Jun 22, 2026 City Council

[00:00:02]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. WE ARE GOING TO START OUR STUDY SESSION.

FIRST, WE HAVE A VIRTUAL PRESENTATION FROM TEXMYGOV.

LANDON BECK IS JOINING WITH US ONLINE. COUNCIL, I PROVIDED THE FIRST EIGHT PAGES OF THE DOCUMENT THAT HE PROVIDED ME. THE LAST PAGES OF THE DOCUMENT IS THE ACTUAL CONTRACT. IF THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO MOVE FORWARD, WE'LL PUT IT ON FOR THE NEXT AGENDA. THEN I HAVE THAT LANGUAGE THERE.

LANDON, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I WILL.

ROGER, I'LL EMAIL IT TO YOU RIGHT NOW. OKAY. WELL, I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS.

YOU'RE ALLOWING ME 10 MINUTES TODAY. I KNOW THAT I'VE PRESENTED TO THE MAYOR A COUPLE TIMES AND WHERE WE ARE SERVICING THE COUNTY AS WELL.

SHE MENTIONED YOU GUYS MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH TEXMYGOV ALREADY, BUT I DID WANT TO JUST OPEN UP FOR THE TIME FOR A COUPLE QUESTIONS BEFORE I DIVE IN MY PRESENTATION HERE. WAS THERE ANY QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY ON THE PROGRAM OR ANYTHING YOU VIEWED THUS FAR? EVERYBODY? IT PROBABLY, FOR MY SAKE, IT'D BE BETTER THAT YOU GAVE YOUR PRESENTATION THAN ASK IF I HAD A QUESTION, I WOULD IMAGINE. OKAY. OKAY.

YEAH, WE CAN JUST GET STARTED HERE. AND LET ME JUST SHARE MY SCREEN. OKAY. SO THE FOCUS OF THE PRESENTATION REALLY IS JUST THE MAIN BENEFITS OF TEXMYGOV. SO OUR MAIN FOCUS WILL BE HELPING COUNCIL BOSS MODERNIZING THEIR COMMUNICATION METHODS IN IMPLEMENTING TEXT MESSAGING TO COMMUNICATE WITH RESIDENTS.

ONE OF THE BENEFITS TO TEXMYGOV WOULD BE THAT WE CAN INSTANTLY IMPORT JUST OVER 18,000 RESIDENTS' CONTACTS TO INSTANTLY RECEIVE TEXT MESSAGES AND ANY UPDATES THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO SEND OUT TO THEM.

OTHER BENEFITS INCLUDE IMPROVED RESPONSE TIMES, REDUCED CALL VOLUME, AND JUST FOSTERING TRANSPARENCY AND TRUST. LET'S FOCUS ON THE CHALLENGES OF CURRENT COMMUNICATION CHANNELS.

SO FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE DECLINING EMAIL ENGAGEMENT.

EMAIL ENGAGEMENT IS DROPPING RAPIDLY WITH HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE CHECKING THEIR EMAIL AND HOW MUCH OF THEIR EMAIL IS ROUTED TO SPAM. CALL TREE CHALLENGES.

THEY OFTEN HAVE LONGER WAIT TIMES AND PUT RESIDENTS IN A HIGHER CALL VOLUME AND JUST PUTTING PRESSURE ON STAFF RESOURCES TO ANSWER THE PHONE. LIMITED ACCESSIBILITY HOURS. I'M SURE CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS THERE WHERE YOU GUYS ARE OPEN AND GENERALLY NINE TO FIVE, THAT ANSWERING RESIDENTS' QUESTIONS AND ANSWERING THE PHONES TAKES UP A GOOD CHUNK OF YOUR DAY. ONE BIG BENEFIT TO TEXMYGOV IS WHEN RESIDENTS ASK QUESTIONS AND REPORT ISSUES, IT DOES OPERATE 24-7. SO ALL THOSE RESPONSES WILL BE HANDLED WITH OUR AUTOMATED RESPONSE.

SO THAT HELPS ALLEVIATE STAFF TIME AND HELPS AGENCIES LIKE YOURSELF THAT WORK ON LIMITED BUSINESS HOURS.

NEXT, LET'S FOCUS ON THE IMPACT OF US IMPORTING 18,000 RESIDENTS. BASED ON OUR ESTIMATES, IT LOOKS LIKE COUNCIL BLUFFS. I'M JUST GOING TO PULL UP THE SPECIFIC NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE APPROXIMATE YOU GUYS HAVE JUST OVER 26,000 HOUSEHOLDS. TEXMYGOV WOULD INSTANTLY BE ABLE TO REACH JUST OVER 18,000 OF THOSE RESIDENTS. WE DO SEND OUT A WELCOME TEXT LETTING THEM KNOW THAT IF THEY WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN RECEIVING TEXTS FROM COUNCIL BLUFFS, ALL THEY SIMPLY HAVE TO DO IS REPLY YES. IF NOT, THEY WILL NO LONGER RECEIVE TEXTS. BUT WE OFTEN SEE A HIGH NUMBER DO STAY IN THE PROGRAM JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE TEXTING IN GENERAL ON A DAILY BASIS AND IT'S COMING FROM A TRUSTED SOURCE LIKE THE CITY OFFICE. SO WITH THE 18,000, YOU MAY GET SOME PEOPLE THAT REPLY NO TO OPT OUT.

BUT WE TYPICALLY SEE ABOUT AN 80 TO 85 PERCENT RETENTION RATE ON THAT WELCOME TEXT THAT IT'S GOING TO GO OUT TO 18,000 RESIDENTS. SO RIGHT OFF THE BAT, YOU GUYS WOULD GET THAT INSTANT ENGAGEMENT WITH THOSE CITIZENS THERE.

LET'S TALK ABOUT EFFICIENCY AND

[00:05:01]

IMPROVED ACCESSIBILITY. SO AS WE TALKED ABOUT, RESIDENTS ARE TEXTING GENERALLY ON A DAILY BASIS.

TEXMYGOV OFFERS A 24-7 SERVICE WHERE THEY CAN ASK QUESTIONS OR REPORT ISSUES AND RECEIVE AUTOMATED RESPONSE. THIS HELPS IMPROVE ENGAGEMENT AND TRUST WITH YOUR CITY COMMUNICATIONS.

ONE THING ABOUT TEXMYGOV THAT SETS US APART IS WE DO PROVIDE UNLIMITED ACCESS THROUGHOUT YOUR CITY.

SO IF THERE'S MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS AND MULTIPLE USERS THAT NEED ACCESS TO OUR TOOL, WE DO NOT CHARGE BY THE USER.

SO WE CAN EXTEND ACCESS TO AS MANY INDIVIDUALS AS NEEDED THROUGHOUT YOUR CITY THERE.

LASTLY, LET'S TALK ABOUT JUST THE OVERALL BENEFITS OF ADDING TEXMYGOV. WE'VE ALREADY HIT ON REACHING 18,000 RESIDENTS RIGHT OFF THE BAT.

FOR CITY AND STAFF, THEY SHOULD SEE FASTER RESPONSE TIMES REDUCE FRUSTRATION AND BETTER ACCESS TO INFORMATION.

TEXMYGOV'S GOAL IS TO TRANSFORM GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATION AND IMPROVE EFFICIENCY AND RESIDENT ENGAGEMENT THROUGH SMS TEXTING. AND JUST AS SOME EXAMPLES, AS YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY IS CURRENTLY UTILIZING OUR PROGRAM. OUTSIDE OF OUR DATABASE IMPORT, WE DO PROMOTE OUR PROGRAM THROUGH YOUR WEBSITE WITH THIS WIDGET. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, TO JOIN TEXMYGOV TO RECEIVE ALERTS FROM THE COUNTY, RESIDENTS SIMPLY JUST HAVE TO TEXT POTCO TO THIS NUMBER OR CLICK OPT IN THIS BOX RIGHT HERE. AND THEY CAN OPT IN JUST BY SENDING IN THE TEXT. WE DON'T REQUIRE ANY APPS OR DOWNLOADS OR ACCOUNT CREATION.

WE ALSO PROVIDE MARKETING MATERIALS LIKE THIS FLYER YOU SEE IN HERE. WE'VE EVEN CREATED A CUSTOMIZED QR CODE THAT RESIDENTS CAN EASILY OPT IN TO RECEIVE ALERTS FROM THE COUNTY. AN EXAMPLE OF A CITY, HERE'S FORT DODGE'S HOMEPAGE. KIND OF A SIMILAR DEAL. THE WIDGET IS HOSTED RIGHT HERE. THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC PAGE DEDICATED TO OUR SERVICE RIGHT HERE.

FORT DODGE HAS ACTUALLY CREATED SPECIALIZED REPORTS AROUND DEBRIS, JUNK DAYS, POTHOLES, STREET LIGHTS, BROKEN SIDEWALKS, SCOOTERS, SNOW REMOVAL. RESIDENTS CAN TEXT IN ALL THESE ISSUES THROUGH OUR PROGRAM AND RECEIVE AUTOMATED REPLIES. WE'LL ACTUALLY HELP ROUTE THOSE REQUESTS TO THEIR CORRECT DEPARTMENT.

HERE'S SOME EXAMPLES OF THEIR FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS.

BIRTH CERTIFICATES, BOARD OF APPEALS, BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS, CHICKENS, CITY CODE ORDINANCES. ANYTIME RESIDENTS TEXT IN THESE ITEMS, THEY'LL RECEIVE QUICK AUTOMATED REPLIES TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTION. SO JUST SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME LOCAL CUSTOMERS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE COUNTY OFFICE IS ACTUALLY PRETTY CLOSE TO YOUR CITY OFFICE. AND WE'VE WORKED REALLY CLOSE WITH KATE ON MAKING THAT PROGRAM SUCCESSFUL THERE. AND WE'VE HAD SOME GOOD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE MAYOR ON IMPLEMENTING IT FOR YOUR CITY THERE. SO I APPRECIATE THE TIME ALLOTTED FOR ME AND I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS FOR LANDON. HEY LANDON, THIS IS DOUG RUE.

GOT A SERIES OF QUESTIONS HERE.

SO I'LL STOP IN BETWEEN. YOU MIGHT HAVE THE ANSWERS RIGHT OFF THE BAT.

FIRST OF ALL, HOW MANY TEXTS ARE YOU RECEIVING FROM DIFFERENT CITIES RIGHT NOW, OR MAYBE FROM POTTAWATOMIE COUNTY? SORRY, HOW MANY TEXTS ARE WE RECEIVING? YEAH, YOU JUST MENTIONED AS LIKE IN FORT DODGE, THEY HAVE A WAY TO TEXT YOU TO GET FOR CERTAIN INFORMATION BACK.

DO YOU HAVE A COUNT OF HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE COMING IN? ARE WE TALKING DOZENS? ARE WE TALKING HUNDREDS? YOU'RE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST THE INBOUND SIDE OF THINGS. RIGHT NOW. YEP.

YEAH. I DO HAVE THEIR TEXT ALLOTMENT HERE. I DON'T HAVE, I DON'T KNOW THAT I COULD PULL UP SPECIFIC NUMBERS OF HOW MANY INCOMING TEXTS THEY'RE RECEIVING, BUT I DO HAVE HOW MANY ALLOTTED TEXTS THAT THEY'RE, UM, THEY'RE USING PER YEAR. IS THAT LIKE SOMETHING I COULD, I COULD DEFINITELY GET BEFORE YOUR, YOUR MEETING TONIGHT.

UM, CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THE COUNTY, THE COUNTY ITSELF WAS A LOT OF 150,000 TEXTS AND THAT INCLUDES BOTH INBOUND AND OUTBOUND. OKAY. UM, SO HOW MANY

[00:10:03]

UM, THEY'LL TRAIN YOU ON HOW TO DO IT YOURSELF. THEY'LL ALSO, YOU KNOW, HELP YOU GET ORGANIZED, UM, UH, FROM DAY ONE AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S LINED UP.

BUT WHENEVER YOU NEED HELP, OUR CLIENT SPECIALIST IS THERE TO HELP YOU. BUT, UM, AS FAR AS UPDATING YOUR CLIENT LIST, ONCE WE TRAIN YOU, UM, YOU SHOULD HAVE A GOOD GRASP ON HOW TO DO THAT.

BUT IF NOT, YOU CAN REACH OUT TO US AS MANY TIMES AS YOU WANT, CAUSE WE DON'T CHARGE FOR SUPPORT OR SERVICE CALLS.

THAT'S ALL INCLUDED IN OUR, IN OUR CONTRACT COSTS. OKAY.

SO WHERE DOES THAT DATABASE RESIDE? DOES IT RESIDE ON THE CITY SIDE OR YOUR SIDE? I'M SORRY. THERE WAS KIND OF AN ECHO THERE. I'M SORRY.

WHERE DOES THE DATABASE OF THE CONTACT INFORMATION RESIDE ON YOUR SIDE OR ON THE CITY SIDE? IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CITY. OH, GOOD.

YEAH. GOOD QUESTION. WE, WE ACTUALLY HOST ALL OF OUR DATA IN THE AWS, UH, CLOUD SERVER.

SO IT'LL ACTUALLY HOST IT IN YOUR DASHBOARD, UM, FOR YOU GUYS TO ACCESS WHATEVER YOU WANT.

AND WE, WE DO ADHERE TO ALL THE, ALL THE GOVERNMENT SECURITY PROTOCOLS, BUT IT IS, IT IS HOSTED ON A, ON A CLOUD SERVER. OKAY. SO FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE, IT'S ON YOUR CLOUD. WE THEN HAVE ACCESS TO GET IN THERE AND LOG IN AND UPDATE INFORMATION.

EXACTLY. AND I BELIEVE IT STATES IN OUR CONTRACT, WE DON'T MARKET ANY OF THE DATA. YOU GUYS ARE ACTUALLY ADMINS OF THE DATA WE PASS OVER. UM, IF YOU GUYS EVER NEED HELP MANAGING THAT DATA, YOU'LL HAVE A DESIGNATED CONTACT TO REACH OUT TO ANYTIME YOU NEED SERVICE AND SUPPORT.

SO YOU'LL HAVE A DEDICATED, BUT YOU'LL HAVE THE SAME PERSON ASSIGNED TO YOUR ACCOUNT WHENEVER YOU NEED HELP WITH ANYTHING. GOTCHA. SO WE'D HAVE LIKE AN ACCOUNT MANAGER ASSIGNED TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFFS. EXACTLY. YES.

UH, UM, HOW ABOUT IN TERMS OF CONTRACT? I SEE IT'S A THREE YEAR DEAL.

IT SAYS 60 DAYS. IS THERE AN EARLY TERMINATION FEE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IF WE WERE TO DECIDE TO GET OUT OF IT, IF WE JUST DIDN'T THINK IT WAS WORKING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? UH, SO YEAH, OUR INITIAL CONTRACTS ARE, UH, UH, LAID OUT FOR, FOR THREE YEARS. WE DO REQUIRE A 60 NOTICE TO CANCEL AS, AS YOU READ THERE. IF YOU'D OPT TO RENEW IT, IT DOES GO INTO YEAR TO YEAR. UH, UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T ALLOW ANY EARLY TERMINATION. UM, BUT I DID TALK WITH MY MANAGER JUST REGARDING THE SIZE AND SCOPE OF YOUR CITY AND SIMILAR, WHAT WE DID WITH, WITH FORT DODGE INITIALLY THAT IF, IF COUNCIL BLUFFS IS MORE COMFORTABLE STARTING OUT ON A TWO YEAR TERM, WE COULD OFFER YOU GUYS A TWO YEAR TERM TO START OUT WITH VERSUS THE THREE YEAR, BUT THAT WOULD BE AS, AS LOW AS, AS WE WOULD GO AS FAR AS AN INITIAL CONTRACT. OKAY. SO IT'D BE, SO WHATEVER THE YEARLY COST IS TIMES TWO WOULD BE OURS UP FRONT.

VERSUS A THREE YEAR, WE'D START YOU OFF ON A TWO YEAR. THE INFLAMMATION COSTS WOULD REMAIN THE SAME.

SO YOU'D BE AT 4,000, UH, TO SET IT UP, BUT YOUR ANNUAL FEE WOULD STAY AT 18. AND THEN AT THE END OF TWO YEARS, YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO CANCEL OR RENEW IT. AND AT THE END OF TWO YEARS, IF YOU GUYS DID RENEW IT, IT WOULD GO TO YEAR TO YEAR.

SO IF TWO YEARS SOUNDS MORE APPEALING TO YOU, UH, WE COULD DEFINITELY SEND YOU A, UH, UH, A DIFFERENT VERSION OVER FOR YOU, FOR YOU TO REVIEW.

OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, MY OTHER QUESTION, MORE INTERNAL MARK, WOULD YOU BE THE POINT PERSON THEN ON THIS INTERNALLY OR WHO WOULD THAT BE? WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED IT YET. IT WOULD BE, UH, THAT WOULD BE A DISCUSSION WE WOULD HAVE ONCE THE COUNCIL DECIDED IF THEY WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD.

OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU, LANDON. YEAH. WHO DO THE, WHAT'S IT? I WAS TRYING TO FIND A MESSAGE BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE I'VE GOTTEN SOMETHING FROM THE COUNTY BEFORE. WHO'S IT? WHO DOES IT SHOW THAT IT COMES FROM? UH, SO IT COMES LIKE MESSAGES THAT YOU GUYS SEND OUT COME FROM A FIVE DIGIT NUMBER.

SO, SO DURING THE STORMS WHEN THEY SAY LIKE, THERE'S A, I KNOW I'VE GOT, I WAS JUST, I WAS TRYING TO TYPE IN EMS. WE COULD ACTUALLY PUSH OUT A CONTACT CARD FOR YOU AS WELL. SO IT'LL ACTUALLY SAY FOR THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLOCKS WHEN YOU TEXT OUT. SURE. OKAY. JUST TO GIVE YOU LIKE ANOTHER LAYER OF SECURITY, BUT IT WILL COME FROM A FIVE DIGIT NUMBER. SO RESIDENTS CAN'T REPLY TO YOUR MESSAGE AS YOU PUSH OUT. SO IT'LL JUST BE A ONE WAY MESSAGE, BUT YEAH, WE CAN GIVE YOU A, A, A CONTACT CARD TO PUSH OUT TO YOUR RESIDENTS. JUST FOR MY OWN. SO THEY KNOW IT'S KIND OF COUNCIL BLESS.

DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THE COUNTY'S NUMBER THERE? DO I HAVE WHOSE NUMBER? SORRY. THE COUNTY'S NUMBER IN FRONT OF YOU.

NO, I DON'T WANT TO REPLY TO IT. I WANT TO LOOK AT THE, I JUST WANT TO PHYSICALLY.

YEAH. YEAH. YEAH. THERE'S FORT DODGE'S NUMBER RIGHT THERE. NO, I WOULDN'T. I'M

[00:15:03]

I FOUND IT. SO IF, IF, WHEN POT COUNTY TEXTS OUT, IT'S COMING FROM 80946. IF YOU WANT TO TEXT THE COUNTY, IT'S THIS NUMBER RIGHT HERE.

YEAH. I, I PULLED IT UP. I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE, I WANTED TO PUT EYES ON IT BECAUSE I KNOW I'VE GOT THEM BEFORE. I JUST WANT TO BRING IT UP SO I COULD SEE IT. YEAH. YEAH. THE MAYOR MENTIONED THERE MIGHT BE SEVERAL OF YOU GUYS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP FOR COUNTY ALERTS, BUT YEAH, IF YOU WANT TO, IF YOU GUYS WANT TO TEXT INTO THE COUNTY AND JUST TEXT HIGH OR ASK A QUESTION AS TO SEE HOW IT WORKS, THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT YOU WOULD USE TO REACH THE COUNTY. MAYBE, MAYBE I JUST MISSED THIS AS A BID, BUT WHAT IS THE COST? OH, IT'S ON THE FORM. YOU DON'T HAVE THE FORM. I SENT IT TO HIM. OH, OKAY. YEAH. IT'S 18,000 A YEAR. ROGER. YEAH.

NO, SORRY. GO AHEAD. IT'S 18,000 A YEAR PLUS A $4,000 SETUP FEE.

I COULD BE OFF ON THIS, BUT THIS TO ME FEELS LIKE MORE OF A WANT THAN A NEED.

YES. WHEN WE TALKED IN THE FALL, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW DO WE LET CITIZENS KNOW ABOUT DIFFERENT EVENTS, DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT COULD OCCUR. SO THE COUNTY USES IT FOR WEATHER ALERT, BUT WE COULD BE USING IT TO PUSH OUT INSTEAD OF SENDING POSTCARDS LIKE ASHLEY DOES AROUND SO MANY BLOCKS FOR LIKE SPRING FEST. WE COULD USE THAT TO REPLACE, WE COULD USE THIS TO REPLACE POSTCARDS. WE COULD DO A BLAST TO THE CITIZENS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SPRING FEST, SUMMER FEST, ANY CITY EVENTS. WE COULD, IT WOULD BE, YOU ARE 100% CORRECT, ROGER, BUT THE REQUEST WAS IN THE FALL IS HOW DO WE ENGAGE MORE CITIZENS IN DIFFERENT THINGS.

AND SO I WAS ABLE TO GET WITH LANDON, UM, EARLY, UH, EARLIER THIS YEAR.

UM, AND A MONTH AGO, THE QUESTION WHEN WE, WHEN I DISCUSSED THIS AT STUDY SESSION, IT WAS WHAT WAS THE COST. AND SO I ASKED LANDON TO COME TO THE, TO THE MEETING TODAY TO GIVE A HIGHER DETAIL OF THE PRODUCT AS WELL AS TALK ABOUT THE COST. HOW MANY, HOW MANY, UH, HOW MANY OF THOSE POSTCARDS AND THINGS COULD WE, HOW MANY DO WE SEND OUT NOW? DO WE, DO WE HAVE AN IDEA? SO FOR EVERY, THAT WAS MY, THAT WAS MY QUESTION. JUST WHAT THE COST OF THE POSTCARDS AND STUFF IS.

I WAS GOING TO SAY, IF WE COULD DO THIS, I MEAN, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT 50 CENTS TO A DOLLAR PER POSTCARD TO, AND WHAT WOULD IT BE LIKE? TWO CENTS A TEXT? I MEAN, IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S THINGS WE'RE CURRENTLY SENDING OUT NOW FOR THE DOLLAR SPENT POSSIBLY, AND THAT MAYBE THAT'D BE SOMETHING TO ASK ASHLEY OR SOMETHING, HEY, WHAT, WHAT'S YOUR BUDGET NOW FOR THE, ALL THE POSTCARDS AND ALL THE NOTIFICATIONS AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WE SENT OUT.

CAUSE I MEAN, WE'VE ALL SENT POST MAILERS AND ALL THAT TO BE WHERE WE'RE AT EXCEPT FOR DOUG. UM, IT'S, IT'S YEAH, 36 CENTS JUST FOR THE POSTAGE, MAN. I CAN GET THE COST FOR LAST YEAR THAT WE SPENT AND THEN WE CAN COMPARE IT AND THEN SEE WHAT, YEAH, HOW MUCH OF THAT. CAUSE IF SAY WE'RE SPENDING 40 GRAND A YEAR ON THAT, THIS COULD POSSIBLY BE A GREAT SAVINGS. EXACTLY. YOU KNOW, NOW IF WE'RE SPENDING FIVE GRAND A YEAR, WELL, THEN THE DEBATE IS HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE CAN WE REACH THIS WAY? IS THIS A MORE MODERN WAY OF DOING BUSINESS? YOU KNOW? RIGHT. IN, IN THE CONVERSATIONS LAND AND I HAD, WE CAN DO IT TO CITYWIDE. WE CAN TARGET CERTAIN AREAS. UM, IF THERE WAS A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT WE WANTED TO TARGET, IF THERE WAS AN EVENT GOING ON AT A SCHOOL OR A ROAD CLOSURE, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE ROAD, WE'RE DOING TEXTS TO MADISON AVENUE OR BROADWAY, WHICH EVERYBODY USES, WE CAN SEND IT OUT TO THERE. BUT IN THE CASE WHERE WE, UM, REDID THE ROAD BEHIND LPLS, WE COULD SEND OUT A TEXT MESSAGE JUST TO THAT, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. WE COULD GEOFENCE, UM, AS FAR AS HOW THINGS WORK AND WE COULD UTILIZE IT THROUGH ACROSS ALL OF OUR DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, UH, TO SEND IT OUT. I, I PERSONALLY WOULDN'T DUPLICATE AS FAR AS WEATHER BECAUSE THE COUNTY SENDS OUT.

YEAH. THERE'S NO NEED FOR US TO DO THAT. YEAH.

BUT WE DEFINITELY COULD UTILIZE IT FOR OTHER WAYS TO COMMUNICATE.

LANDON, DOUG AGAIN. SO WE HAVE AN APPENDIX B LISTED WITH PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS BETWEEN CORE EMA AND PREMIUM, CORRECT? YEAH, WE, WE HAD YOU GUYS

[00:20:01]

UM, WE DISCUSSED WITH THE MAYOR THAT ADDING WEATHER ALERTS WOULD BE A DUPLICATION OF THAT SERVICE. SO WE, WE DECIDED TO, IT'D BE BETTER TO PRICE YOU GUYS AT THE CORE, WHICH ALLOWS YOU TO SEND OUT NON-EMERGENCY GENERAL ALERTS TO YOUR RESIDENTS. SO BASICALLY EVERYTHING BUT EMERGENCIES AND, AND WEATHER ALERTS IS WHAT YOU'RE GETTING WHERE THE COUNTY UTILIZES THAT, THAT SERVICE.

OKAY. THAT WAS MY QUESTION THEN. SO THE THINGS THAT THE MAYOR IS TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE COVERED WITHIN THE CORE PROGRAM AS TO WHAT SHE WANTS TO DO.

AND THAT'S THE PRICE. YEAH.

OKAY.

AND JUST TO ADD ON THE MAYOR'S POINT. UM, I MEAN, MAIL, MAILERS WILL ALWAYS HAVE THEIR PLACE, BUT, UH, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ENGAGEMENT AND SPEED AND ACCESS, UH, JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA, TEXT MESSAGES ARE OFTEN READ IN THE FIRST TWO MINUTES VERSUS MAILERS. UH, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION IS HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET THERE. WILL THEY EVEN BE READ? UH, WHEN YOU NEED SOMETHING QUICK AND URGENT AND, AND, AND, AND IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENTS, UH, UH, BASED TO VIEW TEXT MESSAGING, YOU'RE ALMOST GUARANTEED THAT THEY'LL VIEW IT IN MINUTES.

SO WHETHER IT BE TRASH DELAYS, EVENT PROMOTION, UH, ROAD CLOSURES, UH, LIKE, LIKE SHE WAS MENTIONED, WE COULD TARGET BY AREA IF YOU NEED TO THAT WAY, IF LIKE THERE'S A WATER MAIN BREAK OR, OR THERE'S A, THERE'S AN AREA OF YOUR, OF YOUR CITY THAT'S IMPACTED, YOU COULD GET THESE TEXTS OUT RIGHT AWAY BASED ON THEIR LOCATION VERSUS RELYING ON A MAYOR THAT COULD TAKE TWO OR THREE DAYS AND RELY ON THEM EVEN OPENING THEIR MAILBOX AND, AND VIEWING THOSE MAILERS.

SO JUST, JUST THE SPEED AND ENGAGEMENT AND NOT SAYING THAT MAILERS WILL, WILL, WILL GO AWAY COMPLETELY OR SAME WITH SOCIAL MEDIA, EMAIL, JUST THE TIME AND, AND, AND SPEED OF A TEXT MESSAGE REACHING YOUR, YOUR RESIDENCE IS ANOTHER THING TO CONSIDER.

UM, STEVE GORMAN HERE. UH, MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, ARE YOU GOING TO BE GEO FENCING THESE AREAS? IS THAT HOW YOU PLAN ON PICKING UP AP, THE ADDRESSES OR THE PHONE NUMBERS TO TEXT TOO? YEAH. SO ANYBODY WE IMPORT, WE, WE WORK WITH THE UNITED STATES PERSONAL SERVICE ON IMPORTING THESE RESIDENTS.

SO IN THAT 18,000, WE'LL HAVE THEIR ADDRESS AND NAME AND THAT'S WHAT ALLOWS US TO POPULATE THEM ON THE MAP.

SO IF YOU GUYS EVER NEED TO HIGHLIGHT A PARTICULAR AREA, REACH OUT TO THEM BASED ON THEIR LOCATION, YOU'LL HAVE ALL THAT DATA TO DO THAT. THEY WOULD NEED TO OPT IN THOUGH, STEVE, UM, BECAUSE IT'S TEXT MESSAGES.

AND SO LIKE THE COUNTY DID, THEY PUT OUT A THING ON SOCIAL MEDIA SAYS, IF YOU WANT TO OPT INTO THESE TEXAS NUMBER AND THAT'S HOW THEY OPT IN. CORRECT. THEY DO IT EITHER. THEY'D EITHER, EITHER TO OPT INTO OUR WELCOME MESSAGE, WHICH THE WELCOME MESSAGE WILL BE ABOUT 18,000 PEOPLE. THEY NEED TO SAY YES, OR THEY NEED TO OPT IN VIA THE WEBSITE OR THROUGH VARIOUS MARKETING CHANNELS WE PROVIDE.

LIKE I KNOW WE, WE DO SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS FOR FORT DODGE.

WE ALSO HOST THIS WIDGET ON THEIR HOMEPAGE. SO IF, IF THEY DON'T REPLY YES TO THAT INITIAL WELCOME MESSAGE, THEY'LL HAVE TO OPT IN THROUGH LIKE QR CODES OR THIS, THIS WEBSITE WIDGET HERE ON THE HOMEPAGE.

YOU KNOW, JUST THINKING OUT LOUD, WE COULD UTILIZE THIS, YOU KNOW, TO SEND OUT OUR SURVEY FOR THE 2050 COMP PLAN OR ANY OTHER MAJOR THING THAT THE CITY INITIATIVE THAT WE'RE TAKING ON. UM, SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE COULD UTILIZE THIS TO INCREASE OUR ENGAGEMENT ACROSS THE CITY.

YEAH, THE CORRECT. THERE, THERE IS THE ABILITY TO CONDUCT, UH, SURVEYS. YOU COULD JUST TEXT YOUR RESIDENTS A LINK TO FILL OUT A CUSTOMIZED SURVEY AND GET INSTANT FEEDBACK FROM, FROM YOUR CITIZENS THERE.

WE KNOW A NUMBER OF CITIES THAT PAY, UM, QUITE A BIT OF MONEY JUST, JUST FOR A STANDALONE SURVEY TOOL, WHICH IS SOMETHING TEXBYGUP PROVIDES IN OUR, IN OUR DASHBOARD IN ADDITION TO OUR MASS TAX.

WOULD THAT REQUIRE US TO GO TO THE PREMIUM EDITION? OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, IS, IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD SEND OUT A LINK TO PERHAPS A DIFFERENT SURVEY PLATFORM OTHER THAN YOUR OWN? OR WOULD THAT BE A NO, NO? YEAH. YEAH. SO NORMALLY OUR, I'LL JUST HOP INTO OUR DASHBOARD HERE.

NORMALLY SURVEYS AND VOICE CALLS, WEATHER ALERTS, IPOS, NORMALLY THOSE WOULD BE PART OF OUR PREMIUM PLAN, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE INCLUDING THE SURVEYS IN THE CORE PACKAGE FOR YOU GUYS AS WELL.

OH, OKAY. I JUST DIDN'T SEE IT MARKED ON APPENDIX B, I GUESS.

SO LANDON, CAN YOU TELL ME WHEN OTHER CITIES ARE DOING THIS, ARE THEY SEEING THIS IN ADDITION TO THEIR DIRECT MAILING CAMPAIGNS OR ARE THEY SEEING THIS TAKING THE PLACE OF SOME OF THOSE CAMPAIGNS AND THEN USING THOSE FUNDS TO FUND THIS? HOW DO YOU SEE IT? YEAH. SO WE'RE, WE'RE IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CITIES.

WE'RE, WE'RE ACTUALLY, WE'RE APPROACHING 1400 AGENCIES THROUGHOUT THE U S. UM, UH, EVERY CITY'S DIFFERENT. SOME

[00:25:02]

SOME UTILIZE US JUST TO SEND OUT GENERAL NOTIFICATIONS AND SURVEYS SIMILAR TO YOU GUYS WHERE YOUR COUNTY HANDLES THOSE, THOSE, THOSE EMERGENCY ALERTS. UM, YEAH, WE'RE APPROACHING JUST OVER 1400 AGENCIES THROUGHOUT THE U S. I BELIEVE THE ONLY STATE OR SLASH TERRITORY WE'RE NOT IN CURRENTLY IS PUERTO RICO. SO, UH, WE DEFINITELY HAVE BEEN UTILIZED TO REPLACE TOOLS. AND THEN THERE'S OTHER PLACES THAT UTILIZE US TO JUST TO ADD ANOTHER COMMUNICATION TOOL AND THEY'RE IN THEIR TOOLBOX JUST TO ENHANCE THEIR CURRENT OPERATIONS, RIGHT? THEY'RE NOT REPLACING THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA, THEIR, THEIR WEBSITE.

THEY'RE JUST ADDING ANOTHER TOOL TO REACH THEIR CITIZENS.

AND IT'S, AND IT'S A WAY THAT'S, THAT'S FAMILIAR TO CITIZENS. IT'S, IT'S TEXTING. IT'S, IT'S WHAT THEY'RE ON DAILY AND IT'S, IT'S, IT'S GENERALLY ONE OF THE FASTEST WAYS TO REACH THEM. THANK YOU.

YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR LANDON? LANDON, WE APPRECIATE IT. UM, COUNCIL, I HAVE ASKED ASHLEY, UM, TO PROVIDE ME THE, THE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR POSTAGE AND, AND POSTCARDS THAT WE'RE SENDING OUT RIGHT NOW. UM, I'LL SEND THAT TO YOU, UM, TOMORROW WHEN SHE RESPONDS ABOUT BACK TO ME. AND THEN I JUST ASKED FROM THE COUNCIL, IF YOU LET ME KNOW, UM, INDIVIDUALLY, UM, IF THIS IS SOMETHING YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN, UM, SO WE CAN PUT IT ONTO THE AGENDA IF SO.

FANTASTIC. THANK YOU, LANDON.

THANKS. YEAH. AND I WAS JUST, DID YOU GUYS NEED, UM, UM, UM, A QUOTE OR DOCUMENTS FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING OR IS THAT NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE A PART OF TONIGHT'S MEETING? NO, IT WON'T BE ON TONIGHT'S MEETING. OKAY.

FANTASTIC. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY.

UM, NEXT UP IS WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THE LIME SCOOTERS. UM, AND SO WE HAD TALKED SEVERAL WEEKS BACK, UM, ABOUT WHETHER WE WANTED THE LIME SCOOTERS TO COME IN OR NOT. UH, WHITNEY WAS UP AT A CONFERENCE, UM, AND HAS SOME INFORMATION THAT SHE WANTED TO SHARE AND THEN WE WILL ASK FOR A DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL AS FAR AS HOW YOU GUYS WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT AS WELL.

I AM HAPPY TO SPEAK NOW. UM, AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS RIVETING INFORMATION THAT PROBABLY EVERYONE WANTS, BUT IF YOU WANTED TO DO THE AGENDA FIRST, I'M HAPPY TO ALSO TAKE MY, BECAUSE BNC ARE ME, SO WE COULD PUSH THOSE IF YOU WANTED TO GET EVERYBODY ELSE IN AND OUT ALSO UP TO YOU.

FANTASTIC. NO, I APPRECIATE THE FLEXIBILITY. LET'S GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THE AGENDA. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY. SORRY. I HAD ONE ON THE RECYCLING CENTER, UH, SOUTH YARD EXPANSION.

WAS THERE ANY GRANT FUNDING OR ANYTHING AVAILABLE WITH THE RECYCLING STUFF THAT WE WERE DOING ON THIS? OR DID WE LOOK INTO THAT? I KNOW SOMETIMES THERE'LL BE SOME CERTAIN FUNDING SOURCES THAT WE COULD USE, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF THIS WAS ONE OF THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS OR NOT. UH, SO IN THE PAST, WE HAVE NOT USED THE GRANT FUNDING FOR THIS TYPE OF WORK. UM, AND IT IS NOT PROPOSED FOR THIS PROJECT EITHER. UM, TYPICALLY WHAT I'VE SEEN IS MORE ON THE EDUCATION SIDE OR MATERIAL SIDE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO RESIDENTS IS TYPICALLY WHAT THE GRANTS PROVIDE FUNDING. UH, WE DID GET SOME GRANT FUNDING TO HELP WITH THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE NEW CONTAINERS WHEN WE BOUGHT THE NEW TRASH CANS AND RECYCLING CONTAINERS. UM, WE GOT SOME FUNDING FOR THAT, BUT THIS IS REALLY UPKEEP OF OUR FACILITY AND REALLY IT'S PAVING, UH, AREAS THAT AREN'T PAVED TODAY.

SO WE'RE JUST IMPROVING THE SITE BY PUTTING HARD SURFACE DOWN.

SO WE DON'T HAVE MUD AND, YOU KNOW, PROBLEMS WITH PEOPLE NAVIGATING ON OUR SITE. PERFECT. SO WE'VE JUST KIND OF BEEN CHIPPING AWAY AT IT OVER MULTIPLE YEARS, UH, DOING A SMALL PAVING PROJECT EACH YEAR OUT OF OUR OPERATING BUDGET.

RIGHT. PERFECT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY. PUBLIC HEARING A.

ITEM 5A. SO IT'S ORDINANCE 6684. THAT'S A REQUEST TO REZONE THE HOLY FAMILY CHURCH AT 2231 FROM R2 TO R3, A LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. UH, THE PURPOSE OF THIS REZONING IS TO ALLOW THEM TO OPERATE AN INDOOR RECREATION OR A GOLF SIMULATOR. UM, AT THE FORMER CHURCH,

[00:30:01]

GO AHEAD, CHRIS. UH, NEXT ITEM ON OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS IS RESOLUTION 26224. UH, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR FINAL PLOT APPROVAL TO TAKE THE TWO LOTS THAT ABC COLLISION CENTER OWNS THERE AT THE CORNER OF SOUTH 35TH STREET AND 16TH AVENUE.

COMBINE IT INTO ONE TRACK OF LAND. UH, THE PURPOSE BEHIND THIS IS THAT THEY DO INTEND TO BUILD AN ADDITION TO ACTUALLY CONNECT THOSE TWO BUILDINGS TOGETHER. SO THIS GETS RID OF THE UNDERLYING LOT LINE. IT ALLOWS THEM TO JOIN THOSE BUILDINGS TOGETHER.

CHRIS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YOU'RE LIGHT ON THIS ONE, I KNOW.

I AM. THERE, THERE'S A SECOND AMENDMENT, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

YEAH. OKAY. UM, ON THE 6684, YOU CAN WAIVE THIRD IF YOU CHOOSE. IT'S NOT ON YOUR NOTES. OH, PUBLIC HEARING A? YEP.

CAN WAIVE SECOND? OR THIRD? THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, PUBLIC HEARING C. THIS IS ZACH.

OKAY. 5C RESOLUTION 26-225.

THIS IS A RESOLUTION TO INITIATE THE PIRATE CODE FILTER REPLACEMENT AND ISSUE A BID FOR THAT PROJECT. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. YEP. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. AND THEN I ALSO HAVE 8E RESOLUTION 26-229, UM, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH, UH, CARLY CONSTRUCTION FOR THE SOUTH, UH, 24TH STREET TRAIL EXTENSION.

UM, THIS ONE WORKED OUT, UH, PRETTY WELL CAUSE CARLY, IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER, CARLY IS ACTUALLY DOING THE RICHARD DOWNING AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION.

SO, YEAH. SO I THINK THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ABLE TO DO IT AT THE SAME TIME. YEAH. I WAS GOING TO SAY THANK YOU, ROB, CAUSE I CAME IN QUITE A BIT LOWER THAN WHAT WE WERE ANTICIPATING. ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU. FANTASTIC. ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE TWO? OKAY.

GREAT. THANK YOU, ZACH. BACK TO PUBLIC HEARINGS. UM, C OR SORRY, D.

THIS IS THE FREEZE OUT PROPERTY.

UH, THE SECOND AMENDMENT HERE, UH, IS INTENDED TO CORRECT AN ERROR IN THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT WAS INCLUDED. UH, YOU KNOW, CHRIS, UH, AND MYSELF, UM, HAVE BEEN IN A KIND OF A TOUGH SPOT WITH SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS THAT WERE NEGOTIATED, MOSTLY DRAFTED, UM, BY OUTSIDE COUNCIL. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, COMING IN AND TAKING A SECOND LOOK AT EVERYTHING. UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT OUTSIDE COUNCIL MISSED, UH, SORT OF THE DEVELOPERS COUNCIL, UH, AND THEN GETTING READY FOR CLOSING. UM, I REALIZED THAT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ONLY INVOLVED LIKE 40% OF THE LAND. WE ACTUALLY WERE GOING TO TRANSFER TO THEM.

UH, AND SO, UM, ALL OF THE DISCUSSIONS, ALL OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS, ALL OF THE DRAWINGS THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, HAVE ALL COVERED THE ENTIRE LOT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SELL TO THEM. AND IN FACT, INCLUDED AN ADDITIONAL LOT TO THE NORTH, UM, THAT IS NOT SUBJECT TO THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, BUT, UH, WE HAD TO CORRECT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR TONY ON THAT ONE? FANTASTIC.

ORDINANCES ON THE FIRST ANIMAL CONTROL, JAKE, OUR ANIMAL EXPERT.

EVERYBODY'S FAVORITE. OKAY. SO THIS IS, THERE'S TWO OPTIONS HERE. ONE IS WHAT THE TNR PROGRAM WAS THE FIRST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS. THEN THERE IS AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH JOE, WE CAME UP WITH A SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE THAT REMOVES ANY PROTECTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS FEEDING THE CATS OR ANYTHING.

FEEDING STRAY CATS WOULD STILL BE PROHIBITED. UM, IN A BASIC SENSE, IT JUST ALLOWS THE HUMANE SOCIETY TO DO THE PROGRAM WITHOUT ANY OF THE WEIRD ISSUES WITH OWNERSHIP OF THE CATS OR ANYTHING.

UM, THIS WOULD, AS WE DISCUSSED, IT ALLOWS THEM TO STILL COMPLETE THE OPERATIONS AND DO WHAT IS THE CORE OF WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. WHAT IT REMOVES IS THE LEGAL LOOPHOLE THAT WOULD BE CREATED BY THAT NEW CLASSIFICATION OF NOT A WELLED ANIMAL, BUT NOT OWNED, BUT MAINTAINED, CARED FOR ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS.

SO IT EFFECTIVELY LEAVES THAT SECTION AS, AS IT IS. THE PROBLEM, THE NEED FOR THAT SECTION WAS, OR AT LEAST AROSE OUT OF THE, THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD WITH ABANDON, UH, ABANDONING A CAT, RIGHT? WELL, AS WE DISCUSSED THAT THIS WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT. AND ANY,

[00:35:01]

CORRECT. CORRECT. YEAH. SO IT, IT, IT REMOVES THE LOOPHOLE, BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS THEM TO DO EVERYTHING THAT THEY WANT TO DO REALLY AT, AT ITS ABSOLUTE CORE. I FEEL LIKE, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE HERE TONIGHT. I DID SPEAK WITH, UH, SOME OF THE FOLKS FROM THE HUMANE SOCIETY ABOUT THIS. UM, AND THEN I, AFTER I SPOKE WITH YOU, THEN I SPOKE WITH THEM AND, AND, UM, AGAIN, I FEEL LIKE IT'S A, A GOOD WAY FORWARD FOR EVERYONE. SO, AND I DID, I KNOW SOME OF YOU SPOKE WITH ALEX AS WELL. ALEX IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE HUMANE SOCIETY. AND I TALKED TO HIM ABOUT IT AND KIND OF WENT THROUGH A FEW QUESTIONS WITH HIM JUST SO EVERYBODY'S AWARE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE THINGS FROM A SAFETY ASPECT, IF THE CAT HAS RABIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEY DO TEST THE CAT AND THEY BRING IT IN AND SEE WHAT THEY HAVE. AND IF THEY HAVE TO DO OTHER SHOTS, THEY WILL DO THOSE AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT PUTTING AN UNSAFE ANIMAL BACK OUT THERE, WHICH IS GOOD. UM, ONE OF MY CONCERNS BEFORE WAS, YOU KNOW, IF, IF A NEIGHBOR'S BEING AFFECTED, SO WE HAVE NEIGHBOR A AND THEY'RE FEEDING THE CAT AND THEY LOVE THE CATS, BUT NEIGHBOR B IS DEALING WITH THE CATS AND IT'S A MESS FOR NEIGHBOR B.

HOW DOES THAT WORK WHEN, OKAY, WE GO PICK IT UP AT NEIGHBOR A AND DO THAT. AND HE SAYS, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S CAUSING A NUISANCE ANYWHERE ELSE, THEY CAN BRING THAT CAT BACK.

YEAH. THEY WOULD TAKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. RIGHT. AND THEN YOU DROP IT OFF SOMEWHERE ELSE OR DO SOMETHING ELSE WITH IT.

YEAH. THAT WAS ANOTHER ONE OF THE CHANGES IS THAT REMOVED ANY REFERENCES TO RETURNING IT TO THE ORIGINAL LOCATION, JUST TO JUST RELEASING IT. THAT WAY THEY CAN NOT, YES, THROW THE CAT BACK AT SOME NEIGHBOR THAT DOESN'T WANT IT.

EXACTLY. LIKE, HEY, DEALING WITH THIS. THE ONE THING I DID ASK HIM AND HE SEEMED TO BE AMENABLE TO THIS. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COUNCIL'S THOUGHT PROCESS IS ON THIS SINCE THIS IS NEW. UM, AND IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT OF A CHANGE ON HOW WE'RE HANDLING THESE THINGS CURRENTLY. I GUESS MY CONSERVATIVE NATURE IS YOU KIND OF GO INTO THESE THINGS A LITTLE SLOWLY RATHER THAN JUST JUMPING OFF THE DIVING BOARD AND DOING A DOUBLE BACKFLIP AND SAYING, I THINK I NAILED IT.

IF WE GO INTO IT AND KIND OF SAY THERE'S A TIME PERIOD OF TESTING THIS OUT AND HE SEEMED TO BE, YEAH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO, THEY'RE GOING TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT THEMSELVES AND SEE IF IT WORKS AFTER A YEAR OR SO, AND THEN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS IF THEY HAD TO.

I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS SOMETHING FROM A CITY PERSPECTIVE, IF IT MADE SENSE FOR US TO SAY, IF WE MOVED FORWARD WITH THIS, WE WOULD REEVALUATE IT IN A YEAR TO SEE WHAT THE PROGRAM IS.

WE MIGHT COME BACK IN A YEAR AND IT'S THE GREATEST THING WE'VE EVER DONE. AND WE'RE ALL LIKE, BAM, NAILED THAT. LET'S MOVE ON AND KEEP GOING. OR WE SAY, WELL, MAYBE THERE'S AN ADJUSTMENT HERE.

WE'RE STARTING TO GET MORE CALLS OR WE'RE SEEING A MILLION MORE CATS. WHAT HAPPENED WITH THIS? SO I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE COUNCIL, UH, APPETITE FOR THAT WAS, OR IF WE COULD EVEN DO IT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. SO ORDINANCES CAN BE REVIEWED AND MAYBE I'LL LET YOU KIND OF WEIGH IN, BUT YOU DON'T WANT TO RESTRICT. I'VE LEARNED THIS BY BUYING FUTURE COUNCILS FROM DECISIONS. UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I WOULD THINK PUTTING A TIMEFRAME WOULD POTENTIALLY BE BINDING A COUNCIL. WE WOULD JUST, MY INITIAL THOUGHT IS THAT WE WOULD JUST CALENDAR TO REVISIT IT IN A YEAR AND YOU COULD ALWAYS REPEAL OR AMEND THE ORDINANCE AT THAT TIME. IF IT'S BEEN A MASSIVE FAILURE OR SOMETHING, BUT, UM, WE WOULDN'T BUILD INTO THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, ANY SORT OF LIMITATION.

YEAH, WE WOULD DO THAT ON OUR OWN. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. I GUESS, UH, I'VE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS.

UH, I AGREE WITH THE WORDING.

IT'S BETTER THAN IT WAS, UH, IN THE LAST GO AROUND, BUT, UH, I LIVE IN AN AREA WHERE THERE IS A LOT OF, OF STRAYS AND, UH, I GUESS MY CONCERN IS NUMBER ONE, HOW DO WE KEEP PEOPLE FROM KICKING CATS OUT THE DOOR AND JUST BECOMING A STRAY? AND NUMBER TWO, WHEN WE DO HAVE A HIGH AREA DENSITY OF A CAT POPULATION, WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF THE RETURN BACK INTO THAT? DO WE SHUT IT DOWN WHEN YOU, YOU KNOW, SO WE DON'T OVERLOAD THAT AREA BECAUSE OURS, MY NEIGHBORHOOD SEEMS TO BE PRIME FOR THIS. AND THOSE WOULD BE QUESTIONS THAT COULD BE ANSWERED. JUST LIKE YOU SAY, IF WE REVISIT IT IN A YEAR AND WE STUDY IT, BUT, UH, UH, THOSE ARE SOME CONCERNS I HAD.

AND I TALKED WITH ALEX TOO AND, YOU KNOW, AND, AND, UH, HUMANE SOCIETY ON THOSE ISSUES. SO YEAH, I WOULD HOPE THEY WOULDN'T ALL PUT THEM BACK IN THE SAME SPOT. YEAH. I WAS GOING TO SAY SOME, IN SOME CAPACITY, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY WE WOULD HAVE TO, I GUESS, PUT OUR FAITH IN, IN THEIR ABILITY TO, TO BE GOOD STEWARDS IN OUR COMMUNITY. UM, BUT IF WE WANT TO CHECK BACK ON THINGS A YEAR FROM NOW, THAT'S, I'D BE FINE WITH THAT AND BEEN SEEING WHERE IT GOES.

IF WE, AND THEN IF WE HAVE A

[00:40:01]

AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, YOU TALKED TO ALEX GUM, RIGHT? YES. I'M SORRY. OKAY. I'M SORRY. YEAH. SO NIKKI IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. ALEX SITS AS THE VICE CHAIR OF THEIR BOARD. JUST WANTED TO GIVE NIKKI HER CREDIT THERE.

UM, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

RIGHT.

AND THE OVERALL GOAL IS, IS THAT WITH THE, THE SPAY AND NEUTER IS THAT THERE WILL BE LESS CATS IN THE FUTURE, BECAUSE AS I HAVE LEARNED, THEY PROCREATE OFTEN AND A LOT IN A YEAR. SO THAT'S WHAT THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, IT NOW, JAKE, YOU GUYS TRY.

JAKE, ARE YOU UP FOR SEVEN B THEN? YEAH. I HAVE SEVEN B C AND D. AND THOSE ARE ALL JUST THE PROCEDURAL CHANGES, UM, WITH MOVING ANIMAL CONTROL UNDER THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

CAN I ASK YOU ONE QUESTION ON SEVEN C WITHIN THERE, IT LOOKED LIKE THAT WE WERE TAKING AT SOME POINT WE WERE TAKING A PICTURE OF A DOG. YES. DO WE DO THAT NOW? LIKE IF WE GO OUT AND HAVE A CALL, DON'T WE DO THAT ALREADY? SO WE DID, WE DO. AND THE ANIMAL CONTROL WOULD PROBABLY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS BETTER, BUT I KNOW, ESPECIALLY WITH, UM, THE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS ONE, THERE WASN'T ANY SORT OF TIME LIMIT ON THE PERSON ALLOWING US TO PHOTOGRAPH THE DOG. SO LIKE, I FIGURED WE SHOULD PUT A TIME LIMIT ON THAT SO WE CAN SAY, IF YOU HAVEN'T LET US PHOTOGRAPH THE DOG WITHIN 30 DAYS, BECAUSE AS THE PERSON WHO HAS TO PROSECUTE THE MINUTE MUNICIPAL INFRACTION, I WOULD LOVE IT IF THEY WOULD TAKE A PICTURE OF THOSE DOGS LIKE REALLY CLOSE. GOT IT.

UNDERSTOOD.

THAT MAKES SENSE. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR JAKE? THANK YOU, JAKE. YEP.

ALL RIGHT. JUMPING BACK THEN TO SEVEN A ORDINANCES FOR, UH, ON THE SECOND FOR ALARM SYSTEMS. THIS IS, UM, AGAIN, THE ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING. IT'S JUST THAT IT, UM, WE DECIDED THAT IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR AS WE IMPLEMENT THE FALSE ALARM, UM, SORT OF SYSTEM IN HOUSE FOR THE PD TO DO IT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. SO INSTEAD OF MAKING IT ON THE ANNUAL RENEWAL OF WHEN A PERSON REGISTERS THEIR ALARM SYSTEM, IT'S A PROPOSAL TO MAKE IT SO THAT IT WOULD BE, THEY WOULD GET THE REMAINING PORTION OF THAT CALENDAR YEAR AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO RENEW AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NEXT CALENDAR YEAR. SO ALL OF OUR RENEWALS COULD BE DONE AT THE FOLLOWING JANUARY. DO WE, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY ALARMS WE ANSWER FROM A FALSE ALARM STANDPOINT, THE CITY? UM, WE, AND I ASKED THAT COMING FROM A, FROM A FORMER BANKER WHERE I WAS LIKE, REALLY TRIED TO SPEAK OUT LIKE, COME ON, WE DON'T WANT A FALSE ALARM.

DON'T DO THIS TO THOSE FOLKS.

SO CHIEF IS TEXTING BACK THERE QUICKLY. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FOR THIS.

WE DID HAVE THIS INFORMATION THE LAST TIME THAT WE AMENDED THE, BUT I DON'T, I REMEMBER IT. UM, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER.

IT'S NOT A, I KNOW THAT THE CHIEF HAS SAID THAT IT'S NOT A BURDEN ON OUR RESOURCES. IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING AN INSANE NUMBER OF FALSE THINGS OR ANYTHING.

UNFORTUNATELY, THEY'RE NOT ALL FALSE. YEAH. THAT IS TRUE.

EXACTLY. I'D LOVE IF IT WAS A FALSE ALARM EVERY TIME, BUT I DON'T. DANG IT IF IT ISN'T. YEAH. EXCEPT AT THREE IN THE MORNING.

YEAH. ON CHRISTMAS MORNING AT 3 AM. I ALSO HAVE, UM, 8 C.

OKAY. WHICH IS A RESOLUTION, UM, FOR THE ADDENDUM TO THE MASTER LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND A RECIPROCAL ACCESS AND PARKING EASEMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE RIVER'S EDGE PARKING FACILITIES. UH, BRENDA MAINE HAS ALSO GRACIOUSLY AGREED TO COME AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. WE HAD, UM, WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT, THE MASTER LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE PARKING GARAGE OUT AT RIVER'S EDGE. AND, UM, UM, TO PUT IT MILDLY, THE SYSTEM FOR PAYMENT OF TIF AND THE GUARANTOR PAYMENT BEING MADE BY IOWA WEST IS CONVOLUTED. IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE A BIT CONVOLUTED, BUT THIS WILL MAKE IT LESS CONVOLUTED. UM, AND ALSO THERE WERE, THERE WAS A NEED FOR RECIPROCAL EASEMENTS OVER AREA THAT'S IN WHAT IS LOT ONE NOW. UM, AND THEN THE PARKING GARAGE WAS IN LOT TWO AND LOT THREE. AND SO IT IS ALL THREE OF THE LOTS THAT ARE NOW IN WHAT USED TO BE BLOCK SEVEN OUT THERE AT THE RIVER'S EDGE. IT'S GIVING, UM, ACCESS TO, FOR THE CITY'S BENEFIT, FOR THE BENEFIT OF RIVER'S EDGE ONE, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PARKING GARAGE, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS AND EVERYTHING IS LEGAL IN TERMS OF EASEMENT AND TIME IN CASE WE EVER WANTED TO DO ANYTHING WITH LOT THREE THERE, THEN WE HAVE THAT ALL SORTED AND, AND IN PLACE FOR EVERYBODY. IT'S GOT, UH, COPIES OF THE ACCESS AND ALL OF THE ATTACHMENTS ARE THERE FOR YOU GUYS, BUT WE WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

AND, AND THE WAY THAT I SAW THAT, AND I SPOKE A LITTLE BIT WITH BRENDA AS WELL AS IT'S

[00:45:02]

THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS ON THEIR BACKSIDE BECAUSE THEY'RE THE SAME ENTITY OR SAME GROUP, ESSENTIALLY. BUT FROM OUR STANDPOINT, IT WON'T MATTER. IT'LL BE THE SAME.

IS THAT SUFFICIENT? AM I HITTING IT CORRECTLY OR NO? I WOULD ONLY SAY THAT, UM, THEY ARE BOTH THE DEVELOPER AND THE, AS DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT ENTITIES, RIGHT? I'M SORRY.

ONE OF THEM IS THE DEVELOPER AND ONE OF THEM IOWA WEST IS THE GUARANTOR. AND THIS IS, AND I'VE SAID IT TO BRENDA, SO I'M SURE SHE'S HAPPY FOR ME TO SAY IT. THIS IS A TERRIBLE DEAL FOR IOWA WEST.

WE PAY A PORTION OF WHAT WE GET IN IN TIF FOR, TO BUY THIS PARKING LOT FROM THEM WITH WHATEVER WE GET IN. AND THEN IOWA WEST AGREES TO FUND THE REST OF IT. SO THEY'RE, THEY'RE GIVING US ANY ADDITIONAL MONEY TO MAKE THESE PAYMENTS. AND SO IT'S JUST SHIFTING THE WAY THAT BASICALLY THEY GIVE US THE MONEY TO MAKE THE PAYMENT SO THAT WE CAN PURCHASE A GARAGE USING A LOT OF THEIR MONEY.

COMING FROM THE CORRECT ENTITY.

ON OUR SIDE, THIS IS ALL UPSIDE. SO, UM, THIS IS A VERY NICE THING THAT THEY, THIS IS A LOT OF WORK BY THE WAY, THAT WHITNEY HAS PUT IN, UM, OVER THE LAST MULTIPLE MONTHS, UM, AND, AND, AND WORKING THROUGH ALL OF THE BLOCK SEVEN AGREEMENTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. AND THANK YOU TO, TO BRENDA AND HER TEAM AS WELL FOR BEING, UH, GOOD PARTNERS THERE.

BUT JUST SO THE COUNCIL KNOWS, THIS IS, WAS A VERY IN-DEPTH PROCESS AND, AND WHITNEY, UH, LED IT VERY, VERY WELL. SO THANK YOU.

AND I'D LIKE TO THANK WHITNEY AND ALSO IOWA WEST FOR BEING UNDERSTANDING AS IT IS AN ODD SITUATION AS IT GOES THROUGH.

SO THANK YOU GUYS.

YES. PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. BACK TO ORDINANCES ON THE SECOND.

WE HAVE E, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITH THE CITY ADMINISTRATION AND THE REORGANIZATION. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? THIS AGAIN, JUST SETS THE FRAMEWORK AS FAR AS, UH, IDENTIFYING ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND THAT THEY ARE THERE. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? OKAY. RESOLUTION 8A. UM, AND I WOULD ASSUME WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT 8A AND 8B TOGETHER.

YES. YEAH. UH, THOSE WERE TABLED FROM LAST, UH, COUNCIL MEETING. THEY HAVE TO DO WITH, UH, RAISES FOR THE NON-UNION POLICE AND FIRE, UH, EMPLOYEES. AND, UH, 2615, UH, IS IN LINE WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

AND THE WHOLE, THE IDEA OF TABLING THAT I WASN'T, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE KEEPING THE GAP BETWEEN THE LINE WORKERS TO THE ADMINISTRATION AT A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE THAT THEY HAD AGREED ON MANY YEARS AGO.

AND SO IN, IN, IN HISTORY, UH, IN THE PAST AND OUR, THE, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, I KNOW FOR A FACT, UH, RECEIVED THE SAME RAISE FOR THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE OR NON-UNION POSITIONS AS OUR, UH, SAME PERCENTAGE AS THE NEGOTIATIONS OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. WELL, WITH THAT, UH, 2615 IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THEY'RE NOT DONE NEGOTIATING.

SO WE COULDN'T EVEN TELL YOU WHICH WAY IT WOULD BE, IF IT'D BE MORE OR LESS ON 20, FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, UH, THEY'RE PROPOSING A TWO AND A HALF PERCENT WHEN THE UNION RECEIVED A 3.5 PERCENT RAISE.

AND THAT WILL EAT INTO THAT GAP PERCENTAGE THAT, UH, THEY LIKE TO KEEP. AND THAT HELPS TO, UH, TO, UH, GET THE, THE LYING PEOPLE OUT THERE OR THE PEOPLE OUT ON THE STREETS TO TAKE THE TEST AND TAKE THOSE POSITIONS OF LEADERSHIP. IF THEY'RE TOO CLOSE, THEY WON'T DO IT.

THEY'LL STAY IN THERE AND THEY'LL MAKE OVERTIME AND AND NOT TEST. UH, WE COULD ADD THE CHIEF SPEAK TO THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, OR IF I COVERED IT WELL ENOUGH, I MEAN, YOU COULD ASK QUESTIONS OR WHATEVER, BUT THAT'S WHY I TABLED THEM.

AND I THINK, UH, WE SHOULD, UH, PASS 2015 AND AMEND 2016 TO THREE AND A HALF.

YOU KNOW, YOU TALK ABOUT THE TESTS THAT THEY HAVE.

AND I GUESS THE QUESTION I HAD, BECAUSE WE WERE, AS I WAS LOOKING AT BOTH OF THESE, WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THAT LEVEL, ARE ANY OF THESE INCREASES OR PERCENTAGES BASED ON PERFORMANCE? IS THERE A PERFORMANCE CRITERIA THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET IN ORDER TO GET THOSE THINGS? OR IS IT JUST, OKAY, YOU'RE AT THAT, YOU'RE AT THIS LEVEL,

[00:50:01]

SENIORITY. CORRECT. IT'S SENIORITY.

WELL, AND IT'S A PROMOTIONAL TOO. THEY TEST MOST, MOST OF THESE ARE CIVIL SERVICE TEST JOBS WHERE THEY WILL TEST TO BE A, A LIEUTENANT OR A HIGHER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RANKS ARE IN, IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUT IN OURS, IT WOULD BE A ASSISTANT CHIEF, UH, POSITION, MAYBE IN THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE.

BUT, UH, THERE'S A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THERE AND IF IT GETS TOO CLOSE, WELL, THEN THEY, THEY WOULD RATHER JUST STAY ON THE LINE WITH LESS RESPONSIBILITY, TAKE THE ACTING TIME AND THE OVERTIME AND MAKE MORE MONEY.

AND THAT'S WHY WE LIKE TO KEEP THAT GAP IN THERE. SO THERE'S INCENTIVE TO TEST AND, AND PROMOTE.

SO I GUESS BEFORE CHIEF COMES UP TO TALK, I GUESS I WOULD JUST CALL OUT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS.

UM, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE WANTING TO MATCH UP TO WHAT THE UNION IS, I WOULD HIGHLY SUGGEST THEN THAT YOU AMEND THE BUDGET SO THAT ALL SUPERVISORY STAFF GETS THE 3.5. OTHERWISE YOU'RE CREATING IN A LARGER GAP FROM A POLICE AND FIRE SUPERVISORY TO A NON POLICE AND FIRE SUPERVISORY.

UM, AND THAT WAY, AND THAT GAP IS JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO GROW AS WELL.

UM, SO WE HAVE DIRECTORS, UM, THAT AS IT'S CONTINUING TO GROW IS MAKING LESS MONEY THAN A SUPERVISORY STAFF, UM, BECAUSE THE, THE GAP CONTINUES TO GROW HIGHER AND HIGHER.

UM, I, AND I APPRECIATE THE POLICE AND FIRE SUPERVISORY STAFF AND ALL THE WORK THAT THEY DO. SO I DON'T WANT THE, THESE COMMENTS TO BE TAKEN, YOU KNOW, IN A NEGATIVE LIGHT TOWARDS THEM, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE AT A, UH, THEY'RE NOT ON THE STREET.

THEY'RE AT A DESK JOB FOR 40 HOURS. THEY'RE DOING SIMILAR, OBVIOUSLY ON A MUCH DIFFERENT, DANGEROUS SCALE, RIGHT? BUT THEY ARE SUPERVISING PEOPLE. AND SO THAT TELLS THE REST OF YOUR STAFF THAT SUPERVISORY FOR POLICE AND FIRE SHOULD MAKE MORE MONEY BECAUSE OF THIS ANTIQUATED RULE THAT WAS PUT INTO PLACE OR THAT WAS OBSERVED FOR A LONG TIME, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY NOT AN ORDINANCE THAT'S HERE RIGHT NOW. UM, I WOULD ALSO MAKE, UH, MAKE THE COUNCIL AWARE THAT WE DID NOT BUDGET FOR AN INCREASE OF THE SUPERVISORY STAFF FOR POLICE AND FIRE. THEY ARE NON-UNION, THEY ARE SUPERVISORY STAFF.

AND SO THAT WILL, THAT IS NOT, IT'LL TAKE OUR BUDGET OUT OF WHACK FROM WHERE WE ARE.

UM, SO THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR WAS TO, TO PROVIDE THOSE ADDITIONAL INCREASES TO THAT GROUP OF PEOPLE.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE FACT THAT EVERY PERSON ON THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING THE CHIEF, AND IT'S PROBABLY WITH OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT ALSO ARE LINE DUTY READY AND WILL RESPOND IF NEEDED.

I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AS WELL. SO I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT INCREASING THE RATE AT A LOWER RATE THAN WHAT THE UNION MEMBERS GET. AND HERE'S WHY, BECAUSE I THINK SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP, I'VE SEEN THAT FIRSTHAND QUITE RECENTLY. SO OVER AT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AT THE JAIL WHERE I WORK, WE RECENTLY HAD A LIEUTENANT RETIRE AND WE HAVE A SERGEANT WHO VERY SMART GUY, VERY CAPABLE.

HE'S BEEN IN THAT POSITION FOR MANY YEARS. HE WOULD HAVE MADE A PHENOMENAL LIEUTENANT, IN MY OPINION, VERY QUALIFIED, GOOD JUDGMENT.

BUT THE PROBLEM WAS, WAS THAT BECAUSE HE'D BEEN IN THE SERGEANT ROLE FOR SO LONG, HE WAS TOPPED OUT IN THE SERGEANT PAY. AND WHEN HE LOOKED AT WHAT KIND OF RAISE HE WOULD GET, IF HE APPLIED FOR LIEUTENANT AND GOT THE POSITION, IT WAS GOING TO BE TWO PENNIES AN HOUR.

THAT'S HOW MUCH HIS PAY WAS GOING TO GO UP. AND THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE AMOUNT OF RESPONSIBILITY THAT, BECAUSE THESE ARE VERY IMPORTANT ROLES THAT HAVE A LOT OF CRUCIAL IMPACT ON OUR OPERATIONS. SO ALL THE EXTRA RESPONSIBILITY, THE STRESS, WORSE HOURS, BECAUSE THEY, THEY WORK MUCH WORSE HOURS THAN THE SERGEANTS DO.

I'M JUST BEING COMPLETELY CLEAR. UM, AND FRANKLY, FOR TWO CENTS AN HOUR, HE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS WORTH IT. SO HE OPTED TO NOT EVEN APPLY FOR IT. SO WE LOST OUT ON A VERY QUALIFIED PERSON WHO WOULD HAVE MADE A, IN MY OPINION, A TREMENDOUS LIEUTENANT APPLYING FOR THAT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THE TOP OUT PAY FOR SERGEANT AND THE STARTING PAY FOR LIEUTENANT LINED UP.

CAUSE I, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE CONCERNS REGARDING LIKE SUPERVISORY PAY BETWEEN UNION AND NON-UNION. I, I WOULD BE AMICABLE TO GOING BACK TO THE BUDGET AND LOOKING AT, ALL RIGHT, YOU KNOW, WHAT CHANGES DO WE NEED TO MAKE AND TRYING

[00:55:01]

THAT THAT'S, AND I, I DON'T DISAGREE. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT HOW THEY CAP OUT AT SERGEANTS, RIGHT. AND, AND ADDRESS IT FROM THAT WAY, BECAUSE YOU'RE CREATING A, IF, IF YOU GO WITH THE AMENDED, YOU ARE NOW CREATING A DIVISION WITH THE SUPERVISORY STAFF ACROSS THE CITY.

RIGHT. AND I, AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE HANDLED IN A SEPARATE DISCUSSION. I'D BE OPEN TO WORKING ON THAT AS WELL.

BUT I DO THINK THAT I, I WOULD SUPPORT, AND I INTEND TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THESE FROM 2.5 TO 3.5. AND IF THE COUNCIL DISAGREES, YOU KNOW, VOTE DOWN AND I'LL, YOU KNOW, STILL VOTE FOR THE BILL AS A WHOLE.

BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT IF WE'RE, IF WE WANT TO AVOID THOSE INSTANCES, LIKE WHAT HAPPENED AT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE RAISING THE SUPERVISORY RATE AT THE SAME LEVEL AS THE UNION.

I, AND I, I COMPLETELY RESPECT THAT, COLE, AND, AND ALL THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS. JUST REMEMBER, GOING FORWARD, WE DON'T HAVE A LARGE BUDGET TO BE ABLE TO, LIKE, IT'S PRETTY SOLID. IT'S GOING TO BE 2% ACROSS THE ROOM. SO, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU, AGAIN, THERE WILL BE, THE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT ONE GROUP OF SUPERVISORS IS, IS WORTH MORE MONEY THAN ANOTHER GROUP OF SUPERVISORS FOR ONE YEAR? NO, NO, I'M NOT, I'M NOT SAYING THAT. I'M NOT TRYING TO DISPARAGE AGAINST ANY OF THE NON-UNION SUPERVISORS. I JUST KNOW HOW IMPORTANT PUBLIC SAFETY IS, AND I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE GOOD, QUALIFIED PEOPLE WHO WANT TO APPLY FOR THESE ROLES. AND AS IT'S CURRENTLY STRUCTURED, IF WE GO DOWN THIS RABBIT HOLE WHERE WE, YOU KNOW, TRY TO SCALE IT BACK TO MAKE IT MORE LEVEL ACROSS THE BOARD, I MEAN, WHAT STEVE, OR WHAT THEY, THEY'VE BROUGHT UP HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY CORRECT IS, LIKE, WE, THEY CAN MAKE MORE MONEY JUST DOING A LITTLE BIT OF OVERTIME WORKING AT THE STREET LEVEL THAN YOU CAN AS A SERGEANT. I THINK, AND MIMI, YOU HAD, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THAT HANDOUT HERE OR NOT, BUT THEY'RE MAKING $108 IN OVERTIME, AND SO WE WANT TO GIVE THEM AN ADDITIONAL, ONE AND A HALF PERCENT RAISE. I DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS WITH ME, BUT YOU CAN ACCESS THEM ON.

I DON'T KNOW IF CHIEF WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS. IF YOU'RE A POLICE CAPTAIN. YEAH, THE OVERTIME RATE FOR A POLICE CAPTAIN AT GRADE SEVEN, STEP FIVE, IS $104 AN HOUR.

FOR A STEP FOUR, IT WOULD BE $100 AN HOUR. STEP THREE, POLICE CAPTAIN, WOULD BE $96 AN HOUR. THAT'S FOR CAPTAIN, RIGHT? RIGHT. SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT POLICE SERGEANT, THE STARTING PAY FOR A POLICE SERGEANT IS $113,175. OVERTIME IS $81.30 AN HOUR. THE NEXT STEP IS $100.

THESE ARE 2025, SO YOU GUYS ARE PROPOSING A THREE AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE ON TOP OF THAT. BECAUSE THOSE SUPERVISORY POSITIONS GET OVERTIME. RIGHT. THEY DO.

RIGHT. SO IT WOULD BE, IF YOU WERE A SECOND YEAR SERGEANT, YOU'D MAKE $115,438.

YOU'D MAKE $82,92 IN OVERTIME AN HOUR.

OBVIOUSLY, BOTH OF THOSE PLUS A 3.5 PERCENT INCREASE.

FOR A FIRST YEAR LIEUTENANT, IT'D BE $121,777. IT'D BE $87.48 AN HOUR IN OVERTIME.

THAT'S POLICE SUPERVISORY FOR FIRE. THEY'RE AN FS-04 OR AN FS-05. AN FS-05, WHICH IS A GRADE SEVEN, WHEN YOU START OUT YEAR ONE, IT'S $126,817.

AND OVERTIME IS AT $65 AN HOUR.

THAT'S NOT, I KNOW THAT THERE'S ALSO A SQUAD BONUS. THIS IS JUST THE HOURLY RATES. AND THAT WOULD GO UP TO, BY YEAR FIVE, YOU'D BE AT $136,135. SO $136,135. AND YOU'D MAKE OVERTIME AT $69.85. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY MAKING THROUGH JUNE 30TH OF 2026.

ONCE YOU GO UP TO THE NEXT GRADE, YOU'D BE AT $133,158. AND THEN $95 OF OVERTIME. AND THEN ONCE YOU'RE AT THE TOP OF THAT GRADE, YOU'D MAKE $142,942 A YEAR. AND YOUR OVERTIME WOULD BE $102.68 PER HOUR, PLUS THE 3.5% INCREASE

[01:00:01]

THAT'S MAINTAINING THE GAP THAT WE HAVE. THAT'S CURRENT 2025 NUMBERS. SO THAT'S NOT INCREASING. WHAT I'M ASKING IS THAT MAINTAINS THE GAP BETWEEN THE LINE AND THE NON-UNION, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN PRACTICING THIS SINCE, I THINK, ABOUT 2010. RIGHT. AND BY, IF WE WOULD GIVE THEM, LET'S SAY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, FOR INSTANCE, WE GIVE THEM TWO AND A HALF.

AND WE, AFTER NEGOTIATIONS, THE FIRE UNION MAKES ONE.

WELL, THEN THEY'RE, THAT GAP HAS INCREASED BY THAT MUCH. AND SO THOSE NUMBERS YOU JUST READ ARE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS WITH THE GAP IN THERE. RIGHT. THOSE ARE CURRENT DAY. SO THIS IS NOT WITH THE THREE AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE YOU'RE PROPOSING TO GIVE THEM. SO, OR TWO AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE, IF THAT'S WHAT IT IS. SO THE REASON THAT I HAD BEEN ASKED TO LOOK AT IT IS BECAUSE MOST DEPARTMENT HEADS ARE WHAT'S A GRADE 34. AND THAT STARTS AT 118. SO DEPARTMENT HEADS OF, YOU KNOW, SO PARKS, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, FINANCE, HR, THAT STARTS AT $118,917 AND GOES UP TO AFTER WHEN YOU TOP OUT AT $151,000 AND THEY DO NOT MAKE OVERTIME. NONE OF THOSE EMPLOYEES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR OVERTIME.

SALARY. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? IF WE WERE TO KEEP GOING AND WE TALK ABOUT THIS GAP, BY MY MATH, AND I'M NOT VERY BRIGHT, BUT THE GAP WILL CONTINUE TO GET WIDER EVERY YEAR THAT WE DO THIS. AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A BIGGER DISCREPANCY EVERY YEAR THAT WE GO. SO IF WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR X AMOUNT OF YEARS ALREADY. WHICH, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE GAP BETWEEN THE RANK AND FILE AND THE MANAGEMENT OR BETWEEN NON-UNION AND UNION GUYS? YEAH. I'LL SAY EITHER SIDE BECAUSE THE MATH TO ME WORKS OUT THE SAME ON BOTH WHETHER YOU, IF YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP THAT THERE AND SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO, WE'RE GOING TO KEEP IT THE SAME FOR BOTH.

NON-UNION UNION, RANK FILE, OR DO THIS. IF YOU CONTINUE TO DO THAT YEAR OVER YEAR OVER YEAR, THEY'RE ALREADY UP HERE. THAT 3% IS NOW A LARGER INCREASE EVERY YEAR, EVERY YEAR, EVERY YEAR, RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S HOW I'M SEEING THE MATH WORK OUT.

AT WHAT POINT DO WE COME BACK AND SAY, OKAY, WAIT, NOW WE'RE, WE'VE, WE'RE TOO WIDE ON THE GAP. THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT THERE NOW, I WOULD SAY. SURE. THAT'S WHY WE WERE SUGGESTING NOT TO FOLLOW WHAT THE UNION GOT WITH THE 3.5 AND TO ALIGN ALL SUPERVISORY STAFF AT THE SAME PERCENTAGE. THAT'S STEP ONE, RIGHT, IS TO NOT GIVE A SET OF SUPERVISORY STAFF ONE PERCENTAGE AND ANOTHER SET OF SUPERVISORY STAFF A DIFFERENT PERCENTAGE. THAT IS STEP ONE.

AND THEN STEP TWO WOULD BE WHEN WE GO AND DO THE WHOLE JOB EVALUATION, WHICH I HAVE TASKED WITH THE NEW HR DIRECTOR TO HAVE IT DONE WITHIN A YEAR, RIGHT? SO THAT IS, BUT STEP ONE IS IF YOU'RE SUPERVISORY STAFF, YOU SHOULD BE MAKING THE SAME PERCENTAGE INCREASE EACH YEAR AND NOT ONE VERSUS WHAT IT, WHAT THE UNION DOES OR NOT.

WHILE WE DON'T HAVE FIRE COMPLETED, WE KNOW IT'S NOT GOING TO BE 1% BECAUSE THAT'S NOT OUR FINAL OFFER AND THAT'S NOT THEIR FINAL OFFER.

SO WE KNOW IT'S NOT GOING TO BE 1%. THAT WASN'T AN EXAMPLE. YEAH. YEAH, I KNOW.

BUT IT'S FOR THE SHERIFF. SO WOULD IT, IN, IN AN EFFORT TO MAINTAIN SOME SEMBLANCE OF A GAP, AND I TALKED TO SOME FOLKS ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY, THEY REACHED OUT AND GAVE THEIR, UM, OPINIONS. WOULD IT NOT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE PLAUSIBLE TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO, UM, MAINTAIN A 10% DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN RANK AND FILE AND, AND MANAGEMENT? THAT WAY, HOWEVER, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW THE FIRE IS GOING TO COME OUT YET BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DONE THERE YET. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT A TOTAL AMOUNT THEN? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 11 POINT, ONE OF YOU GUYS I'M SURE HAVE THE NUMBER DOWN THERE, 11 POINT, WHATEVER IT IS, DIFFERENCE. AND THE FELLOW THAT I WAS SPEAKING WITH THE OTHER DAY SAID, WELL, WE, WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE WE AT LEAST TRY AND KEEP AROUND THE 10% MARK BECAUSE OF THE EXAMPLES GIVEN. COULD WE NOT PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT WOULD, WOULD BE MORE BASED OFF OF, OF THE, THE DISCREPANCY VERSUS EVERY YEAR WE HAVE TO HAVE THE INCREASE OR MATCH IT? YEAH.

YOU'RE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT.

THE TOTAL, WHATEVER IT'S GOING TO BE, WE'LL MAKE IT WHATEVER IT IS TO MAINTAIN A 10% BREAK BETWEEN.

SO THERE IS A BIT OF A BREAK BETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND ARE YOU GOING TO DO THAT ACROSS ALL DEPARTMENTS? WELL, I'M, I WAS TALKING ABOUT THESE TWO THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AT THIS POINT.

RIGHT. BUT WE APPROVED THE OTHER ONE IN THE LAST MEETING AND WE JUST TABLED THESE TWO.

SO WOULD, WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO DO IT FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS? WHY WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO, UH,

[01:05:01]

BUT THESE ARE NON-UNION POSITIONS. I KNOW, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT UNION POSITIONS.

YES. BUT FOR EXAMPLE, IN, IN THE LEGAL SIDE OF THINGS, RIGHT, MIMI GETS PAID X AND EVERYONE IN THE DEPARTMENT GETS PAID Y, RIGHT? THEY DON'T COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN FOR THEIR PAY. RIGHT.

THE, THE, THE DIFFERENCE BEING, OKAY. WELL, SURE. SURE. YEAH.

YEAH. YOU'RE RIGHT.

BUT NOT SUPERVISORY.

SUPERVISORY. YOU DON'T, YOU GIVE THEM ALL THE 2%.

I'D LIKE TO HEAR CHIEF HAS ANY COMMENTS ON THIS.

SURE. BUT JUST TO ANSWER A QUESTION THAT COUNCILMAN RUE ANSWERED OR ASKED A LITTLE WHILE AGO ABOUT WHETHER THERE ARE ANY KIND OF LIKE MERIT INCENTIVES, YOU KNOW, ON THE SUPERVISORY SIDE THERE CURRENTLY ARE NOT, BUT THE ONE THING THAT I WOULD SAY THEY ARE, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE NOT UNIONIZED, THEY'RE SUBJECT TO CIVIL SERVICE PROTECTIONS AND THERE HAVE BEEN INSTANCES, UM, WHERE THERE HAVE BEEN DEMOTIONS. SO, UM, IF SOMEONE'S NOT MEETING SUPERVISORY STANDARDS, YOU KNOW, UM, TO, TO THE QUESTION ON LIKE PERFORMANCE BASED COMPENSATION, THAT, UH, PROCEEDINGS CAN BE INITIATED IN FRONT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION SO THAT SOMEONE COULD BE DEMOTED FROM A PROMOTIONAL RANK. AND, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT HAS HAPPENED, UH, PREVIOUSLY IN THE CITY.

SO IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, PROTECTING VALUE OR PERFORMANCE BASED PAY, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT LIKE YEARLY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION EQUALS, YOU KNOW, PAY RAISE, LIKE IN THE BUSINESS SECTOR, THERE ARE PROTECTIONS AGAINST, YOU KNOW, UH, SOMEONE WHO'S NOT PERFORMING AT THE SUPERVISORY RANK THAT THEY COULD BE BUMPED DOWN. THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS, IS BASED ON EXPERIENCE.

UM, I'VE, I'VE WORKED IN PLACES WHERE SALARY DISPARITY ISSUES AND NOT THAT, YOU KNOW, IT HAPPENS, UH, ALL AT ONCE, IT CAN SNEAK UP ON YOU REAL QUICKLY, BUT THE REALITY IS YOU DRAW YOUR SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL FROM THAT UNION POOL. WE DON'T HIRE POLICE SERGEANTS OFF THE STREET. WE DON'T HIRE POLICE SERGEANTS, YOU KNOW, FROM OTHER AGENCIES, THEY COME FROM WITHIN THE RANKS. SO IF WE DON'T CREATE THOSE FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR PEOPLE TO TAKE THE PROMOTION, YOU CAN MAKE A LOT OF MONEY ON OVERTIME. AND, UM, I MEAN, I FELT THESE PRESSURES IN MY CAREER. YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE A DECISION TO BE A BOSS AND STEP OVER THE THRESHOLD. UM, I'D REALLY ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE VALUE OF, OF INCENTIVIZING PROMOTIONS AND NOT CREATING SALARY DISPARITY ISSUES. THE DOLLARS ARE THE DOLLARS, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN QUOTE, YOU KNOW, OVERTIME PAY. IT'S A LOT OF MONEY. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY COPS ARE CHEAP OR FIREMEN ARE CHEAP.

AND THAT'S A REALITY THAT PERVADES GOVERNMENT WHERE, WHERE I CAME FROM. UM, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE TROOPERS MADE MORE THAN THE, UH, UH, CITY ATTORNEYS OR OUR CITY EQUIVALENTS OR THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS, YOU KNOW, IT WAS THE REALITY OF, OF THE SITUATION, BUT OUR, OUR BOSSES ARE DRAWN FROM THAT UNION POOL.

AND I WOULD JUST REALLY, UM, ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER, UM, GUARDING AGAINST SALARY DISPARITY ISSUES THAT WOULD PREVENT PEOPLE FROM WANTING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF PROMOTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES.

AND I KNOW, UH, SOME OF THE HISTORIC SEPARATIONS, YOU KNOW, THAT CAN BE, UH, UH, A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, THE PERCENTAGES THAT GO FROM, YOU KNOW, HIGHEST RANKING OFFICER TO, TO SERGEANT, TO LIEUTENANT, TO CAPTAIN, BUT I WOULD JUST ADVOCATE. AND THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD SAY TOO, IS, UM, AND I'VE SAID THIS TO COUNCILMAN GORMAN, WHEN HE ASKED ME, I WOULD EXCLUDE MYSELF FROM ANY OF THESE CONVERSATIONS AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD. I'M NOT HERE ADVOCATING ON BEHALF OF, YOU KNOW, MYSELF. UM, IT'S, IT'S JUST MY PEOPLE IN INCENTIVIZING, YOU KNOW, GOOD SUPERVISORS AND PROMOTIONS. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU, CHIEF. APPRECIATE IT.

CHIEF DAVIS, I HAVE, I HAVE A QUESTION. I, I GUESS I, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHEN IN COLE'S EXAMPLE AND, AND OTHERS, ALL, I GUESS IN, IN ANY ASPECT OF, OF A JOB IS WHETHER IT'S SERGEANT, LIEUTENANT, OR CAPTAIN, THERE, THERE'S GOTTA BE DIFFERENT STRENGTH AND STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES TO EACH, EACH PERSON. AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT MERIT-BASED, UH, SOME PEOPLE, WHILE THEY'RE IN THE SAME POSITION, CERTAINLY HAVE TO PERFORM DIFFERENT, BETTER, UH, THAN OTHERS AND HAVE DIFFERENT LEADERSHIP SKILLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO DO YOU SEE VALUE IN, IN OFFERING MERIT-BASED PAY TO PEOPLE WHO ARE SHOWING MORE LEADERSHIP, MORE VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY? I, I HAVE SEEN THAT DONE IN THE PAST. UM, IT WAS DONE, UH, AT THE AGENCY THAT I FORMERLY WORKED AT, AT THE RANK OF MASTER SERGEANT, WHERE THERE WAS, YOUR INCENTIVE PAY WAS TIED TO A YEARLY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION. SO THAT HAS BEEN DONE. UM, IT'S NOT VERY, UH, PERVASIVE IN, IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT IT, BUT IT HAS BEEN DONE. AND YOU'RE CERTAINLY RIGHT. THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, VARYING DEGREES OF PERFORMANCE AT ALL RANKS AND IN ALL POSITIONS.

SOME SUPERVISORS DO BETTER THAN OTHERS, BUT THEY WILL ALL BE

[01:10:01]

AND AGAIN, I GUESS THAT, THAT, THAT'S MY QUESTION. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT? BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT, UH, WE DON'T SEE THE RANK AND FILE, NOR DO WE SEE THE SERGEANTS, LIEUTENANTS, CAPTAINS, UH, PERFORMANCE, RIGHT? BUT YOU DO, AND YOU WORK WITH THEM. UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK IS THAT, I GUESS THAT'S MY QUESTION. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT? YEAH, I, I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO IT. IT WOULD TAKE TIME TO COME UP WITH A FAIR AND EQUITABLE REGIMEN. CAUSE I MEAN, TO BE CANDID, UM, YEARLY PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS CAN BE SOMEWHAT PERFUNCTORY. UM, AND THEN WHEN PAY IS GOING TO BE CONDITIONED UPON THEM, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE A VERY GOOD INSTRUMENT TO JUDGE, YOU KNOW, OBJECTIVELY AND FAIRLY TO JUDGE PERFORMANCE WHEN IT'S GOING TO RELATE TO COMPENSATION. SO I'M, I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BE AGAINST IT. UM, BUT I, BEFORE WE WOULD IMPLEMENT SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE WOULD NEED, IF THE COUNCIL WANTED TO MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION, WE WOULD NEED TO REALLY TAKE A HARD LOOK AT HOW WE'RE GOING TO GAUGE PERFORMANCE. UM, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S TIED TO COMPENSATION.

THANK YOU. YEAH. I'M JUST TRYING TO, I THINK WE ALL WANT TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION FOR OUR OFFICERS, FOR OUR FIREFIGHTERS, FOR THE COMMUNITY. I THINK THERE'S JUST A LOT OF UNKNOWNS. THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT, UH, WE NEED TO LOOK AT UH, ASSISTANT CHIEF ROAD WALLED. I JUST HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS OR A FEW, UH, COMMENTS ABOUT SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE.

UM, UH, WE DO NEED TO PROTECT THAT, THAT GAP.

OKAY. UH, WE ARE SUPERVISORS AND, UH, BUT, UH, WE ARE STILL FULL FLEDGED FIREFIGHTERS, PARAMEDICS. WE KEEP UP OUR LICENSES. UM, AND A LOT OF WHAT WE DO IS HIGHLY TECHNICAL. THERE'S HOURS AND HOURS OF STUDYING.

THERE'S, UH, WEEKS AND MONTHS OF CLASSES WE HAVE TO TAKE, UH, IN THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE TO LEARN THE BUILDING CODE AND INTERPRET THAT TO DO INSPECTIONS, UH, FIRE INVESTIGATIONS. THERE'S, THERE'S HOURS AND HOURS OF TRAINING, SPECIALIZED TRAINING THAT WE NEED TO INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO WANT TO DO THAT EXTRA EFFORT. UH, THE, UH, THE SUPERVISORY FIRE SUPERVISORY GROUP THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SIX INDIVIDUALS. UM, WE DO NOT MAKE OVERTIME. SO I WANTED TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT.

THERE WAS OVERTIME HOURS THAT WERE LISTED OF WHAT OUR PAY IS FOR OVERTIME. WE DO NOT GET PAID OVERTIME. OKAY. WE, WE, WE, WE GET SOME ADMIN LEAVE TIME TO, TO, UH, OFFSET THAT. OKAY.

UH, BUT, UH, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, WE, WE MAINTAIN THAT GAP, UH, AND, YOU KNOW, DO WE GET PAID? WELL, YEAH, WE DO, UH, POLICE AND FIRE. I MEAN, YOU, IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH OF A GOOGLE SEARCH TO LOOK AND SEE, UH, IT'S DOCUMENTED. THEY'VE DONE RESEARCH ON THIS. YOU KNOW, THIS JOB TAKES YEARS OFF OF OUR LIFE. IT DOES CANCER. A FIREMAN IS TWICE AS LIKELY TO GET CANCER AS A REGULAR CITIZEN.

OKAY. UH, THE, THE SUICIDE RATES WITH, WITH FIREFIGHTERS AND POLICE, YOU KNOW, ARE MUCH MORE THAN THE GENERAL PUBLIC. I WON'T MAKE ANY APOLOGIES FOR THE, FOR THE, WHAT WE MAKE BECAUSE WE DO MAKE A GOOD LIVING, BUT THERE'S A TRADE-OFF FOR THAT. SO I JUST WANTED TO CONSIDER ALL THAT. OKAY.

THANKS.

THANKS CHIEF. AND THEN TO CLARIFY FOR POLICE, AND I'M GLAD, UH, HE BROUGHT THAT UP.

OUR CAPTAINS DO NOT MAKE OVERTIME, BUT OUR, OUR SERGEANTS AND OUR LIEUTENANTS DO. SO THE, THE OVERTIME HOURLY FOR OUR CAPTAINS, UM, UH, WOULD NOT BE PART OF THE EQUATION. YES, THEY'RE BOTH CORRECT. UM, UH, FIRE SUPERVISORY DOES NOT MAKE OVERTIME AND YOUR CAPTAINS DO NOT, UM, AS WELL. I THINK IT'S, IT'S MY RESPONSIBILITY TO LET, UM, COUNCIL KNOW THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, AND WE'VE LOOKED AT IT, YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR HIGHEST PAID OFFICER TO YOUR FIRST STEP OF A SERGEANT IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS 11.8%. THAT'S THE GAP THERE. THE, FROM YOUR, UH, HIGHEST PAID OFFICER TO YOUR TOP CAPTAIN, THERE'S A 42.33% GAP THERE.

UM, FOR FIRE SUPERVISORY, UH, FROM THE HIGHEST CAPTAIN TO STEP ONE OF AN AC IS A 23.75% GAP, AND TO THE TOP AC IS A 32.84% GAP.

THAT BEING SAID, I THINK WE, UM, WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS A COMPRESSION ISSUE FOUR TO FIVE YEARS AGO BECAUSE THE,

[01:15:02]

THEY'RE IN A NONUNION GRADE.

SO WHEN WE'RE MOVING NONUNION AT, LET'S SAY TWO AND A HALF, TWO, TWO AND A HALF, THAT'S ALL THEY'RE GOING UP WHERE THEIR SUPERVISORIES ARE GOING UP HIGHER.

WE'VE CREATED THAT GAP. WE HAD TO ADD GRADE 36, UM, ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO, FIVE YEARS AGO IN ORDER TO, TO STOP THAT GAP. WELL, RIGHT NOW, UM, YOUR TOP FIRE SUPERVISORY TO YOUR TOP CHIEF, THERE'S A 17% GAP AND YOUR TOP CAPTAIN TO YOUR TOP POLICE CHIEF IS A 15.4% GAP. SO I'M, I'M AFRAID AS WE CONTINUE, WE MAY HAVE SOME OF THESE ISSUES AGAIN, WHERE WE MAY NEED TO LOOK AT ADDING MORE PAID GRADES IN ORDER TO RETAIN RIGHT NOW, IF WE WOULD BRING IN, UM, A NEW FIRE CHIEF OR POLICE CHIEF, WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING THEM IN AT A STEP FOUR. SO THEY'RE HIGHER THAN THEIR TOP PAID SUPERVISORY.

SO I, I JUST FEEL THAT IT'S FAIR TO SHARE THOSE DETAILS AS WELL.

SO, SO YOU SAID BETWEEN A TOP OFFICER AND A FIRST STEP SERGEANT WAS A 11 POINT.

OH, WAIT, 11 POINT. SO ABOUT 11%. HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO THE, TO LIKE THE STATE AVERAGE BETWEEN THE HIGHEST ON THE OFFICER AND THE, BECAUSE I'VE READ THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S CLOSER TO 15 IN OTHER AREAS. ARE WE, AND WE OBVIOUSLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AGAIN, FROM THE EXAMPLE I'VE GIVEN THEM, THE MEASUREMENT I THINK IS MOST IMPORTANT TO YOU, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS YOU CAN LOOK AT NUMBERS AND THERE'S COUNTLESS DIFFERENT MEASUREMENTS YOU CAN USE. I THINK THE ONE WE WANT TO LOOK AT IS WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHERE AN OFFICER MAX OUT AND WHERE THE NEXT STEP UP STARTS.

AND SO DO YOU HAVE ANY STATISTICS ON WHAT THE STATE AVERAGE IS RELATIVE TO OUR 11.08%? I DON'T, BUT I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU. TAKING A LOOK AT OUR COMPARABLES AND SEEING HOW THEY WOULD FALL OUT AS WELL.

HOW MANY TOTAL FOLKS WERE YOU TALKING? YOU SAID SIX AND FIRE.

AND WHAT ARE WE TALKING AT POLICE? I WAS LIKE, TAKE THE SHOES OFF NOW.

I WOULD, I WOULD SAY APPROXIMATELY 25. YEAH, APPROXIMATELY 25. OKAY.

HOW MANY NON, FOR THE NON POLICE AND FIRE WOULD THAT BE? IF THEY WERE TO DO IT ACROSS THE BOARD FOR SUPERVISORY. SO ARE YOU JUST TALKING PEOPLE LIKE CWA AND ASK ME, RIGHT? BECAUSE ALMOST EVERYBODY IN THE CITY BELONGS TO, HAS A UNION THAT REPORTS TO THEM, EXCEPT FOR LEGAL CLERKS AND HR.

AND FINANCE. THERE'S, THERE'S OTHER, I CAN RUN THAT NUMBER FOR YOU REAL QUICK. SO YOUR TOTAL NON-UNION.

I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU.

THANKS, MICHELLE. YEAH.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THESE TWO TOPICS? OKAY.

GREAT DISCUSSION. 8D. THIS IS THE MARKS COMING ON UP.

RESOLUTION 26 TO 28. IT'S TO ACCEPT A BID FROM CARLY CONSTRUCTION FOR THE VALLEY VIEW AND FRANKLIN INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS. AGAIN, WE GOT A FAVORABLE BID. GREAT. CAN I, WILL THEY LEAVE THAT INTERSECTION OPEN OR WILL IT HAVE TO BE CLOSED? HAVE THEY GONE THAT FAR? WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THAT INTERSECTION BECAUSE IT'LL MAKE CONSTRUCTION MUCH EASIER. OKAY. AND GO QUICKER.

ARE WE ALL, ARE YOU ALL GOING DOWN FRANKLIN THEN TO GREENVIEW? IS THAT THE DETOUR? SURE. IT'LL BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID WHEN WE HAD UTILITY WORK AND NOBODY ELSE. OKAY. WE COULD USE TEXTMYGOV TO TELL THEM WHICH ROUTE TO GO. IT COULD BE EITHER ONE, I GUESS. JUST A PLUG.

ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MARK. THANKS, MARK. AF? YES, THIS IS A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING MY APPOINTMENT OF JAKE TO THE POSITION OF ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY 2. SO BACK IN THE SPRING WHEN YOU CREATED THAT NEW POSITION, WHEN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PRESENTED THE BUSINESS CASE, THIS IS THAT POSITION.

SO JAKE WOULD MOVE INTO THAT AND THEN WE WOULD HIRE AN ATTORNEY 1 TO PROSECUTE THE CITY'S SIMPLE MISDEMEANORS AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT JAKE IS CURRENTLY HANDLING. QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? YOU THOUGHT DOGS AND CATS WEREN'T THAT

[01:20:01]

GOOD FOR YOU. AND THIS IS DIRECTLY AS A RESULT OF JAKE'S INCREDIBLE WORK. HE'S VERY PROACTIVE, VERY BRIGHT. HE'S A TEAM PLAYER AND A VALUE TO THE OFFICE. ALL RIGHT. 8G, SCHEDULE FEES.

ANY QUESTIONS? JODI? NO.

THEY'RE NOT MY FEES. I KNOW.

DANIELLE'S NOT HERE. ANY QUESTIONS, THOUGH, FOR SCHEDULE FEES? I TOOK THE PAGES THAT HAD CORRECTIONS AND MADE THAT A SEPARATE DOCUMENT FOR YOU SO YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE THING. SO THERE'S SOME FIRE FEES, SOME PARKS FEES, AND SOME POLICE FEES THAT ARE BEING UPDATED. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? ANDREA'S HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY.

PERMITS FOR APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS AND CANCELLATIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? ALL RIGHT. FANTASTIC. WE CAN JUMP BACK THEN INTO THE STUDY SESSION.

IF THE STUDY DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE NEXT FEW DISCUSSION ITEMS, YOU'RE WELCOME TO LEAVE NOW.

IF YOU NEED TO GET OUT FOR THE NIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THE STUDY SESSION.

JUST TO ANSWER YOUR NON-UNION QUESTION, WE HAVE 71 NON-UNION EMPLOYEES. THANK YOU.

YES. AND I AM CORRECT, MICHELLE, WE DID NOT PUT A BUDGET IN THE BUDGET FOR A HIRE FOR THE SUPERVISORY, CORRECT? WE DID. OKAY. WE DID BUDGET THE THREE AND A HALF. OH, WE DID.

OKAY. AND THREE AND A HALF.

YES.

THANK YOU. I STAND CORRECTED.

ALL RIGHT. WHITNEY, YOUR BACKUP? I JUST WANT TO SAY SO NO ONE THINKS I WAS LYING TO THEM. I LITERALLY JUST PRINTED IT OFF OF OUR WEBPAGE. IT HAS AN OVERTIME AMOUNT LISTED FOR ALL OF THEM. SO I WAS NOT TRYING TO MISLEAD ANYONE BY INCLUDING THE CAPTAIN'S OVERTIME THAT IS ON OUR APPROVED PAY LIST, WHICH IS ON THE WIKI. SO IT'S HARD WHEN WE GRILL YOU RIGHT AT THAT MOMENT, LIKE BECAUSE OF THE QUESTIONS COME UP AFTER SOMEBODY SAYS SOMETHING AND YOU'RE LIKE, HEY, WHAT ABOUT THIS? I JUST, I JUST PULLED IT OFF OF OUR WEBSITE. SO, UM, SORRY, LIME SCOOTER, THE LIME SCOOTER. SO I, EVERY YEAR, UM, WE HAVE A LARGE CITY ATTORNEY MEETING IN DES MOINES. UM, THIS YEAR, UM, I ATTENDED, UM, BECAUSE MIMI WAS DOING SOMETHING ELSE THAT DAY.

AND, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS DISCUSSED IN A BIT OF DETAIL WAS SCOOTER LITIGATION. AND SO BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HADN'T, WHEN WE HAD LIME COME, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CERTAINLY HAVING NOT BEEN IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAD, UM, ELECTRONIC SCOOTERS FOR RENT, WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANY LITIGATION WITHIN OUR CITY, BUT IT WAS AN ISSUE THAT, UM, THE WAY THAT THE AGENDA WORKS IS THAT CITY ATTORNEYS FROM LARGE CITIES MAKE THE AGENDA THEMSELVES. AND THEN THE ONE THAT WHO PUTS IT ON HAS TO SPEAK TO IT. AND CEDAR RAPIDS ACTUALLY PUT IT ON FOR DISCUSSION, BUT THERE WAS ALSO A, UM, I'M GOING TO SAY DES MOINES.

IS IT WEST DES MOINES? DES MOINES CASE. UM, THERE WAS ALSO A DES MOINES ATTORNEY THERE WHO SPOKE TO A DIFFERENT CASE. AND I JUST, I'M NOT ADVISING THAT WE NOT GO AHEAD WITH LIME. I JUST THOUGHT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT YOU HAVE THE INFORMATION THAT WE LEARNED DURING THE DISCUSSION. AND WE TALKED TO, JAKE AND I TALKED TO BOTH, UM, LUKE DESMET WHO IS WITH DES MOINES AND THEN ALSO, UM, WITH TRISH CROFT FROM CEDAR RAPIDS ABOUT THEIR RECENT LITIGATION CASES AND SORT OF WHAT THEY'RE SEEING IN TERMS OF THESE. AND SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. LUKE'S ACTUALLY WAS A PRIVATE SCOOTER, UM, BUT A SCOOTER THAT WOULD GO, UH, VERY QUICKLY.

AND SO HIS WAS NOT A RENTAL AGREEMENT SITUATION, BUT IT WAS RELATED TO LITIGATION AND, UM, BASICALLY SORT OF STANDARD DISPARITIES IN THE ROADWAY AND THE SIZE OF THE TIRES FOR A SCOOTER.

AND SO, UM, IN TRISHA'S CASE, SHE WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO PROVIDE US WITH THE, UM, WITH INFORMATION FROM THEIR CASE, UM, WHICH WENT TO TRIAL AND IT WAS A DEFENSE VERDICT. SO THEY WERE ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY DEFEND IT, BUT THEY RAN INTO A NUMBER OF PROBLEMS. AND IN THAT SITUATION, IT WAS THAT, UM, THERE WAS A ONE AND THREE QUARTER INCH, UM, DISPARITY, WHAT THEY CALL A SURFACE DISCONTINUITY, UM, BETWEEN WHERE THE ROADWAY MET AND THERE WAS A JOINT THEN FOR THE CORBIN GUTTER SYSTEM, WHICH IS, UM, UNDER TWO INCHES IS CONSIDERED STANDARD AND COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE A CAR OR A BIKE TIRE IS LARGE ENOUGH TO TAKE THOSE AND NOT HAVE ANY KIND OF PROBLEMS, BUT SCOOTER TIRES ARE NOT. AND SO THEY, UM, THE PLAINTIFF IN THAT CASE HAD HIRED AN EXPERT WHO WROTE A VERY LENGTHY OPINION ABOUT HOW IT COULD NEVER BE THE FAULT OF THE RIDER WHEN THESE ACCIDENTS OCCUR BECAUSE NO SCOOTER TIRE COULD EVER HANDLE THAT KIND OF SURFACE DISCONTINUITY. AND SO EVEN THOUGH WE'D BE WITH FULLY WITHIN DESIGN STRUCTURE AND COMPLIANT WITH ALL OF THE ROADWAY REQUIREMENTS, THE SCOOTERS CANNOT ACTUALLY HANDLE SORT OF SURFACE DISCONTINUITY THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE ACCEPTABLE. AND SO THERE IS THE POTENTIAL FOR

[01:25:01]

SO IT WASN'T UNTIL THE CEDAR RAPIDS CASE WENT TO A JURY AND THE JURY ULTIMATELY FOUND THAT THE CITY WAS NOT LIABLE, BUT THERE'S A REAL RISK THAT THEY COULD HAVE GONE THE OTHER WAY.

AND IN THE CASE WITH DES MOINES, THEY ACTUALLY, UM, THEY ENDED UP SETTLING THAT FOR AN UNDISCLOSED AMOUNT BECAUSE OF, UM, BECAUSE OF THE INJURIES AND THE LIABILITY THAT THE CITY THOUGHT THAT IT, THAT IT HAD.

AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ALL OF THE ATTORNEYS TALKED ABOUT GENERALLY IS THAT ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH CEDAR RAPIDS SPECIFICALLY AND OTHERS MIRRORED THEIR THOUGHTS ON IS THAT YOU DON'T NECESSARILY ALWAYS GET TO APPROVE THE WAIVER THAT A PERSON SIGNED.

SO WHEN THEY RENT A SCOOTER, THEIRS ISN'T LIME, IT'S A DIFFERENT COMPANY, BUT WHEN YOU RENT THE SCOOTER, YOU SIGN YOUR THING SAYING, YEP, I AGREE. AND THE WAIVER SAYS THAT IT, UM, YOU AGREE THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO TRY TO HOLD THE SCOOTER COMPANY OR ITS SPONSORS LIABLE.

AND THEY SAID, WELL, WE'RE CLEARLY A SPONSOR. WE'RE ALLOWING THEM TO USE OUR CITY ROADS. AND THE COURT SAID, NO, THAT IS NOT SUFFICIENT. THAT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR THEM TO SAY THAT THEY'RE EXPRESSLY WAIVING THEIR LIABILITY, UM, AS IT RELATES TO WAIVING THE LIABILITY OF THE CITY. AND SO WE WOULD WANT TO, IF WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO HAVE CONTROL OVER THAT WAIVER. AND WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY IS SPECIFICALLY NAMED THAT THEY ASSUME THE RISKS AND THAT THERE'S ADDITIONAL STEPS.

I THINK IF AT ALL POSSIBLE TO SAY THAT THEY'RE UNDERSTANDING THAT NOT JUST THE SCOOTER COMPANY, BUT ALSO THE CITY, AND THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SURFACE DISCONTINUITY AND THAT THEY NEED TO SLOW DOWN AND THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOOKING AND ALL OF THESE THINGS. AND EVEN STILL, WHETHER THAT WILL HOLD, I DO NOT KNOW. SO IT'S JUST TO SAY, WE DID NOT TALK ABOUT SORT OF THE INCREASED RISK OF LIABILITY FROM A SCOOTER ON THE STREET PERSPECTIVE.

COULD WE REQUIRE THEM ON THE KIND OF DIFFERENT SIDE OF IT TO, IF THEY'RE GOING TO BRING THEIR SCOOTERS TO TOWN, THEY WOULD LIST US AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED ON THEIR POLICY WITH WAIVERS AND ALL THE DIFFERENT BELLS AND WHISTLES. AND THEY DID ACTUALLY IN THIS ONE, AND THEY ALSO HAD A DUTY TO BOTH INDEMNIFY AND DEFEND.

BUT THEY SAID THEY'RE ONLY BOUND TO INDEMNIFY AND DEFEND THE CITY IF IT'S A PROBLEM WITH THEIR SCOOTER. AND THIS WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE ROADWAY. SO THEY REFUSED TO DEFEND AND THEY REFUSED TO INDEMNIFY.

THEY DECLINED. YOU CAN'T USE THE SCOOTER WITHOUT THE ROADWAY.

SO THE REASON WHY I ASKED...

THAT WAS A SUCCESSFUL ARGUMENT THAT THIS WAS NOT, IT WASN'T LIKE THE SCOOTER BROKE DOWN.

IT'S JUST A PROBLEM WITH THE ROADWAY.

SO THE REASON WHY I ASKED FOR THIS TOPIC TO GET ADDED ON IS THAT SOMEBODY REACHED OUT TO MATT AND ASKED, ARE WE MOVING FORWARD OR WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE SCOOTERS? AND SO, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE APPROVED IN THE LAST, LAST YEAR, YEAR OR SO. AND THEN WE DISCUSSED IT EARLIER THIS YEAR.

AND IT WAS, YEP, LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

BUT THEN WHITNEY WENT TO THIS CONFERENCE.

AND SO I GUESS WE NEED TO KNOW IF WE NEED TO PULL THAT ORDINANCE BACK SO WE CAN UNRAVEL THAT APPROVAL. OR WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO WITH THE SCOOTERS? HAS OMAHA GOTTEN A LOT OF LITIGATION AGAINST IT FOR THEIR SCOOTERS? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, ACTUALLY, THAT MATT ASKED ME ALSO EARLIER TODAY. AND I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. I DID NOT REACH OUT TO OMAHA BECAUSE THIS WAS JUST A MEETING OF LARGE CITY ATTORNEYS IN IOWA. AND THE LAW, OBVIOUSLY, IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A COMPARATIVE FAULT STATE IN NEBRASKA OR NOT. AND SO THE WAY THAT THEY INTERPRET IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE HAD A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LITIGATION THERE OR NOT.

SO. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT PROPOSING WE DON'T GO AHEAD. I HAVE A SCOOTER. I LOVE MY SCOOTER. I RENT THE LINE SCOOTER. I'M JUST SAYING I FEEL LIKE WE, WE DID NOT EVALUATE THE LITIGATION AND POSSIBLE LIABILITY RISK FOR THE CITY WHEN WE FIRST CAME THROUGH. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS ON THE RECORD AND THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED IT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD.

I JUST WANT TO DO A QUICK RECAP OF KIND OF THE HISTORY OF THINGS. SO AS THE MAYOR ALLUDED TO A YEAR AND A HALF AGO OR SO, MAYBE EVEN LONGER NOW, THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFFS ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF OMAHA THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO PIGGYBACK OFF THEIR CONTRACT FOR E-SCOOTERS. WE DID NOT AGREE TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT SCOOTERS IN COUNCIL BLUFFS AT THAT TIME. WE THEN WERE APPROACHED BY HEARTLAND B-CYCLE AND LIME SCOOTERS TO TALK ABOUT BRINGING SCOOTERS TO COUNCIL BLUFFS. ULTIMATELY, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO PRESENT AT STUDY SESSION.

THEY MISUNDERSTOOD AND SHOWED UP FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING. SO I WASN'T PRESENT

[01:30:01]

WE HAD HAD DISCUSSIONS AS A COUNCIL AND AS STAFF ABOUT MAYBE WE WANT TO START SMALL. MAYBE WE WANT TO DO CERTAIN THINGS. THEY CAME AND MADE A PRESENTATION THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BRING SCOOTERS AND PUT THEM ON THE ENTIRE CITY. THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOWED YOU GUYS. AND THAT WAS THEIR PLAN. THEY THEN ASKED FOR FOLLOW-UP FROM THAT PRESENTATION TO YOU. THEY ASKED ME, OKAY, WHAT DOES THE CITY WANT TO DO? AND I SAID, WELL, WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT IT.

SO THEY'VE CONTINUED TO REACH OUT TO ME MULTIPLE TIMES ASKING FOR DIRECTION. THEIR GOAL, IF YOU REMEMBER, WAS TO HAVE THEM IN PLACE BY COLLEGE WORLD SERIES. WE MISSED THAT. SO AT THIS POINT, I THINK THEY'RE SEEKING DIRECTION. IS THE CITY INTERESTED IN ALLOWING SCOOTERS TO BE PRESENT IN COUNCIL BLUFFS? I THINK BASED ON THE RESEARCH LEGAL HAS DONE THAT IF WE WANT TO DO THAT, WE MAY NEED TO REVISIT THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFFS AND THE CITY OF OMAHA, WHICH ALLOWS US TO PIGGYBACK OFF THEIR CONTRACT.

OTHERWISE, WE WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO DO OUR OWN AGREEMENT WITH LYME, BUT THAT PRESENTS A WHOLE LOT OF EXTRA ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT THE CITY IS NOT CURRENTLY PREPARED TO DO OR DOESN'T HAVE THE SETUP TO DO. SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. CERTAINLY, THE COUNCIL CAN SAY, WE'RE STILL NOT READY TO MAKE A DECISION. WE'RE GOING TO THINK ABOUT IT MORE. BUT AT SOME POINT, I THINK, SO I CAN STOP HEARING FROM LYME, I WOULD LIKE SOME DIRECTION THAT I CAN PROVIDE THE FEEDBACK TO THEM THAT SAYS, YES OR NO, OR MAYBE, BUT WE NEED THESE CHANGES IN THE STRUCTURE.

AND IF IT'S A NO, THEN I WOULD ASK OMAHA TO PUT UP A SIGN AT THEIR SIDE OF THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE THAT THE SCOOTERS WON'T WORK WHEN THEY GET TO THE OTHER SIDE, BECAUSE YOU CAN GO DOWN THERE AND THERE'S 15 OR 20 OF THEM A DAY THAT ARE DUMPED THERE BECAUSE AS SOON AS THEY STOP, THEY WON'T TURN BACK ON BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GEOFENCED TO BE ALLOWED OVER HERE. SO WE WOULD ASK THEM TO PUT UP SOME SIGNAGE THAT SAYS THEY DON'T WORK OVER THERE. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN PLACE FOR THE BIKES THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW? I MEAN, I KNOW YOU SAID THE TIRES OF THE BIKE ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE SCOOTER, BUT IF SOMEBODY'S SCREWING AROUND ON THE BIKE AND HAS A PROBLEM, OH, HEY, I HIT THE ROADWAY WRONG, WHATEVER. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING RIGHT NOW THAT COVERS THAT? THAT WOULD HAVE PREDATED SORT OF MY TIME AT THE CITY.

SO WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE, AND I DON'T, I DON'T ANTICIPATE WE WOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPTION TO REVIEW THE WAIVER. I THINK WHEN WE SIGNED ON TO THE AGREEMENT WITH OMAHA, THEY WOULD HAVE ENTERED INTO THE CONTRACT AND WE WOULD HAVE AGREED TO SORT OF, THERE WE GO.

NOT QUITE YET. OH, NOT YET.

PENDING ATTORNEY. SO WITH THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THAT MATT WAS TALKING ABOUT WHERE WE PIGGYBACK OFF THEIR CONTRACT, THEY WENT OUT FOR RFP TO GET THE VENDOR FOR THE SCOOTERS. THE PROBLEM, THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS WHEN THEY GOT THE VENDOR FOR THE SCOOTERS, THEIR CONTRACT ONLY TALKS ABOUT OMAHA. IT ONLY TALKS ABOUT OMAHA BEING AN ADDITIONAL INSURED. IT ONLY TALKS ABOUT THEM INDEMNIFYING OMAHA. IT ONLY TALKS ABOUT THEIR WAIVER PROTECTING OMAHA. SO, I MEAN, I THINK AT THE VERY LEAST WE'D HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOME AGREEMENT ON WHETHER THAT COULD FIT WITHIN THE INTERLOCAL THING.

I'M NOT SURE YET, BUT LIKE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH LIME WHERE THEY AGREE TO INDEMNIFY US AND ADD US AS ADDITIONAL INSURED AND ALL THAT. RIGHT. I THINK, NO MATTER WHAT. OKAY.

THE ONLY OTHER NOTE THAT I HAD IS THAT IN TERMS OF THE ORDINANCE FOR SCOOTERS, ONE OTHER THING THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY SOME OF THE ATTORNEYS IS THAT THE SCOOTER INVOLVED IN THE INCIDENT IN DES MOINES WOULD GO 40 MILES AN HOUR. HE WAS ONLY GOING 25 AT THE TIME, BUT I THINK THAT THAT IS FAST.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, WITH A, YOU KNOW, 750 HORSEPOWER, WHATEVER THEY ARE, I MEAN, MINE'S ONLY 500 AND IT'LL GO 22 MILES AN HOUR. SO I THINK THAT WE WOULD WANT TO LIMIT SORT OF HOW FAST THEY COULD BE TRAVELING. WE'D WANT TO LIMIT WHERE THEY CAN BE TRAVELING IF WE WERE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THEM. SO THEY WERE GOING ON THE ROADWAY AT 40 MILE AN HOUR OR ON LIKE THE TRAILS? ON THE ROADWAY. OH, AND THAT'S WHERE THERE WAS THE DISPARITY OR THE POTHOLE OR WHATEVER THAT SLINGSHOTTED SOMEONE. 25. HE WAS ONLY GOING 25 THAT DAY.

SURE. YEAH. BUT THOSE DISPARITIES WOULD BE EVERYWHERE. YEAH. POTHOLES ARE EVERYWHERE. RIGHT.

I MEAN THAT, UM, WHEN I MET WITH THAT TODAY, TWO, TWO INCHES IS CONSIDERED SOMETHING THAT IS CORRECT.

YEAH. THAT'S NOT LIKE IN NEED OF REPAIR. SO THIS DISPARITY, THIS DISCONTINUITY THAT THIS PERSON HIT IS NOT EVEN SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD IDENTIFY AS NEEDING TO BE REPAIRED BECAUSE WE MAKE ROADWAYS FOR CARS. OTHER VEHICLES, RIGHT. RIGHT. AND YOUR CAR WOULD JUST ROLL OVER IT AND IT WOULD BE NO BIG DEAL.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THESE TIRES, IT'S PROBLEMATIC. SO FOR THIS ITEM, I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND IF YOU GUYS COULD INDIVIDUALLY JUST REACH OUT TO LEGAL OR MYSELF TO LET ME KNOW WHERE YOU STAND ON THIS ITEM BY THE END OF THE WEEK SO WE CAN GET MATT'S PHONE TO STOP RINGING FROM THE LINE SCOOTER ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. FANTASTIC. ALL

[01:35:10]

THANKS, ZACH. THANKS, MATT.

I MEAN, YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY IF YOU WANT, BUT...

ZACH, ZACH. THEY CLEARLY DON'T.

BEFORE YOU GO, ONE QUESTION FOR YOU GUYS. KNOWING THIS, DOES THAT CHANGE HOW YOU GUYS LOOK AT SCOOTERS? KNOWING WHAT WE'RE HEARING NOW? OR WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHT? ARE WE WORRIED ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN OR DO YOU, ARE YOU LIKE, OH BOY, WE BETTER SLOW DOWN HERE? I'LL SAY I'M NOT WORRIED, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS LEGAL FEELS COMFORTABLE ABOUT HAVING SOMETHING IN PLACE. YOU KNOW, OUR, UH, AND I'VE HEARD MATT MENTION THIS, OUR STREETS AND TRAILS AREN'T ANY DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, THAN ANYWHERE ELSE.

BUT THERE, I MEAN, THERE ARE LITTLE DISCREPANCIES, LITTLE, YOU KNOW, UM, UH, PLACES THAT ARE NOT PERFECT.

SO IF, IF LEGAL CAN, CAN, YOU KNOW, FIND A WAY THAT THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH, YOU KNOW, COVERING THAT, THEN, THEN YEAH, I, I'M FINE WITH THAT. AGAIN, I, I THINK LIKE WE SPOKE, UM, ABOUT, I, I DON'T THINK WE TURN THESE THINGS LOOSE AROUND ACROSS THE WHOLE CITY, YOU KNOW, RIGHT FROM THE, THE GET GO. I, I THINK WE CONTAIN THEM INTO A SMALL AREA AND GO FROM THERE. GOTCHA. GOTCHA.

SAME THOUGHT MATTER. YEAH.

UM, THANK YOU. UNFORTUNATELY, WE DON'T HOLD PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS MUCH ANYMORE. UM, THEY CAN WALK DOWN THE SIDEWALK AND TRIP OVER THEIR OWN FEET AND THAT'S OUR FAULT OR, YOU KNOW, WRECK THEIR CAR BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION OR WHATEVER. AND, YOU KNOW, WITHIN PUBLIC WORKS, I SEE CLAIMS EVERY DAY OR AT LEAST EVERY WEEK SOMEHOW SUGGESTING THE CITY'S AT FAULT. UM, RIGHT. WE HAVE ALL THESE NICE ATTORNEYS THAT ARE REALLY SMART AND CAN DEFEND US. AND I THINK THAT NO MATTER WHAT WE DO AS A CITY, WE HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR LIABILITY. UM, AND THAT INCLUDES SCOOTERS. SO IN MY OPINION, IT DOESN'T CHANGE WHETHER WE LIKE THEM OR DON'T LIKE THEM.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW WE WOULD IMPLEMENT THAT.

AND DO WE WANT TO ENTERTAIN SCOOTERS AND COUNCIL BLOWS? GOTCHA. THAT'S JUST ONE MORE PART OF IT. RIGHT. A LITTLE MORE. AWESOME.

THANK YOU GUYS. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU GUYS. I THINK ULTIMATELY, I MEAN, I'M JUST THANKFUL THAT WHITNEY PAID SUCH CLOSE ATTENTION AND WE CAN REALLY DRAFT A TIGHT CONTRACT, BUT THAT CONTRACT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW IS SEVERELY LACKING. AND THEY'RE ALL OVER.

I MEAN, I WAS JUST IN ARKANSAS THIS WEEKEND AND THEY WERE ALL OVER DOWNTOWN AND PEOPLE WERE RIDING THEM AND THEY'RE ON MUCH TIGHTER STREETS THAN WHAT WE'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT. AND SO I'M JUST SURPRISED. LIKE MATT'S RIGHT. PEOPLE WILL BLAME IT ON THE CITY FOR EVERYTHING THAT COULD GO WRONG. SO IT WAS JUST THE FIRST TIME I SAW AN EXPERT REPORT THAT SAID THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU COULD ASSIGN ANY LIABILITY TO THE RIDER BECAUSE THE SCOOTER COULD NEVER HANDLE STANDARD STREET DEVIATIONS. I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT EXPERT MAKES $550 AN HOUR.

SO Y'ALL AND I SHOULD LOOK INTO, WE SHOULD LOOK AT NEW JOBS. UM, YEAH, IT JUST, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK ULTIMATELY A JURY WOULD ALSO FIND THAT, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS IF YOU SAW THAT YOU WERE COMING UP ON A STREET JOINT, YOU SHOULD SLOW DOWN AND NOT BE GOING 40 MILES AN HOUR. AND MAYBE THAT'S WHY THEY RULED IN FAVOR OF THE CITY. YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE REASONABLENESS ON BOTH SIDES. I WOULD HOPE SO.

I GAVE YOU GUYS THE FRANCHISE FEE INCREASE INFORMATION. UM, I, UM, TONY'S DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK ON THIS PROJECT AND I TOOK IT OVER A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO TO ALLOW HIM TO FOCUS ON OTHER THINGS. AND SO, UM, MAYBE JUST A MONTH AGO, NOT, NOT THAT LONG AGO. UM, BUT WE ARE IN THE PROCESS NOW OF FINALIZING OUR AGREEMENTS FOR BOTH AN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND THE NATURAL GAS FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. OUR ELECTRIC FRANCHISE AGREEMENT IS WITH MIDAM. OUR GAS IS WITH BLACK HILLS ENERGY. OUR CURRENT RATES ARE 2%, BOTH FOR, UM, ELECTRIC AND FOR NATURAL GAS.

AND YOU GUYS APPROVED THE RESOLUTION LAST TIME MAINTAINING THAT SO THAT IT DIDN'T EXPIRE BASICALLY DURING THE TERM OF THE FRANCHISE. BUT WE ARE AT THE POINT NOW WHERE WE NEED TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO IN TERMS OF FRANCHISE FEE. AND THE LAW IN IOWA IS THAT ANY CITY OTHER THAN DES MOINES, WHICH IS ALLOWED TO HAVE A 7.5% FRANCHISE FEE, UM, BECAUSE IT IS THE LARGEST CITY, UM, HAS TO HAVE A FRANCHISE FEE AT OR BELOW. YOU CAN SET A FRANCHISE FEE AS LONG AS IT'S RELATED TO COSTS AND IS 5% OR BELOW FOR BOTH NATURAL GAS AND FOR ELECTRIC. SO THE LAST ATTACHMENT THAT I PROVIDED YOU HERE IS FRANCHISE FEES, UM, IN LARGE CITIES AND THEN FRANCHISE FEES IN ALL COMMUNITIES. SO THE IOWA UTILITY ASSOCIATION EVERY YEAR PUTS OUT A FRANCHISE FEE DOCUMENT IN JANUARY THAT OUTLINES WHAT EVERY FRANCHISE FEE IS FOR ANY CITY, COMMUNITY, VILLAGE THAT HAS ONE IN IOWA, WHAT IT IS, AND WHETHER OR NOT IT DISCRIMINATES BETWEEN, UM,

[01:40:02]

WE HAVE TRADITIONALLY HAD ONE THAT IS THE SAME AT 2%. WE'VE HAD THAT SINCE 1995, AND IT'S BEEN 2% FOR BOTH, FOR BOTH OF THE FRANCHISES. THERE HAS BEEN DISCUSSION. SO LAST YEAR WHEN, UM, THE MAYOR AND TONY TALKED ABOUT IT, SHE'D IDENTIFIED THAT SHE THOUGHT 3.5% WAS APPROPRIATE FOR ELECTRIC. THAT IS, YOU CAN SEE ON THE, UM, FRANCHISE FEE IN LARGE CITIES OF MORE THAN 35,000 PEOPLE.

THAT IS PRETTY STANDARD 3.5.

THAT THE AVERAGE ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE FOR COMMUNITIES OF 35,000 PEOPLE OR MORE IN IOWA IS 3.65 FOR BOTH GAS AND ELECTRIC.

UM, OBVIOUSLY, DES MOINES IS GOING TO BE THE OUTLIER THERE, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT DUBUQUE, THEY HAVE 5% FOR BOTH.

CEDAR RAPIDS HAS 4% FOR BOTH.

SIOUX CITY HAS 5% FOR BOTH.

WATERLOO, 4% FOR BOTH. UM, AND THEN, AND IOWA CITY HAS A 1% AND SO DOES A WEST DES MOINES. IOWA CITY, I UNDERSTAND. I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO KEEP COSTS LOW FOR STUDENTS. I'M NOT, NOT SURE WHY WEST DES MOINES HAS 1%. THEY SEEM TO ALSO BE AN OUTLIER THAT WAY.

BUT, UM, THE SECOND PAGE IS THEN FRANCHISE FEES IN ALL COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING VILLAGES AND OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE THEM. AND THAT IS MUCH LOWER. THAT'S A 2.7% ELECTRIC AND A NATURAL GAS OF 2.98. UM, SO USING THE INFORMATION FROM, YOU KNOW, SIMILARLY SIZED CITIES, WE LOOKED AT AND RAN SOME CALCULATIONS.

FINANCE, UM, ANDREAN FINANCE WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE US WITH SOME, UM, GOOD NUMBERS.

AND THAT'S THE MIDDLE SORT OF ENCLOSURE THAT YOU HAVE WITH THE FRANCHISE FEES THAT WE'VE COLLECTED BOTH FROM BLACK HILLS AND MID-AMERICAN IN 2023, 2024, 2025, AND TO DATE IN 2026. IT LOOKS LIKE 2026 IS A TERRIBLE YEAR, BUT WE HAVE NOT YET. THEY PAY QUARTERLY. WE HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED THE FOURTH QUARTER PAYMENT. SO THAT'S WHY THAT ONE IS SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER. UM, BUT THAT'S THE AMOUNT THAT WE GET ANNUALLY. YOU'LL SEE WE'LL GET LESS IN GAS AND MORE IN ELECTRIC. UM, AND THAT IT'S TYPICALLY AROUND 2.2 MILLION PER YEAR. IT HAS BEEN 2024, 2025. AND BASED ON THE ESTIMATE, I HAD AI DO THE MATH BECAUSE I WAS PROMISED THAT THIS JOB WOULD NOT MAKE ME DO MATH, RUN A CALCULATION BASED ON THE LAST QUARTER PAYMENT FROM 2023 AND 2024. I ASKED HIM TO AVERAGE THE LAST QUARTER PAYMENT FROM THOSE, TACK IT ON TO WHAT WE HAVE MADE ALREADY IN 2026. AND IT DID THAT.

AND IT ULTIMATELY, UM, THEN COMPUTED SORT OF THE VALUE FOR WHAT WE EXPECT TO RECEIVE IN 2026, AND THEN LOOKED AT 2.2%, 2.25%, UM, 3%, 3.5 AND 3.75% FOR NATURAL GAS FOR ELECTRIC. I JUST LOOKED AT THE 3.5 AND THE 3.75. AND SO THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT IN 2026 THAT WE'LL GET IN FRANCHISE FEE REVENUE AT THE CURRENT 2% RATE, UM, IS 491,232 FROM BLACK HILLS ENERGY AND 1.797 MILLION FROM MID-AM FOR A COMBINED TOTAL OF 2,288,776. SO THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD ANTICIPATE BASED ON THE LAST QUARTER PAYMENT THAT WE WOULD MAKE IN 2026. THEN LOOKING AT INCREASING THOSE, STAYING AT, UM, GOING TO 2.253, 3.5, 3.75, ET CETERA. I THINK THE MOST, I MEAN, IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION AND THEN THERE'S EXHIBITS AT THE BACK THAT HAVE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS SO THAT YOU CAN CHECK THE CHARTS IF YOU WANT.

IN TERMS OF OUR RECOMMENDATION, OBVIOUSLY WE THINK THAT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER BUDGETARY NEEDS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES, LONG-TERM FINANCIAL PLANNING, BUT WE DON'T HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE A DOG IN THIS FIGHT IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

THAT'S UP TO YOU GUYS TO DECIDE.

I JUST, UM, ROGER HAD SAID IF THE CITY, YOU KNOW, IF THE STATE AVERAGE IS 3.7, WHY ARE WE NOT GOING FOR THE AVERAGE? AND, UM, INSTEAD OF GOING WITH THE 3.7 THAT HE HAD THOUGHT THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER, UM, I TALKED TO CHRISTINE STONE, WHO'S OUR COUNCIL OVER AT ELLERS & COONEY, WHO'S, UM, OUR FRANCHISE EXPERT ON THESE. AND SHE SAID, IT DOESN'T MATTER TO THEM, THE UTILITY PROVIDER, WHAT NUMBER YOU GO WITH, BUT YOU SHOULD KEEP IT AT A QUARTER MARK. SO SHE SAID, DON'T GO TO 3.7, GO TO 3.75 IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO. SO THAT'S WHY I RAN THE ELECTRIC AT 3.5 AND 3.75. UM, AND SO THOSE ARE THE INCREASES BASED ON THAT.

SO THE DIFFERENCE IN AN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE BETWEEN A 3.5 AND A 3.75 WOULD BE ABOUT $224,693 IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE. ROGER, I'M SORRY, YOUR PAPERWORK IS ON YOUR DESK.

SO I'M JUST TALKING RANDOMLY AT YOU, BUT THERE IS, I SWEAR, AN ACTUAL DOCUMENT THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT.

AND THEN, UM, IN TERMS OF COMBINED REVENUE IMPACT, IF THE ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE IS INCREASED TO 3.5 AND THE NATURAL GAS IS INCREASED TO 2.25, THE ESTIMATED COMBINED FISCAL IMPACT WOULD BE 1.41 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE.

INCREASING THE TOTAL ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUE FROM APPROXIMATELY 2.29 MILLION TO 3.7 MILLION. AND THAT'S IN SECTION C THERE, UM, IN THE MIDDLE. IF WE WENT TO THE MAXIMUM SCENARIO WHERE WE PUT GAS AND ELECTRIC AT THE SAME LEVEL, WHICH WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM SCENARIO THAT I RAN OF 3.75 AND 3.75 FOR BOTH, THAT WOULD GENERATE AN ADDITIONAL 2 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE. SO THAT WOULD GO FROM 2.29 MILLION TO THE 4.29 MILLION. UM, SO ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO YOU GUYS

[01:45:02]

SO I, LIKE I SAID, THAT'S WHY I TOLD HER, I THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT 3.7, BUT WITH THE ATTORNEY SAYING, GO TO A QUARTER PERCENTAGE, I THINK 3.75 IS THE RIGHT NUMBER.

I DID ALSO TALK TO RODNEY TODAY, JUST BECAUSE I WANTED TO GET IN AN IDEA OF, IN TERMS OF WINTER HEATING COSTS FOR OUR RESIDENTS, WHETHER WE HAVE MOSTLY ELECTRIC HEAT OR IF WE HAVE MOSTLY NATURAL GAS HEAT. UM, AND HE SAID THAT IT'S ABOUT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WHEN THEY LOOKED AT IT, IT WAS AROUND 83% USING NATURAL GAS FOR HEAT.

BUT EVEN THOSE HOUSES, HE SAID, IT'S A BIT TRICKY BECAUSE THEY MIGHT HAVE AN ELECTRIC HEAT PUMP. AND SO IT COULD BE REALLY A COMBINATION GAS ELECTRIC.

AND THEN IT'S HARD TO KIND OF CAPTURE THOSE NUMBERS, BUT WE DON'T AS THE CITY KEEP THAT INFORMATION.

THAT WAS JUST, UM, HE HAD, HE HAD THAT INFORMATION FROM A FEW YEARS AGO. SO HE SAID, DON'T WRITE IT IN STONE. AND I SAID, I WON'T. I JUST, I THINK THAT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WAS, YOU KNOW, WHY ARE WE SETTING THEM AT DIFFERENT RATES? WHY DON'T WE SET THEM AT THE SAME RATE? AND I THINK THAT THE INITIAL DISCUSSION, UM, AT LEAST WHEN I SPOKE TO TONY ABOUT IT, WAS THAT THEY WANTED TO TRY TO AVOID INCREASED HEAT COSTS FOR RESIDENTS IN THE WINTER.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THE FRANCHISE FEE WAS HIGHER, THAT IT COULD, YOU KNOW, A HIGHER FEE COULD BE CHARGED TO THE RESIDENTS THAN IN THE WINTER, IF ALL OF THE RESIDENTS ARE USING NATURAL GAS FOR HEAT. AND SO KEEPING THE NATURAL GAS, BUT, AND IT IS PRIMARILY THE HEAT SOURCE IN THIS AREA IS PRIMARILY NATURAL GAS. SO THAT IS A CONSIDERATION TO TO THINK ABOUT. UM, IT IS NOT THAT COMMON ACTUALLY FOR THE FEES. I MEAN, SOME FEES HAVE A 1% ELECTRIC AND A 5% NATURAL GAS. SOME OF THEM HAVE, UM, SOME OF THEM ONLY HAVE A NATURAL GAS. SOME OF THEM ONLY HAVE AN ELECTRIC, BUT HAVING ONE SET SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER IS NOT, IS NOT TYPICAL.

SO IF WE COULD GET DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL TODAY, THEN, UM, WHITNEY COULD GO BACK TO ALLERS AND COONEY AND THEY COULD PLUG THOSE NUMBERS IN AND THEN WE WOULD BRING THE ORDINANCE BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING. YOU GUYS WOULD STILL VOTE ON IT. SO I'M NOT ASKING FOR YOUR VOTE TODAY, JUST TRYING TO GET FEEDBACK ON WHERE YOU ARE NUMBERS WISE.

IT'S NOT ORDINANCE. YES. YES.

YEP.

ORDINANCE. YES. I WOULD SAY THAT IF THE STATE AVERAGE IS, WE NEED TO BE AT THREE, SEVEN, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT WE'RE AT TWO NOW, WHICH ISN'T, I MEAN, THAT'S A PRETTY BIG JUMP.

I WOULD IMAGINE THAT'S LIKE THE STATE AVERAGE IS DOUBLE ALMOST WHAT WE'RE AT. UM, PERHAPS NOW IS THE TIME TO UPDATE SOME OF THIS TO GET US IN LINE WITH THE, WITH THE AVERAGE FOR THE LARGER COMMUNITIES IN THE STATE. UM, AND STILL WE'RE NOT TAKING IT TO THE FIVE THAT WE COULD, OBVIOUSLY. I MEAN, THERE'S ROOM THERE SHOULD, SHOULD IT HAVE TO GO UP LATER, BUT I, SO I WOULD JUST TO CLARIFY, JOE, THIS IS, IT'S GENERALLY A 20 YEAR.

UM, SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE COULD SET IT ONCE AND THEN A COUPLE OF YEARS DOWN THE ROAD RENEGOTIATE, RIGHT? SO THIS WOULD BE A 20 YEAR TERM, UM, THAT OUR TAXPAYERS WOULD BE PAYING. SO IT'S A HOUSEHOLD.

IS THAT NOT RIGHT? IT IS A, IT'S A FEE THAT THEY CAN PASS ON. YES. THE UTILITY COMPANIES, THAT'S WHY THEY, THEY PASS IT ON TO THE CONSUMERS. RIGHT.

BUT IN, BUT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO RENEGOTIATE IS WE WOULD SET IT, THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WILL BE, SHE'S RIGHT. IT WILL BE 20, 20 YEARS, RIGHT? RIGHT. IT'S NOT THAT WE COULDN'T PASS FUTURE ORDINANCES TO CHANGE THINGS, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE SORT OF ORDINANCE PROCESS AGAIN.

YEAH. YEAH. IT IS UNCOMMON FOR THEM TO BE ADJUSTED REGULARLY.

RIGHT. THEY ARE, THEY TYPICALLY ARE PUT IN PLACE AND THEN THEY STAY FOR A LONG TIME, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE HAD OURS SINCE 95. SO WHEN YOU SAY THEY'RE GOING TO PASS IT ON, HOW DO YOU FEEL THEY'RE GOING TO PASS IT ON WITH MY BILL EVERY MONTH? IT'S A FEE ON YOUR BILL. IT'LL BE ON YOUR BILL. YEAH. IT'S ON YOUR BILL. SO IF YOU'RE PAYING 2% RIGHT NOW, IT'LL GO UP TO ANOTHER PERCENT AND THREE QUARTERS. YEAH.

POSSIBLY. SO IF YOU WERE, IF YOU'RE, IF YOUR BILL IS A HUNDRED DOLLARS A MONTH RIGHT NOW, YOU'RE ALREADY PAYING $2.

SO YOU'D BE PAYING 375.

THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS ALSO AT THE LARGE TURNING MEETING, BUT YOU KNOW, AS WE'RE RESTRICTED IN PROPERTY TAX GROWTH THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OUR REVENUE STREAMS ARE SO RESTRICTED THAT

[01:50:01]

WE DO NOT THE SAME RATE. SOME CITIES DO THEY HAVE NON-RESIDENTIAL LIKE LOGAN HAS A 5% RESIDENTIAL, 2% NON-RESIDENTIAL, 5% RESIDENTIAL, 2% NON-RESIDENTIAL.

OH YEAH. I WASN'T GOING TO GO THAT WAY AT ALL. YOU WANTED TO GO THE OTHER WAY.

ACTUALLY, UM, HALL HAS A 5% RESIDENTIAL, 1.5% NON-RESIDENTIAL, 0% PUBLIC.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I WANT, SHE WAS SAYING THE RESIDENTS WERE PAYING IN LOGAN. OH, I THOUGHT IT WAS THE OTHER WAY. I WAS LIKE, NO, THAT'S WHAT I WAS LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE.

THE INDUSTRIAL USER SHOULD BE PAYING FIVE. YEAH. NOT THE, ALL OF THE ONES ACTUALLY THAT I'M LOOKING AT. I THOUGHT YOU SAID THE OTHER WAY AROUND. I WAS LIKE, NO WAY. I DON'T WANT THE PEOPLE TO PAY MORE. I WANT YOU TO GET CORRECT AND GO FOR THE RECORD. YEAH. I WANT THE INDUSTRIAL USERS THAT, THAT THEY'RE PUTTING THE MAJOR WEAR AND TEAR ON.

YEAH. I ACTUALLY DON'T SEE, I MEAN, I'M PAGING THROUGH IT RIGHT NOW. I ACTUALLY DON'T SEE ANY, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THEM WHERE THEY MAKE NON-RESIDENTIAL LOWER, BUT I DON'T SEE ANYWHERE THEY MAKE NON-RESIDENTIAL HIGHER. OKAY.

JUST NOT TO SAY THAT I, THAT WE, COUNCIL BLUFFS COULDN'T BE THE FIRST TO DO IT.

YEAH. NO, WE DON'T WANT THE PEOPLE'S TO BE, I DON'T WANT PEOPLE'S PERSONAL GAS BILLS TO BE HIGHER, BUT SOME OF THE MAJOR USERS OF OUR, YEAH. SO DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA ON THESE OTHER CITIES? YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT ANKENY BEING THE SAME AS US, THAT'S A VERY DIFFERENT CITY THAN US. THEY'RE IN A TREMENDOUS GROWTH SITUATION RIGHT NOW THAT WE ARE NOT IN.

THEN YOU LOOK AT IOWA CITY, YOU MENTIONED THAT. THAT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF CITY WITH THE UNIVERSITY BEING THERE THAN WE ARE IN OUR SITUATION. WEST DES MOINES, MAYBE, I MEAN, THEY'RE SOMEWHAT LANDLOCKED, BUT THERE'S A TON OF GROWTH THERE AS WELL.

THEY'RE ALL MAJOR GROWTH AND THEY'RE ALL MAJOR PROPERTY, LIKE THEIR PROPERTY VALUATION OF A PARCEL HERE COMPARED TO IOWA CITY, THE EXACT SAME, PUT THE EXACT SAME HOUSE, PARCEL, EVERYTHING, IT WOULD BE DOUBLE IN IOWA CITY THAN IT IS HERE.

THEY HAVE A WAY LOWER SOCIAL ECONOMIC THAN THESE OTHER CITIES.

AS I SAID, WE'RE NOT IN THEIR BALL GAME, BUT WE'RE IN THE SAME FEE STRUCTURE AND IT'S LIKE, GOSH, I'M NOT SURE THAT FITS FOR WHAT WE'RE DOING.

AND THESE WERE ALL AS OF JANUARY 15 OF 2026, WHICH IS WHEN THE IOWA UTILITY ASSOCIATION TOOK THE INFORMATION OUT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY CHANGE THEIR FRANCHISE FEES NOW, I MEAN, IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT TWO OR THREE CITY ATTORNEYS SAID THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IS HAVING TO ADJUST THEIR FRANCHISE FEES IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE IT'S TO MAKE UP WHAT THEY EXPECT TO LOSE, GIVEN THE PROPERTY TAX LEGISLATION. RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S REGRESSIVE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

WHEN YOU START TO PUT IN FEES TO MAKE UP BUDGETS RATHER THAN, IT HITS OUR COMMUNITIES HARDER THAN IT DOES OTHER COMMUNITIES.

YEAH.

IT DOES.

AND ALMOST A 2% RAISE IS QUITE A JUMP.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL LOW.

WHAT'S WEIRD IS, YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING AT ALMOST A DOUBLE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE SO FAR OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY DONE.

YOU'RE LIKE, WELL, WAIT A SECOND. WHAT ARE WE MISSING? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? HOW ARE WE SO FAR OFF ON THIS? I MEAN, WHEN THEY PASSED THE LEGISLATION SAYING YOU GO TO 5%, I SUSPECT A LOT OF CITIES JUST WENT UP TO 5%.

RIGHT.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE LOW, BUT WE DID NOT DO THAT.

WE'LL GO TO WHAT WE CAN, SURE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MAGIC NUMBER IS, BUT I DO THINK IT NEEDS TO GO UP.

I AGREE, STEVE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S ALMOST DOUBLE.

IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE COULD GRADUALLY BRING IT IN.

RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT.

I UNDERSTAND THE GOING TO 375, THE JUMP, BUT IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE COULD BRING IT IN GRADUALLY OVER A FEW YEARS.

IS THERE A MEANS OF DOING THAT? THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR THE REASONS THAT WE WERE KIND OF TALKING ABOUT WITH THE MAYOR.

OH, OKAY. WELL, THAT'S FINE.

YEAH, THAT'S WHY I JUST STATED THAT IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

BUT WHAT DO YOU DO, COME BACK IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AND SAY, OH, WE WANT TO BUMP IN ANOTHER QUARTER OR HALF PERCENT? CAN WE DO THAT? OR DO YOU HAVE TO REDO IT ALL BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF A 20-YEAR DEAL? IT'S ALMOST LIKE A HYBRID BETWEEN AN ORDINANCE AND A CONTRACT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WITH MID-AM AND THEN BRING IT

[01:55:01]

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S SUCH A CUMBERSOME PROCESS TO DO THAT.

SO KIND OF WHAT JILL WAS SAYING, IS THERE A WAY WE COULD MAYBE SET UP A PROCESS FOR LIKE HAVING ONE RATE FOR RESIDENTIAL AND ONE FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL? WE COULD PASS ONE THAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT.

TO TRY TO NOT RAISE IT SO MUCH ON OUR LOCAL RESIDENTS, BUT MORE ON THE INDUSTRIAL SIDE LIKE JILL WAS SAYING.

YEAH, I'LL TAKE WHATEVER DIRECTION YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE ME.

YEAH.

I MEAN, I'D BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH RATE.

LIKE, I JUST DON'T WANT TO ALMOST DOUBLE IT ON RESIDENTS, BUT I AGREE WITH DOUG.

IT DOES NEED TO GO UP.

DO WE, WELL, AND WHAT CONSTITUTES A, LIKE, AT WHAT THRESHOLD DO WE SAY? IF YOU'RE INDUSTRIAL, IF YOU'RE ZONED INDUSTRIAL, YOU'RE INDUSTRIAL.

YEAH, CORRECT.

JUST DO ALL, YEAH, OKAY.

ANY, FOR INDUSTRIAL USERS, MAJOR INDUSTRIAL USERS, ANYONE I1 OR I2, WHATEVER, IT WOULD BE X AND EVERYONE ELSE WOULD BE Y.

I BELIEVE WE DO HAVE TO IDENTIFY IT AS RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL, BUT I COULD LOOK BACK ON THAT.

IT'S BEEN A MINUTE SINCE I LOOKED AT IT.

SO IT WOULD BE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL VERSUS RESIDENTIAL? YES.

I MEAN, I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT OPTIONS LIKE THAT TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE COULD INCREASE THE TAX REVENUE THROUGH THIS WITHOUT PUTTING SO MUCH OF A BURDEN ON OUR LOCAL RESIDENTS.

THE LOTTERY IS NOT A TAX EITHER, BUDDY, BUT IT IS.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE MAKE CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT A TAX.

RIGHT.

YEAH, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THOUGH.

I UNDERSTAND.

WE ARE NOT ADDING ADDITIONAL TAXES.

CORRECT.

CORRECT.

YEAH.

YEAH.

I RECOGNIZE IT'S A HARD CHOICE.

AND WE'D LIKE TO ADD THIS TO OUR LIST THAT WE RESPOND BY THE END OF THE WEEK.

YOU COULD JUST EMAIL BY THE END OF THE WEEK OR, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ALWAYS CALL OR, YOU KNOW, WE CAN CHECK IN INDIVIDUALLY ALSO AND WE CAN GO THROUGH ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT.

AND CAN YOU FIND OUT FOR ME ON THE VERIFY IF IT DOES HAVE TO BE INDUSTRIAL VERSUS JUST NON-RESIDENTIAL? WHETHER WE COULD DO COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL AS ONE.

YEP.

YEP.

YEP.

BECAUSE THAT WOULD HELP A LOT OF THE, I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT, LIKE, AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER.

YEP.

THAT'S DETRIMENTAL AS WELL.

FAIR.

AND WE MIGHT WANT TO KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT CURRENTLY AS COMPARED.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN IDENTIFY THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL COMING IN AND THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD HAVE NON-RESIDENTIAL COMING IN.

KIND OF LIKE WHERE, HERE'S YOUR LEVEL SET.

THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT.

OKAY.

BECAUSE ALL WE GET IN TERMS OF INFORMATION, WHAT ANDREA WAS ABLE TO PULL FROM ME, IS THE QUARTERLY PAYMENTS THAT COME FROM MID-AM AND BLACKOUT.

THAT'S EVERYTHING.

BUT THEY KEEP RECORDS AND THEY MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE IT TO US.

BUT, YEAH.

GOTCHA.

SO, YEAH.

FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ME.

IT'S JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT.

BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT IF WE'RE, I MEAN, THEY CAN WAIT.

OKAY.

BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERING AS WE GO FORWARD.

SO, IF YOU HAVE THOUGHTS OR IF YOU WANT TO TALK MORE ABOUT IT, LET US KNOW.

THANK YOU.

OR IN GROUPS OF TWO OR LESS, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

THANKS.

ALL RIGHT.

NEXT UP, WE ARE GOING TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

ACTUALLY, THERE'S THE COUNCIL RULES DISCUSSION.

OH, THERE YOU GO.

UNLESS WE WANT TO PUSH THAT TO THE NEXT MEETING, CONSIDERING IT'S ALMOST 6 O'CLOCK.

LET'S DO THAT.

WELL, BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND EXEMPT SESSION.

WE HAVE ONE HOUR TO GET THOSE TWO TOPICS.

YEP.

RIGHT.

AND JODY NEEDS A RESTROOM BREAK IN BETWEEN.

I'M GOOD WITH BUMPING THE RULES OUT TO THE NEXT MEETING.

SO, WE'LL PUSH THE COUNCIL RULE DISCUSSION TO THE NEXT MEETING, BECAUSE IT'S NOT DETRIMENTAL THAT IT HAPPENS TODAY.

YEP.

OKAY.

SURE.

ALL RIGHT.

SO, NOW WE'LL GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

JULY 13TH.

WE NEED TO.

YEP.

JOE JUST WENT TO THE RESTROOM.

SO, AS SOON AS HE GETS BACK.

YOU CAN'T HAVE A RESTROOM BREAK UNTIL I GET BACK.

WHILE WE ARE WAITING, IF WE SEPARATE COMMERCIAL OUT, DO OUR TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT OWN A BUSINESS NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES? I WOULD SAY NO.

WELL, EVERYBODY OWNS A HOUSE, SO THAT WOULDN'T MAKE NO SENSE.

NO, I JUST.

AND THAT'S KIND OF THE LOGIC.

SO, YOU LOOK.

DO THEY RECEIVE A BENEFIT THAT IS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT YOUR TYPICAL COUNCIL PERSON WOULD RECEIVE AS A CITIZEN? AND I WOULD SAY.

I'M FINE WITH IT.

I WAS JUST.

AS SOON AS WE STARTED GOING THAT CLASSIFICATION, I WAS LIKE, OH, WAIT A MINUTE.

YEAH.

YEAH.

OKAY.

IT LOOKED LIKE THE OTHER CITIES DID NOT DO THAT, RIGHT? I MEAN, THEY'RE JUST FLAT.

WE WENT HERE

[02:00:02]

AND MOST OF THE TIME THEY MATCHED, UNLESS YOU WERE A SMALLER COMMUNITY.

SORRY.

YEAH.

SORRY.

WE ARE.

YOU'RE OKAY.

AND BEING RECORDED.

I DIDN'T MEAN.

THAT WASN'T TO SHUT YOU DOWN, DOUG.

THAT'S A LEGITIMATE QUESTION.

I JUST WANTED.

WE HAD SORT OF STARTED CHATTING, AND THEN TONY WAS LIKE, WE'RE STILL IN AN OPEN MEETING.

AND I WAS LIKE, OH, I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYONE'S AWARE.

RIGHT.

WE BETTER DON'T SAY ANYTHING.

YEAH.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY.

YEAH.

THAT WAS.

YEAH.

PURPOSE.

WELL, NOTHING.

WHEN STEVE GETS BACK, WE'LL DO THE.

SORRY.

I DRANK TOO MUCH WATER.

WE ARE STILL IN AN OPEN MEETING, SO EVERYTHING'S BEING RECORDED.

WE'RE STILL ON CAMERA.

UNTIL YOUR VOTE CONCLUDED.

AND WE'RE GOING TO BUMP THE RULES DISCUSSION OUT TO THE NEXT MEETING.

YEAH.

YEAH, THAT'S FINE.

THANK YOU.

WAS THERE A MOTION TO GO TO EXECUTIVE? IS THAT IN HERE? NOT YET.

WE'RE WAITING FOR STEVE TO GET BACK FROM THE BATHROOM, AND THEN THERE CAN BE.

JOE AND STEVE NEEDED A RESTROOM BREAK.

SOUNDS GOOD.

I AM ABOUT 10 MINUTES OUT.

HERE COMES STEVE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO I CAN TAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND AT THIS POINT.

SECOND.

SECOND.

STEVE GORMAN.

AYE.

DOUG RUE.

AYE.

ROGER SANDO.

AYE.

COLE BUTTON.

AYE.

JOE DISALVO.

[1) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

OKAY.

RECORDING OFF.

IF YOU CAN AND ARE ABLE, PLEASE STAND AND JOIN US FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE,

[2) CALL TO ORDER]

I CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER TONIGHT.

[3) CITIZENS REQUEST TO BE HEARD]

FIRST UP IS OUR CITIZENS' REQUEST TO BE HEARD.

THIS IS THE TIME OF THE MEETING THAT IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT A TOPIC THAT IS NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, YOU CAN COME TO THE PODIUM AND HAVE YOUR VOICE HEARD.

SO, AGAIN, IF YOU'RE HERE FOR SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, FEEL FREE TO COME FORWARD.

YOU'LL WANT TO PRESS THE MICROPHONE SO IT TURNS GREEN, AND THEN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

COLTON FINNEGAN, 30 LINWOOD DRIVE.

SO, I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THAT REPEALING BSL AND HOW THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

I HAVE TO LEAVE BY APOLOGIZING.

I GOT SWEPT UP LAST TIME, AND HOW NICE THE PEOPLE WERE TWO WEEKS AGO.

AND THEY MADE ME THINK WE HAD A CHANCE TO MAKE A CHANGE.

CLEARLY, WE DIDN'T.

THE TRUTH IS, I WOULD NEVER BE THAT NICE ABOUT THIS.

YOU THINK YOU OWN THE CITIZENS OF THIS TOWN, AND YOU'RE OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS.

WE OWN YOU.

NOW THAT THAT'S OUT OF THE WAY, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS AN ARTICLE I READ ON THE BBC THE DAY AFTER WE LAST MET.

A GERMAN SHEPHERD MAULED A TODDLER.

PERSONALLY, I THINK WE SHOULD BAN GERMAN SHEPHERDS.

I THINK THE LINE WAS, WE DON'T WANT THAT HAPPENING HERE.

YOU KNOW, NOBODY WOULD HAVE THAT VICIOUS OF A DOG, WOULD THEY? YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, IF ANYONE COULD TELL ME, YOU KNOW, IF THAT IS A BULLY BREED.

I FEEL LIKE IT IS.

I THINK IT IS.

AND, YOU KNOW, IS THAT, YOU THINK THAT'S A PIT BULL, COUNCILMAN BUTTON? COULD BE, COULD BE A PIT BULL.

THAT'S MRS. DESALVO'S FACEBOOK POST.

INTERESTING.

THAT WAS A NO VOTE.

HUH.

YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THE TRUTH IS, YOU GUYS SIT UP HERE ON THE SECOND FLOOR, YOU LOOK DOWN ON US, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS JUST A CIRCUS.

AND YOU CAN EVEN TELL SOME PEOPLE TAKE THIS TOO SERIOUSLY, BECAUSE THEY DON'T DESERVE TO BE HERE.

BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS PRETTY FUNNY THAT WE ALL BROUGHT UP PUBLIC SAFETY, BECAUSE BENJAMIN FRANKLIN SAID, THOSE WHO WOULD GIVE UP ESSENTIAL LIBERTY TO PURCHASE A LITTLE TEMPORARY SAFETY DESERVE NEITHER LIBERTY NOR SAFETY.

THE CITIZENS OF THIS CITY, THIS STATE, AND THIS COUNTRY HAVE GIVEN UP THEIR LIBERTY FOR THE PERCEIVED SAFETY OF A FEW MISINFORMED IDIOTS FOR FAR TOO LONG.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD HAVE

[02:05:01]

I'M NOT WORRIED.

I HAVE NO DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR, AND I'M WILLING TO PUT ON THE CLOWN MAKEUP, FIX YOUR MISTAKES.

I'LL BE RUNNING FOR THAT SEAT RIGHT THERE.

HAVE A NICE DAY.

THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADJUST TO COUNCIL AT THIS TIME ON A TOPIC NOT ON THE AGENDA? MY NAME IS DALLAS LAPSLEY, 3525 9TH AVENUE.

I'M HERE REGARDING SOME ORDINANCES AND POSSIBLY CHAPTERS THAT I FEEL THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED OR CHANGED.

I'VE LIVED IN COUNCIL BLOSS NOW FOR ROUGHLY FIVE YEARS.

AND FOR FIVE YEARS, THE HOUSE TO THE EAST SIDE OF ME, I'VE CALLED REGULARLY AT MINIMUM OF FIVE TIMES DURING THE SUMMER, EACH SUMMER.

REGARDING HIGH WEEDS, DEAD CARS, TRASH IN THE YARD, I'VE CALLED THE MAYOR'S ACTION LINE, THE CITIZEN COMPLAINT, AND I GET RAN AROUND.

AND WHAT I FOUND OUT IS ON THE ORDINANCES, THEY SAY, ONE SAYS 4.19 ABOUT THE WEEDS BEING 18 INCHES HIGH.

I FEEL THAT'S TOO HIGH.

ONE, I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS, THE NEIGHBOR I'M TALKING REGARDING OF THAT'S NEXT DOOR TO ME, PLAYS IT AS A JOKE.

SHE WAITS.

THEY COME OUT.

THEY GIVE HER A NOTICE.

SHE CUTS IT.

WE GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROGRAM AGAIN, AND IT GOES AGAIN, AND IT GOES AGAIN, AND IT GOES AGAIN.

AND THEN I FIND OUT THAT THERE'S ANOTHER ORDINANCE THAT COMES UP.

IT'S A 14-19-20 ABOUT THE NOTICE OF PROPERTY OF THE OWNER'S PROPERTY OF NAGELJENTZ, WHICH IS I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLOSS DOES NOT CHARGE FINES, ALLOWS THESE PEOPLE TO CONSTANTLY REPEAT, REPEAT, REPEAT, REPEAT, INSTEAD OF LOWERING THE GRASS HEIGHT.

I MEAN, I'M 61 YEARS OLD.

I LIVE AROUND PEOPLE THAT ARE 70 AND 80 THAT MOW THE YARD, AND THE YARD I'M TALKING ABOUT ARE A COUPLE 30-YEAR-OLD KIDS THAT LIVE THERE AND THINK IT'S A JOKE.

I'M GETTING TIRED OF IT, AND MY WIFE AND I HAVE LIVED HERE NOW FOR FIVE YEARS, AND I'M TRYING TO WORK TO KEEP MY HOUSE HERE BEFORE I MOVE AWAY AGAIN BECAUSE I CHOSE TO LIVE HERE.

I'VE GOT A NEW CENTRAL AREA, NEW HOT WATER HEATER.

I'VE DONE MY STUFF TO MY HOUSE TO MAKE IT MY LAST HOUSE HERE.

THEN I LOOK IN CHAPTER 675 WHERE IOWA PUBLIC NUISANCE REGARDING HEALTH, LOUD NOISE, SMELL, INTERFERENCE, DISCOMFORT, LIFE AND PERSONAL PROPERTY DAMAGE AND STUFF.

IF YOU DRIVE BY THE HOUSE, ANY OF YOU WILL SEE WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

THE HOUSE TO THE EAST SIDE OF ME.

I WON'T SAY THE ADDRESS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF I'M ALLOWED TO OR NOT, SO I'M NOT USING IT THAT WAY.

IT HAS BEEN A PROBLEM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD LONG BEFORE I GOT THERE.

I'VE TALKED TO NEIGHBORS AROUND ME ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET, BEHIND ME, AND EVERYBODY'S AGREED, BUT THE ONE LADY NEXT DOOR ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THEM IS AN 80-YEAR-OLD LADY THAT'S SCARED TO SPEAK UP.

I'M NOT.

I'M 60 YEARS OLD, AND I WILL SPEAK UP, AND I WILL HOLD MY GROUND.

THE OTHER CODE THAT COMES TO MIND IS 302 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, WHICH TALKS ABOUT KEEPING YOUR PROPERTY FREE OF RUBBISH, DEBRIS, GARBAGE, WEEDS, GRASS, AND CANNOT BE OVER 10 INCHES.

SO YOU'RE CONTRADICTING YOURSELF.

ONE TIME YOU'RE SAYING IT'S 10 INCHES, AND THE OTHER SIDE YOU'RE SAYING IT'S 18 INCHES IN HEIGHT.

I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE, YOU GUYS NEED TO TRY TO MAKE AN ORDINANCE TO, ONE, TO LOWER THE HEIGHT OF THE GRASS.

TWO, WHEN IT'S A REPEAT THING, THEY NEED TO GET CHARGED INSTEAD OF PLAYING THE GAME WITH THEM.

LAST I KNEW WE'RE ALL GROWNUPS IN HERE, AND THAT WE NEED TO CHARGE FOR IT.

THEN YOU GUYS CAN USE THE MONEY TO HELP WITH OTHER THINGS THAT THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF BLESS NEEDS TO GET FIXED.

THAT'S THE MAIN REASON WHY I CAME TO COUNCIL OF BLESS, TO TRY TO DO STUFF THAT WAS ASKED TO ME BY MY IMMEDIATE FAMILY THAT LIVED HERE FOR MANY YEARS BEFORE MY GRANDFATHER DIED AND ASKED ME TO COME BACK TO TRY TO GET IT BACK TO HOW IT USED TO RUN.

AND MY LAST THING THAT I SAW ON FACEBOOK THAT COUNCIL OF BLESS BROUGHT UP ON FACEBOOK, WHAT DO I WANT TO SEE IN COUNCIL OF BLESS? I WANT TO SEE IT CLEANED UP.

IF YOU WANT TO LIVE ON 9TH AVENUE OR ANY OTHER STREET AND

[02:10:01]

I CHOOSE TO TRY TO CLEAN UP MY TOWN.

THAT'S WHY I CAME HERE.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, DALLAS.

ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADJUST TO COUNCIL TONIGHT

[4) CONSENT AGENDA]

IS THERE A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA? SO MOVED.

SECOND.

[5.A) Ordinance 6684 Ordinance to amend the zoning map as adopted by reference in section 15.27.020, by rezoning property legally described as Lots 3 through 7, Block 5, Streets Addition, from R-2/Two-Family Residential District to R-3/Low Density Multifamily Residential District, as defined in Chapter 15.10 of the Municipal Code.  Location: 2231 Avenue B. Case #ZC-26-003 ]

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

PUBLIC HEARINGS.

WE HAVE FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING.

THE FIRST ORDINANCE IS 6684.

ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP AS ADOPTED BY REFERENCING IN SECTION OF 15.27.020 BY REZONING THE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 3 THROUGH 07, BLOCKS 5, STREET EDITION, FROM R2 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R3 LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, AS DEFINED IN CHAPTER 15.10 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

LOCATION IS 2231 AVENUE B.

IS PROOF OF PUBLICATION ON RECORD? YES, IT IS.

ANY WRITTEN PROTESTS RECEIVED? NONE RECEIVED.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADJUST TO COUNCIL ON THIS MATTER? SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION? OR IS THERE A DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL? OKAY.

SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION AWAY IF THEY'RE...

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON MOTION TO WAVE THIRD?

[5.B) Resolution 26-224 Resolution granting Final Plat approval of a one-lot subdivision to be known as ABC Collision Center, located at the southeast corner of South 35th Street and 16th Avenue, being legally described as a replat of Lots 12 through 19, all in Block 2, East Omaha Plateau, together with the vacated alley lying within said Block 2 and the north ½ of vacated 17th Avenue adjacent to Lots 16 through 19 on the south.  Location: Southeast corner of South 35th Street and 16th Avenue. SUB-26-012]

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

NOTHING.

RESOLUTION 26-224, RESOLUTION GRANTING THE FINAL PLOT APPROVAL OF ONE LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE KNOWN AS ABC COLLISION CENTER.

LOCATION IS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH 35TH AND 16TH AVENUE.

LOCATION...

OH, YEP.

THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 35TH STREET AND 16TH AVENUE.

IS PROOF OF PUBLICATION ON RECORD? YES, IT IS.

ANY WRITTEN PROTESTS RECEIVED? NONE RECEIVED.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADJUST TO COUNCIL ON THIS MATTER? AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

YES.

MICHAEL SMITH WITH THOMPSON, REESE, AND DORNER AT 10836 OLD MILL ROAD IN OMAHA.

I'M HERE AS A REPRESENTATIVE TO THE OWNER, A.J. BERNHARDT, REGARDING ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT THE PLAT FOR APPROVAL.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

IS THERE A MOTION FROM THE COUNCIL? MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION?

[5.C) Resolution 26-225 Resolution authorizing the Mayor to initiate the Pirate Cove Filter Replacement, Project R27-02 by issuing a bid for the project.]

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

RESOLUTION 26-225, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO INITIATE THE PIRATE COVE FILTER REPLACEMENT PROJECT BY ISSUING BID FOR THIS PROJECT.

IS PROOF OF PUBLICATION ON RECORD? YES, IT IS.

ANY WRITTEN PROTESTS RECEIVED? NONE RECEIVED.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADJUST TO COUNCIL ON THIS MATTER? SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE

[5.D) Resolution 26-226 Resolution approving and authorizing execution of a Second Amendment to the Purchase, Sale, and Development Agreement by and between the City of Council Bluffs, Iowa and First Avenue Freeze Out, LLC]

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

RESOLUTION 26-226, A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A SECOND AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE, SALE, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF COUNCIL WEST, IOWA, AND FIRST AVENUE FREEZE OUT, LLC.

IS PROOF OF PUBLICATION ON RECORD? YES, IT IS.

ANY WRITTEN PROTESTS RECEIVED? NONE RECEIVED.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADJUST TO COUNCIL ON THIS MATTER? SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? I'LL JUST CLARIFY THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS, THE SECOND AMENDMENT WAS NEEDED TO CORRECT AN ERROR IN THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS THEY WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS.

WE'VE ALREADY KIND OF BEEN THROUGH THERE ONCE BEFORE, BUT JUST SO EVERYBODY'S AWARE OF WHERE WE'RE GOING.

THANK YOU, DOUG.

YOU BET.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION

[6.A) Ordinance 6676 (Continued from 5-4-26) Ordinance to amend Chapter 4.20 Animal Control by amending Section 4.20.020 "Definitions-Animal Control"; Section 4.20.030 "Cruel Treatment of Animals Prohibited"; Section 4.20.050 "Animals at Large"; Section 4.20.060 "Impoundment" and enacting new Section 4.20.075 to be entitled "Management of Cat Population Pursuant to Trap-Neuter-Return; Permitted Acts" and by repealing Section 4.20.272 "Stray Cats".  or Consideration of motion to substitute Ordinance No. 6676-A. Full text of Substitute Ordinance and a comparison version are included in the agenda packet. ]

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MADAM CLERK.

ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING, ORDINANCE 6676, AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 4.20, ANIMAL CONTROL, BY AMENDING SECTION 4.20.020, DEFINITIONS ANIMAL CONTROL, SECTION 4.20.030, CRUEL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS PROHIBITED, SECTION 4.20.050, ANIMALS AT LARGE, SECTION

[02:15:02]

MOTION TO APPROVE, SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE NUMBER 667-A, AS SET FORTH THE AGENDA PACKET, BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE PENDING ORDINANCE 6676.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS WHEN I WOULD ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS TOPIC.

SO IF YOU DID NOT, I'M GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

IF YOU DID NOT WATCH THE STUDY SESSION EARLIER TODAY, COUNCIL MEMBER DESALVO HAS BEEN WORKING QUITE A BIT WITH OUR LEGAL TEAM TO ADDRESS THIS POTENTIAL ORDINANCE, AND THEY HAVE COME UP WITH AN AMENDED ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS THE TNR TO GO FORWARD.

IT REMOVES THE LIABILITY OF A COMMUNITY CAT AND REMOVES THAT CLASSIFICATION AND LEGAL, TELL ME IF I'M SPEAKING WRONG OR JOE.

AND IT ALLOWS THEN FOR THE HUMANE SOCIETY THAT IF A CAT WAS AN ISSUE FOR THE NEIGHBOR THAT CALLED IN, IT WOULD ALLOW THE HUMANE SOCIETY TO PUT IT BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY AT A DIFFERENT LOCATION.

BUT IT DOES ALLOW THE HUMANE SOCIETY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE TNR ITSELF.

YEAH, SO I WORKED WITH LEGAL A BIT, AND THE ISSUE THAT I TOOK, AT LEAST WITH THE INITIAL ORDINANCES THAT WAS WRITTEN, WAS IT CREATED A LEGAL LOOPHOLE KIND OF, RIGHT? AND SO I SPOKE WITH SOME DIFFERENT FOLKS THAT WERE IN FAVOR OF, AND I SPOKE WITH LEGAL A BIT.

AND WE WORKED TO GET TO A POSITION WHERE IT WOULD STILL EFFECTIVELY ALLOW FOR THE TNR PROGRAM TO GET TO THE CRUX OF WHAT IT WANTS TO DO.

IT ALLOWS EVERYONE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

SO WHAT IT DOES IS IT REMOVES THE PORTION OF OUR CODE, OR IT ALTERS A PORTION OF OUR CODE THAT HAS TO DO WITH ABANDONING AN ANIMAL.

SO ANY ANIMAL THAT WOULD BE PART OF THIS PROGRAM WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AN ABANDONED ANIMAL.

SO IT ALLOWS US TO, SORRY, ALLOWS THE HUMANE SOCIETY TO RETURN THAT ANIMAL TO THE WORLD, IF YOU WILL.

BUT IT ALSO REMOVES THE PIECE THAT SAYS IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK NECESSARILY TO THAT SAME SPOT.

SO IN THE EVENT THERE WERE TO BE A PROBLEM, SAY ONE NEIGHBOR, LIKE THE IDEA OF THE CATS AND A COUPLE OTHERS HAD A PROBLEM, IT WOULD ALLOW FOR PLACEMENT ELSEWHERE SO THAT WE WOULDN'T BE PUTTING CATS INTO PLACES WHERE WE MAY BE AGITATING THE NEIGHBOR.

BUT OVERALL, I EVEN JOKE THAT I'D LIKE IT TO BE TNR, C FOR CHIP, AND THEN R FOR RABIES, BUT I DON'T FEEL IT'S PROBABLY NECESSARY OR RIGHT FOR ME TO MANDATE THAT.

BUT I THINK THOSE WOULD BE GREAT ADDITIONS.

THAT'S TO YOUR GUYS' PREROGATIVE IF YOU'D BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

I KNOW THAT IT WAS MENTIONED THAT YOU GUYS DO TEST FOR RABIES, AND YOU WOULDN'T RELEASE AN ANIMAL THAT TESTED POSITIVE UNTIL YOU GOT IT SQUARED AWAY OR CLEANED UP OR WHATEVER.

BUT ALL IN ALL, I FEEL LIKE DOING IT IN THIS WAY STILL ALLOWS THE CRUX OF WHAT IT IS YOU WANT TO DO.

IT ALLOWS IT TO STILL HAPPEN, AND IT JUST ALLOWS KIND OF A MID-GROUND, I GUESS, THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE.

SO NORMALLY THIS WOULD BE THE TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

I AM GOING TO FLIP IT A LITTLE BIT AND LET THE COUNCIL GIVE THEIR COMMENTS, AND THEN AFTER THEY GIVE COMMENTS, IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD, THEN WE CAN GO THAT ROUTE.

IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL? WELL, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THIS MEETING A MONTH OR SO AGO, CORRECT? AND JOE, WE CONTINUED THAT BASED ON JOE'S RECOMMENDATION AS HE THOUGHT HE COULD COME UP WITH A BETTER WAY MAYBE TO LOOK AT THIS.

AS I LOOKED AT IT AND DID MY RESEARCH, AND I THINK, ALEX, I BELIEVE YOU'RE HERE, CORRECT, IN THE BACK, AND HAD A NICE CONVERSATION WITH HIM ABOUT THIS AS WELL, TALKED TO SOME OTHER FOLKS, DID MY OWN RESEARCH WITH IT.

BUT I WOULD AGREE WITH JOE, AND THEN I THINK WE'VE COME UP WITH A NICE COMPROMISE HERE.

THE COMMUNITY CAT TERMINOLOGY CAN BE VERY TROUBLESOME, I

[02:20:03]

AS I LOOK AT IT AND SAY, HOW DO WE PROTECT THE MAJORITY OF THE FOLKS, AND I GUESS JOE MENTIONED THAT, IF ONE NEIGHBOR IS NOT WANTING THAT CAT THERE, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND NOT EVERYBODY AGREES THAT THEY WANT THAT CAT TO BE ABLE TO BE FED OR TAKEN CARE OF OR WHENEVER THEY'RE SAYING, HEY, IT'S CAUSING A PROBLEM FOR ME, THAT STILL ALLOWS THAT CAT TO BE PICKED UP, TAKEN CARE OF, AND THEN POSSIBLY MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE, OR, AS WE TALKED ABOUT, IT COULD GO SOMEWHERE, RIGHT? IT COULD BE ADOPTED OUT, AND THAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL SITUATION, I THINK, FOR EVERYBODY.

HOWEVER, IT DOES GIVE YOU THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT IN THE END, BUT STILL DOESN'T KIND OF GIVE US CARTE BLANCHE TO SAY, WELL, WE JUST HAVE ALL THESE COMMUNITY CATS OR STRAY CATS, AND PEOPLE USE THAT AS A CRUTCH TO SAY, NOT MY CAT, I'M NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR IT, LET SOMEBODY ELSE DEAL WITH IT.

AND SO I THINK I APPRECIATE JOE'S EFFORT IN THIS AND WORKING WITH LEGAL TO GET THAT TO KIND OF A MIDDLE GROUND TO SAY, OKAY, HOW DO WE KIND OF WORK THIS OUT FOR BOTH OF US? AND I'LL BE HONEST, WHEN I FIRST CAME THROUGH, I WAS KIND OF REALLY LEANING AGAINST DOING IT.

I'LL BE HONEST, BECAUSE THE RESEARCH THAT I'D SEEN WAS THIS IS NOT ALWAYS THE BEST SITUATION SOMETIMES FOR THE CATS, AND HOW DO WE PROTECT THE CITIZENS AND THE COMMUNITY FROM NOT WANTING THAT? AND SO I APPRECIATE JOE AND COMMEND HIM FOR DOING THE WORK AND THE LEGWORK TO GET THERE.

AND TO ME, I'M OKAY WITH THE COMPROMISE, AND I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THAT, FOR THE AMENDED VERSION.

WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AT IT, JUST LIKE ANY PROGRAM THAT GETS IMPLEMENTED.

WE WOULD LOOK AT THAT AFTER A YEAR OR SO AND SAY, IS THIS WORKING? AND THEN IF WE NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS FROM THERE, WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS AFTER THAT TIME PERIOD.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW WHERE I WAS COMING FROM ON IT.

THAT'S FUN.

I WOULD LIKE TO JUST STATE THAT IN OUR FIRST MEETING, THE LANGUAGE OF COMMUNITY CAT KIND OF I REALLY HAD A PROBLEM WITH BECAUSE IT CONTRADICTED A LOT OF THE ORDINANCES THAT WE HAD IN PLACE ALREADY.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I TALKED WITH LEGAL ABOUT.

IF WE COULD GET IT WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT WE COULD FIND THE CENTER GROUND OR PROTECT THE CITIZENS THAT DO WANT THESE CATS, THEN WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT DOING THAT.

AND THIS AMENDMENT, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, MEETS IT ABOUT AS CLOSE AS YOU COULD GET.

AND SO I'M HAPPY TO LOOK AT ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO REDUCE THE CAT POPULATION AND REDUCE, YOU KNOW, EUTHANATION OF THEM.

I'M A CAT LOVER.

SO, BUT ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK, JOE, AND LEGAL.

I THINK WE DID IT ABOUT AS CLOSE AS WE COULD WITH THIS AMENDMENT.

AND SO I SUPPORT IT ALSO.

AGREED.

JUST TO ECHO WHAT STEVEN JOE SAID.

I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR NIKKI OR ALEX IF YOU COME UP.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE RED LINE THAT LEGAL AND JOE CAME UP WITH, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS TAKEN OUT THAT I THINK EVERYBODY HERE, WELL, WE DIDN'T VOTE, WE JUST TABLED IT.

SO I THINK AFTER THE DISCUSSION LAST TIME AND GOING BACK AND TAKING OUT AND SEEING THIS RED LINE VERSION, IT'S DEFINITELY A LOT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS IN PLACE BEFORE.

AND SO, AGAIN, I THINK, AS DOUG SAID, WE NEED TO EVALUATE THIS AND UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GUYS HAD THE GUY HERE BEFORE, I THINK, I DON'T REMEMBER THE PERCENTAGE, BUT THEY WERE A LONG WAY FROM WHAT THEY, THE SUCCESS PERCENTAGE WAS ADDRESSED AT.

SO I THINK COMING BACK TO US AND TELLING US WHAT THE PERCENTAGE IS, YOU KNOW, IN SIX MONTHS, I THINK IS A GOOD MEASURABLE.

I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT, THEY'LL JUST BE EAR-TIPPED OR WILL THEY BE CHIPPED AS WELL? WE HAVEN'T, SO FIRST STEP FOR US IS GETTING THIS PASSED.

SO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS ALL LOOKING AT IT.

THE PROGRAM ITSELF STILL HAS TO BE WORKED OUT COMPLETELY.

BUT, LIKE, WHAT YOU'RE BRINGING UP IS VERY VALID.

LIKE, THE CONCERNS OF THE CITIZENS IS DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW.

SO EACH ONE OF THESE, THERE'S MULTIPLE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER.

SO, LIKE, WHILE WE CAN PUT A PROGRAM IN PLACE, EACH ONE IS GOING TO BE TREATED INDIVIDUALLY.

SO IF WE HAVE A NEIGHBOR THAT DOESN'T WANT THE CAT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT ANOTHER PATHWAY, RIGHT? LIKE, SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT ALL WRITTEN OUT, BUT IN THE SAME TOKEN, WE DEFINITELY ARE GOING TO SPARE, NEUTER, EARTIP, RABIES VACCINATE, AND DISTEMPER VACCINE.

AS FAR AS THE CHIP, WE HAVE NOT FIGURED THAT OUT YET.

WE DO NOT RABIES TEST EVERYTHING.

[02:25:01]

OH, SORRY.

NO, IT'S OKAY.

THAT'S DOUG'S FAULT, THEN.

HE SAID THAT.

NO, IT'S FINE.

WE DO NOT RABIES TEST EVERYTHING THAT COMES THROUGH OUR DOORS.

IF IT HAS BITTEN OR WE ARE AWARE OF A SITUATION WHERE THE ANIMAL COULD HAVE BITTEN AN INDIVIDUAL, THEN WE ARE OBLIGATED BY STATE CODE TO DO RABIES TESTING.

SO IF IT'S JUST A STRAY CAT, THOUGH, THAT COMES IN, THERE IS NO RABIES TESTING THAT WILL BE DONE.

BUT OVERALL, THIS ORDINANCE WILL JUST GIVE US THE ABILITY TO MAKE THE PROGRAM.

AGAIN, JUST LIKE YOU SAID, I THINK LOOKING AT STATISTICS AND DATA TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE NEED TO CHANGE AS WE MOVE FORWARD IS GOING TO BE PART OF, IT'S WHAT WE DO EVERY DAY ANYWAYS, BECAUSE HUMANE SOCIETY IS VERY FLUID.

SO, BUT YES, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT WHAT THE SUCCESS RATE IS.

AND AGAIN, WE ARE LOOKING AT SOME DIFFERENT PROGRAMS, TOO, WHERE SOME OF THEM ARE TRULY THAT YOU'RE PUTTING BACK, THE MORE UNSOCIALIZED ONES.

AND IF THERE'S ONES THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE FRIENDLY AND WE CAN'T FIND THE OWNER AND THAT'S GOING TO HELP THE PROGRAM SO WE'RE NOT INUNDATING THE COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THAT DATA.

BUT IT IS PRETTY PROVEN THAT IF YOU PUT THEM BACK, THEY HAVE FIGURED OUT WHERE THE FOOD SOURCES AND THINGS ARE.

THEY'RE JUST NOT REPRODUCING.

BUT IF THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, WE DEFINITELY CAN WORK THROUGH WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN THE END.

AND AGAIN, I EXPECT THAT IT WILL CHANGE THROUGHOUT TIME, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE COMMUNITY.

WELL, I THINK THAT'S THE BIGGEST THING IS, LIKE I SAID, THERE'S A LOT OF RED LINE, A LOT OF THINGS TAKEN OUT.

THE COMMUNITY CAT PIECE WAS THE MAIN PIECE THAT I THINK ALL OF US WERE CONCERNED ABOUT.

AND I GUESS YOU'VE READ THE RED LINE VERSION, RIGHT? YEAH.

AND SO, I MEAN, IT'S GUIDELINES THAT YOU GUYS CAN WORK WITHIN AND.

AND WE CAN WORK TOGETHER THROUGH.

RIGHT.

WE CAN FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE ABOUT IT.

I WAS GOING TO SAY, ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, ROGER WAS CALLING IN AND DOUG HAD ASKED A QUESTION, YOU KNOW, WHAT IF WE GET A LOT OF CATS END UP IN ONE SPACE? MAYBE IT WAS STEVE, I DON'T RECALL.

ANYWAYS, AND WHAT ED KIND OF SAID IS WE KIND OF HAVE TO PUT OUR FAITH IN YOU GUYS AT THAT, IN THAT CAPACITY THAT WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER IN AN EFFORT TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY.

AND THAT YOU'LL KEEP THAT MINDSET WHEN YOU'RE PLACING, YOU KNOW, ANIMALS BACK.

100%.

EVERY DAY.

IN THE COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW.

YEAH.

AND AS THINGS COME UP, IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN TWEAK, BUT I FEEL LIKE IT'S A VERY GOOD, IT'S A VERY GOOD, YEAH, FRAMEWORK OR STARTING PLACE FOR US TO WORK TOGETHER IN THIS ISSUE.

AND I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO, NO MATTER WHAT, I MEAN, THERE'S GOING TO BE THINGS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK THROUGH.

AND I THINK THE WAY YOU'RE KIND OF WRITING IT, IT'S KIND OF MORE TARGETED, RIGHT? IF YOU HAVE A COMMUNITY THAT'S REALLY WILLING TO DEAL WITH THE CATS AND WE CAN GO IN AND SPAY AND NEUTER AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE NOT JUST REPRODUCING, THAT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY.

THE ONE-OFF, LIKE, I HAVE A PROBLEM CAT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION A LOT OF THE TIMES ANYWAY.

SO, LIKE, ULTIMATELY, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE STEP FORWARD THAT WE NEED TO BE DOING, AND THEN WE JUST NEED TO CONTINUE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S WORKING.

ARE YOU GETTING COMPLAINTS THROUGH ANIMAL CONTROL THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF, YOU KNOW, WORKING THROUGH THAT AS WELL? BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GET THE COMPLAINTS.

WE HEAR IT SECONDHAND, SO WORKING ON SOME OF THOSE THINGS TOGETHER TO MAKE IT BETTER WOULD BE HUGE.

I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, AND I DID WITH ALEX A LITTLE BIT, DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO TALK TO YOU, BUT LIKE ROGER SAID, YOU'VE SEEN THE RED LINE VERSION.

YEAH.

YOU KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH THIS.

YOU'RE OKAY ON THAT SIDE.

I THINK FROM OUR STANDPOINT, WE'RE OKAY WITH WHERE WE'RE GOING FROM A CITIZEN AND PROTECTION OF THE COMMUNITY STANDPOINT AND MAKING SURE THAT THAT FITS.

SO I'M WITH YOU.

I THINK IF WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER TO GET THE RIGHT THING, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THIS.

AND I THINK YOU'LL HAVE SOME PRETTY CLEAR INFORMATION TO SAY, OKAY, THIS IS GOING WELL OR THIS ISN'T GOING WELL.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? YEAH.

AND SAME WITH YOU.

I MEAN, I THINK YOU GUYS WILL HEAR IT TOO.

SO, I MEAN, YOU'RE GOING TO BE JUST AS MUCH A PART OF IT AS WE ARE.

AND, AGAIN, IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT TO GET THE PROGRAM RUNNING.

THIS WAS REALLY FIRST STEP.

SO WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT, JUST MAKING SURE THAT THE PROGRAM IS SUCCESSFUL.

SO, AND, AGAIN, REVIEWING IT, CHECKING THE DATA, STAYING IN TOUCH WITH ONE ANOTHER, I THINK WOULD BE A BIG PART OF IT.

WELL, LIKE YOU SAID, YOU HAVE FUNDERS FOR A LOT OF THIS, RIGHT? SO I GUESS I WOULD ASK ONCE, LIKE YOU SAID, THIS IS THE FIRST STEP.

ONCE THAT PROGRAM IS IN PLACE, IF YOU WOULD BRING IT BACK TO US, LIKE HERE'S WHAT THE FUNDING IS GOING TOWARDS, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING, RIGHT? I MEAN, IT'S LAID OUT PRETTY SIMPLE IN OURS, BUT, LIKE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A DIFFERENT, LIKE, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO.

RIGHT.

AND IT'S WITHIN THESE GUIDELINES, BUT THIS IS OUR PROCESS.

RIGHT.

I WOULD LIKE THAT TO COME BACK TO US AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS WHERE THE FUNDING, THIS IS THE LAUNCH, THIS IS HOW IT'S GOING TO GO DOWN.

AND SO WE KNOW AND THE COMMUNITY KNOWS, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S PEOPLE WHO ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS.

I THINK PEOPLE HOPEFULLY CAN SEE THAT WE ALL TRY AND DO THE RIGHT THING, WHETHER WE AGREE OR DISAGREE, AND I HAVE SAID THAT BEFORE.

SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD COMPROMISE, AND AS DOUG SAID, JOE TOOK THE LEAD ON THIS ONE, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO I AGREE.

AND JUST CLARIFICATION FROM EVERYBODY'S STANDPOINT, THIS IS ALL BEING FUNDED THROUGH THE HUMANE SOCIETY AND THROUGH YOUR SOURCES.

YEP.

[02:30:02]

THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH OR PAY FOR THIS PROGRAM.

WE'RE JUST GIVING YOU THE GREEN LIGHT TO DO IT.

TO BE ABLE TO.

YEP.

AND THEN WE ADJUST.

AND YOU STILL HAVE TO BRING, I MEAN, THE STRAIGHT HATS AND THE CONTRACTS.

I GOT YOU.

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

I'M GOING TO, IF YOU'RE GOING TO SAY THAT, I'M GOING TO SAY, YEAH.

BUT, YES, IF IT'S THE TNR GOING BACKWARD, THAT'LL BE DONOR FUNDED.

YEP.

PERFECT.

AWESOME.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL? I'LL JUST SAY I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE TNR PROGRAM.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.

I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE AMENDMENT JOE HAS PRESENTED.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD COMPROMISE, SO I WOULD FULLY ENCOURAGE IT TO PASS.

JAKE.

OKAY, WE'VE GOT ONE, I FORGOT TO TAKE OUT ONE PART OF IT, SO YOU GUYS WERE REALLY TALKING ABOUT LEGAL AND MADE A MISTAKE.

SO, IF ONE OF YOU COULD MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND SECTION ONE OF THE ORDINANCE, I FORGOT WHAT THE NUMBER IS.

WAS IT 667? 6676A.

6676A.

TO DELETE IN SECTION ONE AND BY REPEALING SECTION 4.20.272.

I'M REALIZING NOW THIS IS REALLY A LONG THING TO SAY.

DO WE HAVE A FRIENDLY MOTION FROM JOE? YOU MADE THE MOTION.

YEAH.

AND THEN SECOND WAS? ME.

STEVE.

FRIENDLY MOTION.

PER JAKE'S.

SO MOVED.

RIGHT, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

PER JAKE'S LEGAL SPEAK.

OKAY.

CAN YOU EMAIL ME THAT? SO NOW I'LL ASK IF ANYBODY FROM THE AUDIENCE WANTS TO STILL COME FORWARD, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK.

OTHERWISE, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE VOTE.

BUT IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I'M JUST STATING YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

I DON'T THINK SO.

OKAY.

I'M NOT FROM COUNCIL.

YOU'RE SO WELCOME TO SPEAK.

HEY, THANKS.

I'M AMANDA WITH STRAY TO SPAY.

SOME OF MY VOLUNTEERS WERE HERE ABOUT A MONTH AGO.

SINCE THAT TIME, WE'VE RECEIVED LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF STORIES FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS WITH PICTURES OF CATS JUST IN THEIR YARDS.

SO I WANT TO APPLAUD ALL OF YOU AND MIDLANDS HUMANE SOCIETY FOR YOUR EXCELLENT WORK ON THIS.

WE HAVE, I SENT YOU A REPORT LAST WEEK ON A HOLIDAY, I'M SO SORRY, AND I USE THE TERMINOLOGY COMMUNITY CAT.

THAT IS THE LANGUAGE FOR UNOWNED STRAY CATS, FERAL OR NOT.

SO YOU WILL BUMP INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT HERE AND THERE.

THIS IS EXCELLENT.

I WOULD URGE ALL OF YOU TO CONSIDER THAT CATS WILL TRY TO FIND THEIR WAY HOME.

AND SO IF YOU ARE FIGURING OUT WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO RETURN THEM, THAT'S NOT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THEY'RE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO GET BACK TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE ARE HAPPY TO BE A RESOURCE TO HELP COMMUNITY MEMBERS FIND DETERRENT METHODS FOR CATS.

IT'S SOMETHING WE DEAL WITH IN OMAHA.

WE HAVE REQUESTS FROM ALL OVER NEBRASKA AS FAR AS DES MOINES TO HELP PEOPLE.

AND THIS IS OFTEN ONE OF THE KEY ISSUES THAT WE FACE AS WELL.

SO AGAIN, THIS IS EXCELLENT.

WE APPLAUD YOU.

WE'RE HAPPY TO PARTNER WITH MIDLANDS HOWEVER WE CAN.

LITERALLY, I'M SITTING ON LIKE 60 REQUESTS FROM COUNCIL BLUFFS RIGHT NOW FOR HELP, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO GET IN TROUBLE, RIGHT? WE DON'T WANT TO PULL OUT OUR BIG DROP TRAPS, GET THE HARD CATS.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT ENCOURAGING COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO GET $800 FINES FOR FEEDING CATS AND POSSIBLY EVICTED FROM THEIR HOMES.

SO THANK YOU FOR THIS GREAT WORK.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MIDLANDS.

THIS IS AWESOME.

WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU AND TO HELP COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE FRUSTRATED, WHO DON'T WANT THESE CATS.

AND ULTIMATELY, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS, IS THE COMMUNITY CAT POPULATIONS GO DOWN AND THE CATS EVENTUALLY GO AWAY.

HAPPENED IN RALSTON.

SO THANK YOU AGAIN.

APPLAUD YOU ALL FOR THIS GREAT WORK.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER CITIZEN WISHING TO ADJUST TO COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? ABSOLUTELY.

SHE WAS MENTIONING ME, I BELIEVE.

MY NAME IS JENNIFER JONES.

I LIVE AT 3100 ATLANTIC AVENUE OVER IN DEGROBE AND COUNCIL BLUFFS.

AND WHAT SHE MENTIONED AS FAR AS AN $800 FINE, I RECEIVED THIS FROM COUNCIL BLUFFS ANIMAL CONTROL FOR FEEDING A STRAY CAT THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR EIGHT YEARS.

NO ONE'S BEEN ABLE TO CATCH IT.

SHE HAS ABOUT FOUR LITTERS A YEAR.

SHE'S SO FAR HAD 160 CATS.

AND I HAVE CAUGHT 30 AND PUT THEM IN PROGRAMS WITH MIDLANDS COMMUNITY FOR THEIR BARN CATS, ADOPTED THEM OUT, BUT THEY CAN'T CATCH HER.

AND MY DAUGHTER SEEN HER LAST WEEK.

SHE JUST HAD KITTENS AGAIN.

SO SHE IS IN THE AREA.

I HAD AN ELDERLY LADY ACROSS THE STREET THAT WAS HELPING ME.

SHE PASSED AWAY.

BUT AS FAR AS A NEIGHBOR THAT DOESN'T WANT IT, THE OTHER LADY NEXT TO ME, SHE DOESN'T LIKE IT.

SHE JUST PREFERS TO SHOOT IT WITH A BB GUN, IF POSSIBLE.

EVEN THOUGH I HAVE MADE SURE HER HOUSE IS IMPREGNABLE, THAT CAT IS NOWHERE GOING TO GO NEAR HER HOUSE.

BUT STILL, SHE'S AN ELDERLY LADY, TOO.

BUT THIS NOTE IS A NOTICE TO COMPLY.

PICK UP ALL FOOD OUTSIDE, DESTROY SHELTER, SET UP,

[02:35:01]

THEY ALSO TOLD ME AN $800 FINE WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I'VE LIVED IN BLUFFS ACRES OR DEGROBE FOR 21 YEARS.

AND BECAUSE, OF COURSE, THE TRAILER COURT IS GOING TO BE COMPLIANT WITH YOU FOLKS, I WAS FACING EVICTION IF I ALSO FED THESE CATS.

AND I HAD A BUNCH OF PICTURES.

I WAS GOING TO GIVE AMANDA FROM STRAY TO SPRAY, BUT I HAVE THEM HERE.

I'M SURE YOU FOLKS DON'T NEED TO SEE THEM.

BUT LIKE I SAID, I HAVE PROOF THERE'S OVER 30 CATS THAT I HAVE HELPED.

BUT THAT'S NOT COUNTING.

THE OTHER 130, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO.

BUT SHE'S STILL OUT THERE, STILL HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET CAUGHT BY THE MAINE SOCIETY BECAUSE SHE'S FERAL.

AND THE CORNFIELD THAT WAS ON THE SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY, THEY HAVE TORN THAT DOWN.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD A DATA CENTER THERE OR WHAT, BUT THAT REDUCED THE FOOD SUPPLY.

SO THE CATS ARE GOING TO REALLY GO TO THE TRAILER COURT NOW BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANYWHERE ELSE TO GO.

BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE PUTTING THERE NOW, BUT THEY CUT ON ALL THE BRUSH, ALL THE CORN, EVERYTHING'S GONE.

SO I IMAGINE THIS YEAR IT'S GOING TO BE PRETTY BAD.

BUT I'M HOUSEBOUND MYSELF NOW, BUT I CAME OUT BECAUSE IT SAID THAT THE LAST TIME THAT YOU FOLKS WERE THINKING ABOUT NOT, YOU KNOW, DOING IT.

BUT, I MEAN, WE REALLY NEED SOME HELP.

I HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING, FELINE FRIENDS IN OMAHA, STRAIGHTEST PAY.

I'VE JUST GOTTEN OLDER.

I'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH MIDLANDS DOING, I WILL PAY THEM.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.

I'LL PAY OUT OF MY OWN POCKET, YOU KNOW, WHICH I HAVE FOR THE BARN CAP PROGRAM.

BUT THEY'LL ONLY TAKE A CERTAIN AMOUNT THERE.

AND THE ONLY OTHER PERSON THAT DOES TNR IN THE STATE OF IOWA IS WESTERN ALLIANCE.

THAT'S OUT BY DAVENPORT.

THEY WON'T TAKE ANYTHING HERE.

AND THEN IF YOU LOOK ON THE INTERNET, IT'S KIND OF JUMBLED, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS IF YOU LOOK AT TNR FOR, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL BLUFFS OR WHATEVER, YOU JUST PUT THAT IN.

AND IT SAYS RIGHT ON HERE THAT CITY COUNCIL BLUFFS AND SURROUNDING COUNTY AGENCIES PRIORITIZE TNR RATHER THAN CALLING OR BRINGING FERAL CATS INTO SHELTERS.

THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS THERE NOW BEFORE YOU GUYS EVEN PASS THAT.

BUT IF YOU LOOKED AT ANOTHER GOOGLE SEARCH, IT SAYS THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFFS HAS BEEN CONSIDERING TRAP-NEUTER RETURN.

SO IF YOU LOOK UP ON GOOGLE TWICE, IT'S UNSURE OF THE POLICY FOR COUNCIL BLUFFS.

AND I FEEL SINCE WE'RE PART OF THE METRO AREA, BASICALLY OMAHA, IF THEY HAVE A TRAP-NEUTER RELEASE PROGRAM, WE ALSO SHOULD, TOO.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S LIKE WE'RE KIND OF ONE BIG COMMUNITY.

AND IF THEY GOT THAT MANY CATS, WE DEFINITELY HAVE THAT MANY CATS, YOU KNOW.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ON IT.

THANK YOU.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU FOLKS DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

AND LIKE I SAID, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ANY OF THE CATS IN MY AREA.

IF THEY'RE ABLE TO CATCH THEM OR SHE'S ABLE TO HELP ME TO CATCH THE MOTHER CAT, THEN I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM SPAYING IT AND RETURNING IT TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE SHE WILL STAY THERE.

AND I KNOW THEY SAY THAT STRAY CATS LIVE ONE TO THREE YEARS.

SHE'S GOING ON EIGHT YEARS OLD NOW.

AND SHE HAS FIVE, AT LEAST THREE TIMES A YEAR, MINIMUM.

I MEAN, THIS CAT DON'T SLOW DOWN.

AND YOU'LL NEVER CATCH HER.

SHE WON'T GO NEAR A TRAP.

BUT I HAVE HOPE, YOU KNOW.

SO, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU AT LEAST GIVING US, YOU KNOW, THE CHANCE.

PERFECT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? MY NAME IS JENNIFER HARRELL, H-A-R-R-I-L-L, 1407 AVENUE B.

I WAS HERE FOR THE LAST MEETING, SO I'M GLAD THAT YOUR OPINIONS HAVE CHANGED A LITTLE BIT.

BUT AS A CITIZEN OF COUNCIL BLUFFS FOR THE LAST 18 YEARS, I FIGURED MAYBE MY OPINION MIGHT HOLD A LITTLE BIT MORE WEIGHT THAN SOME OF THE PEOPLE FROM OTHER AREAS.

I LIVE RIGHT IN THE CENTER OF COUNCIL BLUFFS.

YOU DON'T ALWAYS SEE THE CATS DURING THE DAYTIME, OUT AT NIGHT.

YOU HEAR THE CATS FIGHTING.

IN FACT, IN NOVEMBER, I HAD A KITTEN SHOW UP ON MY DOORSTEP, AND WE TOOK HER IN TO SEE IF WE COULD FIND A HOME FOR HER AND SEE IF SHE WAS MISSING FROM SOMEBODY'S.

BUT IF YOU EVER LOOK AT THE LOST PETS OF COUNCIL BLUFFS, A MAJORITY OF THE CATS OUTSIDE THAT PEOPLE HAVE SPOTTED AND TAKEN PICTURES OF ARE NOT ANYBODY'S CATS.

SO WE TOOK HER AND KEPT HER, AND SEVEN WEEKS LATER, SHE HAD THREE KITTENS.

THAT IS FOUR CATS THAT WE KEPT FROM THE STREETS, AND I FOUND HOMES FOR THE KITTENS.

BUT THAT'S FOUR CATS THAT WE

[02:40:01]

THEY CAN HAVE AS MANY GIRLS AS THEY WANT.

SO IF THEY MULTIPLY THE SAME WAY AS WHAT SHE HAS WITNESSED, THEN THAT'S A LOT OF CATS THAT WE JUST KEPT OFF THE STREETS.

I REALLY HOPE THAT YOU DO TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE IT IS AN ISSUE, ESPECIALLY IN THE CENTER OF COUNCIL BLUFFS.

SO I DO APPRECIATE THE HUMAN SOCIETY AND ALL OF THE SPAY AND NEUTERS AND THE LOCAL RESCUES FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT THEY DO, BECAUSE THIS IS TIRELESS WORK THAT WE DON'T RECOGNIZE ALL THE TIME BECAUSE WE AREN'T THERE TO EXPERIENCE IT.

SO I REALLY DO HOPE THAT YOU GUYS DO DECIDE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND PASS THIS TODAY TO BE ABLE TO HAPPEN.

AND IF IN A YEAR YOU DON'T SEE THE NUMBERS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE, I'D SAY THAT YOU SHOULD MAYBE GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME, BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO GET THESE ANIMALS AND SEE THE RESULTS THAT THEY NEED.

I THINK THAT A YEAR MIGHT BE JUMPING THE GUN JUST A LITTLE BIT, BUT, I MEAN, HOPEFULLY THOSE NUMBERS WILL SHOW SOME IMPROVEMENT.

IF IT'S NOT ENOUGH, PLEASE GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE LISTENING TO THE JUSTICE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? OKAY.

BEFORE WE TAKE OUR VOTE, I'D JUST LIKE TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT WE ARE IN AN OFFICIAL BUSINESS, SO NO CHEERING, CLAPPING, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

APPRECIATE THAT.

ALL RIGHT.

MOTION TO APPROVE? WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

BUT NOW, THAT WAS THE MOTION TO AMEND IT.

NOW THEY NEED THE MOTION TO APPROVE IT, PER JAKE.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

[7.A) Ordinance 6685 Ordinance to amend Chapter 3.12 Alarm Systems of the 2025 Municipal Code of Council Bluffs, Iowa, by amending Section 3.12.040 "Registration Application Fee-Termination and Renewal". ]

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING.

ORDINANCE 6685, AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 3.12, ALARM SYSTEMS, BY AMENDING SECTION 3.12.040, REGISTRATION, APPLICATION, FEE, TERMINATION, AND RENEWAL.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ANYONE FROM THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC? ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ANY INTEREST IN WAVING THIRD? MOTION TO WAVE THIRD.

SECOND.

OKAY.

[7.B) Ordinance 6686 Ordinance to amend Chapter 4.20 Animal Control of the 2025 Council Bluffs Municipal Code by amending Sections 4.20.010 "Administration and Enforcement", 4.20.020 “Definitions-Animal Control”, and 4.20.132 “Administrative Appeal Procedure”.       ]

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ORDINANCE 6686, AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 4.20, ANIMAL CONTROL OF THE 2025 MUNICIPAL CODE, BY AMENDING SECTION 4.20.010, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, 4.20.020, DEFINITIONS ANIMAL CONTROL, AND 4.20.132, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL PROCEDURE.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE COUNCIL, OR EXCUSE ME, ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL? ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION TO WAVE THIRD.

SECOND.

CAN WE WAVE THIRD ON THAT ONE? OKAY.

ALL OF THESE.

THESE ARE ALL ORDINANCE ON SECOND.

IT SAYS, I KNOW, I WAS CONFUSED TOO.

IT SAYS EIGHT, NOT SEVEN.

THEY'RE ALL SEVEN A, B, C, D.

OKAY, GOT YA.

THAT'S WHERE I WAS CONFUSED.

THAT'S WHY I WOULDN'T BE LIKE, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? WE CAN'T DO THAT.

THEY'RE ALL ORDINANCES ON SECOND.

ALL RIGHT, PERFECT.

YOU'RE CORRECT.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND.

MOTION TO SECOND TO WAVE THIRD, RIGHT? ANY DISCUSSION

[7.C) Ordinance 6687 Ordinance to amend Chapter 4.20 Animal Control by amending Sections 4.20.083 “Potentially Dangerous Dog Designation” and 4.20.084 “Dangerous Dog Designation”.]

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ORDINANCE 6687, ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 4.20 ANIMAL CONTROL BY AMENDING SECTIONS 4.083, POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG DESIGNATION, AND 4.20.084, DANGEROUS DOG DESIGNATION.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION TO WAVE THIRD.

SECOND.

[7.D) Ordinance 6688 Ordinance to amend Chapter 4.20 Animal Control by repealing Section 4.20.128 “Seizure/Destruction Of Animal”, by amending Section 4.20.020 “Definitions-Animal Control” and by amending and retitling Section 4.20.120 “Keeping of Vicious Animals Prohibited-Proceedings to Determine-Seizure And/Or Destruction Authorized” to be titled “Keeping of Vicious Animals Prohibited”.]

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ORDINANCE 6688, AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 4.20 ANIMAL CONTROL BY REPEALING SECTION 4.20.128, SEIZURE, DESTRUCTION OF ANIMALS, AND BY AMENDING SECTION 4.20.020, DEFINITIONS ANIMAL CONTROL, AND BY AMENDING AND RETITLING SECTION 4.20.120, KEEPING VICIOUS ANIMALS PROHIBITED,

[02:45:01]

MOTION TO BE TITLED KEEPING OF VICIOUS ANIMALS PROHIBITED.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SOMETHING THAT KIND OF, I THINK, GOT OVERSHADOWED LAST MEETING, OR TWO MEETINGS AGO, RATHER, BECAUSE WE HAD A SPECIAL, WAS THAT SOME OF THESE CHANGES THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN, AS JAKE POINTED OUT, WERE IN GETTING THE ORDINANCES PUT TOGETHER IN A CONCISE FASHION.

WE HAD CONFLICTING DIFFERENT PIECES HERE, WHERE SOMETIMES WE HAD AN APPEALS PROCESS, IF I RECALL, THAT ALLOWED FOR THE DESTRUCTION, POSSIBLY, OF AN ANIMAL PRIOR TO A TIME SET ON THAT APPEALS PROCESS.

SO THIS, AND YOU CAN SPEAK TO IT IF YOU'D LIKE QUICKLY, JUST THAT IT GETS ALL THAT KIND OF OUT OF THE LINE AND GETS IT ALL SQUARED AWAY HOW IT SHOULD BE.

YEAH, WITH THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY, THERE WAS TWO SEPARATE CODE SECTIONS, ONE OF WHICH SAID THE PERSON HAD TO DESTROY THE ANIMAL, AND THE OTHER CODE SECTION SAID THAT WE IMMEDIATELY SEIZED THE ANIMAL AND DESTROYED IT.

SO IT JUST KIND OF LINES THAT ALL UP, AND IT DOES FIX THE APPEALS PROCESS AND PAUSES THE TIMELINE, BECAUSE THERE'S A 10-DAY QUARANTINE PERIOD BEFORE WE CAN DESTROY IT.

SO IT PAUSES THAT WHILE THE APPEAL IS ONGOING, AS WELL.

WHEREAS IT SOUNDS LIKE, AS YOU WERE SAYING BEFORE, IT COULD HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN DESTROYED BEFORE AN APPEAL WOULD HAVE FINISHED.

YES.

WHICH, AGAIN, ALL OF THE ANIMAL BOOKS ALREADY LEFT, SO.

OKAY.

BUT AT LEAST WE'RE LOOKING AT IT.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL? ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS MATTER? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

[7.E) Ordinance 6690 Ordinance to amend Chapter 1.09 "Chief Executive Officer" of the Municipal Code of Council Bluffs by renaming Chapter 1.09 to “City Administration and Organization,” renaming Sections 1.09.010 and 1.09.020 within Chapter 1.09, relocating without amending or altering the substantive language of Sections 1.09.010 and 1.09.020 to Section 1.09.030(A), and expanding Chapter 1.09 by adding new sections to better delineate the administrative organization of the city.   ]

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON WAIVING THIRD? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ORDINANCE 6690, AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 1.09, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF COUNCIL BLUFFS, BY RENAMING CHAPTER 1.09 TO CITY ADMINISTRATION AND ORGANIZATION, RENAMING SECTIONS 1.09.010 AND 1.09.020, WITHIN CHAPTER 1.09, RELOCATING WITHOUT AMENDING OR ALTERING THE SUBSTANTIVE LANGUAGE OF SECTIONS 1.09.010 AND 1.09.020 TO SECTION 1.09.030A, AND EXPANDING CHAPTER 1.09 BY ADDING 1.09 BY ADDING NEW SECTIONS TO BETTER DELINEATE THE ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF THE CITY.

MOTION TO APPROVE? SECOND.

AND I HOPE I DON'T HAVE TO READ THAT AGAIN.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS MATTER? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION TO WAIVE THIRD.

SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON WAIVING THIRD?

[8.A) Resolution 26-215 (Continued from 6-8-26) Resolution authorizing wage increases for the Council Bluffs Fire Supervisory employees for the period of July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027.]

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY, SO WE HAVE RESOLUTION 26-215, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING WAGE INCREASE FOR THE COUNCIL BLUFFS FIRE SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2026 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2027.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE TO THE NEXT MEETING.

JULY 13TH.

YEP.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION AT STUDY SESSION.

I WAS ON THE PHONE, BUT I LISTENED IN AND WEIGHED IN A LITTLE BIT.

ONE, WE'RE NOT FINISHED TODAY WITH THE FIRE UNION NEGOTIATIONS FOR THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY, BUT IN PERTAINING TO THE NEXT ONE AS WELL, WE'VE JUST GOT A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT I THINK A LOT OF US ARE SEEKING ANSWERS FOR.

SO I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION FOR THE ENTIRE CITY THAT WE DO A LITTLE BIT MORE, HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO WEIGH IN ON THESE THINGS.

I WOULD AGREE.

I THINK THERE WAS SOME GOOD QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP TODAY THAT REQUIRED SOME ANSWERS BEFORE WE MOVED FORWARD TO SAY YES OR NO ON CERTAIN THINGS OR WHERE WE WERE GOING UNTIL WE GET THAT INFORMATION.

WE DIDN'T FEEL WE COULD MAKE A STRONG, SOLID DECISION AT THIS TIME.