.
THAT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PARK 3 POSITION.
>> BECAUSE THIS PARK 3, IT HAD TO DO WITH WEEKENDS AS WELL.
WHICH IS THE WEEKENDS IS WHEN [OVERLAPPING].
>> THIS ONE WILL BE TOO, SO I ASKED ZACH TODAY.
I SAID, AND NOBODY KNOWS BECAUSE IT'S NOT DONE.
WHEN WE JUST LOOK AT THE SPACE.
>> THERE WILL BE REGULAR ONGOING MAINTENANCE THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITIVE FOR ONE PERSON TO DO ALL THE THINGS.
>> I AGREE, THAT'S AGAIN WHERE I THINK WHY WE ASKED FOR THE ENDOWMENT.
IS ZACH WHEN I ASKED HIM, HE SAID HE WOULD BE COMFORTABLE IF WE WERE TO BUILD IT WITH NO OTHER MONEY.
HE WOULD ALLOCATE THREE PARKS WORKERS DOWN THERE AND FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT SINK WOULD WANT.
WE WOULD WANT TAXPAYERS WOULD WANT AND IT'D PROBABLY BE ONE GRADE 19 AND TWO GRADE 14S.
THAT'S UPWARDS OF 150K, OUT OF THE BUDGET THAT TO BE HONEST WITH WE HAVEN'T BUDGETED FOR.
WE'VE BUDGETED FOR THE ONE, BECAUSE WE APPROVED IT.
SO YOU REALLY HAVE TWO MORE FULL TIME EMPLOYEES THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO WORK WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS WHEN THIS IS AND IT SPECIFICALLY STATES IN THEIR SERVICE ON WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS.
>> BUT HASN'T SINK TAKEN OVER SOME OF THAT DAY TO DAY STUFF?
[00:10:03]
>> LOCATION ARE GOING TO MAINTAIN THEIR LOCATION.
>> LET'S SAY THEY'RE TAKING THEIR OWN.
>> BUT NOT THE TREE TOP, NOT ANY THE BENCH.
NOT WHAT IT SAYS IN HERE, I GUESS, BENCHES, BIKE RACKS, TRASH RECEPTACLES, WATER FOUNTAINS, ET CETERA.
>> WELL, AND IF YOU GO DOWN FURTHER, THEN IT'S WEEKLY CLEANING, SWEEPING OF ELEVATED WALKS, PUBLIC AREAS, ELEVATORS, PIERS, REPAIR REPLACEMENT OF THE RESTROOM FIXTURES, WINTERIZING.
>> RESTROOMS OF CLOSE SEASONALLY TRUSH REMOVAL.
SO AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT IN THE AGREEMENT, IT SAYS.
IF WE NEED TO WINTERIZE THE BATHROOM.
AND THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL COST.
>> ONCE A YEAR, WE HAVE TO WRITE WRITE TO THE ENDOWMENT, AND THEY HAVE 15 BUSINESS DAYS.
SO THREE WEEKS TO GIVE US THE MONEY TO DO THAT.
>> THE BATHROOMS WOULD, NOT BE PART OF THE ENDOWMENT.
>> NO, IT SAYS THAT WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR WINTERIZING.
>> THAT IS ROUTINE MAINTENANCE.
>> WE'RE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIRING, RESURFACING AND GRAVELING THE NON PUBLIC ACCESS ROADS.
>> I GUESS THERE'S, AND THEN, AGAIN, 15 WE HAVEN'T SEEN THIS UNTIL WEDNESDAY, OR JODY GOT THE PACK IT OUT THURSDAY BECAUSE THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH PEAK ALREADY IS FRIDAY MORNING.
THE OTHER THING IS WE HAVE TO CARRY INSURANCE ON THIS AS WELL.
>> AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT COST IS.
AND IT'S NOT DONE YET, SO WE DON'T KNOW.
>> APPROACH WOULD INDEMNIFY THE CITY, WE WOULD STILL HAVE INSURANCE ON CITY PROPERTIES, BUT THE ACTUAL.
>> JUST THE CLIMBING WALL WOULD BE UNDER APPROACH.
THAT'S THAT'S HOW I READ IT, I GUESS, AND I'M LOOKING AT THE ENDOWMENT.
I GOT THE AGREEMENT PULLED UP, BUT FOR THE TOWER, BUT THAT WAS A SEPARATE.
QUESTION ABOUT I GUESS THAT WE CAN STILL STAY ON THE ENDOWMENT.
IT WAS STATED BY VINCENT, I THINK, ON 21 FEBRUARY THAT IF PARKS CAN'T BUDGET FOR IT.
WE COULD GO TO THE ENDOWMENT FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT SAID AT THE MEETING.
>> I HAVE NOT SEEN THE FEBRUARY 21 AGREEMENT THAT WAS NEVER.
>> IT WAS JUST VINCENT TALKING, IT WAS AT THE STUDY SESSION.
HE HE SAID THAT SINK HAS AND I COULD PULL IT UP.
I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY HOW HE SAID IT.
BUT HE SAID IF THERE WAS A BIG INSURANCE CLAIM, SINK WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR THAT.
AND HE ALSO SAID, IF THE FUNDS WEREN'T ENOUGH, WE COULD GO TO THE ENDOWMENT FOR IT.
AND SO I DON'T SEE THAT IN HERE AT ALL.
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW FEBRUARY 21 CORRELATES TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THAT OCCURRED IN 2021.
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT FEBRUARY 21, 2021. THAT'S WHAT TALKING ABOUT.
>> 4.1, ROGER, SORRY FOR JUMPING IN.
SAYS THE ENDOWMENT COVERS MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT EXCEEDS THE PARK AND WRECKS, TYPICAL BUDGET AND CAPABILITIES.
INCLUDING STRUCTURAL REPAIR, MAINTENANCE REPLACEMENT DUE TO DEFECTS AND REQUIRED ANNUAL STRUCTURE INSPECTIONS.
>> WELL, WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT FUN OR.
>> ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, PICKING UP TRASH, DOING SMALL REPAIRS, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.
WERE TO BE PAID FOR BY THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFF, WITH ONE PARKS WORKER ASSIGNED FULL TIME TO THAT LOCATION.
AND I BELIEVE AN UNDERSTANDING THAT MAYBE ONE WOULD NOT BE ADEQUATE, BUT THAT WE HAD ENOUGH TO COVER WHERE THE INADEQUACIES WERE.
>> I GUESS IT SAYS, IN THE STAFFING PROVISION 7.2.
IF ANTICIPATED ONGOING MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS ARISE.
THE CITY MAY REQUEST THE ENDOWMENT EARNINGS OR PRINCIPAL TO FUND DEDICATED MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEE AT RIVERS EDGE DEVELOPMENT.
>> WHEN WE START, ONE IS NOT ADEQUATE.
>> I THINK ZACH'S TELLING US TODAY,
[00:15:02]
ONE ABSOLUTELY WOULD NOT BE ADEQUATE. I MEAN.>> I DON'T THINK WE KNOW TODAY.
>> WELL, I GUESS AGAIN, AND I DON'T KNOW CAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN IT.
IF WE WERE TO BUILD IT OURSELVES AND I'D SAY ZACH, WHAT DO YOU NEED? HE WOULD SAY THREE PEOPLE. WHETHER.
>> I WOULD GO AHEAD AND TALK TO ZACH.
I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT SINCE IT'S.
>> IT'S A DIFFERENT ANIMAL, THERE'S NO SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT.
>> AND THAT'S JUST LIKE WE SPOKE EARLIER, THIS IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN ANYTHING ELSE WE'RE DOING.
IF WE WERE TO DO THIS ON OUR OWN, THREE.
I FEEL VERY CONFIDENT THAT WE WOULD MAINTAIN, THESE FACILITIES AT A HIGH LEVEL OF SERVICE.
THEN WORKING WITH P THROUGH JUST THE EXTENDED WARRANTIES AND HAVING THE INSTALLERS, MAINTAIN SOME OF THESE ITEMS. THROUGHOUT THE WARRANTY PERIOD THAT WAY.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE WARRANTIES IF THE INSTALLER, IS ALSO TAKING CARE OF IT.
WE FEEL LIKE IT'LL BE A LOT EASIER FOR PLANT MATERIAL AND WHAT NOT TO BE REPLACED.
IF THE INSTALLER IS ALSO THE ONE TAKING CARE OF THE WARRANTY WORK. SO.
>> BUT THESE PEOPLE PROBABLY AREN'T LOCAL.
>> THE PEOPLE WHO BUILD, THE ENTIRE PROJECT IS LOCAL?
>> NOT THE ENTIRE PROJECT. NO, THE.
>> LUTA CONSTRUCTIONS AT OMAHA.
>> WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE THREE FULL-TIME PEOPLE, THIS IS THE LOOK AHEAD FOR WHEN ALL PHASES ARE COMPLETE.
THE PLAYGROUND IS THE GOAL IS FOR IT TO BE PRETTY A DESTINATION PARK AND BE PRETTY EXTRAVAGANT.
WHEN I LOOK AHEAD TO THAT POINT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS BASING THE THREE FULL-TIME FOLKS IN ORDER TO KEEP THESE THINGS MAINTAINED AT A HIGH LEVEL.
>> I AGREE. IT MAY NEED ONE FOR A YEAR OR IT MAY NEED THREE RIGHT AWAY.
WE DON'T KNOW, BUT AGAIN, THE SPIRIT OF THE ENDOWMENT, WHY WE BROUGHT IT UP TO ME AT THE TIME WAS NEUTRAL COST TO TAXPAYER.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.
I STRUGGLE WITH THAT BECAUSE THAT'S AGAIN, WHY WE BROUGHT UP THE ENDOWMENT.
>> IF YOU GET IN AND YOU READ 7.2 OF THIS THING.
IT HAS A PROVISION IN THERE IT'S UNDER ARTICLE 7 STAFFING PROVISION, 7.2 THAT WE CAN USE THE ENDOWMENT, IF WE FIND NECESSARY TO HAVE A DEDICATED PERSON DOWN THERE ALL THE TIME.
THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD.
>> I HAVE TO GO TO THEM AND WAIT 15 DAYS OR 30 DAYS DEPENDING ON WHETHER IT IS WE KNOW ALREADY, ONE IS NOT ENOUGH.
WE SHOULD HAVE THE PAYMENT OR AT LEAST TWO OR THREE PEOPLE ALLOCATED FOR THIS BEFORE BEFORE THIS GOES INTO PLACE.
>> WE DON'T KNOW THAT AT THIS POINT BECAUSE IT'S NOT EVEN COMPLETE.
>> IT WON'T BE COMPLETE UNTIL AFTER MARTIN.
>> THERE IS A PROVISION IN HERE, IF WE NEED TO, WE CAN GO BACK TO THE ENDOWMENT.
I'M SURE IT'S GOING TO BE A COUPLE OF YEARS IN.
BEFORE IT REALLY STARTS TO GENERATE REVENUE IN THE ENDOWMENT, THEN WE CAN GO AND GET A DEDICATED PERSON FOR THAT AREA TO OVERSEE IT AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S GETTING MAINTAINED, AND THEY WOULD HELP STAFF THAT.
>> BUT I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY, AGREE.
IT STILL COSTS THE TAXPAYER IN TWO YEARS.
>> I SAID YOU VOTED TO ADD ANOTHER PERSON WITH THEIR SALARY.
>> BUT THE JUSTIFICATION WAS ALL THESE OTHER SPOTS TOO, NOT JUST THIS PLACE.
>> HONESTLY. I DON'T REMEMBER THAT CONVERSATION.
THAT WOULD BE A LUDICROUS EXPECTATION TO HAVE THE GUY MANAGE THE ENTIRE WEST END OF COUNCIL BLESS ONE PERSON, WHICH IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED.
>> I WONDER IF IT'S LIKE AN OVERS LIKE A SUPERVISOR POSITION OVERSEEING AN AREA WITH WORKERS UNDERNEATH THE EMPLOYEE OR SUPERVISOR.
>> IT'S A GRADE 19, SO THEY WOULD HAVE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE UNDERNEATH THEM.
>> YES. THAT WOULD LAY OUT THE WORK IN THOSE AREAS, BASICALLY IN THE WILD.
>> UNSUPERVISED MULTIPLE AREAS.
>> BUT IF WE NEEDED SOMEBODY JUST LATER ON,
[00:20:02]
THAT'S WAY TOO MUCH FOR THAT PERSON, THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO THE ENDOWMENT AND SAY, WE NEED ONE MORE PERSON THAT'S GOING TO BE OVERSEEING ALL SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT AREA DOWN IN THERE AND WE HAVE THAT ABILITY.>> WELL, TO BE HONEST WHEN WE TAKE THIS OVER, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF THE WARRANTY AGREEMENTS, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT COVERS.
>> THAT WOULD BE WHAT IS THE DAILY MAINTENANCE SPECIFICALLY?
>> THE EXPECTATION IS ROUTINE MAINTENANCE IS TO PICK UP THE TRASH, TO DO MINOR REPAIRS, TO DO THE MOWING AROUND THE FACILITY.
ANYTHING THAT ON A DAILY BASIS NEEDS TO BE MAINTAINED, IT'S NOT STRUCTURAL OR EXPENSIVE MAINTENANCE.
THAT IS THE INTENT OF THE ENDOWMENT.
>> I AGREE WITH THAT, EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THEY PUT IN THERE.
REPAIRING AND REPLACING THE RESTROOMS, THE PLUMBING.
THAT COULD GET PRETTY EXPENSIVE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE SOME VANDALS DOWN THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.
>> THAT'S NOT DEFINED. THEN IT ALSO SAYS ELEVATOR INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE.
WE SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT THE ELEVATOR IN FEBRUARY OF 2021.
>> CHAD WHEN HE WAS UP HERE OBVIOUSLY, A MERTAR HAS A ELEVATOR IN THE FLOODWAY.
>> THE ELEVATOR. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY WERE TOLD THEY COULD ELEVATE.
>> OPERATE EVERYTHING FROM ABOVE OR BUILD IT IN A MANNER SUCH THAT IF HAD B, IT WOULD RAISE THE ELEVATOR ABOVE THE LEVATOR OR WHATEVER.
QUESTION THAT I HAD LOOKING AT IT.
MAYBE I MISSED THIS SOMEWHERE.
WHAT HAPPENS IF THE ENDOWMENT GETS BELOW A CERTAIN THRESHOLD? IS THERE ANY.
>> I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ON THAT.
>> IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS RENEWABLE REFUNDABLE, THERE IS NO LANGUAGE TO THAT EFFECT.
ONCE IT'S EXHAUSTED, IT'S EXHAUSTED.
>> WELL, AND I EXPRESSED THIS TO MIMI.
WHEN WE BROUGHT IT UP, I DIDN'T SEE ALL THESE STRINGS ATTACHED.
I THOUGHT IT WAS HERE'S 2 MILLION.
DICK WADE SAID IN THE MEETING WHEN FINANCED. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE STRINGS ATTACHED SO THAT THE FUNDING DOES NOT GET EXHAUSTED ON ROUTINE TYPE MAINTENANCE STUFF.
>> WE DON'T NEICK DIME IT DOWN TO NOTHING.
>> BUT AS I SAID, WE ALL WANT IT TO BE SUCCESSFUL.
THE CITY, AS A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY, WOULD JUST SPEND, AS IT SAYS IN HERE, WE WOULD SPEND THE EARNINGS.
BUT AGAIN, WITHOUT ALL THE STRINGS, WE DON'T HAVE TO GO TO THEM FOR THIS AND THAT AND THIS AND 15 DAYS LATER, AND 30 DAYS LATER, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.
BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS IN FRONT OF US IN FEBRUARY 2021.
WHEN I GOT IT, IT'S LIKE, THERE'S A LOT OF STRINGS ATTACHED TO IT.
I CALLED CHAD UP, AND I SAID, I DIDN'T REMEMBER ANY STRINGS.
I SAID, I DON'T EITHER. I STRUGGLE WITH IT.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THERE'S SO MANY QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE, I GUESS, THAT AREN'T GOING TO BE ANSWERED TODAY, PROBABLY, I WOULD PROBABLY ASK THE TABLE THIS.
>> WHAT ARE YOUR QUESTIONS SO THAT WE CAN GET ANSWERS FOR YOU.
>> I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE INSURANCE.
>> THEY WOULD CARRY A POLICY AND THEY NAME US, PROBABLY FIRST NAME ADDITIONAL INSURED, OR WHATEVER.
THEIR POLICY WOULD COME IN ANY EVENT OF AN INCIDENT OR ACCIDENT.
SOON THEY'RE SUING ANYONE AND EVERYONE THEY CAN. THEY'LL SUE THEM.
THEY'LL SUE THE CITY BECAUSE WE OWN IT, THEY'LL SUE WHATEVER.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU PUT SOMEONE AS A FIRST NAME ADDITIONAL INSURED? MORE OR LESS YOU TRANSFER YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO BEING COVERED BY THEIR POLICY.
THEN THEIR POLICY COMES IN WITH A MILLION OR WHATEVER THE UMBRELLA MAY BE, IN THIS CASE, PROBABLY HIGHER AND WOULD COME OVER AND WOULD FIGHT THE FIGHT FOR YOU, SO IT WOULDN'T COME ONTO YOURS.
IN A LOT OF CASES, AGAIN, I'M NOT THE AGENT ON THE POLICY FOR THE CITY, BUT THE CITY'S CURRENT FOLKS WOULD SAY, HEY, YOU GOT TO NAME US AS ADDITIONAL INSURED, AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING TRANSFERS OVER TO THEIR POLICY BECAUSE THERE'S A SPECIFIC TO THAT AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES IN THERE, SO IT'S RATED FOR THAT.
WHEREAS OUR POLICIES ARE RATED FOR UTILITY WORK OR DOING WORK ON THE STREETS, WE DON'T RATE FOR THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.
THAT'S WHY AS PART OF THE AGREEMENTS THAT WE'D HAVE WITH THEM, LIKE MARY SAYING, THEY WOULD CARRY THE PRIMARY, AND THEY WOULD NAME US IN THAT CAPACITY SO THAT THEIR POLICY WOULD
[00:25:04]
FLOW OVER TO COVER US FROM ANY INDEMNITY OR WHATEVER IN THOSE CASES.>> UNDER IOWA LAW, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES GET SOME LEVEL OF INDEMNIFICATION.
I'M NOT SURE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THAT I WANT TO QUOTE WHAT LEVEL THAT WOULD BE, BUT OUR EQUIPMENT AND OUR PARKS, ALL ARE INDEMNIFIED TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.
>> THEN I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE REVENUE, HOW IT'S COLLECTED AS WELL.
IF, LET'S SAY IT'S 2 MILLION AT 10%, 200,000 A YEAR, DOES THAT GO INTO A SEPARATE FUND THAT WE HAVE ACCESS TO? IT GOES OUT OUR FUND?
>> THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING ABOUT REFUNDING.
LIKE IN THE EVENT PART OF THE YEAR, WE END UP SPENDING DOWN A LITTLE BIT ON SOME IMPROVEMENTS, BUT THEN IN THE SUMMERTIME MONTHS, SAY THE PLACE IS DOING REALLY WELL AND IT'S BRINGING IN A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY.
IS THERE A MEANS OR AN ACCESS?
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FUNDING.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BRING IN ENDOWMENT FUND.
>> THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING IF IT WAS RUNNING A HEAVY SURPLUS AND THE ENDOWMENT FUND HAD BEEN SPENT DOWN, IS THERE A MEANS TO REFILL THAT HOLDING? YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING?
>> WE HAVE ACCESS TO IT, BUT LIMITED.
WE CAN ACCESS THE REVENUE AND THE PRINCIPAL WITH WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM CYNC.
>> WILL YOU PLEASE STAND UP FOR THE [INAUDIBLE]?
>> I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
>> WELL, IT SAYS AND I'M JUST GOING TO READ IT BECAUSE JUST SO YOU KNOW.
IT SAID THE FUND ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT IS THE CYNC BOARD OF DIRECTORS SHALL HAVE OVERSIGHT OF THE ENDOWMENT FUND, INCLUDING APPROVAL, AUTHORITY, AND DISBURSEMENT REQUESTS AS SPECIFIED IN THE AGREEMENT.
>> I BELIEVE THERE'S ALSO AN AGREEMENT IN THERE THAT IF THE CYNC THAT THERE'S A SEPARATE GROUP THAT IS FORMED, MIMI, YOU HAVE TO CORRECT ME ON THIS.
THERE'S A SEPARATE GROUP THAT IS FORMED THAT INCLUDES THE MAYOR AND A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY THAT MAKES THOSE FUNDING DECISIONS.
JUST WHILE SHE'S LOOKING THAT UP, A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT MIGHT BE OF INTEREST TO YOU RIGHT NOW.
FIRST OF ALL, IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO BE FUNDING THE ENDOWMENT AT $2.5 MILLION BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL AT KEEPING THE COST.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE PROJECTING FUNDING THE ENDOWMENT AT THE END OF THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD WITH 2.5 MILLION.
I'M HOPING IT EVEN GOES A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.
AS MATT WAS MENTIONING, AS THE MAYOR WAS MENTIONING, WE HAVE INCORPORATED INTO OUR BUDGET FIVE YEARS OF EXTENDED WARRANTY THAT WE ARE PAYING FOR OUT OF OUR CONSTRUCTION BUDGET.
OUR INTENTION BEHIND THAT WAS TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS SMOOTH, TO MAKE SURE IT'S A SMOOTH TRANSITION AT THE END OF FIVE YEARS, EVERYTHING'S WORKING, EVERYTHING'S WELL CARED FOR, ALL THE PLANT MATERIALS ARE DONE, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT.
DURING THAT TIME, WE'LL WORK WITH ZACH AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND THE SUPPLIERS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY UNDERSTANDS WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
BUT HVAC, EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE COVERED FOR FIVE YEARS.
WE'VE BUILT THAT INTO OUR BUDGET.
THOSE TWO POINTS, I THINK ARE REALLY IMPORTANT.
>> UPON TERMINATION OR DISSOLUTION OF CYNC, THEN THE MOST RECENT BOARD MEMBER OF CEO OR BOARD CHAIR OF CYNC, THE CEO BOARD CHAIR OF IOS, AND THE MAYOR. IF CYNC DISSOLVES.
>> IF CYNC DOESN'T DISSOLVE, CYNC HAS AUTHORITY OVER ALL OF THE MONEY.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. THE OTHER THING THAT PLAYS INTO THAT IS, THIS IS MY LAST PROJECT.
I'M LEAVING CYNC AT THE END OF THIS PROJECT.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION.
JUST LIKE THE OTHER PROJECTS, JUST A PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN WHEN I WAS CEO OF THE IOS, THE FIELD HOUSE, THE SOCCER COMPLEX, THE ARTS COMPLEX, THE COUNCIL BLUFF STADIUM.
IT'S $60 MILLION THAT WE RAISED FOR THE RIVERFRONT.
ALMOST 40 I THINK IT'S 40 MILLION.
DON'T QUOTE ME EXACTLY ON THE NUMBER, BUT ROUGHLY 40 MILLION OF THAT, 60 MILLION CAME FROM SOURCES OUTSIDE OF IOWA.
THE TWO MAJOR FUNDERS IN IOWA WERE THE IOWA'S FOUNDATION AND THE STATE OF IOWA DEPARTMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
THOSE WERE THE TWO MAJOR FUNDERS.
THE REST CAME FROM MOSTLY OMAHA FROM KANSAS CITY FOUNDATIONS.
I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
THAT'S REALLY WAS HOW WE RAISED ALL THE MONEY FOR ALL THOSE OTHER PROJECTS THAT I MENTIONED.
THE INTENTION BEHIND THIS IS TO REALLY SET THE CITY UP WELL AND NOT TO LEAVE YOU HANGING AT ALL, BECAUSE TRUST ME, I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FOR NINE YEARS.
I DON'T WANT IT TO GO DOWN THE TUBES.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU CAN MANAGE IT WHEN YOU GET IT AND THAT IT'S A SUCCESS FOR THE COMMUNITY.
[00:30:03]
I KNOW YOU DO, TOO.>> THERE IS A PROVISION IN THERE IN THAT AGREEMENT.
MIMI, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
BUT THERE'S A PROVISION IN THAT AGREEMENT THAT SAYS, IF YOU GOT A PROBLEM, THAT BOARD CAN MAKE THE DECISION TO HELP YOU FIX THAT PROBLEM FINANCIALLY FROM THE ENDOWMENT.
BY DOING THAT EXTENDED WARRANTY, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THAT, 2.5 MILLION OVER FIVE YEARS, THAT'S GOING TO GROW.
IT MAY BE, I DON'T KNOW. WHAT WOULD THAT BE? SOMEBODY BETTER THAN MATH AND ME, FIGURE THAT OUT.
BUT THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE 3.5 MILLION BY THE TIME YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO INTO THE ENDOWMENT.
I THINK THAT'S A REALLY SOLID BASIS FOR YOU HAVING THE RESOURCES COMING OFF THE ENDOWMENT YOU NEED TO MANAGE IT.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE AND MIMI LOOKED AT IT AFTER I DID, BUT WHEN I LOOKED AT IT, THE END OF THE DAY, THERE'S NO ABILITY FOR CYNC OR ITS PREDECESSORS TO SAY, NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE THE MONEY?
>> IF WE NEED IT, WE CAN GET IT.
>> THAT'S YOUR CHOICE. IF YOU SPEND THE ENTIRE ENDOWMENT, YOU COULD ACTUALLY LEGALLY DO THAT.
SHE WORKED ON AS MUCH MORE THAN ANYBODY ELSE IN PROCESS.
>> WELL, THE CYNC BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAS ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT OF THE ENDOWMENT FUND.
THERE WAS A PROVISION WHERE IT DID STATE THAT IT WAS MERELY ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT, AND THAT ULTIMATELY THE CITY HAD TO SAY, AND I BELIEVE THAT SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT THAT WAS TAKEN OUT.
NOW THE CYNC RETAINS THE ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT, AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACCESS TO EARNINGS, IT'S LAID OUT THERE IN SECTION 6.1 WHERE THE CITY SUBMITS A WRITTEN REQUEST WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE MAINTENANCE NEED AND ESTIMATED COSTS, AND SOME OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.
IN THE FUND ADMINISTRATOR PROCESSES APPROVED REQUESTS WITHIN 15 DAYS, REQUESTS ARE DEEMED APPROVED IF THEY MEET ESTABLISHED CRITERIA UNLESS THE ADMINISTRATOR PROVIDES WRITTEN OBJECTION WITHIN 10 BUSINESS DAYS.
RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A MECHANISM FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR TO OBJECT TO THE CITY'S REQUESTS.
>> THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS TAKEN OUT THAT SAYS THAT THEY CAN'T OBJECT.
>> I DON'T REALLY LIKE THAT IF I'M BEING HONEST WITH YOU.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WHAT'S OUR RECOURSE AT THAT TIME, IF SAY THE ELEVATOR GOES OUT AND SAY, WELL, NO, IT'S NOT.
>> WE COULD PUT SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS, IF THERE'S A DISPUTE BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE FUND ADMINISTRATOR, UNLESS THERE IS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF THIS AGREEMENT, UNLESS IT'S CLEARLY BASED MAINTENANCE THAT INTERPRETATION FAVORS THE CITY.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THAT LANGUAGE WAS IN THERE, THE LAST TIME I SAW IT, THAT'S NOT THAT WAS IN THERE.
>> THEN ON THE SAME TOKEN WHEN IT GETS DOWN TO THIS SECTION DOWN AT THE BOTTOM, ABOUT IF IT OVERSTEPS WHAT WE'VE ALLOTTED TO IT.
THAT WOULD BE ON THE SAME TIME OR THE SAME PROCESS, CORRECT?
>> IN SECTION 7, WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT, IN THE EVENT, WE HAVE THINGS THAT COME TO SOME TOTAL HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'VE ALLOTTED TO IT, WITH MAINTENANCE COSTS.
THAT WOULD FOLLOW THE SAME PATH, YES?
>> THE EMERGENCY ACCESS TO PRINCIPLE IS LAID OUT IN SECTION 6.2.
IF THERE'S A NEED FOR FUNDS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT'S TYPICALLY LAID OUT, THAT'S SET FORTH IN SECTION 6.2, AND WE PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION TO SYNC, AND THEN THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO REVIEW FOR THE UNANTICIPATED ONGOING MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.
I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT.
THIS DESCRIBES A PROCESS FOR US, BUT DOES THAT ALLOW FOR THE SAME VETO POWER BY SYNC TO SAY, WELL, YOU SUBMITTED THIS, BUT WE STILL DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S TRUE.
YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT MY QUESTION IS ME?
>> AFTER 30 DAYS, IT SAYS THEY CAN DENY.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, DOES IT?
>> THEY VOTE FOR THE FUNDING. THEY HAVE 30 DAYS. [OVERLAPPING].
>> BUT WE STILL DON'T HAVE A RECOURSE, I GUESS, JUST LIKE WITH THE SECTION ABOVE.
>> RIGHT, THE RECOURSE WOULD BE COURT.
[00:35:04]
>> TO ME, THE SPIRIT WAS, YOU HAVE THE MONEY.
DICK SAID IN THE MEETING THAT THE CITY FINANCE WOULD BE THE HOLDER OR THEY WOULD CONTROL IT.
THAT'S WHAT WE THOUGHT AT THE TIME.
>> WE DIDN'T, NO. THAT WAS NEVER THE UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE THE CITY FINANCE WOULDN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO EARN THE TYPE OF INCOME THAT WOULD BE EARNED.
>> YOU'RE RIGHT. WE CAN'T HOLD AN ENDOWMENT, BUT CHAD SPECIFICALLY ASKED WHO WOULD HOLD THE EARNINGS AND DICK SAID THE CITY FINANCE DEPARTMENT.
>> THERE COULD BE A LANGUAGE IN THERE 7.5 THAT IF THERE IS A DISPUTE, THE PARTIES NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH WITHIN 110 DAYS, SIMILAR TO WHAT I DISCUSSED BEFORE.
>> JUST A MEANS LIKE PETE WAS JUST SAYING, IF WE WANTED TO DO WHATEVER, YOU ULTIMATELY COULD, BUT THIS SEEMS TO BE IN A MANNER IN WHICH MAYBE THAT'S NOT SO MUCH THE CASE.
IF WE PUT IN A 75 OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD SAY, HEY, WE'LL COME TO A MUTUAL.
>> I SUPPOSE THE NORMAL PRACTICE WOULD BE TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH, WE'RE GOOD PARTNERS.
>> EVERYONE WANTS TO. THEY WANTED TO GO, AND WE WANTED TO GO.
WE'RE ALL WANTING THIS TO BE A WONDERFUL, GLORIOUS PROJECT.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT BY ANY MEANS.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE MAYBE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT LANGUAGE IT MAYBE USED TO BE IN, AND PETE'S REFERENCING THE SAME LANGUAGE IT SOUNDS LIKE, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT MAYBE ISN'T THERE? I THERE SOMETHING WE COULD PUT IN MAYBE IN SECTION 7.5, LIKE YOU JUST SAID, OR A MEANS OF, APPEAL TO SOME AN ARBITRATION OR A BOARD OR WHATEVER.
>> SURE. I CAN PUT THAT IN THERE.
I WANTED TO POINT OUT TOO, IN 7.2 BECAUSE THERE WAS A DISCUSSION OF THAT.
THE FUNDING FOR THE ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE WORKER.
SO 7.2D POINTS OUT THAT THE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF MAINTENANCE NEEDS EXCEEDING BASE CARE THAT COULDN'T BE FORESEEN.
MY CONCERN ABOUT THE DISCUSSION TODAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO NEED THREE, VERY LIKELY.
UNDER THIS LANGUAGE, THEY COULD COME BACK AND SAY, THAT WAS FORESEEN, SO YOU'RE DENIED.
I'M NOT SAYING THEY WOULD SAY THAT, BUT BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST OF THE-.
>> I WANT TO GO BACK TO ROGER BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR AWAY FROM THERE BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT DICK WADE SAID, BUT THERE IS NO EXPECTATION THAT THE INTEREST OFF THE $2 MILLION ENDOWMENT WOULD GO TO THE CITY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE YOU WOULD WANT THAT EARNING TO GET MORE EARNINGS ON IT.
>> THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK IN. THAT'S HOW YOU GET FROM 2.5 UP TO 3, 3.5.
>> BUT YOU SAW TOO. WHEN CHAD ASKED THAT QUESTION, THAT'S WHAT DICK SAID.
MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD, BUT THAT'S WHAT I SAW WHEN I RE-WATCHED THE VIDEO.
>> I APOLOGIZE, IF YOU CAN'T HEAR ME.
BECAUSE I WAS NOT HERE IN 2021 WHEN THEN SCOTT DEBATED, I HAD GONE BACK AND WATCHED MARCH 22ND, AND THEN ALSO THE MARCH 8TH DISCUSSION.
DURING MARCH 22ND, I'M SO SORRY.
>> FEBRUARY 22ND, JUST TO CONFIRM. I'M SORRY.
>> SORRY, I'M ON A LOT OF DQL.
>> I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
>> I TOOK NOTES, SO I WILL READ THEM TO YOU.
ON FEBRUARY 22 OF 2021, THERE WAS A LENGTHY DISCUSSION, AND CHAD HANNON HAD BROUGHT OUT THE ENDOWMENT AND ASKED A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS.
AT THAT TIME, THOSE QUESTIONS WERE MOSTLY ABOUT REPAIR COSTS FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS, AND THEN ALSO WHETHER THOSE FUNDS COULD INCLUDE OTHER PORTIONS OTHER THAN JUST THIS PROJECT.
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT VINCENT HAD REACHED OUT TO MR. TULA PANA ON AND THAT AN EMAIL HAD COME BACK THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED TO COUNSEL BEFORE YOU GUYS VOTED.
THOSE WERE DEALT WITH IN THAT SITUATION.
BUT VINCENT HAD ALSO OUTLINED THAT IO WEST AND SINK HAD BEEN GRACIOUS TO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE ENDOWMENT.
HE'D STATED THEY'D AGREED WITH THE DRAFT SCOPE OF IT COVERING INSURANCE CLAIMS, AND IF ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, JUST THE USE OF IT EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS, THEN WE COULD GO AND MAKE A REQUEST TO HAVE SOME MONEY ALLOCATED FOR STAFF FOR THAT.
NO FURTHER INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED.
FINALLY, THE QUESTION ABOUT THE FINANCE, THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED AT THE FEBRUARY 8TH MEETING.
CHAD HANNON ASKED IF IT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE FOR THE CITY TO HAVE AN ENDOWMENT, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT, THE CITY WAS UNSURE, AND THEY WANTED TO LOOK IN FROM THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION WHETHER THAT WOULD BE LEGAL.
[00:40:01]
MR. WADE HAD IDENTIFIED THAT YES, THE CITY CAN HAVE AN ENDOWMENT.CHAD HANNON FOLLOWED UP WITH, AND THE CITY WOULD MANAGE THAT ENDOWMENT AND MR. WADE HAD SAID, YES, THEY WOULD.
>> SO THAT CITY WOULD HIRE SOMEBODY TO MANAGE THE ENDOWMENT? IF THE CITY WOULD TAKE $2 MILLION AND PUT IT IN THE BANK, THEY WOULD EARN PASSBOOK SAVINGS RETURNS ON IT, AND SO THAT WOULD NEVER BE THE EXPECTATION, BUT WE WOULD MANAGE THE MANAGER OF THE ENDOWMENT.
>> FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, I GUESS, ON A LOT OF THIS, THOUGH, IT SOUNDS LIKE OUR REAL QUESTION IS JUST ABOUT ACCESS TO THE ENDOWMENT.
IF WE WERE TO PUT IN LANGUAGE THAT WAS WOULD GIVE SOME MEANS OF US TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION OR TO APPEAL TO GET AWAY FROM JUST A FLAT NOTE.
THAT WOULD PUT ALL THESE PIECES INTO PLAY AND GIVE US A MEANS TO ACCESS, IF NEED BE, I GUESS.
I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE OUT THAT, THAT COULD NOT BE FORESEEN PORTION OF D IF IT EXCEEDS THE BASE CARE.
>> WELL, I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU, I WOULD LIKE IT TO COVER THE BASE CARE.
LIKE I SAID, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE TAX NEUTRAL.
SUPPOSED TO BE NEUTRAL TO TAXPAYERS.
THAT WAS WHY WE BROUGHT UP THE ENDOWMENT, BECAUSE THESE GIFTS, WHICH THEY'RE ALL APPRECIATED, ALL THESE THINGS, THEY TURN OUT TO COST THE CITY MONEY. WOULD YOU AGREE?
>> BARKS COSTS THE CITY MONEY.
>> AGREED. BUT WHEN WE RECEIVE MULTIPLE GIFTS IN MY TEN YEARS.
>> SOME OF THE THINGS YOU SAID, THAT IO WEST TAKES CARE OF THE MEDIAN EXPENSE TODAY.
>> BROADWAY IS NOT PART OF THAT.
>> BUT THEY PAID FOR THE PROBLEM. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY DID THE LANDSCAPING, THE SOUTH OMAHA BRIDGE ROAD, BY AVENUE G VIDA, ALBY BOM GAS, ALL THE AREAS THAT IO WEST PAID FOR INITIALLY, THEY CONTINUED TO DO THE LANDSCAPING TODAY TO THE TUNE OF NORTH OF HALF A MILLION.
WHEN THEY GOT TO BROADWAY, WHICH WAS PROBABLY THE MOST RECENT IO WEST SAID ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
>> YEAH. WE SCALED BACK ON THE STUFF WE DID BECAUSE-.
>> YEAH, AS YOU HAVE POINTED OUT, IN SOME AREAS, THE DENSITY OF THE VEGETATION IS SO MUCH THAT IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO MOW AND EXPENSIVE TO MAINTAIN.
WHEN WE DID BROADWAY, WE LOOKED AT MORE AFFORDABLE MODEL FOR MAINTENANCE.
>> AGAIN, AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, IO WEST HAS INVESTED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS IN THIS TOWN.
BUT AS WE SIT HERE, THE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE TAXPAYERS, AND THAT'S WHY I HAVE THESE QUESTIONS.
IT'S WHAT I THINK IS THE RESPONSIBILITY, I GUESS.
>> MAYOR, I THINK, WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO EARLIER, THERE ARE SEVERAL PROVISIONS THAT ME AND MR. TULA PANA WORKED WITH US ON.
THE AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH IN SECTION 3.3 REGARDING UNFORESEEN MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS THAT EXCEED THE SCOPE OF BASE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES.
SECTION 4.2, WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER MAINTENANCE QUALIFIES AS ENDOWMENT FUNDING INTERPRETATIONS SHALL IN FAVOR INCLUSION, AND ALSO 6.2 B THREE THE BOARD MAY ONLY DENY REQUESTS THAT CLEARLY FALL OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF COVERED MAINTENANCE AS DEFINED IN THIS AGREEMENT.
THE PART THAT IS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IS WHEN THERE IS A LEGITIMATE DISPUTE, AND WE CAN'T RESOLVE IT IN GOOD FAITH.
>> WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS, THERE WERE DEFINITELY SOME CONCERNS AND CAVEATS BECAUSE IT SAID THAT THE CITY HAD TO EXPEND ALL OF ITS ABILITIES TO FUND NON ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, INCLUDING EXHAUSTING ALL ITS ABILITY TO BORROW THE FUNDING, AND SO WE CHANGED THAT.
THEN I STILL DIDN'T LIKE THE LANGUAGE.
THE LAST VERSION THAT I SAW, SAID THAT TIE GOES TO THE RUNNER FOR THE CITY, AND IF WE COULDN'T COME TO MUTUAL AGREEMENT, THE CITY STILL HAD THE ABILITY TO ACCESS THE MONEY.
>> I THINK THAT VERY LAST PART THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GOT CUT.
>> THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH POSSIBLY A SECTION 7.5, IS THAT?
[00:45:03]
4.2 SAYS, WHEN WE'RE MAKING THESE DECISIONS, IT FAVORS INCLUSION.THEN WE CLARIFY THAT THE ENDOWMENT EXCLUDES BASE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES.
SO THERE COULD BE A 4.4 THAT SAYS, IF THERE'S A DISPUTE.
>> REFER TO 7.2. IF SYNC DISPUTES WHETHER AN ITEM QUALIFIES AS ENDOWMENT FUNDED MAINTENANCE, THE PARTIES SHALL CONFER IN GOOD FAITH WITHIN TEN BUSINESS DAYS.
ABSENT AGREEMENT, THE CITY'S DETERMINATION SHALL CONTROL UNLESS CLEARLY INCONSISTENT WITH THIS AGREEMENT.
THERE'S NO PROVISION LIKE THAT ANYWHERE CURRENTLY.
>> WE CAN HASH THIS OUT. BUT I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO DELAY IT TWO WEEKS, GIVE MIMI AND HER TEAM A CHANCE TO DO A RED LINE FOR US TO REVIEW.
>> TILL DECEMBER 15, THE MEETING. YEAH.
>> I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO RE-WATCH THE MEETING.
>> WELL, IT'S NOT EVEN BUILT YET.
>> IT'S GOT TO BE GREEN. PUSH THE BUTTON ONE MORE.
IT WAS ON BEFORE. THERE YOU GO. YOU'RE GOOD. PERFECT.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE ONE POINT.
MY HEARING IS NOT VERY GOOD, WHICH IS WHY I'M GOING TO FULLY RETIRE HERE SOON, BUT, AS I UNDERSTAND YOUR DISCUSSION, THERE'S JUST ONE POINT I WANT TO MAKE ABOUT THIS, THIS IS A $60 MILLION PROJECT THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CASH FLOW THROUGH THE DONATIONS WITHOUT HAVING TO BORROW ANY MONEY SHORT TERM.
THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE HAVE AN EXTRA HALF MILLION DOLLAR THAT'S GOING TO GO INTO THE ENDOWMENT, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO CASH FLOW THE PROJECT WITHOUT HAVING TO BORROW MONEY, EVEN THOUGH WE HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH LOCAL BANK TO BORROW MONEY SHORT TERM.
I HAVE A MAJOR DONOR WHO HAS $6 MILLION COMMITTED TO THIS PROJECT, WHO WILL NOT GIVE US ONE NICKEL OF THEIR $6 MILLION UNTIL WE HAVE THIS AGREEMENT FINALIZED AND IN HIS HANDS.
IF THIS GETS DRUG OUT FOR A LONG TIME, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GO BORROW MONEY TO PAY TO CASH FLOW THE PROJECT TO FINISH IT UP BECAUSE WE'RE REALLY MOVING ALONG ON THE NORTH PROJECT, IT'S GOING TO BE COMPLETED, PROBABLY AS EARLY AS FEBRUARY.
>> THE TREETOP WALK, THE TOWER, ALL THE AMENITIES INSIDE THE TOWER AS EARLY AS FEBRUARY OR EARLY MARCH.
>> PARK, THE PIER AND THE [OVERLAPPING] AND SOUTH OF THAT.
>> WELL, ACTUALLY, THE PIER WILL BE DONE THEN AS WELL.
THE TWO THINGS THAT WON'T BE DONE ARE THE DOG PARK AND THE PLAYGROUND.
I JUST WANT THE COUNSEL TO UNDERSTAND, IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, WHICH IS MAYBE OVER SIMPLY STATED, THAT ULTIMATELY, IF IT COMES DOWN TO A DISAGREEMENT, YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY OVER THE SINK BOARD TO SAY, WE'RE GOING TO USE THIS MONEY, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT.
>> I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS WHAT, BUT IF WE COME TO AN IMPASSE, THERE HAS TO BE SOME ARBITRATION WHERE WE CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT.
IT'S NOT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THIS MONEY, NO MATTER WHAT.
IF WE'RE AT AN IMPASSE, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO SIT DOWN AND ARBITRATE TO AN AGREEMENT, AND TRY NOT TO BE IN COURT.
OTHERWISE, I WOULDN'T HAVE DONE WHAT I DID IN MY CAREER.
SINK AND MYSELF, AND ALL THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON OUR BOARD ARE REALLY THE DECISION MAKERS WENT OUT AND ASKED ALL THESE DONORS TO GIVE $60 MILLION TO COUNCIL BLUFFS FOR THIS PROJECT.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LET IT GO DOWN THE TUBES.
IF YOU NEED THE MONEY, THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT GETS TAKEN CARE OF FROM THAT ENDOWMENT.
HONESTLY, I THINK IT'S REASONABLE PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO LET THIS DETERIORATE.
THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE RESOURCES YOU NEED.
THAT'S WHY THAT ONE STIPULATION WAS PUT IN THERE, AS IN OUR CONVERSATION SO THAT YOU COULD DO THIS, AND YOU COULD TAKE CARE OF IT, BECAUSE, I'M GOING TO DIGRESS FOR ONE SECOND SINCE I HAVE THE PODIUM.
I CAME OVER TO THE MID-AMERICA CENTER THIS WEEKEND WITH MY GRANDKIDS.
I WAS SO HAPPY TO SEE MAMMOTH CROWDS DOWN THERE IN THE SOCCER COMPLEX, AND THE BASKETBALL COMPLEX, EVEN IN A COUPLE OF THE RESTAURANTS.
WE WANT THIS TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN THAT SAME WAY, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM FOR YOU TO GET WHAT YOU NEED TO TAKE CARE OF IT. THAT'S MY OPINION.
>> I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU, THAT'S WHY ALL THESE STRINGS THAT ARE TIED INTO THIS, THAT'S WHY I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE I AGREE 100% WITH WHAT YOU SAID.
UNFORTUNATELY, TO LIMIT THE LIABILITY OF THE CITY,
[00:50:06]
WHAT IT SAYS IN HERE IS WHAT IT SAYS. WE HAVE TO CHANGE THAT.THE OTHER THING, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, PETE, IS WE WANT IT TO BE SUCCESSFUL, TOO.
I THINK OUR DUE DILIGENCE, THE MAYOR SAW, BUT THE COUNCIL SAW THIS WHEN WE GOT OUR PACKET.
THIS IS A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WE DIDN'T SEE IN FEBRUARY OF 2021.
WE HAD THE MOU, AND THAT WAS IT.
FOR ME, I CAN'T APPROVE THIS TONIGHT THE WAY IT IS.
>> DON'T KNOW, WE HAVE TO SCHEDULE AN ADDITIONAL MEETING?
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT.
AFTER YOU REVIEW AGENDA, I WAS GOING TO BE TELLING YOU THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING LATER THIS WEEK. WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY?
>> WELL, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HAS TO DO SOME OF THE EAST MANAWA COVENANTS, AND IT DIDN'T REALIZE IT NEEDED TO BE COUNCIL APPROVAL, AND THOSE HAVE TO BE DONE BEFORE THE PLAT CAN BE FILED AND THE PLAT NEEDS TO BE FILED THIS WEEK, SO WE NEED TO DO THE COVER.
>> CAN WE ADD THAT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M GOING TO BE ASKING YOU FOR A SPECIAL MEETING ALREADY FOR WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY OF THIS WEEK.
>> WELL, IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR A DATE, LET'S MAKE IT THE FURTHEST OUT DATE SO IF IT'S THURSDAY OR FRIDAY, WHENEVER.
>> YEAH. FRIDAY WOULD BE THE TIME TO VISIT, THIS WEEK.
>> MIMI, DOES THAT SOUND LIKE A PLAUSIBLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT LANGUAGE BACK POSSIBLY IN THERE?
>> YEAH, I MEAN, YOU COULD DO A MOTION TONIGHT IF YOU WANT TO.
I'M NOT SURE THIS IS WHAT'S WANTED, BUT, YOU COULD JUST SIMPLY MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDED VERSION, AND YOU COULD INCLUDE A SECTION 4.4.
YOU COULD DO THE STUFF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN SECTION 7 AS WELL.
>> WELL, IF WE CAN JUST MAKE CHANGES, I WOULD WANT THE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE TO BE COVERED BY THE ENDOWMENT, TOO.
>> I HONESTLY WOULD ADVISE AGAINST THAT BECAUSE THAT MONEY IS GOING TO SOAK AWAY EVERY MINUTE.
>> IT'S ONE PART OR THE OTHER, EVENTUALLY. [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT IF WE DO IT WITH THE ONE GUY WE HAVE APPROVED, AND THEN IF IT GOES OVER THAT, THEN WE HAVE A MEANS NOW OF ACCESS WHERE WE CAN GET MORE THAN WHAT WE NEED.
>> I WOULD JUST HATE TO START SPENDING DOWN THAT ENDOWMENT BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT OF THE ENDOWMENT.
THE ENDOWMENT IS TO COVER NON-ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, UNFORESEEN NON-ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND TO BUILD UP THE AMOUNT OF THE ENDOWMENT, RATHER THAN TO SPEND IT DOWN IMMEDIATELY AND THEN HAVE NO MONEY AVAILABLE.
>> YEAH, IT'S GOT TO HAVE SEED MONEY IN THERE TO GROW.
>> WHICH AGAIN, I DON'T THINK I'M MAKING THIS UP, SOME CONVERSATION WAS HAD THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE FUNDED IN 2021 SO IT WOULD HAVE FIVE YEARS OF GROWTH WHEN IT WAS DONE.
WE HAD SOME RUNWAY TO BUILD THAT UP.
>> WELL, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I THINK WE JUST SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BUY EXTENDED WARRANTY FOR FIVE YEARS SO THAT THAT MONEY WOULD GROW.
>> IT WOULDN'T BE NO MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE, NO MAJOR ISSUES WOULD ARISE IF THEY DO IT ALL BE COVERED BY A WARRANTY.
THEY SHOULD IN THEORY ALL BE COVERED BY.
>> I DON'T REMEMBER BENSON'S COMMENT THAT THIS SINGLE PERSON IS GOING TO TAKE OVER THE ENTIRE DOG PARKS AND FIRST AVENUE AND ALL THAT.
BUT THERE WAS TO BE ADDITIONAL PARKS EMPLOYEE WHO WOULD DO THE DAILY ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, DUMP THE TRASH CANS, CLEAN UPS, THE SPILLS, DO THE MOWING, AT THIS SITE, NO OTHER SITE AT THIS SITE.
>> YEAH. I GUESS, THAT'S WHERE I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THIS.
I THINK THAT THAT IS ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, BUT REPLACING THE BATHROOM PLUMBING PICTURES, VANDALISM REPAIR, ELEVATOR INSPECTION, THE MAINTENANCE, REPAIRING, RESURFACING, AND GRAVELLING, ACCESS ROADS.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS BASIC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE.
I THINK THE CLEANING, THE TRASH.
>> WELL, THIS WOULD ALLOW? THAT'S WHY I ASKED MY QUESTION EARLIER, WHAT DICTATES? YOU NEED TO PUT A NEW TOILET IN.
THAT'S A $250 FIX THAT WE CAN DO.
BUT IF THE PIPEWORK IS BAD TO THE SEWER LINE, DOES THAT CONSTITUTE THAT A MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUE AT THAT TIME?
[00:55:01]
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD GO TO THEM.BUT IF IT'S REPLACEMENT OF A FIXTURE OR SOMETHING SMALL AND MINOR THAT YOU WOULD.
>> THROWING SOME GRAVEL DOWN? WE GRAVEL STUFF ALL THE TIME.
>> JUST THE DEBATE BECOMES AT WHAT POINT DOES IT SHIFT? IS IT A THRESHOLD?
>> WHAT'S CORRECT? THAT'S THE QUESTION.
WHAT CONSTITUTES ROUTINE MAINTENANCE? WELL, THE WAX SEALS WORN OUT ON THIS TOILET.
WE'RE GOING TO PULL IT, PUT A NEW ONE IN.
THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED ROUTINE MAINTENANCE.
AGAIN, NOW IF YOU HAD TO REPLACE THE SEWER LINE FROM THE TOILET ALL THE WAY DOWN OUT THROUGH THE MAIN OUT TO THE SEWER. THAT WOULD BE A MAJOR ONE.
>> I THINK ELEVATOR INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE IS ROUTINE.
>> WELL, BUT IF YOU HAVE AN ELEVATOR, THEY HAVE TO BE INSPECTED EVERY YEAR.
SOMEONE'S GOT TO COME AND DO AN INSPECTION, MAKE SURE THEY'RE ALL SAFE.
I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOME COSTS INVOLVED, BUT THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THE DEBATE BECOMES WHAT?
>> THIS ONE GETS INSPECTED EVERY YEAR, TOO.
>> YES. THAT'S A MAJOR MAINTENANCE.
>> BUT I GUESS IT GOES BACK TO ROGER'S ORIGINAL POINT WHERE IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE NEUTRAL TO THE TAXPAYERS.
>> I WASN'T ON THE BOARD EITHER, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE CONVERSATION.
I THINK THE CONVERSATION WAS AND IT MAY HAVE BEEN FOR ROGER BECAUSE ROGER IS THE ONE THAT BROUGHT IT UP.
BUT THE UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THEY WOULD PUT AN ENDOWMENT OF $2 MILLION THAT WE COULD ACCESS.
I'M CONCERNED THAT MAYBE THE ACCESS IS NOT AS EASY AS IT SHOULD BE.
BUT THAT THE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WOULD BE DONE BY THE CITY WITH AN ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEE.
NOW THEY'VE EVEN JUICED IT UP TO SAY IF YOU NEED A SECOND EMPLOYEE, YOU CAN DO THAT.
>> THERE'S A MEANS FOR THAT, YES.
>> I THINK OVER TIME, AS WE RUN INTO PROBLEMS OR IF THERE IS MAINTENANCE, BIG, LARGE MAINTENANCE PROBLEMS, AND WE GO TO THEM AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS OVER AND ABOVE REGULAR MAINTENANCE, WE'RE GOING TO SET PRECEDENTS AS WE GO FORWARD.
WE'LL HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS DAILY MAINTENANCE VERSUS MAJOR MAINTENANCE COST THAT WE CAN ACCESS.
>> CAN YOU GIVE US SOME SUGGESTED LANGUAGE?
>> YEAH. TAKE OFF THE LAST FIVE WORDS.
>> COULDN'T BE FORESEEN. BECAUSE ZACH'S BASICALLY FORESEEING IT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE COVER THERE, AND THEN THE 4.4 OR THE 4.5, WHATEVER WE'RE AT 4.4 RECOMMENDING.
>> HE SAYS, HE'S GOOD WITH PUTTING LANGUAGE IN HERE ABOUT A FIVE-YEAR WARRANTY.
YOU CAN GIVE ME THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'D LIKE.
THEN IF THAT WOULD MAKE THIS MORE LIKELY TO GET THIS DONE, IT SOUNDS LIKE HE WAS OKAY WITH THAT BEING IN HERE AS WELL.
A FIVE-YEAR WARRANTY SO THAT THIS DOESN'T GET SPENT DOWN IN THE FIRST FIVE YEARS.
IS THAT WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO SAY?
>> WE HAD BUDGETED TO PUT IN A FIVE-YEAR WARRANTY ON HPAK, BOREHOLES, WHAT ELSE? IS PLUMBING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> HAVE A LIST IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW.
BUT WHEN YOU GET A MANUFACTURER WARRANTY, USUALLY YOU GET A YEAR.
WE'RE GOING TO EXTEND THAT FOR UP TO FIVE YEARS.
THE IDEA BEHIND THAT WAS, WE'RE ADDING A HALF MILLION DOLLAR TO.
>> YOU GOT TO COME UP. OTHERWISE, NOBODY CAN HEAR. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M SORRY. THEN IT DOESN'T SHOW ON THE VIDEO AND WHEN THEY WATCH IT IN FIVE YEARS, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO HEAR WHAT YOU SAID.
>> YOU LEFT IT ON GREEN BEFORE. THERE YOU GO.
>> WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO WAS TO MAKE THE TRANSFER AS POSITIVE AS POSSIBLE, AND SO WE'VE BUDGETED THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS SO THAT WE THINK WE CAN ADD ANOTHER HALF MILLION DOLLAR INTO THE ENDOWMENT.
THEN WE THOUGHT, WHAT ELSE COULD WE DO? THE THOUGHT WHAT WE CAME UP WITH WAS, WELL, LET'S EXTEND ALL OF THE MANUFACTURER WARRANTIES FOR UP TO FIVE YEARS, WHICH GIVES YOU ANOTHER FIVE YEAR RUNWAY.
TO YOUR EARLIER QUESTION ABOUT THE ENDOWMENT STARTING IN 2021, WHICH WE COULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T HAVE FUNDED THE ENDOWMENT INITIALLY, BUT THE ADDITIONAL 500,000 WILL GET YOU MORE THAN WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN THAT INTERIM ANYWAY.
THEN THIS SHOULD ADD PROBABLY ANOTHER THREE OR $400,000 TO THE ENDOWMENT.
THEORETICALLY, AT LEAST IN MY MIND, BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THE END OF THE FIVE YEAR WARRANTY, YOU SHOULD HAVE A $3 MILLION ENDOWMENT, WHICH THEN CAN EARN $150,000 A YEAR IF IT'S EARNING 5%.
>> WHICH THEN, IF WE NEEDED TO ACCESS, IF WE HAVE ACCESS TO THE FUNDS, WE COULD THEN USE THAT TO ACCESS AND ADD ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL, CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. ESPECIALLY IF WE AMENDED THE LANGUAGE AND PICTURES AT THE LEVEL THERE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF WE'RE PROJECTING THREE, THEN WOULD COST US THAT.
THAT WOULD GIVE US THE NEEDED FOR THE TWO.
>> DO YOU HAVE THE ISSUE? PETE, DO YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH MAKING THE TWO CHANGES?
[01:00:02]
BUT I HAVE A BOARD I HAVE TO REPORT TO.I PERSONALLY WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT.
I NEED IT TO BE DONE SO THAT I CAN GET THIS PROJECT BUILT.
I NEED TO GET THE MONEY IN SO WE CAN PAY THE BILLS.
I WILL ARGUE WITH OUR BOARD AT SINK.
I DID THIS ON ANOTHER COUPLE OF ISSUES THAT WE HAD EARLIER THAT THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
THE COUNCIL IS NOT GOING TO APPROVE IT WITHOUT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WOULD THIS BE SOMETHING MIMI, YOU COULD GET PUT TOGETHER? IF WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK LATER IN THE WEEK, THAT WOULD STILL?
>> WELL, YOU COULD PROBABLY GET LANGUAGE TOGETHER TO GIVE THEM TONIGHT TO AMEND IT.
>> I COULD HAVE EXCEPT FOR THE MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY LANGUAGE.
>> I CAN SEND YOU A DRAFT THAT WE HAVE OF A LITTLE CHART THAT SHOWS WHAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, WOULD BE BETTER TO TAKE TWO DAYS TO GET IT, SO WE'RE NOT RUSHING YOU TO DO IT IN THE NEXT 4 HOURS OR 3 HOURS. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING?
>> JUST SOMETHING FROM YOUR BOARD.
>> YEAH, GET SOMETHING PUT TOGETHER TODAY, TOMORROW.
>> I RECOMMEND YOU APPROVE IT, AND I KNOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO IT THE OTHER WAY.
>> YOU APPROVE IT. YOU SIGN IT AND GIVE IT TO ME TO TAKE BACK TO MY BOARD.
I THINK THAT'S A SMARTER MOVE.
>> I MEAN, I THINK A LOT OF THINGS, MY FRIEND.
>> IS THE COST OF INSURANCE ROUTINE?
>> THE INSURANCE COSTS AREN'T GOING TO COME ON TO AGAIN, THAT'LL COME THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATOR.
>> THEN TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS IS GOING TO BE OVERTIME COSTS OF THAT.
>> CAUSE THAT'S WHEN THE GUY IS GOING TO BE ASSIGNED TO WORK.
>> THEY'RE REGULAR ASSIGNED HOURS.
THEY'RE NOT WORKING 40 AND THEN WORKING A WEEKEND.
>> THAT'S PART OF THE HOURS OF REGULAR.
>> REGULAR JOB. THAT'S HOW WE DESIGNED IT, WASN'T IT? WITH WITH THOSE TIMES IN MIND BECAUSE THAT'S THE HIGH TRAFFIC TIMES.
>> YOU CAN STAY UP THERE. I GOT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TOWER, TOO.
>> IS HE GOING TO AMEND IT TONIGHT?
>> HE SAID HE'LL GET THE STUFF TOMORROW.
>> YOU'LL GET STUFF OVER TO MIMI. DOES THAT WORK?
>> YES, AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.
WE'RE ADDING IT A 4.4 TO TALK ABOUT THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION.
WE'RE PUTTING IT ABOUT THE MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY.
>> NO, I THINK THAT'S GOOD. THEN I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING ON FRIDAY OR WHATEVER, THEN I WOULD SAY WE COULD APPROVE IT AT THAT TIME.
I KNOW PETE WOULD LIKE US TO APPROVE IT TONIGHT, BUT WITHOUT THAT STUFF BEING DONE, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO ASK YOU TO HAVE IT DONE, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR FOR YOUR BOARD TO HAVE TO GET IT TO HER IN THE NEXT HOUR.
>> I THINK HAVING A RED LINE WOULD BE GOOD.
>> YEAH, GET IT BACK TO US LATER IN THE WEEK.
>> CAN YOU DECIDE ON A DATE AND TIME NOW SO WE KNOW WHAT THAT IS?
>> FRIDAY, I'D SAY WE HAVE ONE ON FRIDAY.
>> WHAT DIDN'T YOU SAY WE HAD TO HAVE ONE ON FRIDAY? [BACKGROUND] [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE LEGAL TEAM IS ALL OUT OF TOWN ON FRIDAY AT TRAINING.
>> YOU WANT TO DO SATURDAY [OVERLAPPING].
>> BUT WE COULD ZOOM IN OR SOMETHING.
>> I'M OPEN LATE AFTERNOON, THURSDAY.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE LOOKS AFTER 2:30.
>> DO WE HAVE LIKE A THREE O’CLOCK ON THURSDAY?
>> I'LL ZOOM, BUT I'LL BE HERE.
>> I CAN'T, I HAVE A TAX MEETING.
>> WHAT TIME COULD YOU ZOOM IN?
>> I'VE GOT 10 OR 11 IN THE MORNING ON THURSDAY.
>> ARE YOU OKAY WITH US APPEARING REMOTELY BECAUSE WE'LL BE TRAVELING TO DES MOINES?
>> AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT DRIVING AND TALKING A SAME TIME.
>> WHEN DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS? WHEN DO YOU NEED THAT.
>> WE HAVE TO MEET THIS WEEK, FOR THE OTHER.
>> NO, I UNDERSTAND. CAN WE PUT IT ON DECEMBER 15TH? [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO, HE'S SAYING THAT. [OVERLAPPING].
>> PUT TOGETHER AND NOW SO WE CAN GET HANDED TO THE FELLOW THAT I GIVE HIM THE DONATIONS.
>> IT WAS DUE ON OCTOBER 31ST TO THE FOUNDATION THAT PLEDGED THE 6 MILLION.
>> I HAVE PUT THEM OFF ALREADY FOR HOW MANY DAYS IT IS?
>> FIFTEEN. THE SOONER, THE BETTER.
>> WEDNESDAY AT 11, WHAT'S THAT LOOK LIKE?
>> WHAT DOES WORK FOR YOU IS WHAT I'M ASKING? [OVERLAPPING].
>> NOTHING ON WEDNESDAY AND FIVE O’CLOCK ON THURSDAY.
[01:05:01]
>> FRIDAY, YOU'RE OUT. COULD SOMEBODY ZOOM?
>> [OVERLAPPING] FRIDAY DOESN'T WORK.
>> NO, I'M HERE ALL DAY FRIDAY.
>> MEANING YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE LEGAL TEAMS CAN ZOOM IN.
>> FRIDAY AFTERNOON WORK FOR ME.
>> DOES THAT GIVE US ENOUGH TIME FOR.
>> YOU'LL GIVE ME WHAT WE NEED.
>> NO, FOR THE OTHER ONE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT JUST HAS TO BE DONE THIS WEEK,.
>> IS THIS SOMETHING THAT I NEED TO BE AT?
>> I HAVEN'T SEEN THE NEW RED LINE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S ENOUGH, BUT MORE THAN THREE OF YOU, SO THAT'S RIGHT.
>> WE GOT TWO O’CLOCK ON FRIDAY.
>> OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE RESOLUTIONS?
I STRUGGLE WITH, WE BUILD THIS TOWER AND APPROACH FOR FIVE YEARS, GETS TO RUN IT, PAY SALES TAX, AND THAT'S IT, THERE'S NOTHING, WE JUST GIVE IT TO THEM.
THERE'S BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN TOWN FOR YEARS THAT HAVE GOT NOTHING FROM THE CITY.
THIS APPROACH, AND I DON'T KNOW THE FOLKS, BUT THEY RUN THIS TOWER, AND THAT'S IT, THEY GET IT FOR FREE.
WE BUILD OUT A TOWER. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I KNOW THEIR COST STRUCTURE, BUT WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE INSURANCE, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE LABOR.
IT'S A SINGLE PURPOSE USE BUILDING, AND I DON'T KNOW WHO ELSE WOULD [OVERLAPPING].
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FINANCIAL AND REVENUE SHARING.
WE'RE JUST GIVEN TO THEM. MAKE A MILLION BUCKS OFF IT, AND WE JUST GAVE IT TO THEM.
>> I'M NOT SURE THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE A MILLIONS.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE MAKING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT COSTS.
IT'S JUST A FREE BUSINESS. THAT'S HOW I SEE THAT.
>> THEY DO THE SIMILAR APPROACH AT MAHONEY STATE PARK, WHICH I THINK IS WHERE WE CAME ACROSS THEM, MAYBE.
>> I KNOW APPROACHING THE NORMAL I'VE SEEN IT.
AGAIN, IT'S A FREE BUSINESS. WHO WOULDN'T WANT THAT?
>> A LOT OF PEOPLE. IT'S A SPECIALIZED BUSINESS.
>> THEN IT SAYS IN THERE, 10 DAYS PER YEAR TO LOW INCOME FAMILIES OR WHAT QUALIFIES AS LOW INCOME? TEN DAYS ISN'T A WHOLE LOT, IF I'M BEING HONEST WITH YOU.
THERE SHOULD BE MORE THAN 10 DAYS.
THEN WHAT QUALIFIES ISN'T IN THAT AGREEMENT EITHER.
HOW MANY FREE PASSES? NONE OF THAT'S DEFINED.
WE'RE IN THAT POSITION WITH THE IOS.
BASKETBALL COURT, WHERE THEY SAY, THERE'S NO TIME.
>> BECAUSE EVERYBODY WANTS FREE TIME.
[OVERLAPPING] IT'S USED A LOT FOR FREE.
>> I UNDERSTAND. BUT IT'S NOT LINED OUT IN HERE.
THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET.
>> THE WHOLE COUNCIL COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICTS THERE IS LOW INCOME.
IT'S A PRETTY BROAD STROKE FOR THEM TO SAY 10 DAYS FOR LOW INCOME FAMILIES WHEN THE WHOLE COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT QUALIFIES IS THAT SO THAT MIGHT BE ONE OF THEIR QUALIFIERS.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING WHEN I READ I COULD COME UP WITH.
>> NOT ENOUGH. [BACKGROUND] I FEEL LIKE I'M BEING CRITICAL, BUT THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO GET ASKED TO US.
>> THE ENDOWMENTS IS THE IMPORTANT PART, IS THIS PART JUST EQUALLY IMPORTANT? [LAUGHTER]
>> I WOULD LIKE TO PUSH THIS ONE TO NEXT MONTH. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE ENDOWMENT, WHAT I'M GATHERING AND THAT'S THE IMPORTANT OF [OVERLAPPING].
BUT THE LICENSE AGREEMENT FROM THE TOWER.
>> THE ENDOWMENT'S THE IMPORTANT PIECE.
THAT'S ONE WE WANT TO GET DOWN THE STREET, BUT THE TRANSFER AND ASSIGNMENT OF LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR THE TOWER,
[01:10:01]
IS THAT EQUALLY AS IMPORTANT FOR YOUR [OVERLAPPING].>> NEEDS TO BE APPROVED. [OVERLAPPING] THE SINK SIGNED THE AGREEMENT AFTER THE AGREEMENT WAS WORKED OUT WITH THE CITY BETWEEN APPROACH AND THEN WE TRANSFER THAT WHEN WE GIVE THE CITY THE AMENITIES.
>> WILL THAT AFFECT YOUR DONOR IF [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE ENDOWMENTS THE MAIN PIECE. WILL THAT AFFECT YOUR?
>> TO BE TOTALLY HONEST, I'M NOT 100% SURE.
>> I WOULD LIKE MORE TIME ON OF THIS PIECE.
TO GO BACK AND I WANT TO WATCH THE VIDEOS FROM 2021.
I ACTUALLY WENT TO THE COMMUNITY SESSION AND I HAVE THE RECORDING OF THE PRESENTATION AND ALL THE PICTURES, AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO MATCH IT UP TO THIS.
>> THIS WON'T BE DONE UNTIL MARCH?
>> [OVERLAPPING] THAT'S WHY I LIKE MORE TIME ON THIS.
>> WE WON'T MAKE THE TRANSFER. [OVERLAPPING] [BACKGROUND]
>> IF WE DID THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING, IT'S NOT GOING TO CAUSE FUNDING FOR OPERATION [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S THE REGULAR MEETING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE IT TO THE CITY, I'D LIKE TO SEE IT.
I KNOW THERE'S PEOPLE DOWN THERE. IF THE CITY OF TAXPAYER IS GOING TO OWN IT, I'D LIKE TO GO DOWN THERE AND SEE.
>> DO YOU COME DOWN AND SEE IT? SURE. THEY'RE HAPPY TO GIVE YOU A TOUR, GET A TOUR SET UP.
SEE THE FACILITY? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
>> THE TOWER THAT YOU'RE GOING.
YOU CAN SEE THE PIER, BUT YOU CAN DRIVE BY AND SEE THAT, BUT I CAN TAKE YOU UP INTO THE TOWER AND ON THE TREE TOP WALK.
ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION AND I HAVEN'T HEARD IT MENTIONED TONIGHT TOO, WE ALSO HAVE MADE ARRANGEMENTS WITH APPROACH THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE FREE PASSES FOR ALL THE AMENITIES AVAILABLE AT THE PUBLIC LIBRARY HERE.
THEY ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO WORK WITH LOCAL NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS 12 DAYS A YEAR AND MAKE ALL THE AMENITIES AVAILABLE TO THOSE FAMILIES AND KIDS WHO MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO PAY TO GET THERE.
>> WITH THE LIBRARY CARD, YOU COULD GO CHECK OUT A PASS FOR THE DAY IRRELEVANT TO YOUR LEVEL OF INCOME, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WHAT DOESN'T COST YOU ANYTHING IF YOU CHECK IT OUT.
>> IT'S SIMILAR TO HOW WE HAVE DONE OTHER THINGS.
>> ALLOWS EVERYBODY TO ACCESS [OVERLAPPING].
>> CORRECT. THAT'S A GOOD THING TO KNOW.
>> CALL THE ZOOM THING? YOU CAN DO THAT. I PAY FOR IT EVERY YEAR.
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY I DIDN'T KNOW.
>> I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE AN AMENITY THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE EXTRAORDINARILY PROUD OF.
>> WHITNEY SAID BEFORE SHE LEFT THAT IF THERE WAS AN INSURANCE CLAIM, SINK OR IOS WOULD COVER THAT.
>> I'D ASKED PETER TO SPEAK TO THAT.
I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY THE PARTICULARS OF THAT.
>> IF THERE'S AN INSURANCE CLAIM HAS SINK COMMITTED TO FUNDING OR PAYING FOR THE INSURANCE CLAIM?
>> THE INSURANCE IS CARRIED BY APPROACH, WHO'S RUNNING IT.
THEY HAVE THEIR INSURANCE, THEY'VE ALREADY SUBMITTED ALL THEIR INSURANCE INFORMATION.
IT'S APPROACH WHO WILL BE CARRYING THE INSURANCE, NOT SINK.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE OPERATING IT.
>> THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL INSURANCE THAT SINK IS GOING TO BE GETTING ON IT.
>> THAT IS ADDITIONAL INSURED ON THEIR [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT WOULD BE LISTING YOU AS THE CITY INSURED.
>> [BACKGROUND] CONSTRUE THAT WE ALSO WOULDN'T HAVE TO BUY INSURANCE.
>> BECAUSE IT WON'T COVER SOMEBODY WHO JUMPS ON SLIPS AND FALLS.
>> RIGHT. THE CITY HAS TO HAVE A VAULT [OVERLAPPING].
>> [OVERLAPPING] SOMEONE SLIPS AND FALLS ON THE SIDEWALK.
CITIES HAVE IMPLIED AN INDEMNITY FOR RECREATIONAL.
>> WE HAVE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS THAN A PRIVATE PARTY.
WE HAVE TO HAVE NOTICE AND HAVE TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO REPAIR AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
>> I CAN YOU RECALL WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT SOMEONE SLIPPING AT THE BASEBALL DIAMOND, THEY TRIPPED ON THE CONCRETE ON THE SIDEWALK.
IT'S A PREMISE LIABILITY ISSUE, MEANING YOU WERE THERE AND YOU TRIPPED, FELL, WHATEVER, IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL FUNCTION OF THE PARK.
>> BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE COVERAGE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> CAN YOU JUST MAKE A PHONE CALL TO [INAUDIBLE] TO GET A IDEA WHAT THE ADDITIONAL INSURANCE COSTS WOULD BE.
>> AT THE SAME TIME, THAT'S THE SAME FOR EVERY PARK WE HAVE.
[01:15:02]
LIKE THE BALL DIAMONDS OR VALLEY VIEW, WHATEVER, SOMEONE, AGAIN, SLIPS FALLS, TRIPS ON THE SIDEWALK.WE HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED THROUGH WHATSAPP THERE WAS AN ISSUE THERE, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT ON SOME OF THAT.
BUT THE ACTUAL UNDERWRITING OF THE ACTIVITY OF CLIMBING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE WOULD FALL UNDER THEIR POLICY.
>> THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL QUESTION.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BUT SOMEONE WALKING IN FROM THE PARKING LOT THAT TRIPS ON THE CURB OR WHAT HAVE YOU. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'D LIKE TO KNOW THE COST. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW THE COST OF INSURANCE ON THAT AS WELL.
>> I THINK WE CAN MAYBE WE CALL THE INSURANCE COMPANY.
>> [OVERLAPPING] I WOULD SAY, JUST TO BE THE ONE TO ASK, HEY IF WE WERE TO ADD THIS AND THEY COVERED THINGS, WE NEEDED JUST PREMISE LIABILITY ON OUR SECTION OF THINGS, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE FOR US OR WOULD IT FALL UNDER A PRE-EXISTING BLANKET WE HAVE OR DEPENDED ON HOW WE HAVE IT. [BACKGROUND]
>> [INAUDIBLE] IS NODDING YES, THAT SHE CAN MAYBE GET A BALLPARK FOR US.
>> WE ALREADY HAVE INSURANCE AT BAHNSEN PARK.
>> IT'S JUST FOR THE NEW AMENITIES. OTHER THINGS YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.
>> LIKE I SAID, JUST LIKE THE TOUR BEFORE WE APPROVE IT.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. OTHER THINGS ON THE RESOLUTIONS?
I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION ON THAT, AND I FEEL LIKE I'M JUST NOT READING IT PROPERLY.
BUT 6-I TALKS ABOUT THE MANAWA PROJECT.
WHERE'S MY QUESTION? HOLD ONE REAL QUICK.
>> THAT IT'S ONLY A CERTAIN NUMBER OF THE LOTS AND THAT ALL OF THEM?
>> CORRECT. THESE ARE THE ONES WE HAVE FOR SALE BECAUSE IT IS NOT PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION THAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE STATE OF IOWA MONEY.
>> CORRECT. THIS IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE PROJECT THAT WE ARE SELLING THESE LOTS FOR 35,000 A PIECE, AND YOU JUST HAVE TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL, AND WE'RE GOING TO KEEP IT OPEN UNTIL ALL 22 OF THOSE LOTS ARE SOLD.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED JUST TO CONFIRM.
>> THERE'S NO ENCUMBRANCES, EITHER, CORRECT? [OVERLAPPING] NO STATE MONEY ENCUMBRANCES. [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER]
>> I JUST WHAT MAKE SURE THAT THESE WERE SEPARATE LOTS AND THAT WE ALREADY WENT THROUGH.
THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
BECAUSE IT WAS [INAUDIBLE] SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S ON MOHAWK. OUR NEW ROAD IS MALLARD.
>> COULD HAVE NAMED IT JOE. [LAUGHTER]
MOHAWK, THE INDIANS ARE [INAUDIBLE] THE DUCKS.
>>JUST SAYING JOE'S ROAD SOUNDS.
>> ON 6-I, I WILL BE ABSTAINING.
>> WE'LL HAVE TO ROLL CALL AT THAT.
>>THEY'VE DONE SOME THINGS IN TOWN ALREADY.
>> HI, I'M PHYLLIS PETERSON, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER OF NEIGHBORWORKS.
I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR ALL YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT OF OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I THINK THIS WILL BE A GOOD PROJECT.
IT'LL BE SIX WORKFORCE HOUSING UNITS.
>> OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE RESOLUTIONS.
>> ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE? SEE YOU AT 7:00. WE'RE GOING TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
>> HEY, WE GOT TWO OTHER THINGS ON THE AGENDA.
>> ONE B IS THE HUNTING REGULATIONS.
>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SAY.
BUT AFTER FURTHER THOUGHT PROCESS.
I THINK WE NEED TO GO TO 25 OR 30 OR EVEN MAYBE 50 LIKE URBANDALE.
[01:20:03]
MY THOUGHT BEHIND THAT IS, IF YOU COOPERATE WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS, YOU CAN PUT IT RIGHT ON THE DAMN LINE.THAT WAS MY THOUGHT BEHIND IT.
IF YOU'RE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT RIGHT ON THE LINE.
HONESTLY, I WOULD SUPPORT 25 FOR SURE.
>> ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT GALEN POINTED OUT TO ME BECAUSE I WAS OF A SIMILAR MINDSET, THOUGH.
BUT IF YOU TAKE THAT 30-YARD PERIMETER ALL THE WAY AROUND, PRETTY SOON, YOUR ONE ACRE IS NOT HUNTABLE ANYMORE BECAUSE THERE ISN'T MUCH LAND LEFT.
>> BUT IT'S HUNTABLE, IF YOUR NEIGHBORING GUY IS AMENABLE TO IT.
>> THAT DEER CAN WALK WHEREVER IT WANTS.
>> SOME MIGHT JUST BE, I'M ANTI-HUNTING.
IT MAY NOT BE THAT IT'S A NICE GUY.
>> CAN I INTERRUPT ONE MINUTE?
>> CAN YOU A TOUR AFTER THE SPECIAL MEETING ON FRIDAY?
>> HOW ABOUT THURSDAY AT 1:00 OR 3:00? NO.
>> ARE YOU ON A TOUR AT THIS WEEK? NO, I WANT TO TOUR BEFORE WE AGREE.
>> I WAS LIKE, NO, I DON'T WANT THAT.
>> NO, BEFORE WE APPROVE THIS.
>> SORRY. WE DON'T NEED TO JUMP AROUND ON YOU.
>> NO, JOE, BEFORE WE APPROVE THIS.
>> WE'RE GOING TO DELAY THE TREAT.
>> YEAH. I GOT. I WAS LIKE, WELL, HOLD ON.
YOU'RE TALKING LIKE THE NEXT TWO DAYS, MAN.
>> YOU'LL ALL SEND ME YOUR AVAILABILITY FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS, AND THEN I'LL WORK WITH PETE TO GET SOMETHING GOING ON.
>> YOU WANT TO DO TOGETHER AND POST IT?
>> OR HOW DO YOU WANT TO? I DON'T WANT TO ADHERE.
>> I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT.
>> YEAH, WE CAN WORK ON THAT AFTER.
>> RATHER THAN DOING THREE DIFFERENT TOURS.
>> YEAH. BUNCH OF DIFFERENT TOURS. YEAH.
>> WE'RE TO MEET AT 2:00. I DON'T KNOW.
>> I HAVE SOMETHING IN BETWEEN THAT AND CAN'T MAKE THAT WORK.
>> EXCEPT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, IF IT'S AT 2:00. WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO GET IT IN, BUT IF YOU GOT SOMETHING ELSE.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO WORK.
>> CAN YOU SHOOT A DEAR FROM THE TOP OF THE TOWER?
>> I MEAN, YOU CAN, BUT IS IT LEGAL? [LAUGHTER]
>> HOW DO YOU GUYS WANT US TO PROCEED IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR? WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION BASED ON THE COMPLAINT THAT WE RECEIVED AND HOW WE FEEL THE ENFORCEMENT SHOULD BE, WHICH IS WHERE, OR IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE SOMETHING, REDUCING THE SIZE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ACTUAL HUNTABLE AREA IS AS BEST AS POSSIBLE.
>> I GUESS. THE REASON, IN MY 10 YEARS, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT'S EVER COME UP.
>> I THINK COURTNEY SAID TWICE.
>> TWICE. THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE GUY WOULDN'T EVEN TALK TO HER.
IF HE WOULD HAVE SAID IF HE GETS HER NUMBER, THE LAND OWNER.
>> THERE'S TWO SIDES OF THE COIN TO THIS.
WE GOT ONE SIDE. YOU GUYS PROVIDED MORE IN DEPTH.
>> THAT ARNOLD FRIEND, RIGHT. I GUESS, AGAIN, IF YOU'RE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO WORK WITH THEM LIKE, "HEY, I WON'T SHOOT ON YOUR LAND, THERE'S THESE THINGS.
I'LL TELL YOU WHEN I'M GOING TO BE THERE." I MEAN, THESE PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE THERE.
THEY WOULDN'T EVEN TALK TO HIM, LIKE THEY SEE HIM IN THERE.
>> I'M COMFORTABLE WITH YOUR SUGGESTION AFTER THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT STORY, THAT EMAIL.
>> I DON'T KNOW THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY.
>> I'M OKAY WITH THE SMALLER, WITH THE 10 FEET.
>> IS THAT YARDS OR FEET YARDS? YARDS. YEAH. I WAS LIKE, HOLD ON. THAT'S A DIFFERENT DEAL.
>> BUT I DO SEE THE SETTING UP, AND I'M NOT A HUNTER SO BARE WITH, THE STAND OR THE WHATEVER FACING THE OTHER WAY, THE BLIND.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT BEING FACED INTO THE PROPERTY.
>> YES. WELL, DOING THAT ALLEVIATES IN THIS, WE JUST HAD A DISCUSSION.
LAST TIME I THINK IF YOU MAKE IT FURTHER BACK AND YOU'RE SHOOTING DOWN AND AWAY, THE PASS THROUGH, WHATEVER.
IF YOU HAVE IT GO IN, IT ALLEVIATES.
>> RIGHT. YEAH, I THINK IT SHOULD BE FACING INTO THE PROPERTY.
BECAUSE THEN IF YOU'RE NOT A GOOD NEIGHBOR OR YOU'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF THE HUNTING OR WHATEVER, YOU'RE SHOOTING IN TOWARDS YOUR OWN PROPERTY, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT OTHER PERSON.
I THINK THAT THAT IS A GOOD COMPROMISE.
PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE TRAIL CAMS NOT, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING I'M GOING TO PUSH FOR.
I'LL LEAVE IT TO YOU PEOPLE THAT HUNT IF A TRAIL CAM IS NEEDED IN THE CITY OR NOT.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE NEEDED, BUT I'M NOT A HUNTER.
[01:25:03]
>> I SEE A HUNTING IN THE CITY IS A PRIVILEGE AND A REDUCE OF THE DEER HERD.
>> AN ACRE OF LAND, WHY DO YOU NEED A TRAIL CAMERA TO HUNT AN ACRE OF LAND? SOME ARE LARGER, BUT TO REDUCE A DEER HERD, I DON'T THINK WE NEED CAMERAS PERSONALLY.
I'VE NOT DONE A LOT OF HUNTING.
HAVING TO STAND BACK, YOU'RE BACK TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY, YOU CAN STILL HAVE THAT 10 YARDS BEHIND YOU THAT YOU COULD TAKE A STRAIGHT DOWN SHOT AND BE LESS LIKELY TO GO INTO THE OTHER PROPERTY.
IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO THAT ROUTE, MAYBE WE NEED TO HAVE THE ARROWS HAVE A NAME ON IT AND ADDRESS.
YOU CAN MARK IT AND THAT WAY, YOU KNOW IF IT WAS SHOT ONTO YOUR PROPERTY OR NOT, AND IT GOES RIGHT TO THE HUNTER.
I MEAN, WE HAVEN'T HAD MUCH OF A PROBLEM OR WHO IT IS DOWN IN TOWN.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT FROM LIVING NEXT TO FAIRMONT AND SO IT IS A PRIVILEGE, AND IT'S DIFFERENT HUNTING IN THE CITY THAN IT IS, HUNTING OUT INTO THE COUNTIES AND THE REST OF THE STATE.
THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. I THINK THE DISCUSSION OF TRAIL CAMS BECOMES VERY HARD WHEN YOU HAVE EVERY OTHER HOUSE ON THE BLOCK, HAVE A RING CAMERA THAT POINTS OUT IN A WAY.
>> IT'S DIRECT. I MEAN, I HAVE ONE THAT DOESN'T WORK.
BUT WHEN IT DID WORK, IT WAS POINTING DIRECTLY OUT MY FRONT DOOR.
I MEAN, I HAVE OTHER CAMERAS UP, SO JUST IN CASE EVERYONE WANTS TO BE AWARE..
THE BATTERY, I GOT TO REPLACE THE BATTERIES, ANYWAYS.
BUT IT POINTS DIRECTLY OUT MY FRONT DOOR, WHICH HAPPENS TO LOOK AT MY NEIGHBOR'S GARAGE AND FRONT DOOR.
I'M NOT TRYING TO SPY ON MY NEIGHBOR BY ANY MEANS.
TED IS JUST, WHO IS AT MY FRONT DOOR.
>> YEAH, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.
LIKE MY CAMERA, I CAN ZONE IT OUT.
IT DOES NOT GO OFF MY PROPERTY.
>> YEAH, MINE IS JUST A STRAIGHT.
>> YEAH, I ZONED MINE JUST FOR MY PROPERTY BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE SPYING ON MY NEIGHBORS, BUT LIKE I SAID, I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING THE STAND FACING IN.
>> RIGHT NOW, SINCE WE'RE GOOD WITH WHERE WE'RE AT.
WHAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS OR WHAT WHICH?
>> THAT WOULD BE MY OPINION, YES.
JUST TO CLARIFY, ROGER, IT'S DOORS ONLY.
THE ONLY TIME A BUCK IS AVAILABLE IS IF YOU HARVEST FOUR DOORS IN ONE SEASON, YOU DO GET AN INCENTIVE BUCK TAG THE FOLLOWING SEASON.
THAT'S THE ONLY TIME A BUCK COMES INTO PLAY.
TO THE DIRECTION OF THE STANDS.
MOST, AND I REALIZE YOU'VE NEVER BEEN IN A STAND, I'M GUESSING.
>> NO. [LAUGHTER] I KNOW WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE.
>> SHOOTING STRAIGHT OFF THE STAND.
>> YEAH. I KNOW WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE.
>> MANY OF THE SHOTS ARE TO THE SIDES, NOT STRAIGHT OFF THE FRONT.
TO FACE IT INTO THE PROPERTY, THAT PUTS YOUR SHOTS OFF THE SIDES.
>> SHE'S SAYING IF YOU WANT TO SHOOT BEHIND AND YOUR CAMERA.
>> I'M SAYING YOU PUT IT UP AT THE PROPERTY LINE YOU NEED TO SHOOT IN. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU HAVE AVAILABILITY TO, BUT HER PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO AN AVOIDANCE AND AVOIDING THE PASTURE LIKE AS I WAS SAYING.
>> YES, THESE HUNTS ARE A PRIVILEGE.
HOWEVER, WE'RE ASKING THESE HUNTERS TO HELP US WITH OUR DEER POPULATION.
THE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAT WE MAKE THIS, THE LESS PARTICIPATION WE ARE GOING TO GET, AND WE'RE LIABLE TO LOSE SOME FOOTING ON THIS POPULATION.
IS IT DUE TO THIS HUNTING SPECIFICALLY? NOT SOLELY, NO.
HAS IT HAD AN EFFECT? I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT IT HAS.
GIVEN THE NUMBER OF DEER THAT OVER THE COURSE OF THIS WHOLE PROJECT THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN, I THINK IT HAS BEEN BENEFICIAL.
ALTHOUGH THE NUMBER THAT ARE STILL BEING HIT BY CARS ARE OUTNUMBERING WHAT THE HUNTERS HAVE TAKEN.
BUT I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS SO RESTRICTIVE THAT WE LOSE OUR HUNTERS AND THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THEM TO HUNT.. WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT SO DIFFICULT TO FIND PROPERTIES FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THAT I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL.
[01:30:04]
I DO PREFER FOR IT TO STAY WHERE IT IS.I HATE TO THINK THAT WE NEED TO STEP IN AND CHANGE AN ORDINANCE JUST BECAUSE OF ONE COMPLAINT OVER THE COURSE OF 18 YEARS.
WITH THE HISTORY, THERE'S LITTLE TO KNOW HISTORY.
>> THAT GAVE ME A LITTLE BIT OF HEARTBURN.
>> WE HAVE TWO SIDES OF A STORY.
>> RIGHT. NOW, IF WE HAD 10 COMPLAINTS EVERY YEAR, ABSOLUTELY, SOMETHING HAS CHANGED.
>> BUT I THINK THAT THAT GOES TO WE HAVE GOOD HUNTERS OUT THERE AND GOOD PROPERTY MANAGERS THAT ARE SAYING, THIS IS HOW I WANT IT DONE.
BUT FOR THIS CASE, AND IF THERE IS ANOTHER CASE OUT THERE, IT GIVES THAT OTHER PROPERTY OWNER AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, "NO, DON'T SHOOT INTO MY PROPERTY."
>> IN THIS CASE, IT SHOULD BE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS.
>> RIGHT. IF BOTH OF THEM ARE NOT WILLING TO SPEAK TO EACH OTHER.
>> BUT FOR CLARIFICATION, THEY CANNOT SHOOT OFF OF THE PROPERTY THAT THEY HAVE PERMISSION.
YOU CAN'T SHOOT ONTO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
YOU CAN ONLY SHOOT ONTO THE ONE THAT YOU HAVE PERMISSION.
>> THEN WHY WOULD IT FACE THAT WAY.
>> [OVERLAPPING] ALLOW IT TO BUTT RIGHT UP TO THE THING AND FACE THEN.
>> IF IT'S FACED THAT DIRECTION, HIS SHOTS ARE OFF THE SIDE ADJACENT WITH THE PROPERTY LINES, ON THE PROPERTY THAT HE HAS PERMISSION TO SHOOT ON.
>> THEN IT'S, HE SAID SHE SAID, AGAIN.
>> IT'S THE INVERSE ON THE OTHER SIDE.
>> CORRECT. THERE'S A TREE BIG ENOUGH TO GO ON A PROPERTY LINE RIGHT HERE.
WHAT I THINK JILL IS SAYING IS THEY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO FACE THIS PROPERTY.
EVEN IF THEY'RE SHOOTING THIS WAY AND THIS WAY DOWN THE LINE, IF THEY'RE FACING THIS WAY, THEY CAN STILL SHOOT THAT WAY.
>> THEY CAN STILL SHOOT LEFT RIGHT, THEY NEED TO BE FACED, AGAIN, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE SHOOTING LEFT RIGHT HERE OR YOU'RE SHOOTING LEFT RIGHT HERE, STILL EAST AND WEST ARE GOING THROUGH SOUTH.
>> I'M JUST SAYING THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR TREES, WHICH WE CAN'T, YOU WOULDN'T ANYWAY.
YOU WOULDN'T HAVE IT FACE THAT DIRECTION.
>> YEAH, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING.
>> THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING.
>> THAT'S WHAT THE LADIES SAYING.
>> THIS IS THE CLAIM BY ONE PERSON, YOU'RE CORRECT.
I THINK THAT WHAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT IS UNLESS IT'S SOMEBODY COMPLAINING ABOUT IT, WE DON'T GO OUT AND INSPECT TREES.
>> I AGREE. BUT IT GIVES THIS PERSON AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A PICTURE AND THEN THEY CAN DEAL WITH IT.
>> I THINK THAT'S THE MINIMAL, BUT I AGREE.
>> LET'S JUST MAKE SURE THEY FACE THE PROPERTY WITH PERMISSION TO HUNT.
>> I'M NOT EXPECTING YOU GUYS TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT EVERY TREE STAND AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. IT JUST GIVES THAT PERSON.
>> IT TAKES PICTURES AND PROVIDES OF THEM.
>> IT GIVES THAT PERSON THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, "NO, THEY'RE SET UP, AND THEY'RE FACING INTO MY PROPERTY."
>> THEN YOU GUYS CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE HUNTER.
THE HUNTER HAS THE PERMIT, AND SAY, "LOOK, HERE'S A PICTURE OF YOUR STAND.
IT'S FACE THE WRONG DIRECTION, GO TURN."
>> WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS WE CAN KEEP THEM ON THE PROPERTY LINE, BUT THEY JUST NEED TO BE FACING, THEY NEED TO NOT BE ON THE, OKAY.
>> FROM A NON PARTICIPATING NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> WE'RE GOING ON THE LINE OR WE'RE GOING 10 YARDS OFF?
>> I'M FINE WITH THE ON THE LINE.
>> AS LONG AS YOU'RE FACING IN GO ON THE LINE.
>> YEAH. AS LONG AS YOUR BACK IS TO THE.
>> AS LONG AS YOUR BACK IS TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY, YOU CAN SHOOT PARALLEL EACH SIDE.
>> YOU CAN GO RIGHT LEFT OR STRAIGHT.
>> YEAH. I THINK THERE WAS JUST SOME CONFUSION, WE UNDERSTAND NOW.
>> IF THAT IS THE ONLY CHANGE, TONY GOT SOMETHING.
>> A LITTLE BIT OF A POINT OF CLARIFICATION FOR MY BENEFIT.
>> SORRY, BUDDY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO.
>> YEAH. THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD ON BY REQUEST OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO YOU GUYS, AND THEN WE SET IT OVER FOR THIS CONVERSATION.
I GUESS I'D JUST LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE REQUESTING THAT THIS BE WITHDRAWN OR IF THERE'S SOMEONE OR TWO PEOPLE UP THERE THAT WANT TO, I GUESS, SPONSOR SOME VERSION OF THIS MOVING FORWARD.
>> YEAH, I'M OKAY WITH THE CHANGE TO MAKE THE FACE INTO THE PROPERTY, THERE YOU HAVE PERMISSION TO HAND ON.
>> IF YOU'RE OUT IN THE WOODS.
>> IF YOU'RE IN THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY?
>> WELL, IF YOU SAY, YOU CAN BE RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE? HOW DO YOU KNOW?
>> IT'S HARD TO TELL. YOU SHOULD KNOW, BUT IT IS GOING TO BE TOUGH TO TELL IF THAT TREES ON THEIR LINE OR NOT.
BUT THAT'S AGAIN, WHY YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR.
THAT'S THE WHOLE SPIRIT OF IT, I WOULD THINK.
>> DO WE NEED TO PUT A CAVEAT TO THAT? YOU CANNOT FACE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY WITHIN THE 10 YARDS OR THE 20 YARDS OR 25 YARDS, WHATEVER IT IS.
YOU CAN HUNT ON THE LINE IF YOU'RE FACING IN.
BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO FACE BACK TOWARDS SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY FACING OUT.
>> WELL, DO DOES 10 YARDS GIVE YOU A BUFFER WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS.
>> IF THERE'S TREES RIGHT HERE RIGHT HERE AND YOU PUT IT ON THIS ONE THAT'S NOT ON THIS WHITE PIECE OF PAPER.
LIKE YOU'RE NOT ON THE PROPERTY, YOU HAVE APPROVAL TO HUNT ON ANYWAY.
>> I THINK THAT, 10 YARDS IS 30 FEET.
THAT'S PROBABLY WIDER THAN THIS.
[01:35:01]
>> THAT'S WHY OUR PREFERENCE, AND THAT'S WHY WHEN WE WERE ORIGINALLY TALKING WITH MAYOR, WE WERE TRYING TO SAY, COULD WE DO IT AS SMALL OF AREA AS POSSIBLE? I DON'T I THINK THAT WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET IT IN A WAY THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE OUR PROGRAM AND NOT LOSE HUNTERS AND NOT LOSE LAND THAT WE'RE HUNTING AS ALL.
>> WE NEED TO MAKE IT. THEN DO WE NEED TO MAKE IT SAY, LIKE I SAID, IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE WITHIN 10 YARDS OF THE PROPERTY LINE, YOU HAVE TO BE POINTED THE INTERIOR.
>> I THINK IT'S THE HUNTER'S JOB TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THEY CAN HUNT AND WHERE THEY CAN, AND THEY NEED TO BE FACING THE OTHER DIRECTION.
IF THEY SHOOT IN, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO GET IN TROUBLE.
>> OR SHOOT OUT. SORRY. AGAIN, NOT A HUNTER.
SAME RULES THAT WE HAVE NOW, BUT DIRECTIONAL STANS BASIC LANGUAGE.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
>> FACING THE PROPERTY HAVE PERMISSION TO HUNT ON.
IF YOU HAVE PERMISSION TO HUNT, BOTH PROPERTIES, AND YOU FACE IT WHEREVER YOU WANT.
>> ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT? HOW ABOUT SHELL ORDINANCE UPDATE?
>> YOU HAVE WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED.
WE HAVEN'T HAD CHANCE. MINIMAL, YEAH.
>> YEAH. ME YOU SAID YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN PRETTY BUSY THE LAST WEEK OR TWO WITH SOME THINGS.
>> WELL, AND I THINK DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT POP? NO.
>> I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SOME DETERMINATIONS ABOUT WHO OWNS A LOT OF THE LAND UP THERE TO THE NORTH.
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER JUST IN TERMS OF AN ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE.
I THINK THAT WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL OPTIONS THAT WE WEREN'T PREVIOUSLY AWARE OF.
AS WE'VE CONTINUED TO MEET, THE CHIEF HAS BEEN HE WENT TO A TRAINING OUT OF TOWN AND MET WITH SOME INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE PART OF AN ORGANIZATION THAT ACCREDITS POLICE ORGANIZATIONS WITH THEIR DEFLECTION STRATEGIES.
AS PART OF THAT PROGRAM, IF THEY WERE TO COME IN.
I DON'T WANT TO STEAL YOUR THUNDER CHIEF, BUT PART OF WHAT THEY'LL DO IS THEY'LL MAP OUT ALL OF THE SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED IN AN AREA, SO THAT I MEAN, THE INTENT WOULD BE FOR POLICE OFFICERS IN LIEU OF ARRESTING THE PERSON, THEY'D BE ABLE TO DEFLECT THEM TO PREDEFINED AND MAPPED SERVICES.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE JUST BEEN NOT IN TERMS OF THE ORDINANCE, BUT SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING IS, I THINK WOULD BE OBVIOUSLY HIGHLY BENEFICIAL TO KNOWING, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A GOOD NETWORK NOT EVEN A LOT OF THE NON PROFITS, EVEN WHEN THEY TRY TO WORK TOGETHER ARE STILL SILOED FROM OTHER NON PROFITS.
I THINK GETTING A MAPPING LIKE THIS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S COME UP IN A LOT OF MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NON PROFIT PROVIDERS, HOW THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL, AND I SEE IT AS BENEFICIAL.
I THINK THAT WORKING WITH THIS POLICE AGENCY THIS ORGANIZATION THAT'LL COME IN AND ACCREDIT US FOR DEFLECTION STRATEGIES IS SOMETHING THAT THE CHIEF HAS BEEN PURSUING FOR HP PURPOSES, BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY CAN BENEFIT FROM BEYOND JUST POLICE PURPOSES.
>> I THINK IT'D BE GOOD TO HAVE SOME DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL TOO AS TO WHETHER YOU WANT, IF WE WERE TO FULLY VET THAT PROPOSED ORDINANCE, DO YOU WANT THAT ON THE DECEMBER 15 CALENDAR ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS BECAUSE THE VOTE WOULD BE SPLIT AMONGST THE FIRST SECOND AND THIRD READING OF THE ORDINANCE.
>> I THINK A STUDY SESSION IS GOOD AGAIN ON THE PLAN.
>> BECAUSE YOU HAVE A NEW COUNSEL, I AGREE.
I MEAN, TONY, I'D LIKE TO SIT DOWN AGAIN WITH HIM, AND WE HAVE 30 DAYS BEFORE THE 15TH TO HAVE ANOTHER SUBSTANTIAL UPDATE.
>> IF YOU WANT TO. MOTION NUMBER?
>> ROGER. IF YOU WANT TO SHIT ON ROGER SANDO? JILL SHUDAK? A. JODI SALVO. STEVE GORMAN.
CHRIS PETERSON. WHO SECONDED THAT? ROGER MADE THE MOTION AND WHO SECONDED?
[1) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]
>> THE PLEDGE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVIDUAL WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
[2) CALL TO ORDER]
>> LIKE CALLING ME IN ORDER SHALL ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE IN ATTENDANTS,
[3) CONSENT AGENDA]
I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.>> IS THERE DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
[01:40:01]
OPPOSED SAME SIGN TONIGHT.[4.A) Ordinance 6659 Ordinance to amend the zoning map as adopted by reference in Section 15.27.020, by rezoning 473 acres (m/l) of land legally described as being part of Sections 29-74-43 and 32-74-43, City of Council Bluffs, Pottawattamie County, Iowa and part of Sections 5-73-43 and 6-73-43, City Of Council Bluffs, Mills County, Iowa (and being more particularly described in the Council packet) from a mixture of A-3/River Front and Agricultural Production District (Pottawattamie County), I-1/Limited Industrial District (Pottawattamie County), I-2/General Industrial District (Pottawattamie County), and I/Industrial District (Mills County) to a mixture of A-2/Parks, Estates and Agricultural District (City), C-2/Commercial District (City), and I-2/General Industrial District (City) as defined in Chapters 15.05, 15.15 and 15.21. ZC-25-006]
WE HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL IN REGARDS TO EITHER ONE OF THESE, PLEASE STEP FORWARD THE MICROPHONE, GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
NOW IT'S TIME PLACED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE 6659.
THIS ORDINANCE IS TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP AS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE IN SECTION 15.27 0.02 BY REZONING 473 ACRES OF LAND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING PART OF SECTIONS 29-70 4-43, AND 32-7443, CITY OF COUNCIL BLUS POTTAWATOME COUNTY, MANAWA, AND PARTS OF SECTION 573-43 AND 6-70 3-43, CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFFS, MILLS COUNTY, IOWA, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE COUNCIL PACKET, FROM A MIXTURE OF A THREE RIVERFRONT AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION DISTRICT, WHICH ARE POTAWATOME COUNTY ZONING DISTRICTS, AND I ONE, LIMITED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, POTTAWATOME COUNTY, I TWO GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, POTTAWATOME COUNTY, AND I INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, MILLS COUNTY ZONING TO A MIXTURE OF A TWO PARKS, ESTATES, AND AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, CITY OF COUNCIL BUS C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT CITY, AND I TWO GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT CITY AS DEFINED IN CHAPTERS 15.05, 15.15 AND 15.21.
IS PROOF OF PUBLICATION ON FILE?
>> ANY WRITTEN PROTESTS RECEIVED?
>> ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL IN REGARDS TO THIS MATTER? IS THERE A MOTION FROM THE COUNCIL?
>> IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE.
>> SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO WAVE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE.
NOW IT'S TIME PLACED FOR PUBLIC HEARING REGARDS TO RESOLUTION 25-285,
[4.B) Resolution 25-285 Resolution approving the plans and specifications for the South 23rd Street Sewer Rehab, Phase II. Project # PW26-12]
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE SOUTH 23RD STREET SEWER REHAB PHASE TWO, PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT 26-12.IS PROOF OF PUBLICATION ON FILE?
>> ANY WRITTEN PROTESTS RECEIVED? NONE RECEIVED? ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL IN REGARDS TO THIS MATTER?
>> SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
[5.A) Ordinance 6660 Ordinance to amend Chapter 9.34 Emergency Snow Routes of the 2025 Municipal Code of Council Bluffs, Iowa, by amending Section 9.34.030 "Emergency Snow Route Established"]
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 9.344 EMERGENCY SNOW ROUTES OF THE 2025 MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 9.34 0.030.EMERGENCY SNOW ROUTES ESTABLISHED.
>> SECOND. IS THERE SOME DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
>> DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
[5.B) Ordinance 6661 Ordinance to amend Chapter 3.08 "Beer and Liquor Control" of the 2025 Municipal Code of Council Bluffs, Iowa, by amending Section 3.08.045 "Exceptions to CBMC 3.08.045 Paragraph E"]
>> ORDINANCE 66 61, AND ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 3.08 BEER AND LIQUOR CONTROL OF THE 2025 MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 3.08 0.0 545, EXCEPTIONS TO CB MC 3.08 0.045 PARAGRAPH E.
>> OH, TONY. COME. YOU GOT TO GO TO MIC.
>> EXCEPTIONS TO C B MC 3.08 0.040.
IF SOMEONE COULD MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THAT TO PROPERLY REFLECT IN THAT LAST LINE IN THE QUOTES, EXCEPTIONS TO CB MC 3.08 0.040.
>> IS IT INCORRECT BEFORE THAT? IT'S TWICE.
>> WE'RE AMENDING 3.08 0.05, WHICH IS TITLED EXCEPTIONS TO CB MC 3.08 0.040 PARAGRAPH E.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
>> MOTION TO WAIVE THIRD ALLOW 12.
>> SECOND. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE? OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
>> OKAY. WE HAVE RESOLUTION 25-287,
[6.B) Resolution 25-287 Resolution of intent to enter into a Maintenance Endowment Agreement with Southwest Iowa Nonprofit for Collective Impact (SINC) for the Riverfront Revitalization River's Edge Development (River's Edge Development)]
[01:45:03]
A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO ENTER INTO AN A MAINTENANCE ENDOWMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE SOUTHWEST LOWA NONPROFIT FOR COLLECTIVE IMPACT FOR THE RIVERFRONT REVITALIZATION RIVERS EDGE DEVELOPMENT.>> MOTION TO TABLE TO NOVEMBER 21, AT 2:00 P.M.
>> IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO TABLE?
>> WE HAD A VERY HEALTHY DISCUSSION TODAY ABOUT THE ENDOWMENT.
THE WAY I REMEMBERED IT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2021.
WENT BACK AND WATCH THE MEETINGS, AND AS I THE SPIRIT OF THE ENDOWMENT TO ME WAS TO COVER ALL COSTS AND MAKE IT NEUTRAL TO THE TAXPAYER.
THAT'S NOT HOW THAT'S NOT HOW THIS READ TO ME.
THE COUNCIL HAS PUT HAS SOME AMENDMENTS THAT I THINK WILL COME ON FOR THE 21ST.
I'M NOT SURE IT'S STILL ENOUGH FOR ME.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO GET A RED LINE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY.
I THINK SINK IS GOING TO GO TO THEIR BOARD AND GET SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS WELL.
>> ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. MOTION IS TO TABLE AND TILL A DATE CERTAIN.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE? OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
[6.A) Resolution 25-286 Resolution of intent to enter into a Transfer and Assignment of License Agreement for MidAmerican Energy Adventure Tower with Southwest Iowa Nonprofit for Collective Impact (SINC)]
>> RESOLUTION 25-286, A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO ENTER INTO A TRANSFER AND ASSIGNMENT OF LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR MID AMERICAN ENERGY ADVENTURE TOWER WITH SOUTHWEST LOWA NONPROFIT FOR COLLECTIVE I PEC.
>> MOTION TO TABLE TO DECEMBER 15 MEETING.
THIS ONE ISN'T AS TIME SENSITIVE, BUT DEFINITELY WANT OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK AND FOR MYSELF, GO BACK AND WATCH THE FEBRUARY 8 AND FEBRUARY 22 OF 2021 MEETINGS, SEE WHAT THAT INTENT WAS. AND WHAT WAS DISCUSSED?
>> WHEN I ASKED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL, LIKE, WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST FOR INSURANCE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> IS THAT DATE GOING TO BE ADEQUATE? FAR ENOUGH OUT?
>> ME I THINK HE'S TALKING TO YOU.
>> WELL, WE TABLED UNTIL DECEMBER, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT'S FAR ENOUGH TO GET THAT ONE RESOLVED BY THE NEXT MEETING.
>> GET THE TOWER AGREEMENT RESOLVED THE ASSIGNMENT.
>> YEAH. YOU THINK THAT I GUESS IT WOULD BE THE 15TH, IS IT?
>> WELL, I THINK THAT'S I THINK IT'S FINE.
I THINK IF WE GET THE ENDOWMENT AGREEMENT ADDRESSED THIS FRIDAY, THEN THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE TOWER COULD BE ANY TIME THEREAFTER.
>> WE STILL WOULDN'T TAKE POSSESSION UNTIL MARCH AFTER THEY GET THEIR CERTIFICATE.
>> CORRECT. I THINK THE WAY WHITNEY HAS IT WRITTEN AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WHITNEY IS, WE'VE GOT PASSAGE OF THE ENDOWMENT AGREEMENT.
THERE'S SEVERAL CONDITIONS PROCEEDING TO TAKE POSSESSION.
COMPLETION OF THE CONSTRUCTION, PASSAGE OF THE ENDOWMENT AGREEMENT.
FINAL CERTIFICATE OF CC OCCUPANCY NOT TEMPORARY.
>> SOUNDS LIKE IT'LL WORK. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED. SAME SIGN.
>> RESOLUTION 25-288, A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF
[6.C) Resolution 25-288 Resolution accepting the bid of Western Iowa Utilities, Inc. for the East Ridge Drive Sanitary Manhole Reconstruction. Project # PW25-25 ]
WESTERN LOWA UTILITIES INC FOR THE EAST RIDGE DRIVE SANITARY MANHOLE RECONSTRUCTION.>> DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
[6.D) Resolution 25-289 Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with HGM Associates, Inc. for engineering services in connection with the Mid-America Center Parking Lots Rehab, Phase 6. Project # BM26-01]
>> RESOLUTION 25-289, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH HGM ASSOCIATES INC FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE MID AMERICA PARKING LOT REHAB PHASE 6.
>> SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION?
>> LAST PHASE THE PARKING LOT.
THERE'S STILL SOME ROUGH AND SOME BOILERS.
>> WHO KNOWS? IT'S BEEN 22 YEARS.
>> WELL, SOME OF THOSE HOLES IN THE PARKING LOT, YOU BUILD APARTMENT COMPLEX IN SO FISHING.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> RESOLUTION 25-290, A RESOLUTION
[6.E) Resolution 25-290 Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with Snyder & Associates, Inc. for engineering services in connection with the Hillcrest Avenue Reconstruction, Phase II. Project # PW26-14]
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH SNYDER AND ASSOCIATES IN CONNECTION WITH THE HILLCREST AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION PHASE 2.>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
[6.F) Resolution 25-291 Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with Strand Associates, Inc. for engineering services in connection with the WPCP Digester Lid Rehabilitation. Project # PW26-15 ]
[01:50:02]
>> RESOLUTION 25-291, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH STRAND ASSOCIATE FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE WPCP DIGEST LID REHABILITATION?
>> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
[6.G) Resolution 25-292 Resolution authorizing the City Clerk to certify assessments against properties to the Pottawattamie County Treasurer for unreimbursed costs incurred by the City for the abatement of weeds and the removal of solid waste nuisances upon properties and directing them to be collected in the same manner as a property tax.]
>> RESOLUTION 25-292, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO CERTIFY ASSESSMENTS AGAINST PROPERTIES TO THE POTTAWATOMIE COUNTY TREASURER FOR UNREIMBURSED COST INCURRED BY THE CITY FOR THE ABATEMENT OF WEEDS AND THE REMOVAL OF SOLID WASTE ON PROPERTIES AND DIRECTING THEM TO BE COLLECTED IN THE SAME MANNER AS PROPERTY TAX.
>> IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
[6.H) Resolution 25-293 Resolution approving the use of 2026 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) program funds and directing the mayor to submit the 2026 Action Plan to the City of Omaha and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).]
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE USE OF 2026 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS, AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDS AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO SUBMIT THE 2026 ACTION PLAN TO THE CITY OF OMAHA AND THE US DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.>> IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE.
[6.I) Resolution 25-294 Resolution declaring the intent of the City to accept a proposal received in accordance with the Requests for Proposals and to enter into a purchase, sale, and development agreement based on the selected proposal.]
>> RESOLUTION 25-294, A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE CITY TO ACCEPT A PROPOSAL RECEIVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND TO ENTER INTO A PURCHASE, SALE, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BASED ON THE SELECTED PROPOSAL.
>> JUST REAL QUICK. THESE ARE GOING TO BE REALLY GOOD AFFORDABLE HOUSES, AND THE LOTS AT 35,000 IS A GOOD START.
[6.J) Resolution 25-295 Resolution authorizing the City of Council Bluffs to provide a City tax exemption on newly annexed properties.]
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF COUNCIL BUFFS TO PROVIDE THE CITY TAX EXEMPT ON NEWLY ANNEXED PROPERTIES.>> IS THERE A DISCUSSION? THESE WERE PROPERTIES IN MILLS COUNTY THAT AND MAYBE SOME IN POTTAWATOMIE COUNTY THAT VOLUNTARILY CAME INTO THE CITY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PROJECT THAT DIDN'T COME TO FRUITION DOWN AT MILLS COUNTY, BUT IN ORDER TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO ANNEX, TO THE CITY, WE'RE PHASING IN-CITY PROPERTY TAXES THAT THEY HADN'T PREVIOUSLY HAD TO PAY.
I THINK IT'S 75%, 50% AND THEN 75% FORGIVENESS, 50%, AND THEN 25% YEAR 3, AND THEN 100% TAXED AFTER THAT.
FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE?
>> RESOLUTION 25-296, A RESOLUTION APPROVING
[6.K) Resolution 25-296 Resolution approving a worker's compensation settlement agreement and authorizing the City of Council Bluffs to make the necessary payments pursuant to said settlement agreement. ]
A WORKERS COMPENSATION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF COUNCIL BUFFS TO MAKE NECESSARY PAYMENTS PURSUANT TO SAID AGREEMENT.>> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFIED BY SAYING AYE?
>> OTHER BUSINESS, I THINK MIMI HAS.
[7) OTHER BUSINESS]
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WHEN I WAS CAUGHT OFF IN MY OWN WORLD BY CITY COUNCILMAN SANDO, IT'S BECAUSE I WAS RESEARCHING HOW TO FIX THE SCRIVENER'S ERROR THAT WE HAVE ON 5B THAT TONY CORRECTED ON ORDINANCE 6661.
MADAM CLERK, I WOULD JUST ASK, IN THE MINUTES THAT THERE WAS A SCRIVENER'S ERROR ALSO ON THE FIRST READING OF THAT ORDINANCE AND THAT IT'S BEEN CORRECTED.
THE CORRECTION WAS NON SUBSTANTIVE AND DID NOT ALTER THE MEANING OR EFFECT OF THE ORDINANCE, AND THAT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO FIX THAT.
WE DIDN'T WAIVE THIRD ON THAT, DID YOU?
>> WE DID. I STILL THINK IF YOU PUT THAT IN THE MINUTES, WE'RE GOOD.
THEN, SECONDLY, I JUST WAS GOING TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THE SELECTION FOR THE OPEN CITY COUNCIL POSITION.
>> MIMI, ANY CHANCE YOU CAN DO THAT UP THERE BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THIS, SO THE CAMERA CAN SEE YOU.
THEY CAN PUT CITY ATTORNEY MIMI DOBSON ON THE LITTLE THING, AND PEOPLE WATCH, PEOPLE KNOW. THANK YOU.
>> SURE. IF YOU TILT THE TOP, THAT'S WHERE I'VE BEEN. THERE YOU GO.
[01:55:01]
>> I THINK EVERYBODY HERE KNOWS THAT THE OPEN POSITION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL PERSON THAT WILL COME OPEN ON JANUARY 2ND AT NOON WHEN JILL SHUDAK BECOMES MAYOR CAN BE FILLED EITHER BY APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR BY SPECIAL ELECTION.
ONE THING I DON'T THINK, MANY OF YOU KNOW THIS, THE CURRENT SITTING COUNCIL CAN DO SOME PLANNING FOR THAT AND SET A PROCESS RESOLUTION.
FOR INSTANCE, AT YOUR DECEMBER 15TH MEETING, IF THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT THAT YOU WANT TO DO THIS BY APPOINTMENT, YOU COULD FILE A PROCESS RESOLUTION TO GET THAT PROCESS STARTED.
HOWEVER, ANY ACTUAL ACTION VOTING ON THE APPOINTMENT, THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY THE NEW BODY AFTER THE SECOND OF THE YEAR.
I WOULD SET THAT FORTH IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD DO.
BASICALLY, THE OUTGOING COUNCIL WOULD ADOPT A PROCESS RESOLUTION, WHICH DIRECTS THE CLERK TO FILE NOTICE THAT THAT'S THE INTENT OF THE COUNCIL.
THE VACANCY WOULD OCCUR ON THE SECOND, JODY WOULD PUBLISH NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILL BY APPOINTMENT, AND THEN THERE'S A 14-DAY PETITION WINDOW THAT OPENS.
NOW, DURING THAT 14-DAY PETITION WINDOW, THAT'S WHEN THE PUBLIC CAN GATHER SIGNATURES OR SOMEBODY CAN GATHER SIGNATURES IF THEY WANT THAT TO HAPPEN BY SPECIAL ELECTION INSTEAD.
OBVIOUSLY, THAT MIGHT NOT BE THE CHOICE OF THE COUNCIL, AND THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO DO.
IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DO IF YOU WANT TO GET THE BALL ROLLING EARLIER.
WE PRELIMINARILY CAME UP WITH THE NUMBER 716 FOR THE NUMBER THAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE NUMBER OF VALID SIGNATURES THAT WERE NEEDED FOR THE PETITION FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION.
I'VE NOW GOT A CALL-IN TO MARYANNE HANUSA BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF VOTERS THAT CAST A VOTE FOR CITY COUNCIL.
YOU CAN'T JUST LOOK AT HOW MANY PEOPLE VOTED BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE MAY HAVE VOTED FOR ONE, SOME PEOPLE MAY HAVE VOTED FOR TWO.
I THINK THAT, I WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER IN CASE SOMEONE STOPPED AT 716.
YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO DELIBERATE TODAY BECAUSE THIS WASN'T ON THE AGENDA, BUT I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> IF WE DO DECIDE TO APPOINT AND SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO THAT ROUTE, WHEN WE SAY WE ARE GOING TO APPOINT DO WE HAVE TO PICK THAT PERSON AT THAT TIME, OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE WOULD DO AFTER? HOW DOES THAT PROCESS, I GUESS WORK?
>> THE LAW ALLOWS YOU AS COUNCIL PEOPLE TO DETERMINE HOW YOU WANT TO DO THAT.
THE ONE THING THAT YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IT OPENLY.
>> IF YOU WANTED TO CREATE A COMMITTEE TO DO THAT, YOU COULD, BUT, OF COURSE, THAT COMMITTEE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO OPEN MEETINGS.
IN THE PAST, I THINK THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN COMMITTEES MADE FOR THAT PURPOSE, BUT AS YOU ALL KNOW, THERE'S BEEN THAT LITIGATION ABOUT BEING MUCH MORE FIRM WITH OPEN MEETINGS.
>> WHEN WE DO THAT, IT WOULD REQUIRE 3/4 THEN, CORRECT?
>> WE DELIBERATE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
THEY CAN COLLECT THEM AFTER JANUARY 2ND?
>> YES. I SUPPOSE IN THEORY, THAT'S WHEN THEY CAN TURN THEM IN TO FORCE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
>> COULD THEY START COLLECTING NOW IN ANTICIPATION.
>> I DON'T KNOW OF ANY REASON WHY THEY COULDN'T.
ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY HAVE TO GET THE FORM FROM MARYANNE HANUSA.
NO, THEY DON'T. JODY'S THINKING THAT THEY DON'T.
>> YOU PROBABLY GET IT ON THE SECRETARY STATES' WEBSITE.
>> I THINK THAT THEY CAN MAKE THEIR OWN FORM AS WELL.
[02:00:01]
I THOUGHT I HAD READ SOMETHING ABOUT THE COUNTY AUDITOR CREATES A FORM.
I DIDN'T READ ANYTHING THAT SAYS THEY CAN'T START COLLECTING THEM NOW.
>> THAT MIGHT BE WHEN SHE CALLS YOU BACK A QUESTION FOR HER.
>> JODY, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE COST OF A ELECTION.
>> DON'T WORRY YOURSELF BECAUSE YOU MAY NOT HAVE THE PROPER LANGUAGE ON IT.
>> I WILL CHECK ON THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THE NUMBERS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THE LEGALITY OF THE FORMS.
>> DOES THAT GO INTO DEBATING AND DISCUSSING THE TOPIC MIMI?
>> THE COST OF THE GENERALITIES AND THE COST OF AN ELECTION.
I THINK IF IT'S JUST A FACTUAL QUESTION.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT JODY WAS GOING TO ASK MARYANNE ABOUT.
I KNOW THERE'S BEEN INQUIRIES ABOUT THE POTENTIAL OF SPLITTING THE COST WITH THE COUNTY, IF THE COUNTY IS LOOKING AT A SPECIAL ELECTION.
>> I DON'T THINK THEY'LL HAVE A SPECIAL, THERE HAS TO BE APPOINTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, I BELIEVE.
>> THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF A SPECIAL ELECTION.
WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS THIS MORNING, AND I LOOKED INTO IT, AND THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF A SPECIAL ELECTION.
IF THERE'S AN OPEN COUNCIL SEAT.
>> THE PRIMARY ELECTION WE JUST WENT THROUGH COSTS $43,000.
I DON'T HAVE THE BILL FOR THE GENERAL.
>> NO. THAT WAS OUR PORTION OF IT.
>> YOU CAN DOUBLE THAT, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
>> SINCE IT'S ONE COUNCIL SEAT, IF THERE'S THREE OR MORE PEOPLE, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A PRIMARY AND ANOTHER ELECTION TWICE?
>> IF THE PRIMARY WE SPLIT WAS 40, WE'RE TALKING AT LEAST 80.
>> WELL, AND IT REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE COUNTY.
THEY'RE ALL WHAT IFS AT THIS POINT.
>> THE OTHER THING THAT'S HAPPENED HISTORICALLY THAT I'D CAUTION YOU AGAINST IS THAT THE AUDITOR COULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF POLLING PLACES, WHICH THEY DID IN A SCHOOL ELECTION AT ONE POINT, AND THEN VOTERS WERE VERY UPSET BECAUSE THEY WENT TO THEIR TRADITIONAL POLLING PLACE AND IT WAS LOCKED.
>> THEN THEY JUST DON'T GO THERE.
>> I'D SAY WE'RE BORDERING ON, BY GIVING ADVICE THIS IS LIKE LEAVING THE FACTUAL QUESTION TO ANSWER, SO LET'S BE CAREFUL WITH THAT.
>> IT' S A FRIDAY BECAUSE I HAVE COMMENTS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.
>> ESPECIALLY, YOU CAN DO IT IN DECEMBER. TO ADD TO THE SPECIAL ONE.
>> IF YOU WANT, WE CAN ADDRESS IT AT BOTH.
>> IF I'M ADDING IT TO DECEMBER, IS THAT ON THE STUDY SESSION OR AS AN AGENDA ITEM.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN DO AN AGENDA ITEM.
A STUDY SESSION DISCUSSION AND PROCESS PLANNING?
>> I SAY PEOPLE WILL WATCH THOSE ALL IN DECEMBER.
>> ARE YOU ASKING FOR FRIDAY JILL?
>> DECEMBER IS THAT FINE. I DON'T CARE.
WELL, WE DON'T HAVE A STUDY SESSION ON FRIDAY, IS WHY I WAS SAYING THAT.
>> OPEN VACANCY PROCESS PLANNING OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT?
>> COULD YOU POST IT AND DO IT FRIDAY? IF THEY WANTED TO DO SOME PLANNING IN DECEMBER.
>> THEY COULD DO SOME PLANNING THIS FRIDAY.
>> JUST PUT IT UNDER OTHER DISCUSSION.
>> LIKE ANOTHER BUSINESS THING OR SOMETHING.
>> I COULD DO THAT, I GUESS.I JUST WASN'T THINKING WE'D HAVE A STUDY SESSION THERE AND SO, OTHER BUSINESS DISCUSSION?
>> MOVE YOU FORWARD A LITTLE MORE FOR THE 15TH OF DECEMBER.
>> IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT PROCESS RESOLUTION ON THE 15TH?
>> IF YOU SET IT FOR THIS FRIDAY, THEN YOU COULD DISCUSS MORE FULLY THAN YOU CAN RIGHT NOW, WHETHER YOU WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROCESS RESOLUTION, AND YOU COULD PUT THAT THEN ON THE CALENDAR FOR DECEMBER 15TH AND THEN VOTE WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO DIRECT THE CLERK TO POST THE PUBLIC NOTICE ON JANUARY 2ND.
>> SHE POST A NOTICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPOINT THE POSITION OF CITY COUNCIL PERSON.
NOTICE, AND THEN IT ADVISES THE PUBLIC,
[02:05:04]
IF THEY WANT A SPECIAL ELECTION, HOW THEY GO ABOUT DOING THAT?>> I HAVE A LOT, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, BUT I WILL WAIT UNTIL FRIDAY.
>> FRIDAY, I WILL ADD THAT TO OTHER BUSINESS AS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
>> WE JUST HAVE A PAUSE BEFORE WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION ON IT.
>> YOU'LL BE IN AN OPEN MEETING AND YOU CAN DISCUSS IT MORE.
>> FRIDAY, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WATCHING.
NOT THAT WE DO ANYWAY, BUT I THINK THAT'S MY CONCERN ABOUT.
>> NO, BUT THAT'LL LET YOU HAVE YOUR DISCUSSION EARLIER, AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO PUT A RESOLUTION ON THE NEXT MEETING.
>> WE CAN STILL DISCUSS IT IN DECEMBER, TOO.
>> AS LONG AS WE PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.
>> ASK MORE QUESTIONS AND STUFF.
>> ANY CITIZENS OR QUESTION TO BE HEARD.
SEEING NONE, I ADJOURN.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.