Jul 27, 2026 City Council

[00:00:06]

FIRST UP ON STUDY SESSION, WE HAVE BRENDA MEYERING HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE IOWA WEST FOUNDATION CYCLE TWO GRANTS.

GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS HOT OFF THE PRESS. IN FACT THE PRESS HASN'T SEEN IT YET.

SO YOU'RE THE FIRST. SO I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING TARDY WITH IT, BUT LAST WEEK, THE BOARD APPROVED $4.6 MILLION IN GRANTS AND INITIATIVES. AS USUAL, JUST RUNNING THROUGH A FEW OF THESE.

SO WE'VE ALLOCATED $500,000 TOWARDS THE PROJECT THAT WE'RE WORKING ON COLLECTIVELY WITH THE CITY AND WITH THE CHAMBER, WHAT WE'RE CALLING GROWING CB, JUST SO WE CAN BE KIND OF FLEXIBLE AND AVAILABLE AS THINGS COME UP.

AN EXAMPLE IS, AS WE FOUND OUT ABOUT SOME OTHER COMMUNITY EVENTS THAT WERE GOING ON, WE WERE ABLE TO GIVE THE CITY SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDS SO THAT THE CITY COULD SUPPORT THE JULY 30TH EVENT AS SOMETHING THAT THEY WANTED TO BE INVOLVED WITH.

SO THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO BE ON TOP OF, AS OPPOSED TO MAKING PEOPLE WAIT THREE MONTHS IN CASE THEY'RE HAVING AN EVENT MORE QUICKLY. I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THE $62,500 TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY THAT IS SPECIFICALLY TO ENGAGE NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION, REALLY FOCUSED ON WEST OF DOWNTOWN. ON THE SECOND PAGE.

THERE'S A PARAGRAPH THAT STARTS OUT ROUNDING OUT THE CYCLE TWO GRANTS THAT FOCUS ON RETAINING TALENT.

SO ONE OF THOSE IS STARS, WHICH WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR, I THINK SOMETHING LIKE 30 YEARS NOW, CONTINUING TO WORK ON THE STARS SCHOLARSHIP, WHICH IS REALLY INTENDED FOR SINGLE PARENT FAMILIES SO THEY CAN GO BACK AND FINISH OUT WHATEVER SCHOOLING SEEMS APPROPRIATE UP TO AND INCLUDING A BACHELOR'S DEGREE.

AND THEN ALSO IOWA WESTERN SKILLS FOR SUCCESS.

WE HAVE COLLECTIVELY BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO HELP EMPLOYERS UPSKILL AND RESKILL WORKFORCES.

AND I THINK THAT IOWA WESTERN HAS REALLY FIGURED OUT A PROCESS.

THEY'RE DELIVERING SOME REALLY GOOD RESULTS ON THAT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE LIST CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE IS MAKING ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS AT CHILDREN'S SQUARE. I THINK THAT IT WAS, IT WAS HARD TO LOSE THE INDEPENDENCE OF THAT ORGANIZATION, BUT CHILD SAVING HAS REALLY COME IN AND DONE SOME GOOD WORK THERE. I THINK THEY'VE EXPANDED THE SERVICES THAT THEY'RE OFFERING, AND THEY'RE DOING SOME OF THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THAT REALLY NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED ON THE CAMPUS. WE CONTINUE WITH THE GREEN HILLS AREA EDUCATION AGENCY, $1.35 MILLION FOR PRESCHOOL IN POTTAWATTAMIE COUNTY.

THAT IS TO SUPPLEMENT SOME OF THE SCHOOL FUNDS SO THAT THEY EVERY SCHOOL DISTRICT IN POTTAWATTAMIE COUNTY CAN HAVE A FULL DAY, FOUR-YEAR-OLD PRESCHOOL IF THEY CHOOSE. ALMOST ALL OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS PARTICIPATE, AND ABOUT A MILLION OF THAT $1.3 MILLION GOES TO COUNCIL BLUFFS SCHOOL DISTRICT BECAUSE WE ALSO CONSIDER THE LEVEL OF NEED. SO EVERY SCHOOL DISTRICT GETS AT LEAST ONE CLASSROOM, AND THEN WE DISBURSE THE REST OF IT BASED ON ECONOMICS.

ALSO A NEW PROGRAM IN COUNCIL BLUFFS SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

IOWA LEGAL AID HAS THIS FUNCTIONING IN SOME OTHER COMMUNITIES.

THEY'VE APPROACHED COUNCIL BLUFFS SCHOOL DISTRICT. OFTENTIMES, EDUCATORS WILL IDENTIFY THAT A CHILD OR CHILDREN ARE HAVING SOME CHALLENGES AT HOME.

AND THIS PUTS IOWA LEGAL AID SCHOOL BASED ATTORNEY WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS SO THAT THOSE REFERRALS CAN HAPPEN DIRECTLY SO THAT A FAMILY CAN, SO THAT A STUDENT CAN BE IDENTIFIED AND FAMILIES CAN COME IN AND GET HELP, ESPECIALLY WITH HOUSING AND RETAINING HOUSING.

NEBRASKA PHILANTHROPIC TRUST REGIONAL FIRST RESPONDER EDUCATION AND TRAINING CENTER.

THIS IS OF COURSE A NEBRASKA BASED FACILITY, BUT IT IS GOING TO BE THE BEST IN THE REGION BY FAR.

WE CONSULTED WITH THE CHIEF DAVIS AND CHIEF JAMES.

BOTH WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT. IT ALLOWS RELATIVELY CLOSE ACCESS TO TRAINING THAT IS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT CAN BE OFFERED LOCALLY.

WHEN I WAS IN TEXAS WITH UNION PACIFIC, I WAS ON THE AN ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR TEXAS A&M, THEY HAVE THE PREMIER HAZMAT TRAINING IN THE COUNTRY, AND THIS ONE WILL. THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF STUDY AT A&M, AND I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO DO SOME THINGS THAT WILL REALLY PUT OUR METRO AREA ON THE MAP WITH TRAINING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. TOGETHER INC HAS BEEN DOING SOME REALLY GREAT WORK ON HOUSING STABILITY, ESSENTIALLY IDENTIFYING FOLKS THAT NEED EMERGENCY SUPPORT WITH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY, LESS THAN $2,000. OFTENTIMES, YOU CAN KEEP PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES, AND IF YOU CAN KEEP THEM OUT OF HOMELESSNESS, THAT IS THE SOLUTION ALL OF US WANT. AND THEN LAST THING, I'LL POINT TO THE COMMUNITY HOUSING ORGANIZATIONS, INCLUDING A COUPLE OF FOLKS FROM COUNCIL BLUFFS CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFFS. WE DO SCHOLARSHIP FOLKS TO PAY BOTH THE TUITION AND THE COST TO GO TO THOSE SUMMITS.

THIS IS THE IOWA HOUSING SUMMIT IN SEPTEMBER IN DES MOINES.

IT JUST IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING, TO CONNECT WITH SOME OF THE FOLKS WHO HAVE THE MONEY, TO MAKE SURE THEY KNOW ALL THE GREAT

[00:05:04]

SO THAT'S SORT OF A HIGH LEVEL REVIEW. ANY QUESTIONS? SINCE YOU'VE HAD ABOUT THREE MINUTES TO LOOK AT IT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU BRENDA IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING? I HAVE ONE THING ON.

ITEM ON THE AGENDA. ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THAT'S I'M LOOKING IT UP HERE.

I THINK IT'S F. IT HAS TO DO WITH NEIGHBORWORKS.

YEAH IT'S F. IT'S F SO WE'LL DO THE ENTIRE CONSENT AGENDA AND THEN WE'LL DO THE 26.255.

OKAY, PERFECT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING? OKAY. PUBLIC HEARINGS. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE ONE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE HAVE? CHRIS IS GOING TO COME UP AND JUST GIVE A QUICK REVIEW OF IT.

SO ITEM 5.A IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST OF A LOCAL BUILDER TO REPLAT ESSENTIALLY THREE AND A HALF LOTS THAT ARE BETWEEN 29 AND 30FT WIDE INTO TWO TRACKS THAT ARE 54FT WIDE IN ORDER TO BUILD TWO NEW HOMES ON THE PROPERTY.

SO THIS JUST CLEANS UP THREE AND A HALF LOTS AND GETS US TWO NEW BUILDABLE LOTS ON THE WEST END OF TOWN.

PERFECT. CHRIS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FOR TONIGHT? I THINK THAT'S IT.

6.A. JAKE. OKAY. SO.

UNDER OUR IOWA CODE, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REGULATE THE POSSESSION OF WEAPONS IF IT'S OTHERWISE LEGAL UNDER STATE LAW.

AND ACCORDING TO THIS DEFINITION OF POSSESS, MOST OF THESE WEAPONS ARE NOT THAT IS NOT REGULATED UNDER STATE LAW.

THE ONE THAT IS, IS OFFENSIVE WEAPONS. BUT THE PUNISHMENT UNDER STATE LAW IS A FELONY.

AND SO THAT'S LIKE THINGS LIKE EXPLOSIVES AND STUFF, AS OPPOSED TO THE SIMPLE, SIMPLE MISDEMEANOR PUNISHMENT HERE.

SO I FEEL LIKE IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE FOR THAT TO BE A FELONY.

SO WE JUST SHOULD GET RID OF THIS WHOLE THING.

THIS IS PART OF THE CLEANUP PROCESS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THROUGH ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS, RIGHT? YEAH. I MEAN, IT CAME UP THERE WAS THERE WAS AN INSTANCE WHERE IT WAS BROUGHT UP BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. AND THEN I LOOKED AT IT.

THEY HAD LOOKED AT IT BEFORE BECAUSE OF THE OPEN CARRY CHANGES.

AND THEY DID ADD LIKE AN EXCEPTION IN FOR FIREARMS, BUT I THINK THEY MISSED THE OR OTHER WEAPONS PART AND THEY SHOULD HAVE JUST GOTTEN RID OF THE WHOLE THING. GOTCHA. ANYTHING ELSE? JAKE ALSO HAS 8.A.

YES, WHICH I ASSUME THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ABOUT.

[LAUGHTER] AND THEN ALSO I CAN ALSO JUST DO QUICKLY.

9.A FOR MICHELLE SO SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO COME UP HERE.

THE ARBITRATION SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 1ST, THEY HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION WITHIN 15 DAYS.

SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUSH THAT OUT, IT SHOULD BE AT LEAST.

THE SECOND MEETING IN SEPTEMBER? SECOND MEETING IN SEPTEMBER WOULD BE WHAT I WOULD SAY, YEAH. SO IT'S 7? 24. SEPTEMBER 14TH, AND THE SECOND ONE IS THE 28TH.

OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE FOR JAKE? OKAY, BACK TO 6.B.

JOE, THIS ONE'S YOURS. YEAH CONCERNED WITH OUR SEWER WATER CAPACITY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

I'VE MADE REFERENCE MANY TIMES TO A CHANGE WE MADE A LITTLE OVER FIVE YEARS AGO.

WE MADE SOME CHANGES TO AFFECT HOW INDUSTRIAL USERS ARE BILLED OR CHARGED FOR THEIR USE OF OUR SEWER CAPACITY AND THEIR RESERVING IT AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AT THE TIME WE BROUGHT IT CLOSER TO WHAT JOHN Q.

PUBLIC, I'LL SAY PAYS AT YOUR AT YOUR HOUSE. BUT IT STILL WAS NOT IN LINE WITH WHAT THE REGULAR,

[00:10:02]

SO THIS IS DONE IN AN EFFORT TO. IN MANY, MANY YEARS AGO, THEY WERE CHARGED MUCH, MUCH LESS THAN WE WERE.

AND THAT WAS AN EFFORT TO BRING MORE INDUSTRIAL USERS TO TOWN.

AND WITH THE THINGS AS THEY ARE AT CURRENT, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH WE.

WE HAVE A A LOT OF INDUSTRIAL USERS THAT ARE COMING TO TOWN.

SO THAT NEED I DIDN'T FEEL EVEN FIVE YEARS AGO, WE SHOULD BE GIVING THEM A BIG BIGGER DISCOUNT THAN WHAT YOU OR I WOULD PAY FOR OUR PERSONAL HOME. SO THIS IS AN EFFORT TO JUST MAINLY BRING THEM IN LINE WITH US.

SO WE'RE ALL ON AN EVEN KEEL. THEY'LL, THEY NEED TO BE PAYING AS MUCH FOR THE SERVICE AS YOU OR I WOULD AT OUR HOUSE.

AND THEN OTHER DISCUSSIONS HAVE COME UP. I'VE MET WITH MATT COX BRIEFLY AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING SOME STUDIES AND WHEN WE GET THE STUDIES, THE STUDY THAT WE DID 6 YEARS AGO TO MAKE THE CHANGES 5 YEARS AGO, WE'RE DOING THAT AGAIN.

BECAUSE IT'S A THING WE DO EVERY 5 OR 6 YEARS TO, TO MAKE SURE WE'RE UP TO SPEED AND WE'RE COVERING ALL OF OUR COSTS FOR OUR, OUR UTILITIES. SO ANY, ANY CONVERSATION OR DISCUSSION OF THIS, I MEAN, WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO DISCUSS IT.

SO IF WE NEED TO INSTRUCT MATT AND HIS STAFF TO REACH OUT TO THE FOLKS DOING THAT STUDY, THEY CAN BE ABLE TO PRESENT US DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND THINGS WHEN THEY DO THAT. BUT AGAIN, THE MAIN PIECE HERE IS IT JUST, IT BRINGS THEM IN LINE WITH THE REST OF YOU AND I AT OUR HOUSE.

IN THE DISCUSSIONS OF BRINGING THEM WHEN TO MAKE THIS EFFECTIVE, WE, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW IF WE DID IT AT THE ONSET, YOU KNOW, SAY WE WERE TO PASS IT TODAY, THAT WOULD BE VERY HARD FOR, YOU KNOW, THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE AND WORLD TO KIND OF BUDGET SOME OF THAT.

SO WE PUSHED IT OUT TO THE BEGINNING OF THE, OF THE CALENDAR YEAR.

I'M OPEN TO DISCUSSION WITH, WITH THE REST OF YOU GUYS AND YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT, BUT IT WAS SOMETHING THAT KIND OF AFTER OUR CONVERSATIONS WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT A MONTH AND A HALF AGO, TWO MONTHS AGO, WE HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW ALL OF OUR SERVICES ARE BEING USED.

I THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME. AND ESPECIALLY TALKING WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ABOUT THE STUDIES THAT ARE GOING TO BE A GOOD TIME TO KIND OF HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AND MAKE SURE WE'RE, WE'RE ALL KIND OF ON THE SAME PAGE.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'VE GOT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM YOU GUYS OR THOUGHTS? I GUESS. I'M JUST CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, IF WE STARTED THIS FIVE YEARS AGO AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MAIN GOAL WAS TO TRY AND BRING THIS IN LINE WITH.

AND MATT CAN SPEAK TO THIS POSSIBLY MORE, BUT WAS TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT IS IT COSTING US? WHAT ARE THINGS COSTING US? WHAT DO WE NEED TO BE DOING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE OFFSETTING THOSE COSTS PROPERLY? RIGHT? BECAUSE THINGS CHANGE OVER TIME.

AT THAT TIME WHEN WE DISCUSSED IT, WE BROUGHT IT UP TO, I BELIEVE, AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

WE BROUGHT THEM UP TO 80% OF OF WHAT SAY YOU OR I WOULD PAY FOR SEWAGE RIGHT AT OUR HOUSE.

RIGHT? SO BECAUSE BEFORE, IF I REMEMBER, I WANT TO SAY IT WAS LIKE 60% OR WAS IT 40? IT WAS SIGNIFICANTLY.

THEY.

THEY, THEY THEN RETRACTED BACK BECAUSE WE SAID YOU'LL HAVE TO PAY FOR A PERCENTAGE.

WE DID NOT. WE STILL DIDN'T MAKE THEM PAY FOR FULL TILT. SO IF THEY RESERVED 1,000,000YD³ OF WATER OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND THEY ONLY USED HALF THAT, THEY PAID FOR THE HALF, AND THEN THEY PAID A PORTION OF THAT WHICH THEY DIDN'T USE.

BUT AGAIN, SO WE. BETWEEN EVERYONE ELSE IN THE CITY THAT PAYS FOR AT THEIR HOUSE, THEY PAY FOR WHAT THEY USE.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THE INDUSTRIAL GUYS, WE GIVE THEM A DISCOUNT BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO ATTRACT.

AND THEN WE WOULD LET THEM RESERVE. AND THEN ON THAT WHAT THEY RESERVE IF THEY DIDN'T USE IT, WE GAVE THEM ANOTHER DISCOUNT ON TOP OF IT. SO THEY'RE GETTING DOUBLE DISCOUNTED AND AND IT'S TAKEN UP SPACE AND WHAT WE HAVE USABLE FOR OTHER, OTHER USERS, RIGHT? AT A CERTAIN CAPACITY, LIKE WE ONLY HAVE X AMOUNT, RIGHT.

AND THEN THE DNR WOULD HAVE TO SIGN ANY MAJOR USERS HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR, FOR USE OF THAT SEWER.

RIGHT? SO AND THAT'S ALL THAT WE ADMINISTER THAT FOR THE IOWA DNR.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT DID IT WAS THAT PIECE OF IT WAS VERY EFFECTIVE IN GETTING THEM TO REASSESS THEIR NEEDS.

AND THEN WAIT A MINUTE. IF I GOT TO PAY FOR THIS, DO I REALLY NEED TO RESERVE IT? MAYBE NOT.

BUT AGAIN, IN THE ALL DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD, WE'RE AT A PLACE IN TIME WHERE I FEEL THAT IT'S IT'S THEY SHOULD BE PAYING AS MUCH AS YOU OR I DO AT OUR HOUSE.

[00:15:02]

OUTSIDE THE CITY, WE'RE 36%. AGAIN, KIND OF LIKE WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.

AT SOME POINT, WE GET TO A LEVEL WHERE IT'S LIKE, OKAY [LAUGHTER]. WHEN DO WE STOP? CORRECT. WE ONLY HAVE SO MUCH CAPACITY. AND THAT THAT'S A TRUE STATEMENT.

YEARS INSIDE THE CITY ON THESE USERS. SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS A PLAN.

SO.

YEAH. WE'VE HAD RAISES INCREMENTALLY OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

AND NOW WE'RE AT THE END OF THAT. IF YOU RECALL, WHEN MATT WAS SPEAKING ON THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN LAST MEETING MEETING BEFORE WE'VE, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THAT AND WE'RE NOW AT WHERE WE WERE AND WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY INCREASES.

AND THIS IS NOW YEAR. THIS IS YEAR SIX, I BELIEVE.

SO NOTHING HAS HAPPENED IN THIS YEAR. AND WE WON'T HAVE THAT STUDY BACK UNTIL SOMETIME IN 2027.

OKAY. NOW AT THAT TIME, ANY CHANGES WE WILL MAKE AT THAT TIME WILL.

WE HAVE TO. AND THIS ISN'T WORKING WITH LEGAL.

WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT ANYTHING THAT WE DO WITH, WITH SOME SORT OF BACKING AS TO WHY WE'RE DOING IT.

RIGHT. OKAY. AND BY MAKING IT EVEN, IT MAKES IT, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, VERY SIMPLISTIC, THAT, HEY, WE'RE ALL PAYING THE SAME PRICE IS AN EVEN PLAYING FIELD FOR YOU AND I AT OUR AS OUR HOUSE, AS IT IS FOR YOU AND YOUR BUSINESS THAT COMES TO TOWN WHEN THE STUDY COMES BACK, IF THEY SAY, HEY, THESE ARE THE COSTS INCURRED THAT WILL GIVE US MUCH MORE DIRECTION.

THIS IS JUST AN EFFORT TO, IN TODAY'S TIME RIGHT NOW TO MAKE TO KIND OF.

IF WE GET THE RESULTS IN MID 27 AGAIN, JUST LIKE I PUSHED THIS OUT TO THE SIX, EIGHT MONTHS TO THE END OF THE.

WE'RE SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT. WE WOULDN'T AT THAT POINT MAKE ANY CHANGES UNTIL POSSIBLY 2028, EITHER ANNUAL YEAR OR FISCAL YEAR, BOTH OF WHICH PUSH US OUT INTO, YOU KNOW, TWO YEARS FROM NOW.

SO AGAIN, IT'S A NOT A HUGE PIECE OF IT. BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE SHOULD BE PAYING THE SAME AS WE SHOULD ALL BE ON THE SAME PLAYING FIELD, I GUESS IS MY POSITION. DID WE RUN ANY NUMBERS OF IF THEY'RE PAYING, IF THEY WERE PAYING THE SAME AS US TODAY, INDUSTRIAL USERS VERSUS LIKE WHAT THEY'RE PAYING RIGHT NOW? THAT I, I DID NOT. PERSONALLY AT LEAST. IS THAT.

DO YOU KNOW? YEAH. NO THAT'S FINE. I ASSUME. YEAH. HE KNOWS THE NUMBERS IF THEY'RE PAYING FULL TILT VERSUS.

I'M GOING TO SPEAK IN GENERAL TERMS BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU NUMBERS. YEAH NO. THE SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USERS, WHICH ARE GENERALLY OUR LARGEST USERS IN THE COMMUNITY.

NOT ALWAYS, BUT THERE'S SOME OTHER CRITERIA THAT MAKES THEM A SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER BESIDES JUST VOLUME.

BUT FOR REFERENCE, THE LARGEST USER, THERE'S.

JUST TAKING THE MOST RECENT BILLING. SO THE JULY BILLING, IF WE WERE TO GO TO THE NEW RATE, THEIR BILL WOULD INCREASE $31,000. AND CHANGE THAT MONTH.

FOR TWO MONTHS? FOR ONE MONTH.

THEIR BILL EACH MONTH. THEIR BILL? INDUSTRIAL USER, YEAH.

SO THE TOTAL FOR THE ALL OF THE SIGNIFICANT USERS WOULD BE ROUGHLY $70,000 MORE PER MONTH.

OKAY. BASED ON THE NEW RATE PROPOSED. JUST UNDER HALF A MILLION PER YEAR YEAH. SO NOT QUITE A MILLION.

I MEAN, YEAH, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN STAFF THIS MORNING BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, IT WASN'T ON THE AGENDA LAST WEEK FOR US TO REVIEW.

LAST WEEK? WE HAD TO HAVE IT.

LAST MONDAY. NO, NO, NO, YEAH, CORRECT. RIGHT.

SO WE TALKED ABOUT IT.

SPEAKERS] SO SORRY. NO THAT'S OKAY. I JUST THE. CLARIFICATION. LAST WEEK ON WEDNESDAY WHEN IT WENT PUBLIC, IT WAS OUT. WE TALK THROUGH ALL THE ITEMS THE MONDAY BEFORE.

AND SO WE TALK THROUGH THIS ONE THIS MORNING.

AND I KNOW ROGER AND JOE, YOU WERE ON THE COUNCIL THE LAST TIME, AND THAT THERE SEEMED TO BE QUITE A BIT OF PUSHBACK FROM THE INDUSTRIES AT THAT TIME FOR THE RAISING OF THE AMOUNT. RIGHT? SO I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT SUPPORTS BUSINESSES COMING INTO TOWN, WHAT WOULD NEGATIVELY SUPPORT BUSINESSES FROM COMING INTO TOWN.

[00:20:04]

IT SEEMS TO ME THIS IS A CATCH UP PERIOD, RIGHT? WE KNEW WE WERE OUT OF LINE. WE'RE TRYING TO CATCH UP DURING THIS PERIOD, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE GOT TO LOOK TO THE FUTURE AND SAY, OKAY, AT WHAT POINT ARE WE AT THAT LEVEL WHERE WE THINK WE NEED TO BE? OBVIOUSLY, WHEN THAT COMES TO PASS HERE IN THE NEXT YEAR OR SO.

THEY'RE DOING THOSE THAT RESEARCH. NOW, WHEN WE LOOK AT COMPARABLES OR OTHER CITIES GIVING A 30%, 40%, 50% DISCOUNT TO INDUSTRIAL USERS, ARE THEY ARE THEY PAYING THE SAME AS WE ARE? OR WHAT ARE? WHAT ARE OTHER CITIES DOING AROUND US, AROUND IOWA? IT VARIES ALL OVER. AND I DO WANT TO BRING UP ONE THING SO RELATED TO MR. REW'S COMMENT ABOUT THE 55% OR BASICALLY IT WAS EIGHT, 8.7% INCREASE EACH YEAR OVER THE FIVE YEARS.

AND THAT WAS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL USERS.

OKAY. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WHEN WE STARTED THAT WE WERE THE LOWEST OR ONE OF THE LOWEST IN EVERY CATEGORY ACROSS THE STATE OF IOWA.

SURE. SO EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE.

EXACTLY. COMPARED TO OUR PEERS, WE WERE STILL BELOW MOST OF THE OTHER CITIES IN IOWA AND WE STILL MAINTAINED TODAY. I LOOKED AT THE MOST RECENT DATA TODAY.

WE'RE STILL IN THE LOWER HALF IN EVERY CATEGORY.

GOTCHA. SO WE'RE NOT AT THE BOTTOM, WHICH I DON'T THINK THAT'S OUR GOAL IS TO BE AT THE BOTTOM.

RIGHT. BUT WE ARE IN THE BOTTOM HALF IN EVERY CATEGORY.

BUT MOST COMMUNITIES ARE ALSO IMPLEMENTING INCREASES.

SO EVEN THOUGH WE INCREASE THEY ALSO INCREASE.

SO WE'RE NOT JUMPING TO THE TOP. THAT'S A GREAT POINT BECAUSE IT DOES IT SKEWS THE PERCENTAGE WHEN YOU STARTED SO LOW TO BEGIN WITH, IT'S LIKE, OKAY, WHEN DO YOU STOP? ONCE YOU'RE THERE.

SO I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. WELL, AND LIKE YOU SAID, WE DON'T WANT TO BE AT THE BOTTOM, BUT I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY WANT TO BE AT THE TOP. WE WANT TO GET TO BE FAIR COME AND BE FAIR TO THE CITIZENS. CORRECT. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT ASKING I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD.

DO IT TOMORROW. DO IT. DO IT TOMORROW. I'M NOT SAYING THEY SHOULD.

IT SHOULD EVEN BE AT THIS POINT. I'M NOT EVEN SAYING IT SHOULD BE ANY MORE THAN THAN IT IS FOR ANY NUMBER OF THESE FOLKS IN, YOU KNOW, IN THE CITY. BUT AS THINGS AGAIN, IN MY OPINION, IS THAT WE ALL SHOULD BE ON THIS PAYING THE SAME AMOUNT.

YOU KNOW? IT'S A LITTLE VARIABLE FOR THE INDUSTRY BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER PARTS THAT GO INTO THEIR ULTIMATELY WHAT THEY PAY EACH MONTH, INCLUDING SURCHARGES FOR THE OTHER COMPONENTS WITHIN THE LOADING FACTORS OF SEWER.

BUT ACROSS THE BOARD, IT'S GENERALLY AROUND 13% IS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

IF YOU WANT TO PUT A NUMBER TO THE INCREASE. OKAY.

DOES IT MATTER WHAT TYPE OF INDUSTRY IT IS? OR DO WE JUST SAY INDUSTRIAL USER? USERS. CORRECT. JUST HOW.

WE CLASSIFY THEM AS SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USERS.

YEAH. OKAY. BUT THE TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT THEY ARE, WE DON'T GET INTO? I THINK I DON'T THINK WE COULD.

CLASSIFIES THEM AS THAT. OKAY. IT IT'S NOT RELATED TO THE ACTUAL BUSINESS, BUT OBVIOUSLY CERTAIN BUSINESSES CREATE OR HEAVIER WATER USERS CREATE MORE FLOW. THEY TEND TO BE IN THAT CATEGORY, BUT IT'S NOT DEFINED THAT WAY.

GOTCHA. OKAY. CAN YOU. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS ONLY THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE.

CAN YOU GET US SOME COMPARABLES LIKE WE DO WITH WAGES? RIGHT. LIKE OTHER CITIES ARE GIVING, GIVING A 10% DISCOUNT OR 50%, JUST SO WE KNOW? IF IT'S NOT, I DON'T WANT TO PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO IT. BUT IF SIOUX CITY SAYS, HEY, WE'RE GIVING THEM A 10% DISCOUNT AND WE'RE AT 30% OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, RIGHT? LIKE WE'RE BRINGING IT UP TO 0%. I JUST WANT TO KNOW THAT.

SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY'S LOOKING AT COMING TO TOWN.

SURE. RIGHT. BUT THAT. I THINK, AS YOU SAID, IT'S AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOL, BUT I DO THINK.

WELL, AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I SAID, LOOK, I, THIS IS MY POSITION ON IT.

I REALLY WE TALKED BEFORE ABOUT HOW WE NEED TO START HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS.

SO I KIND OF THOUGHT, ALL RIGHT, WELL, LET'S START PUSHING SOME OF THESE CONVERSATIONS. LET'S HAVE THE. LET'S WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK? WHAT'S? ON. YOU KNOW. YEAH. YOU'RE RIGHT.

THEY SEE?

[00:25:03]

WE KEPT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO CLASSES.

CORRECT. WE DIDN'T REALLY TRY TO CLOSE THE GAP.

IN THE MOST RECENT ONE SIX YEARS AGO. WE DID TRY TO CLOSE THAT GAP, BUT WE.

WE FELT LIKE IT WAS TOO MUCH TO MAKE THEM EQUAL BECAUSE THEY WERE SO FAR APART TO START.

AND SO WHAT YOU SAW IS IN YEAR ONE, WE ACTUALLY DID A MUCH LARGER INCREASE ON THE INDUSTRY.

AND THEN WE YEARS TWO THROUGH FIVE WERE, WERE MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT WE DID ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.

THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE STAYED THE SAME THROUGH ALL FIVE YEARS, AND THAT BROUGHT THEM CLOSER BUT STILL SEPARATE.

WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE VIDEO. BUT I THINK I DO RECALL, LIKE YOU SAID, WE TALKED ABOUT BRINGING THEM EQUAL AT THE TIME.

CORRECT. WE JUST DIDN'T BECAUSE THEY WERE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A MASSIVE JUMP.

MASSIVE. SO LIKE YOU SAID, YEAR ONE, IT WAS BIG AND THEN IT WAS IN LINE.

BUT WE TALKED ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO DOING THAT, PUTTING THEM EQUAL.

SO THAT CONVERSATION HAS BEEN HAD. AND I, I DON'T RECALL HUGE PUSHBACK.

MAYBE I'M WRONG, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER ANYBODY COMING HERE BEING LIKE, WHAT THE HELL'S GOING ON? I MEAN, WE HAD 100 PEOPLE IN HERE FOR CATS. YEAH, [LAUGHTER] THERE WERE A FEW HERE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH CONVERSATION THEY HAD. [INAUDIBLE].

THEY MIGHT HAVE COME HERE AND LISTEN, BUT NOBODY GOT UP. I DON'T REMEMBER ANYBODY BEING LIKE, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? ATTORNEYS FROM SOME OF THESE BIG COMPANIES THAT ARE NATIONWIDE COMPANIES BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THE ONLY WAY THEY COMPETE FOR THEIR PARTICULAR OPERATION, SO MANY OF THEM, YOU KNOW, LIKE A LARGE CORPORATE ORGANIZATION, THEY HAVE PLANTS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.

EACH ONE OF THOSE PLANTS OPERATES AND COMPETES AGAINST THE OTHER PLANTS.

PART OF THAT COMES DOWN TO UTILITY COSTS. AND SO TO THEM, IT'S VERY SIGNIFICANT WHEN YOU CHANGE THEIR RATES.

UNDERSTOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. THANKS.

WHITNEY. THIS IS JUST THE SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE TO BRING THE COUNCIL BLUFFS CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION RULES INTO LINE WITH THE NEW STATE CHANGES.

ONE OF THOSE CHANGES IS THE APPOINTMENT TERM FOR COMMISSIONERS.

AND I SEE THAT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT THERE ARE I BELIEVE FIVE OF OUR CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION MEMBERS WHO ARE UP FOR REAPPOINTMENT AND HAVE ALL AGREED TO DO THAT.

AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY BRIEFLY THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY WHO VOLUNTEERS THEIR TIME. CITY GOVERNANCE RELIES VERY HEAVILY ON VOLUNTEERS.

AS COUNCIL MEMBER REW KNOWS, IT CAN BE AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF WORK FOR ZERO MONEY.

SO THANK YOU TO THEM FOR BEING WILLING TO DO THAT AND FOR TAKING ON WHAT WILL BE, AT THIS POINT, TWO-YEAR TERMS INSTEAD OF THREE. YOU'RE GETTING PAID NOW THOUGH, RIGHT? ARE YOU STILL VOLUNTEERING? THIS IS NOT VOLUNTEER.

IT'S VERY LUCRATIVE, [LAUGHTER] BUT IT IS NOT VOLUNTEER.

RIGHT, I FIGURED. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. [LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT.

WE ALREADY COVERED 8.A EIGHT, NINE THEN. OR EXCUSE ME, 9.A SO IT SOUNDS LIKE JAKE COVERED THAT.

SO B WOULD BE THE ADOPTING OF THE CITY COUNCIL RULES THAT WE DISCUSSED LAST COUNCIL MEETING.

9.B. 9.B I JUST WANT TO THANK MIMI AND JODI FOR PUTTING ALL THAT TOGETHER.

AND ALSO, I WANTED TO THANK ALL YOU GUYS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD.

I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD OPEN DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW BEST TO HANDLE THE MEETINGS IN THE, IN THE BEST WAY FOR EVERYBODY.

AND IT WAS NICE TO SEE EVERYBODY JUST KIND OF COME TOGETHER TO COMPROMISE ON CERTAIN THINGS AND SOME THINGS MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

AND WE HAD A NICE DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AND I APPRECIATE IT, YOU KNOW, HAPPENING THAT WAY.

BUT I ALSO APPRECIATE AFTER WE GOT DONE WITH OUR STUFF THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN MIMI AND JODI GOT TO DO THE HARD WORK AND PUT IT TOGETHER.

SO I WANTED TO THANK THEM FOR DOING THAT. SO YEAH, IT WAS, IT WAS A GOOD COLLABORATIVE CONVERSATION WITH DISAGREEMENTS, RESPECTFULLY. RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.

WE ALL WE ALL WANT SIMILAR THINGS. AND IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T READ THE RULES AFTER THIS MEETING, THE STUDY SESSION WILL NOW START AT 3:00 P.M.

INSTEAD OF 3:45. SO WE'LL MOVE IT UP JUST SO YOU JUST SO YOU GUYS KNOW, I DON'T I THINK A LOT OF YOU LEFT BY THE TIME THE REASON STEVE BROUGHT UP STARTING AT 3:00 IS SO SOME OF YOU GUYS ARE OUT OF HERE BEFORE FIVE BECAUSE THE WORK HOURS.

SO THAT'S THE REASON. SO WE'RE NOT KEEPING HERE AFTER WORK HOURS.

TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. WE TALKED ABOUT ENDING THE STUDY SESSION AT 5:00.

I DON'T THINK WE DECIDED THAT'S PROBABLY NOT THE BEST PLAN BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO HAVE LONGER CONVERSATIONS.

BUT STARTING THE STUDY SESSION EARLIER WAS A GOOD COMPROMISE.

[00:30:04]

I THINK WE SHOULD PUT IT ON THE PAPER AND FACEBOOK RIGHT NOW.

9.C AND ZACH IS ALSO ON VACATION. IF YOU GUYS DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE KIDS IN SCHOOL, IT'S DEAD WEEK THIS WEEK.

SO A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE ON VACATION THIS WEEK TAKING ADVANTAGE.

SO ZACH IS UP IN CANADA. BUT HE DID SEND A NOTE FOR THIS ONE.

THERE WERE THREE BIDS FOR THIS FLUID MECHANICAL BEING THE APPARENT LOW BID.

IT IS $27,500 OVER THE CIP. HOWEVER, HE DOES HAVE THREE OPTIONS OR TWO OPTIONS TO PAY FOR IT.

A VALUE ENGINEERING PROCESS HAS BEEN INITIATED TO IDENTIFY COST SAVINGS WITHOUT REDUCING THE INTENDED PROJECT SCOPE.

HE DOES HAVE ANOTHER PROJECT DOWN AT THE REX COMPLEX THAT'S GOING TO FINISH ABOUT $30,000 UNDER BUDGET SO WE COULD ALLOCATE THOSE MONIES AND IF NEEDED, HE IS CONFIDENT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO FIND. IDENTIFY OTHER FUNDS IN PARKS TO COVER ANY BUDGET DEFICIT IF NEEDED.

SO HE WANTED TO PASS ALONG THOSE NOTES TO THE COUNCIL THIS EVENING.

WELL, I DON'T THINK. I MEAN, WE WERE CLOSE IN THE CIP $27,000.

THE OTHER TWO BIDS WERE I MEAN, ONE WAS ALMOST DOUBLE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER.

SO I DON'T THINK IT'S OUT OF LINE. NO, I AGREE.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT ITEM? SO REGARDING THE APPLICATIONS FOR LIQUOR LICENSES, THE FIRST ONE ALIBI BAR IS THE LEVELS BAR ON THE 100 BLOCK.

WHICH IS.

WELL, IT'S THE OLD RODEO.

WHICH ONE? THAT'S. YEAH, IT WAS THE RODEO. BUT IT'S THAT LEVELS THAT'S ON THE CORNER.

NO. IT'S THE OLD RODEO. IT USED TO BE. BUT THEN IT WAS THE.

SO THEN IT WAS LEVELS WAS THE LEVELS. THE LAST GUY CAME IN HERE WAS LEVELS.

LAST GUY CAME IN HERE AND BEGGED AND PLEADED.

AND THEY DID SEND AN EMAIL. HE IS ON A PLANNED VACATION.

SO HE WANTED YOU ALL TO KNOW THAT THE INTENTION IS TO WORK WITH THE CITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT, LAW ENFORCEMENT, NEIGHBORING BUSINESSES AND THE COMMUNITY.

I DID MEET HIM ON THE JULY 3RD EVENT. HE IS INTERESTED IN JOINING THE 100 BLOCK ASSOCIATION.

BUT HE WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW HIS ABSENCE SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A LACK OF INTEREST.

HE JUST HAD A PREVIOUS COMMITMENT TO BE OUT OF TOWN TONIGHT.

AND HE CALLED TODAY AND SAID THAT HIS MANAGER IS COMING SHOWING UP TONIGHT SO.

JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW WHICH ONE THAT WAS. DID YOU SAY THEY WERE CONNECTED WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNERS JODI? WELL, HE'S BEEN IN THERE WITH HIM. I DON'T KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE HE DOESN'T WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE OLD GUY AND CUTTING TIES AND.

THEY'VE CUT TIES. HE HAD TO GET A NEW LIQUOR LICENSE. HE'S NOT JUST WORKING WITH HIM UNDER HIS LIQUOR LICENSE. HE HAD TO GET A NEW ONE. SO THAT'S WHY IT SAYS NEW UP THERE. AND THEY CHANGED THE NAME AND SUCH. AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY REASON TO DENY IT AT THIS POINT. FINE. OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT 10 A, B OR C? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THEN GOING BACK TO THE STUDY SESSION, AGENDA 1.C IS THE MAINTENANCE FUND DISCUSSION.

IF ANYBODY DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THIS DISCUSSION, YOU'RE WELCOME TO LEAVE. [LAUGHTER].

GIVING YOU THE OPPORTUNITY. NOT FAIR ROGER. ROGER WAS LEAVING.

NOT FAIR. I DIDN'T SEE YOU. I LOSE MYSELF OKAY. COME ON. SO THIS WAS BROUGHT AND PUT ON THE AGENDA.

SORRY, BRENDA. I DID NOT GET BACK TO YOU. WE PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA LATE THURSDAY AFTER SOME DISCUSSION.

DOUG HAD HAD SOME INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSIONS WITH BRENDA ON THIS CONVERSATION AND SOME INFORMATION WAS STARTING TO GET PASSED, SO WE FIGURED IT WOULD BE BEST JUST TO PUT IT ON SO WE COULD HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION.

THIS IS REGARDING THE MAINTENANCE FUND FOR THE RIVERFRONT PROJECTS.

THE PIER IN THE, IN THE BOARDWALK. DANIELLE, I'M GOING TO HAVE YOU COME UP JUST BECAUSE DANIELLE OBVIOUSLY HAD A FINANCE

[00:35:02]

IT WAS DISCUSSED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THE CITY NEED TO INVEST THIS MONEY? DANIELLE PROACTIVELY REACHED OUT TO OUR BOND COUNCIL? AUDITORS. IT WAS THE AUDITORS. AUDITORS. THANK YOU.

AUDITORS TO DISCUSS HOW WE SHOULD BE INVESTING THIS INFORMATION.

WE THEN DANIELLE, MYSELF, WHITNEY MET WITH TOM, PETE AND JOHN AND DISCUSSED WHAT OUR AUDITORS HAD SAID. I BELIEVE WE SENT THAT INFORMATION TO BRENDA AT SOME POINT IN TIME.

THEN IT WAS ASKED AGAIN FOR US TO LOOK, TO SEE COULD WE INVEST THAT MONEY IN A DIFFERENT WAY? AND I KNOW DOUG, AT SOME POINT IN TIME IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, YOU ASKED IF WE COULD KEEP PART OF IT HERE AT THE CITY AND INVEST IT HOW THE AUDITORS WANT AND THEN INVEST IT. THE OTHER PART IN THE WAY THAT JOHN AND PETE AND.

SORRY. JOHN, PETE AND TOM [LAUGHTER] WERE REQUESTING.

DANIELLE DID A FOLLOW UP CONVERSATION WITH OUR AUDITORS.

I SENT THAT INFORMATION ALONG TO YOU GUYS LAST WEEK.

THEY RECOMMENDED THAT WE KEEP IT AND INVEST AS WE HAD ALREADY VOTED ON AS A COUNCIL.

YOU GUYS VOTED ON AS A COUNCIL AS FAR AS HOW TO INVEST IT.

BUT BECAUSE THERE WERE SIDE CONVERSATIONS, WE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO BRING THIS TOPIC TO THE COUNCIL.

SO IF THERE WAS ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE, WE COULD HAVE THAT WITH EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM.

THAT WOULD BE ACCURATE. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, BRENDA, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

YOU KNOW, WE HAD YOU WERE AWARE WE'D ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, SO I WAS KIND OF SURPRISED IT WAS COMING BACK.

AND I KNOW THERE'S SOME, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE INVESTMENTS, RIGHT? THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO DO IT IN A CERTAIN WAY.

THE SAFEST WAY THAT IT CAN. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT SOMETIMES FROM THE OUTSIDE IT LOOKS LIKE, WELL, IT WOULD BE NICE MAYBE TO INVEST IN SOME OTHER THINGS OR MAYBE GET MORE BACK FOR YOUR MONEY.

AND I GET THAT FROM A BANK PERSPECTIVE. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT SIDE.

AND I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHAT YEAH, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP KIND OF THAT'S WHERE THAT'S KIND OF ORIGINATED FROM.

IS THAT RIGHT? WOULD THAT BE FAIR? BECAUSE WE THINK THERE.

MAYBE GET A LITTLE MORE INVESTMENT FOR WHAT WE HAD OR NO? THIS THING HAS BEEN AROUND THE BLOCK. CORRECT [LAUGHTER]. I THINK SO. SO THE AUDITORS ARE TELLING YOU THE SAFEST WAY IS TO KEEP IT IN BONDS.

I DON'T THINK ANYBODY COULD POSSIBLY QUESTION THAT. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

I THINK THE THE CONCERN IS THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT WHAT THIS MAINTENANCE FUND HAS TO DO IS PAY FOR MAINTENANCE FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. AND $2 MILLION IS NOT GOING TO GO VERY FAR IF IT'S NOT MAKING ANY MONEY, ANY, ANY INCOME OFF OF THE MONEY.

SO THE QUESTION THE IOWA WEST SWITCHED HOW WE'RE PAYING OUT OUR PLEDGE FOR THE RIVERFRONT SPECIFICALLY TO PAY THE CITY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WITH THE $2 MILLION MAINTENANCE FUND.

ORIGINALLY, THAT WASN'T GOING TO GET FUNDED UNTIL EVERYTHING WAS DONE, WHENEVER EVERYTHING IS DONE.

THAT WAS NOT GOING TO BE ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO MAKE ANY MONEY ON IT AT ALL.

SO WE SWITCHED IT AND WE SAID, WE'RE GOING TO FUND IT.

AS SOON AS YOU TAKE POSSESSION. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SOME INTEREST ON THAT BEYOND SIMPLE BOND.

I MEAN, YOU HAVE THE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE CARE OF THE CITY'S RESOURCES AND YOU WILL MAKE THE BEST DECISION ON THAT.

I THINK THE CONVERSATION THAT CAME BACK WAS. NOW THAT THERE ARE WARRANTIES ON EVERYTHING, AND THAT'S STILL KIND OF BEING FINALIZED.

BUT NOW. BUT THERE ARE GOING TO BE WARRANTIES.

THERE'S SOME THERE'S SOME FUNDS HELD IN RESERVE FOR THINGS THAT AREN'T COVERED BY THE WARRANTY, WHICH I THINK IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE CITY UNDERSTOOD.

THE AUDITORS ARE GIVING 100%, GIVING YOU CORRECT ADVICE ABOUT HOW IS THE SAFEST WAY TO PROTECT THIS FOR THE CITY.

THE SECONDARY QUESTION IS WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT COVERS THE COSTS THAT IT'S INTENDED TO COVER? AND SO THE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH DOUG WAS, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO SAY, LOOK, WE'RE GOING TO THE CITY IS GOING TO DECIDE WE NEED $1 MILLION LIQUID, AND WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THAT AVAILABLE EASILY ACCESSIBLE IN BONDS.

AND YOU'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, SET UP A SWEEP, WHATEVER IT IS THE CITY WANTS TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALWAYS HAVE $1 MILLION LIQUID.

BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU ALL ARE COMFORTABLE THAT THE FUNDS ARE STILL SECURE AND THERE'S TIME TO GROW BECAUSE OF THE WARRANTIES THAT ARE IN PLACE AND THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT'S IN PLACE TO COVER ANY GAP FOR WARRANTIES. IS THERE AN AVENUE TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO.

THAT OTHER MILLION WE FEEL OKAY INVESTING THAT AS LONG AS THERE'S NO POTENTIAL, THAT THE INITIAL MILLION IS GOING TO BE REDUCED, THAT WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE THAT LIQUID, WHATEVER THE TERMS ARE.

IT'S UP TO THE CITY TO DECIDE. THE FUND IS YOURS.

[00:40:02]

WE ALL KNOW HOW THE STOCK MARKET WORKS. IT GOES UP.

IT GOES UP I HAD TALKED TO SOME FOLKS ABOUT IS THERE ANY LATITUDE ON THAT.

AND SO THAT'S THE QUESTION. GOTCHA. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT GENERATED THIS PIECE HERE.

AND AS I WE WERE HAVING DISCUSSIONS AND I TALKED TO DANIELLE AND TALKED TO MIMI A LITTLE BIT.

AND, YOU KNOW, WITH MY BACKGROUND, I UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT.

AND SO I JUST KIND OF THOUGHT, JUST AS JILL HAD MENTIONED, OKAY, WE'RE GETTING DIFFERENT INFORMATION IN, OR AT LEAST WE'RE GOING FURTHER DOWN THE PATH. LET'S JUST SAY THAT AND LET'S JUST LET EVERYBODY HEAR WHAT WE'RE GETTING BACK FROM THAT, WHETHER THAT CHANGES ANYTHING OR NOT. THAT'S OBVIOUSLY UP TO THE COUNCIL AND WHETHER THEY WOULD WANT TO DO ANYTHING.

BUT THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS KIND OF MY COMPROMISE OF SAYING, OKAY, WELL, THE WARRANTY IS IN PLACE, SOMETHING I WAS NOT AWARE OF AT THE BEGINNING.

AND IF THAT PROTECTS US IN SOME WAY, OKAY, WELL, MAYBE THERE'S AN OPTION TO DO THAT, WHICH IS WHY I WENT TO DANIELLE AND THEN I ASKED DANIELLE, OKAY, YOU, AS YOU KNOW, AGAIN, FORMER BANKER, I GO BACK TO FINANCE AND SAY, WHAT ARE WE WORKING WITH? AND WHERE'S OUR SAFEST OPTION SO THAT WE DON'T GET IN TROUBLE HERE? AND YOU WENT BACK TO AUDITORS AND THEN THEY WERE ABLE TO GIVE US SOME MORE INFORMATION.

YES? YEAH. SO ULTIMATELY, THEY SAID THAT IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE A CHANGE IN HOW WE WERE STRUCTURING THE $2 MILLION, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND AMEND THE AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THE AGREEMENT STATES TODAY IS FULL OWNERSHIP OF THE CITY.

SO THAT WE WOULD INVEST IT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE OF IOWA.

THEY SAID THAT THE SAFEST, LESS RISKY OPTION FOR US FROM AN OPERATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN STANDPOINT WOULD BE TO INVEST THAT $2 MILLION IN THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION THAT IS AGREED UPON BETWEEN SINC AND THE CITY.

AS THE AGREEMENT IS WORDED TODAY. I THINK THE MOST POSITIVE THING TO LOOK AT HERE WOULD BE THAT THE CITY CAN CASH FLOW FOR PROBABLY A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME THAN WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES OR OTHER ENTITIES CAN DO.

SO WE COULD KEEP THAT MONEY INVESTED, THAT FULL $2 MILLION INVESTED FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME THAN IF IT WERE SITTING IN A SEPARATE INDIVIDUAL INVESTMENT.

EARNING MAYBE MORE INTEREST FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

BUT OVER TIME, WE COULD INVEST IT FOR A LONGER PERIOD AND EARN PROBABLY EQUAL, IF NOT MORE, DEPENDING ON WHEN WE WOULD ACTUALLY NEED TO GET INTO THOSE FUNDS.

SO AFTER A FIVE YEAR WARRANTY, IF YOU LOOK BACK, HISTORICALLY, THE CITY'S CASH FLOW HAS BEEN IN GREAT STANDING, AND I CAN THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

SO I DON'T FORESEE THERE BEING AN ISSUE FROM A CASH FLOW STANDPOINT.

I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST POSITIVE WAY TO LOOK AT IT IS THAT THE CITY CAN CASH FLOW IT, PAY IT OUT OF RESERVES, AND THEN KEEP THAT MONEY INVESTED FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME THAN THAT $2 MILLION WOULD SIT TO PULL OUT AS EXPENSES ARE INCURRED.

RIGHT HAVE IT WRITTEN. YEAH. TO FOLLOW THE STATE OF IOWA AND COMPLIANCE WITH HOW THE CITY WOULD OPERATE.

SO AND I KNOW THERE MIGHT BE A QUESTION AND THIS WOULD BE MORE OF A QUESTION, I THINK, FOR LEGAL ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AS YOU GET DOWN THE PATH WITH THIS AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE IOS IS COMING FROM, AND WE'D LOVE TO EARN AS MUCH AS WE CAN ON THE MONEY THAT WE HAVE.

I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT. IS THIS SET IN STONE OR IS IT ANY TIME DURING THE AGREEMENT? LIKE IF WE SEE WITHIN A YEAR THAT, OH MAN, WE THINK WE COULD DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT HERE.

IS THERE FLEXIBILITY AT THAT TIME TO AMEND IT? OR IS THIS KIND OF SET THE WAY THAT IT IS? OH NO, THERE'S ABSOLUTELY FLEXIBILITY.

BOTH PARTIES WANT TO CHANGE IT. THEY CAN ABSOLUTELY DO SO.

OKAY. AND IN TERMS OF THE CITY RETAINING OWNERSHIP AND COMPLYING WITH LAW, IF THE CITY RETAINS OWNERSHIP, THE LAW WOULD BE DIFFERENT IF WE RETAIN OWNERSHIP AS OPPOSED TO LIKE DANIELLE SAID, IF WE DRAFTED AN AMENDMENT.

AND, AND JUST CHANGED THE STRUCTURE, WE COULD DO THAT AT ANY TIME.

PERFECT. SO WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING AT THIS POINT IS, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'LL TAKE MAYBE A MILLION OF THAT AND PUT IT INTO SOME SORT OF BOND LADDER OR SOMETHING. CORRECT? AND THEN THE AND THE OTHER HALF WE PUT INTO SOME SORT OF LIKE ONE OF THE COMMUNITY FUNDS OR SOMETHING.

CORRECT. WOULD THAT INVEST IN. AND TRY AND RECOUP MORE THAN THE BONDS WOULD IF IN THE EVENT WE WERE TO DO THAT.

WOULD THAT. MY FEAR LIKE THIS REMINDS ME ENTIRELY OF THE PARABLE OF THE TALENTS.

[00:45:04]

AND THEN HE COMES BACK AT HIS MASTER'S DISPLEASED BECAUSE YOU'VE WASTED THE TALENTS. RIGHT? AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE NOT DOING WE'RE NOT TURNING, YOU KNOW, THREE TALENTS INTO SIX.

MAYBE WE'RE ONLY TURNING TWO INTO FOUR. WE WOULD, WE WOULD PROTECT OURSELVES, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, BY KEEPING THE FIRST HALF OF THAT IN, IN A SECURE INTEREST, LIKE BONDS OR SOMETHING.

BUT BY PUTTING IT INTO SOME OF THESE DIFFERENT COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONS OR WHOEVER IT IS, WE WOULD DECIDE THAT WOULD DO THAT.

WOULD THAT HELP US IN THE LONG. I FEEL LIKE THAT WOULD HELP US.

I GUESS IN THE LONG RUN, IT SOUNDS LIKE, TO MAKE THAT MONEY.

THE CONCERN IS TO MAKE THAT MONEY LAST INTO PERPETUITY.

RIGHT? SO, JOE, OUR AUDITORS ACTUALLY SAID OVER THE LONG RUN, WE WILL MAKE MORE IF WE KEEP IT ALL OR THE SAME.

SO SHORT TERM, POTENTIALLY WE COULD MAKE MORE MONEY.

BUT IN THE LONG TERM, IF THE CITY KEPT EVERYTHING AS WRITTEN AS WE VOTED ON LAST FALL, IF WE JUST CONTINUE DOWN THE PATH THAT WE VOTED ON LAST FALL, LONG TERM, WE WOULD MAKE THE SAME OR MORE MONEY IF WE KEPT IT.

KEEPING IT ON BONDS. AND HAVE IT SAFER. AND THEN IT WOULD, AND IT WOULD CREATE MORE ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL BURDENS IF WE SPLIT IT. YEAH. ONCE YOU MOVE THAT MONEY INTO AN ORGANIZATION.

SO OUTSIDE OF, SAY, THE CITY'S OWNERSHIP, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THE STATE OF IOWA REQUIREMENTS ARE, YOU WOULD PULL THAT MONEY OUT. LIKE WE WOULD HAVE NO CONTROL.

WE HAVE SOME CONTROL, BUT WE WOULD HAVE NO CONTROL ON LIKE AUDITED FINANCIALS TO SHOW THAT IN OUR CITY'S FINANCIALS THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN AND THE OPERATIONAL BURDEN TO REQUEST THAT MONEY TO PAY OUT, THEN THAT MONEY IS DIRECTLY COMING OUT OF THAT FUND.

AND SO THEN YOUR INTEREST BEING PAID ON THAT IS LOWERING EACH TIME YOU INCUR AN EXPENSE AGAINST THAT FUND.

WHEREAS IF WE CAN CASH FLOW IT, KEEP THE $2 MILLION INVESTED IN WHATEVER OPTION WE DETERMINE THAT IS ALLOWABLE BY THE STATE OF IOWA, THEN WE CAN KEEP THAT MONEY LONGER PERIOD OF TIME, EARNING AN INTEREST VERSUS HAVING TO PULL IT OUT DIRECTLY OF THAT FUND.

BECAUSE WE WOULD PAY FOR IT AND THEN BASICALLY REIMBURSE OURSELVES WHENEVER WE NEED TO FROM OUR INVESTMENT.

BUT WE COULD CASH FLOW THAT FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

YEAH. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. THANKS, DANIELLE. I LIKE I SAID, I MEAN, I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION FROM A FIDUCIARY STANDPOINT.

I WILL SAY THE ONE THING THAT I'M HEARING HERE THAT'S DIFFERENT, I THINK IT WAS THE UNDERSTANDING OF SINC IN IOWA WEST.

I WILL SPEAK JUST FOR IOWA WEST THAT THAT THE CITY HAD INTENDED TO USE THE FUNDS BECAUSE YOU HAVE, WHILE THERE'S, THERE HAS TO BE MUTUAL CONSENT FOR USE OF THE FUNDS, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT COULD BE USED FOR, IF IT IS THE CITY'S INTENTION TO LEAVE THE $2 MILLION THAT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT EQUATION. AND THAT MEANS THAT IT'S GOING TO BE INVESTED FOR THE LONG TERM, NOT JUST KIND OF SPUN OFF IN SMALL AMOUNTS. SO THAT KIND OF CHANGES THE PERSPECTIVE AND WHATEVER YOU DECIDE IS FINE.

IT'S JUST WANTED TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION AND IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE IT WITH EVERYBODY INSTEAD OF ONE AT A TIME.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. NO, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND BELIEVE ME, I. THE SAME BOARD MEMBERS, PLEASE.

OBVIOUSLY, I KNOW THEY'RE NOT HERE, BUT LET THEM KNOW THAT I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM.

RIGHT? WHEN YOU DO THOSE INVESTMENTS, YOU WANT TO EARN AS MUCH AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN ON IT.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT SOMETIMES WHEN YOU'RE WORKING WITH A FOUNDATION AS COMPARED TO WHEN YOU'RE WORKING WITH THE CITY. AND I'VE BEEN ON FOUNDATION BOARDS WHERE WE'VE GIVEN MONEY TO OTHER FOUNDATIONS TO INVEST IT FOR US.

AND THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT ANIMAL THAN WHEN THE CITY HAS TO DO IT FIDUCIARY WISE.

SO AGAIN, I DID NOT WANT TO MAKE A BIG THING ABOUT IT.

I JUST THOUGHT WE ALL SHOULD BE ON THE SAME PAGE.

AND IF YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT SOUNDS LIKE IF THERE WERE ANY CHANGE, IT WOULD BE MADE.

IT HAS TO GO THROUGH AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT.

THAT WOULD BE A WHOLE NOTHER CONVERSATION. BUT AT LEAST RIGHT NOW WE'RE ALL HEARING THE SAME INFORMATION.

WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH. AND THEN WE CAN EITHER KEEP IT THE SAME, OR IF SOMEBODY SAID YOU WANTED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEN THAT WOULD BE UP TO THEM. BUT AT LEAST WE'RE THERE.

SO I WANTED TO THANK BOTH OF YOU BECAUSE I APPRECIATE YOU BOTH LOOKING INTO IT.

LOOKING AT COMPROMISES, WHAT MIGHT WORK, WHAT MIGHT NOT WORK.

BUT WE KIND OF KNOW WHAT WE'RE GETTING BACK FROM A CITY STANDPOINT AS TO WHAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE AND WHAT JOE WAS SAYING SO.

YEAH, I THINK LIKE BRENDA SAID, I GUESS I DON'T KNOW THAT WE INTENDED TO USE IT.

[00:50:05]

I THINK THAT'S PART OF IT. BUT AT ONE POINT, THEY WERE ONLY GOING TO FUND IT TO $1.5 MILLION AND WE PRESSED THEM TO 2.

RIGHT. WE PRESSED PRETTY HARD. AND SO I THINK.

LIKE READING YOUR EMAIL AND LISTENING TO DANIELLE AND UNDERSTANDING MAYBE WE TAKE $500,000, RIGHT? AND SO I THINK HAVING THE DISCUSSION OF MAYBE IT'S 1.5 AND 500 THAT WE PUT OUT AND HAVE THAT.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN'T DO. THERE'S. THERE'S AMENDMENTS AND THINGS WE HAVE TO DO, BUT I THINK IT'S $500,000 IN AN INVESTMENT NOT LIMITED BY WHAT THE GOVERNMENT CAN INVEST IN.

COULD EARN A LOT MORE MONEY. I DON'T DISAGREE AT ALL.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO GO OUT TO RFP SEVERAL WEEKS AGO, AND WE GOT A LITTLE BIT HELD UP BECAUSE TOM WATSON.

WATSON WANTED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES. SO WE WERE ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO ISSUE THIS LAST WEEK SO WE COULD GET THE MONEY AND START INVESTING.

SO IF WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK AND START CHANGING AGREEMENTS, WE'RE GOING TO BE MULTIPLE MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD BEFORE WE CAN GET THE MONEY.

WE JUST NEED TO KNOW WHETHER WE ISSUED THE RFP SAY 500 LESS SAFE, RIGHT? LIKE THAT'S IN MY BRAIN.

THAT'S HOW I THINK ABOUT IT, RIGHT? LIKE IT'S THREE QUARTERS OF IT IS GOING TO.

RIGHT? AND YOU'RE THE BANKER. I MEAN, AND DANIELLE, I'M JUST.

AND I'M SOMEWHAT SKEWED, I'LL BE HONEST AS, AS A BANKER, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE AUDITOR SAYS SOMETHING, YOU LISTEN TO HIM.

AUDITOR IS SAYING. I'M SAYING IN MY IN MY BRAIN, YOUR PERSONAL FINANCIAL RETIREMENT.

YOU MEAN. SHE'S LISTENING.

WELL, I. NO, I AGREE. I'M JUST WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS ORIGINALLY. WE LOOKED WE REALLY LOOKED HARD AT THE WARRANTY THAT THEY WERE LEAVING ON THE TABLE TO HELP WARRANT SO WE COULD BUILD THIS MONEY, YOU KNOW, AND I REALLY THINK IT'S.

UP TO THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE AND PUT THAT MONEY WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAFEST POSSIBLE.

AND IF WE DON'T HAVE TO DRAW OFF OF IT AND WE CAN CASH FLOW IT, THEN OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY. AND, AND THEN DEPEND ON THOSE WARRANTIES WHICH THEY PUT UP, WHICH WAS GENEROUS OF THEM TO DO SO. AND I THINK WE MAXIMIZE THAT AND KEEP OUR MONEY AS SAFE AS WE CAN POSSIBLY KEEP IT.

YEAH. THAT'D BE MY OPINION. SO. YEAH I'M NOT SAYING WE CHANGE IT.

I'M JUST TALKING OUT LOUD. NO I AGREE. I AGREE.

WE'RE JUST HOLDING THE RFP. SO I JUST WANT TO.

IS THE CONSENSUS IS WE'RE OKAY TO PUT OUT THE RFP.

BECAUSE THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS IN THE RFP. SO THAT'S WHY WE HELD IT FROM LAST WEEK.

RIGHT. OKAY. GO FOR IT. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING FOR THE COUNCIL THIS EVENING?

[1) 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, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

[2) CALL TO ORDER]

FIRST UP IS OUR CITIZENS REQUEST TO BE HEARD.

[3) CITIZENS REQUEST TO BE HEARD]

OH, CAN YOU HIT THE BUTTON? PERFECT. THANK YOU.

ROGER WILLIAMS 10605 WABASH AVENUE. COUNCIL BLUFFS.

I HAVE SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO PLAY FOR YOU.

IT'S 30S LONG AND I RECORDED IT. DO WE HAVE TO? HOW DO WE DO THAT? IS THAT OKAY OR? IF THE MAYOR WANTS TO ALLOW IT, THAT'S FINE. AND IF WE WANT TO MAKE IT PART OF THE RECORD, WE CAN DO THAT LATER.

OKAY. GO AHEAD.

[00:55:08]

IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE, THE BACK OF MY HOUSE, AND IN MY BEDROOM.

AND I'VE RECORDED DECIBEL READINGS OF 56.8DB.

AND I KNOW THAT THERE IS A DECIBEL LIMIT, ESPECIALLY AFTER 11:00 AT NIGHT.

I THINK IT'S AFTER 10:00 AND THERE'S A STATE ONE AND THERE'S A CITY DECIBEL LIMIT.

AND SO I PREVIOUS TO GOOGLE BEING THERE, I HAD THE PLEASURE OF LISTENING TO WHIP-POOR-WILLS, BLUE JAYS, HOOT OWLS. NOW I HAVE THAT NOISE TO DEAL WITH 24 HOURS A DAY.

LIKE I SAY, I LAY IN BED AND HEAR THAT NOISE.

IT'S NOT AS PREVALENT AS IT IS ON THE FRONT DECK.

BUT ONCE AGAIN THAT'S NOT RIGHT. I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THAT.

SO I GUESS THAT'S ABOUT ALL THE MOANING AND GROANING I'VE GOT FOR TONIGHT FOR YOU.

I'VE GOT PICTURES ON HERE, BUT I COULDN'T SHOW THEM TO YOU.

THEY'VE BEEN DIGGING WELLS OVER THERE AGAIN, RUNNING WATER ON THE GROUND FOR FOUR DAYS STRAIGHT.

JUST ON THE GROUND. THE WELLS COME OUT OF THE SAME AQUIFER I DRINK.

AND WHEN THAT WATER IS GONE, WELL, IT MEANS I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY WATER.

AND NEITHER IS MY MOTHER OR A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE OUT THERE.

SO I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK INTO THIS AND WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT WATER AND WHY THEY WOULD BE WASTING IT LIKE THAT.

I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT AT LEAST. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, EVERYONE.

THANK YOU, ROGER. ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL TONIGHT ABOUT AN ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA? STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. HEATHER BILLINGS, TWIN CITY.

DO I NEED TO RESET THAT? YEAH, JODI WILL RESET IT.

WE'VE NOTICED NEW HOUSING GOING UP, BUT A LOT OF BUSINESSES CLOSING.

WE'VE NOTICED A LOT OF INTEREST IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS WHILE A LOT OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS GO NEGLECTED.

WE HAVE NOTICED A LOT OF GROWTH IN THE HOMELESS POPULATION AND NO GROWTH IN JOBS OR OPPORTUNITIES.

WE HAVE HEARD A LOT OF INTEREST IN REVITALIZATION OF DOWNTOWN THE 100 BLOCK.

WHILE THERE'S A LOT OF PROBLEM BUSINESSES THAT JUST REBRAND AND OPEN RIGHT BACK UP WITH THE SAME CLIENTELE CAUSING THE SAME PROBLEMS. WE HAVE NOTICED A LOT OF TIMES IN THESE MEETINGS, WE COME IN AND THERE'S A LOT OF PASSIONATE CITIZENS, BUT WE HAD AN 11% TURNOUT FOR VOTING. WE NOTICED A LOT OF THE PEOPLE UP HERE FIND US WHEN YOU NEEDED OUR VOTE, BUT WE HAVE TO FIND YOU AND WE NEED SOMETHING.

AND I'VE HEARD A LOT OF REALLY GREAT IDEAS FROM PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THE CHAMBERS, BUT A LOT OF TIMES SPENT IN HERE TALKING ABOUT FERAL CATS AND POOL FILTERS.

YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE TO OMAHA EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK IF WE DON'T STEP OUR GAME UP AND MAKE SOME CHANGES.

I DON'T WANT TO SOUND HARSH, BUT I SEE A LOT OF FOR SALE SIGNS TO THAT GENERATIONAL LEGACY THAT COUNCIL BLUFFS HAS IS GOING AWAY, AND YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY LOST A LOT OF PEOPLE UNDER 50.

NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A LOT OF LEGACY COUNCIL BLUFFS RESIDENTS THAT DON'T WANT THINGS TO CHANGE, AND THERE'S A LOT OF NEW PEOPLE WHO DO WANT IT TO CHANGE.

IT'S YOUR GUYS JOB TO CLOSE THAT GAP, AND I REALLY THINK THERE COULD BE A LOT MORE DONE THAN SITTING IN HERE AN HOUR OR TWO A WEEK.

THERE'S A LOT OF RIBBON CUTTING. THERE'S A LOT OF GOING TO OTHER THINGS THAT I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THE CITIZENS CARE THAT MUCH ABOUT.

I'VE SEEN THE ONLINE COMMENTS. I'VE HEARD THE COMMENTS IN HERE.

I'VE HEARD THEM OUTSIDE IN THE STREETS AND THE RESTAURANTS.

THIS IS A REALLY GOOD CITY, AND IT'S VERY REMINISCENT OF BENSON IN OMAHA TO ME, WHERE YOU COULD REALLY HAVE A GOOD GRASSROOTS WE BUILD WITHIN.

[01:00:01]

WE DON'T NEED DES MOINES. WE NEED WHAT'S ALREADY HERE.

I JUST THINK, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOU NEED TO STEP YOUR GAME UP AND REALLY LISTEN TO THE CITIZENS MORE AND STOP FOCUSING ON THINGS THAT AREN'T HURTING THE CITY, BUT THEY'RE NOT HELPING YOU EITHER. SO AS AN OUTSIDER, WE CHOSE TO MOVE TO COUNCIL BLUFFS BECAUSE WE LIKED WHAT IT HAD TO OFFER.

BUT IT'S NOT AT ALL WHAT WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE, BUT I THINK IT CAN BE.

AND SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU GUYS START REALLY MOVING FORWARD, THE INITIATIVE THAT YOU PUT FORWARD WITH 2030.

THOSE MEETINGS ARE NOT EASY TO FIND. YOU HAVE.

I MEAN, YOU HAVE A LOT OF CITIZENS HERE THAT ARE NOT GOING TO GO SCAN A QR CODE AND FILL OUT AN ONLINE THING. YOU REALLY SHOULD BE AT LIBRARIES, AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, AT RESTAURANTS, ENGAGING WITH THE LOCAL BUSINESS OWNERS AS WELL AS THE CITIZENS.

AND I JUST THINK THAT THERE COULD BE A MUCH BETTER JOB HAPPENING.

I UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN PLAY A PART IN IT, BUT WE HAVE JOBS TOO.

WE'RE NOT REPRESENTING THE CITY. IT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO STEP UP.

IT'S OUR JOB TO RESPOND. AND I JUST, AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU GUYS DO JUST A LITTLE BIT BETTER OF A JOB OF REALLY TRYING TO BUILD COUNCIL BLUFFS INTO WHAT IT HAS BEEN AND WHAT IT COULD BE, AND FOCUSING LESS ON JUST KIND OF BAND-AIDING THE THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY HERE.

AND I THINK THE GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES ARE GREAT.

SO I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT WE'VE NOTICED.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, HEATHER. AND HEATHER, JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INFO, THERE IS A 2050 COMP PLAN TOMORROW NIGHT FROM 5:00 TO 7:00 P.M. AT THE LIBRARY. ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL? MY NAME IS DALLAS LAPSLEY. I KNOW THE CITY COUNCIL KNOWS ME PRETTY GOOD.

FIRST OF ALL, I'VE NOTICED ON 311 STUFF. THE BIGGEST ISSUE AGAIN IS THE HIGH GRASS AND WEEDS ISSUE IS STILL THE NUMBER ONE PROBLEM.

I THINK THE REASON WHY I'M HERE TONIGHT AGAIN, IS I'M CHALLENGING THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT AN ISSUE. AND I CHALLENGE YOU GUYS TO MAKE THAT AN AMENDMENT OR AN AGENDA TO CHANGE THE 419 TO THE WEEDING GRASS FROM 18IN TO AT LEAST 10 OR LOWER.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SOMEBODY TO SECOND THAT OR HOWEVER IT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO BE ADDRESSED, BECAUSE IT'S GETTING WORSE. IT SHOWS THE NUMBERS SHOW IT.

IT DOESN'T LIE. IT'S SHOWING IT ON YOUR COMPUTER, ON THE MAYOR'S THING.

THAT'S ONE THING I'VE NOTICED. I'VE NOTICED THAT THE JUNK CAR ISSUES.

I NOTICED THAT BUSINESSES CAN HAVE JUNK CARS SITTING IN THEIR YARDS WITH CAR PARTS MISSING.

BUT YET HOUSES, HOUSES THAT HAVE JUNK CARS SIT THERE TOO, AND NOTHING GETS DONE EITHER WAY.

I DON'T KNOW WHY BOTH BUSINESSES AND PRIVATE PARTIES CAN HAVE JUNK CARS.

LET'S CLEAN UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUST LIKE THE YOUNG LADY RIGHT HERE SAID.

I MEAN, IN OMAHA, WHERE I CAME FROM, INITIALLY THEY WERE CLEANED UP.

THEY WEREN'T SITTING AROUND. GET AN IMPOUND LOT, CLEAN UP THE CARS, MAKE SOME MONEY FOR YOUR CITY, DO SOMETHING WITH IT, AND INVEST IT BACK INTO THE CITY.

AND MY AND THE OTHER THING I'VE NOTICED THAT'S BEEN A BIG ISSUE, JUST LIKE THE GENTLEMAN BACK HERE WITH GOOGLE THAT I'VE NOTICED.

I HAVE A GOOGLE WIRE THAT'S BEEN IN MY YARD FOR THREE WEEKS NOW THAT'S BEEN DUG UP OVER TO MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.

I HAVE CALLED FOR OVER THREE WEEKS TO HAVE SOMEBODY FROM GOOGLE TO PUT THAT WIRE BACK IN THE GROUND TO MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, AND ALL I GET IS, WELL, YOU HAVE TO GIVE ME YOUR DATE OF BIRTH AND YOUR ADDRESS.

I'M NOT A. IT'S NOT MY WIRE. I'M NOT A CUSTOMER GOOGLE.

I'M NOT GOING TO BE A CUSTOMER GOOGLE. THEY WON'T COME OUT AND DO IT.

THE LADY NEXT DOOR, THAT'S THE GOOGLE LADY. THAT HAS GOOGLE DON'T WANT TO DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.

AND IF GOOGLE SERVICE IS THAT POOR, IMAGINE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE FOR THE CITY OF COUNCIL BLUFFS.

THAT'S HOW I LOOK AT IT. AND I'VE NOTICED, TOO, THAT THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE GETTING TIRED OF GOOGLE.

AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL BLUFFS NEEDS TO LOOK AT TOO.

GOOGLE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GETTING TIRED OF GOOGLE.

GOOGLE'S GOT TOO MANY, TOO MANY DATA PLACES. BUT AGAIN, MY BIGGEST THING THAT I KEEP COMING BACK HERE FOR IS I'M STILL WAITING FOR SOMEBODY TO MAN UP TO GET THE WEED ISSUE CHANGED IN THE CITY.

LET'S DO ONE THING AT A TIME. I'M STILL CHALLENGING SOMEBODY TO DO SOMETHING.

HOW COME IT'S ONLY IN COUNCIL BLUFFS THAT'S 18IN?

[01:05:05]

COUNCIL BLUFFS IS 18. WHY? I'M STILL WAITING FOR AN ANSWER.

NO ONE'S EVER GAVE ME A DIRECT ANSWER. AND THAT'S BEEN FIVE WEEKS.

THANK YOU. DOES ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SPEAK OR ADDRESS THE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME FOR AN ITEM THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA? SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD.

[4) CONSENT AGENDA]

IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? THAT MOTION APPROVED OR PASSES.

[4.F) Resolution 26-255 Resolution setting the date for a public hearing for August 10, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. on the proposal to convey interest in real property located within the East Manawa Drive Housing Urban Renewal Area pursuant to a proposed a Purchase, Sale, and Development Agreement with New Community Development Corporation d/b/a Neighborworks Home Solutions.]

MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. OH SORRY. MADAM CLERK ROLL CALL.

JOE DISALVO. AYE. STEVE GORMAN. ABSTAIN. DOUG REW.

AYE. ROGER SANDAU. AYE. COLE BUTTON. AYE. ALL RIGHT.

AND THAT MOTION IS APPROVED. UP NEXT, PUBLIC HEARING.

[5.A) Resolution 26-260 Resolution granting final plat approval of a two-lot subdivision to be known as Contreras Lots Subdivision, being a replat of property legally described as Lots 2 through 4, Drew’s Subdivision of Lots 1 through 3 in Block 3 of Squire’s Addition, and the east 20 feet of Lot 4, Block 3, Squire’s Addition.  Location: West of 2302 5th Avenue. Case #SUB-26-013]

RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF TWO LOT SUBDIVISION KNOWN TO BE KNOWN AS CONTRERAS LOTS SUBDIVISION.

LOCATION WEST OF 2302 5TH AVENUE. IS PROOF OF PUBLICATION ON RECORD? YES IT IS. ANY WRITTEN PROTESTS RECEIVED? NONE RECEIVED.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. MADAM CLERK. ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING.

[6.A) Ordinance 6693 Ordinance to amend Title 8, Public Safety and Morals of the 2025 Council Bluffs Municipal Code by repealing Chapter 8.75 "Possession of Weapons" in its entirety. ]

POSSESSION OF WEAPONS. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ORDINANCE 6694.

[6.B) Ordinance 6694 Ordinance to amend Title 5 Sewers by amending Chapter 5.22 Service Charges of the 2025 Council Bluffs Municipal Code by amending Section 5.22.060 "Special Rates" and by amending the prevailing City Schedule of Fees adopted pursuant to Chapter 2.08.                         ]

MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT MAYBE WEREN'T HERE THIS AFTERNOON.

THIS IS SOMETHING WE PUT FORWARD. IT'S IN REFERENCE TO THE WHAT WE CHARGE FOR SEWER RATES RIGHT NOW AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS OURSELVES AND YOURSELVES ALL HERE PAY ONE RATE FOR OUR SEWER USE.

MAJOR. WELL, MAJOR INDUSTRIAL USERS IN TOWN PAY A DIFFERENT, LESSER RATE.

SO WHAT THIS WOULD DO WOULD INCREASE THEIR RATE TO THE SAME AS THAT OF YOURS IN OUR, IN MINE.

THAT WAY WE'RE ALL PAYING THE SAME EFFECTIVE SEWER RATE FOR, FOR THE USE OF THAT, THAT THOSE FACILITIES AND SUCH SO.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

[7.A) Ordinance 6692 Ordinance to amend Chapter 1.40 Council Bluffs Civil Rights Commission of the 2025 Council Bluffs Municipal Code by amending Sections 1.40.010 "Purposes", 1.40.020 "Construction", 1.40.030 "Definitions - Civil Rights Commission", 1.40.040 "Establishment, Membership And Organization", 1.40.060 "Powers And Duties", 1.40.070 "Public Meetings, Records And Confidentiality", 1.40.080 "Unfair Employment Practices", 1.40.090 "Unfair Practices - Accommodations Or Services", 1.40.100 "Unfair Or Discriminatory Practices - Housing", 1.40.110 "Unfair Credit Practices", 1.40.120 "Unfair Or Discriminatory Practices - Education", 1.40.150 "Complaint Procedures", 1.40.160 "Conciliation", 1.40.170 "Public Hearing" and 1.40.200 "City Employment". ]

MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. MOTION TO APPROVE IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ORDINANCE. ORDINANCES ON 3RD READING.

[8.A) Ordinance 6676-A (as amended 6-22-26) 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"; and enacting New Section 4.20.075 to be entitled "Management of Cat Population pursuant to Trap-Neuter-Return; Permitted Acts".]

ANIMAL CONTROL. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. RESOLUTION 26-215. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING WAGE INCREASES FOR THE COUNCIL BLUFFS FIRE SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES.

[9.A) Resolution 26-215 (Continued from 7-13-26) Resolution authorizing wage increases for the Council Bluffs Fire Supervisory employees for the period of July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027.]

YEAH 28TH. CORRECT. SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? WE HAVE ARBITRATION ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, SO WE SHOULD BE 15 DAYS AFTER THAT.

WE SHOULD KNOW. SO THIS WILL BE THE NEXT MEETING AFTER THAT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED?

[01:10:03]

[9.B) Resolution 26-261 Resolution adopting the amended City Council Rules of Procedure 2026.]

I JUST WANTED TO THANK MIMI, OUR LEGAL TEAM AND JODI FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.

WE HAD A DISCUSSION BETWEEN COUNCIL MEMBERS AT THE LAST MEETING, KIND OF GOING MEETING BEFORE KIND OF GOING THROUGH THE RULES.

AND IT JUST STRUCK ME AT THAT MEETING, I THOUGHT WE HAD A REALLY GOOD DISCUSSION AND GIVE AND TAKE AND BACK AND FORTH, AND COMING UP WITH SOME COMPROMISES AND WILLING TO WORK WITH EACH OTHER ON THAT.

AND I THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY NICE WAY TO GO ABOUT IT.

BUT OUR DISCUSSION THEN LEADS TO A LOT OF WORK ON THE BACK END FOR THOSE GUYS TO PUT THAT TOGETHER.

AND I JUST WANT TO THANK THEM FOR PUTTING ALL THOSE NOTES TOGETHER FOR US TO GET THEM RIGHT.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. SO STUDY SESSIONS WILL BE AT 3:00 FROM NOW ON.

[9.C) Resolution 26-262 Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an agreement and award a contract in the amount of $238,000.00 to Fluid Mechanical, LLC for the Pirate Cover Filter Replacement, Project R27-02.]

ALL RIGHT. [LAUGHTER] YES. MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS AND CANCELLATIONS.

[10.A) Liquor Licenses1. Alibi Bar & Grill, 164 W Broadway (New)2. Bucksnort Grill And Sports Bar, 25 Scott St3. Council Bluffs FM, 100 Pearl St4. Council Bluffs FM, 100 Pearl St5. D&S Xpress, 2924 N Broadway6. D&S Xpress, 1220 N 25th St7. Quaker Steak And Lube, 3320 Mid America Dr8. Queen Of Apostles Church, 3304 4th Ave9. The Hut, 429 Veterans Memorial Hwy10. The Olive Garden Italian Restaurant, 3707 Denmark Dr11. Wal-Mart Supercenter, 3200 Manawa Dr]

[10.B) Retail Tobacco Permits (5)]

[10.C) Retail Device Permit (3)]

MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. MADAM CLERK, IS THERE ANY OTHER CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEMS? I HAVE NONE. ANY OTHER BUSINESS? ANYONE? I GUESS OTHER BUSINESS MIGHT BE A TIME TO GO OVER THIS.

[12) OTHER BUSINESS]

SOME OF THEM GO EXCEEDINGLY FAST. I HAD ONE CRASH IN FRONT OF ME THIS LAST WEEK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

HE WAS NOT PAYING VERY CLOSE ATTENTION, SAW THAT HE WAS COMING INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC.

LUCKILY, I SAW HIM PLENTY OF TIME AHEAD AND I WAS GOING SLOW ENOUGH, BUT HE WENT TO TURN FAST AND HE JUST FLAT WRECKED.

THERE WAS RECENTLY A PRETTY NASTY INCIDENT OVER ACROSS THE RIVER THAT HAPPENED INVOLVING A VERY SIMILAR INCIDENT.

THAT WAS AWFUL. CLOSE TO HOME FOR MYSELF. SO AGAIN, I TALKED WITH THE CHIEF WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT TRYING TO MAYBE GET OUT SOME INSTEAD OF BEING A REACTIVE NATURE, BEING MORE PREVENTATIVE AND TRY AND WORK WITH ASHLEY AND WORK WITH THE SCHOOLS AND TRY AND WORK WITH KIDS TO JUST CONVEY TO THEM THAT THEY NEED TO BE, YOU KNOW, GOING ON THE SIDE, THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC, NOT GOING AGAINST TRAFFIC, NOT WEAVING THROUGH LANES, JUST OVERALL SAFETY WITH, WITH THOSE APPARATUSES IN TOWN.

AND AGAIN, THERE'S, IT'S KIND OF A ONE OF THOSE TOUCHY AREAS.

I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT REALLY A MOTORIZED VEHICLE, BUT THEY ARE.

THEY NEED.

RIDE AND USE THEIR, THEIR SCOOTERS. SO THANK YOU.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD REMINDER, JOE. AND ALSO FOR THE PEOPLE THAT RIDE BICYCLES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, THOSE TYPES OF ITEMS NEED TO BE WRITTEN IN THE ROAD.

FOLLOW THE RULES OF THE ROAD. AND YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.

A LOT OF TIMES THE KIDS JUST THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING OUT FOR THEM.

AND WITH THESE NEW SCOOTERS, THERE'S, THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME POTENTIAL FOR SOME MAJOR ISSUES TO OCCUR SO.

AND WEAR A HELMET. WEAR A HELMET. ABSOLUTELY.

ANY OTHER BUSINESS FOR THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS TONIGHT? JUST A REMINDER THE 2050 COMP PLAN IS TOMORROW EVENING.

THIS IS A TIME OF THE YEAR WHERE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND PUBLIC INPUT WILL BE GATHERED.

IT'S FROM 5:00 UNTIL 7:00 P.M. TOMORROW OVER IN THE LIBRARY IN ROOM, I THINK B ON.

THE LARGE ROOM ON THE MAIN FLOOR. OKAY. WITH THAT, I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

SO MOVED. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? WE ARE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.