Common Council - Regular Meeting

Okay, roll call please, Carol. Steve Beardsley. Present. Isaac Chavez. Taylor Crenshaw is absent. John Large. Present. Robert Stevens. Present. Clarence Worthen. Present. Eric Woods.

Present. Okay, we have the minutes from the August 10th, 2026 regular meeting.

I make a motion to pass the minutes from the... August 10th. August 10th, 2026. Second.

Roll call, please. Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye.

Eric Woods. Aye. Okay, the minutes are passed. Next, do we have any public, no public comments? Okay, I think what we'll do next is a little bit out of order, but we also have four additional ordinances that were not in your packets. And you do have hard copies. Yes, you have hard copies. And one of them, is this the one right there? 25. Wait a minute. That's a resolution.

Oh, I'm so sorry. That's the one, though. That's not the, okay. That's the resolution that goes along with it. So it's 25. Here I have it. Right here. There you go. Sorry. Get it.

Okay. Okay, this one right here.

And the resolution from the USB is information that goes along with that.

Yeah, so the Utility Service Board made a recommendation to change the utility ordinance. And so their resolution that they are submitting to the council making that recommendation is in the packet of papers that were placed on your desk. And then there's an ordinance that's associated with that.

Okay, so I will recess the council meeting at 7.05 and open the public hearing on ordinance number 26-25.

So this public hearing is regarding the adjustment of the sprinkler credit. Every year, residents and ratepayers can get a sprinkler credit for the water that they use. It's actually a wastewater credit, but if you use additional water to water your grass or fill up your pool or whatever the case may be, The utilities gives a credit against your wastewater, and that credit was for June, July, and August, three months of the year. It has become apparent that it would be more beneficial for the ratepayers and the residents if that credit was from July, August, and September, as the months of July, August, and September have been hotter than June. So, the Utility Service Board did issue a resolution recommending that we change that ordinance so that it is now for July, August and September rather than June. So that's what this is regarding.

I'm going to pass ordinance 2625, I'm sorry really right now.

That's right because it used to.

I'm sorry I misspoke it used to be June, July, August and September we're moving into July, August, September and October, so there are 4 months not 3.

So do I have any comments questions concerns. Okay, I will go ahead and dismiss or close the public hearing at 7.07 and reopen the council meeting. Now we're ready.

Okay, now I'll move to read ordinance 2625 by title only. Second.

Roll call, please. Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye. Common Council, City of Frankfort, Indiana, Ordinance No. 26-25, an ordinance amending ordinance establishing sprinkler credit.

motion to pass this on first reading yes we can pass it on first and second if you'd like to because we did have the public hearing tonight so I think the utility service board would appreciate if that was done just because otherwise it won't apply for this year but if you'd like to do that on first and second we could do that tonight is there anything about this that's controversial Not to my knowledge. We're literally just moving the months.

I would move that we suspend the rules so we can pass it on first and second.

I'll second that.

Okay. Roll call, please.

Was that Isaac for the second? Joe. Thank you. Steve Beardsley?

Aye.

Isaac Chavez? Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stephens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye.

Okay. Do I have a motion to pass?

I move we pass Ordinance 2625 on first and second reading. Second.

Roll call, please.

Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stephens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye.

Okay. Ordinance number 26-25 passes on first and second reading. was that the only one that you okay okay so we'll go back to the agenda our next thing on the agenda is ordinance number 26-19 and this is on second reading and that should have been in your packet 2619.

And your copy should have notes in red as to the reason for this additional.

But if you'd like me to speak to anything or ask anyone... Would you give us the breakdown on the 69,000 one more time?

Yes. Let me grab those notes. That would be... the I T consulting for 44,000 and the Garmon contractual services for economic development for 25,000. I should thank you.

25,000 is a worthy cost. And that 44,000 is the website as well.

So

which as a refresher, the website is gone by, the current website we have will be gone by December 1st. So we really need to replace that.

I don't like computers or anything, but I know the city does need a website. Especially if it wants to grow.

Mayor, can we speak on how the process will go with this economic development contract as far as Who will be involved? Who will make up the kind of the decision-making team?

Right. I'm going to try to put together a team, and it may be an ad hoc maybe committee. Would that be the best way to go on that probably?

I would recommend an ad hoc committee because if we do a formal committee appointed by you, then we would have to have meetings every time, a formal meeting with the 48-hour notice. Yes.

So I was thinking a member of the Utility Service Board, a member of the Redevelopment Commission, and a member of the Council, Kimberly and myself, would consist of this group. And if we saw that it needed expanded or we needed more input, we would do that as well.

I'll tell you, I'm prepared to support this for the remainder of this year if we can treat the... Council appointment, like we do all other committees and that we, uh, we named three people. You don't always get three people there, but we, uh, we named three people to this because we're only talking about the remainder of the year before we would have to make some other commitment.

So you're saying three members from the council and then, um, Would you suggest one USB, one RDC, since those are smaller groups?

I personally have no problem with the other members. I want to see the council fully engaged in any economic development efforts. Okay. There may be things we don't chime in on, but I think there's probably several we will.

Yeah. Yeah. I think this would be very beneficial for our community. As we all know, we're wanting economic growth. We're wanting, you know, development to happen. And Garmong is a good, good group there. And I've met him and heard them talk many times. And I think that they have a lot to offer to our community and to move us forward in that direction that we need to be going. Okay, you have a motion.

Motion to pass ordinance 2619. Second.

Roll call, please. Steve Beardsley.

Aye.

Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye.

Eric Woods. Aye. Okay, ordinance number 26-19 passes on second reading. Do we want to go ahead then to these next ones with the development? Yeah, we can do that. Okay. So the next one is ordinance number 26-21.

Good evening. So this is an ordinance to amend the Unified Development Ordinance, specifically the zoning maps. This is a request to rezone what would be known as Outlots 4 and 5, as depicted in the Meadowbrook subdivision. These two outlots front on, I believe it's Haven Avenue. It's the avenue, I'm misnaming that. It's the Wilshire Drive. That's what it fronts on. where all the multi-family apartments are. And the request was to move these to see residential. This was properly advertised through the plan commission and they had a public hearing. They did end up sending a favorable recommendation to the city council. to adopt this rezoning. I believe there's also a representative here for Meadowbrook if there's any questions about that intent. Well, they're not bound to it. They did provide to the plan commission a conceptual plan looking at putting in similar types of multifamily units as what you see there in Turtle Hill adjacent and some of those others, you know, five to six buildings each with a number of units inside of it. Unless you have any questions for me, I think that consists of the plan commission recommendation. There were no commitments or anything recommended with that. And the applicants here, if you have questions.

And then on this, because it did go in front of the plan commission and they had a public hearing on it, this is one of the ordinances that you would just either adopt or you could deny. You could amend it if you wanted to, or you can let it go. And in 90 days, it would become law if you take no action.

I'm just wondering, would the investor be interested in widening the four-foot sidewalks he's got in there now?

Any future development would have to have the 5-foot sidewalks.

Would you be willing to do the ones already in?

We actually took care of that on a different item of action with the Plan Commission. They were through recently for platting Section 2 of the current phase, and they needed an extension on the timeline for the additional elements of that primary plat, which include these outlots and then Section 3. and they would otherwise expire this coming January, and they would have to start over again with the primary plot with the city. So the plan commission did give them the five-year extension they asked for for the subdivision on the outlots and the subdivision for Section 3, but the condition of that extension was that they must... submit construction plans including five foot sidewalks for the outlaws and for that section three so if for some reason they were to try to back out of that then i would probably argue their extension is no good and they're going to have to reapply and the current rules say five foot so either way you're going to get to a five foot sidewalk well i was just wondering if they would be willing to go ahead and widen the ones that are four foot now oh that are in section two that's not in this section that's being rezoned but i don't know i don't i don't know if there's anybody here that could speak to

Yeah, I can't speak to that. I'm not sure if that's been discussed at all. I know they had no objection to all the future ones being five foot. But as far as ripping anything out that's already in there, I don't know what your position on that would be.

I would note you do have 90 days. So if that's something that the council would like to discuss is them fixing those four foot to make it five, you could choose to continue this and ask them to bring representation to the next meeting to discuss it. if you've got some time, if that's something that you want to discuss. But yeah, I also have not had any conversation with the applicant. Rob, have you? That they would trade that commitment for the rezoning?

No, but I can speak for what he's asking. If I have permission to speak.

Come on up.

I spoke to the developers. The sections right now, Hoke Avenue going from the entry of Meadowbrook down to where Hoke currently ends, the west side and the east side are already four-foot sidewalks from one end to the other. The last house going down the dead end is five foot. He chose to do. So there's an expansion there. going to take place whenever those lots between the current house and the one that is on the end there will be a transition to five feet the rest of those lots in phase two The only things that we have are four feet is the ADA pads and the entrances or the crosswalks, okay? Every house lot in phase two that will be built will have five feet sidewalks. So the only four feet you're gonna have in phase two is the ADA ramp, which comes off of the street, and then it will automatically expand to a five-foot sidewalk because... That's anything permitted past whatever that ordinance was, because the UDO went into effect, I believe it was June of 23. And then at some point, it was amended, and Alicia would probably have the date in her brain, but it went from- I don't know that I have the date, but it did get amended. We had the paper when residential was changed to five. that phase two plan was approved before that change actually became an ordinance, okay? That's why the entries are four feet. Every house, every sidewalk, especially on the corners, because those are entries, they will all have five foot sidewalks. So you're only gonna have like a six foot, Whatever it is, or what's the green space? Four feet, five feet?

Four feet green space between the curb and the sidewalk.

So it's four feet, four feet by four feet square, and then that's going to feed a five-foot sidewalk. So it's really, what is a wheelchair? What is a walker?

36 inches is your required width for a wheelchair. The reason five foot is what's liked in a lot of communities is because two wheelchairs can pass one another. But how often is that going to happen in the four foot coming down to the street versus one passing and then the other?

I can be wrong. Okay. And I can be overruled. We did make the exception on Hoke Avenue. for the four-foot sidewalks because of having to widen because that is a main thoroughfare. If that ever goes, if Hoke ever extends on out to Kelly Road, which is a future plan at some point, that has to be wider because that's a connector, what they consider a connector. It's not just a side street. Okay. Everything going on has to be wider. We give them permission. Then again, this is I'm assuming any additional development on out toward Kelly will have to be five foot sidewalks because there's nothing permitted there right now. Same way with phase two. The four foot by four foot square, they got us. It happened. It was there. They got it in before the five foot rule went into effect. But every house that is permitted in phase two and in the remainder of phase one, except Hoke Avenue, will have five foot sidewalks. So you're talking just a four by four pad rule. entering into a five-foot sidewalk. So it's really, at this point, it's not really much of an issue.

Okay.

But they are required to do five-foot phase three, outlots four and five. Everything will be five-foot.

And anything going south to Kelly that would be future development would be under the currently adopted ordinance. Correct. Rob's 100% right. Five-foot would then, the only way you wouldn't have that would be if your plan commission... granted a modification, which as staff, I would not be supportive of. I don't think Rob's supportive of shrinking sidewalks either. So as long as the two of us are involved in that, we would be recommending the plan commission not grant sidewalks.

Like I say, it's just a four foot by four foot from the curb to the sidewalk and all the sidewalks, corner lots, everything else out there that's lotted and platted off will have five foot sidewalks. And we'll make sure of that. I appreciate it.

Thanks, Rob.

Okay, we ready for a motion.

Yeah, if you all want to make a motion, again, you can approve it, and then it becomes part of the UDO. You can deny it. You can send it back to the Planning Commission with amendments, or you can do nothing, and after 90 days, it will take effect.

Do we need to read by title or anything? I move we pass Ordinance 2621. Second.

Roll call, please. Steve Beardsley.

Aye.

Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen.

Aye.

Eric Woods. Aye.

Okay, ordinance number 26-21 passes. Thank you. Next, we have ordinance number 26-22. It's the same rules on this as well.

Yes, this is also an amendment of the Unified Development Ordinance, so same procedure. So this is...

A recommendation also that is favorable to the City Planning Commission, this is for the rezoning, actually the initial zoning, of what we would know as 180. So your zoning ordinance says that when an annexation takes place within 30 days, the Planning Commission is supposed to initiate an amendment to give you an initial zoning discharge, but the state law says you can't... create a zoning in your annexation ordinance, you actually have to follow the process of zoning under state law for that initial zoning. The ordinance states that the first day in, it's zoned residentially, but a ban on permits except for houses on already subdivided lots. So technically, 180 is right now zoned residentially, which is obviously not the ideal as their use wouldn't be able to rebuild in that. So The Plan Commission has recommended zoning this to industrial in accordance with the goals and objectives of the City of Frankfort Comprehensive Plan. It was previously zoned industrial before annexation as well. And we've been, as we find a few of these here and there, we've been trying to get them caught and through to get the map cleaned up. And Alicia was kind enough to send this over. So there's no emergency here, but we want to clean it up before there is.

And in the annexation ordinance, as you'll recall, they voluntarily annexed into the city of Frankfort. In that ordinance, we recommended, the council recommended that they be zoned industrial, and then this will just make that official.

Everything around it is industrial in all directions.

I move that we approve ordinance 2622.

Second.

Roll call, please.

Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods.

Aye. Okay, ordinance number 26-22 passes. Next, we have ordinance number 26-23.

All right, this is the last one. We'll drill over these this time around. So again, this is an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance, specifically the zoning map. And this is for the new NHK, which actually, just as of this last week, is annexed into the city. It's so fresh, the lines aren't quite drawing yet in Beacon. But it is fully annexed, so you can rule in the zoning. We caught this one as it was coming through. Alicia, let me know. So the plan commissioners looked at this, and they are giving a favorable recommendation that it be initially put in the industrial district. It was previously light industrial in the county zoning maps. So the city just has one industrial district, so that makes sense. And similarly to 180, if it's put in industrial, nothing about its rebuilding process changes if it adds on or

I'll move to pass ordinance 2623. Second.

I'm sorry, I didn't catch who the second was. Thank you. Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye.

Okay, ordinance 26-23 passes. I'll get the maps amended. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Now, we do have some things that were passed up this evening. We have some ordinances. Was there a resolution?

No.

It goes with the law.

So, we should just have three more ordinances, Mayor.

Okay.

So, we have 24.

26-24 should be the next up.

Okay.

Next we have ordinance 26-24.

So this ordinance would amend the solicitation ordinance, and what it would do is it allows extensions of the license. So when someone comes into town and they want to sell something, they have to go and get a license to do that. This would extend or allow an extension of that license so they wouldn't have to get a new license every 30 days.

I didn't have a chance to read this yet. How long is it allowed to be extended?

twice for a total of 90 days and what is that fee I believe it's $10 It's minimal. It's more about causing less book work for the clerk treasurer's office so that they're not coming in every 30 days and refiling everything. They can just ask for an extension.

And what all does the solicitor license cover?

It allows door-to-door solicitation as opposed to a farmer's market or a vendor that sets up.

In one location. Is it included in that?

I do not believe so.

Just door to door?

Yeah, it's door to door. It's peddlers, solicitors. So there would be no additional...

No, I don't believe that there was any additional fee associated with it. Basically, the clerk's treasurer's office asked me to amend this just because they were getting bogged down with paperwork having to redo these every 30 days. And the fee is nominal. The main goal is just to get them to come in and know who they are. So if there are any issues, we've got contact information for them is really the purpose of the ordinance or the initial ordinance, I guess. more efficient i just wonder if ten dollars is a proper fee who had any information at all on surrounding communities what they charge for this i mean i know we could take it up at the second reading yeah um i didn't look into the fees at all because that wasn't something that we were considering we were just looking at getting the extension so i don't i don't have any information on that but i certainly can look at other ordinances if that's something you would like me to do

I'll do it.

Do you want to table it? Do you want to pass it?

We can deal with the second reading. Okay. Well, this one we've got to read by title only.

Sorry, this one's different.

It's the hard way. Got to switch back to the hard way. Okay, so this is to read by title only, 2614.

Motion made.

Are you seconding that?

I did.

Okay. Okay, roll call, please.

Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stephens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye. Common Council, City of Frankfurt, Indiana, Ordinance Number 26-24, an ordinance amending ordinance establishing issuance of licenses for peddlers and solicitors.

Yeah, now it's your turn. Okay.

I make a motion we pass ordinance number 2624. Second.

First reading, right?

On first reading.

Yes.

And Mr. Stevens, you seconded that? Yes. Thank you.

Roll call, please.

Steve Beardsley.

Aye.

Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye.

Okay, ordinance 26 dash 24 passes on first reading. Next we have ordinance number 26 dash 26. Which one is that? That is the fire. Okay.

So this one was recommended by Chief Stidham. This is for fire reinspections. They wanted to increase the fees associated with fire reinspections. So if they... have an inspection and they need a follow-up inspection, the first inspection's at no cost after the first inspection or first re-inspection, which would be the second inspection, then it goes up by $200 each time that they need a re-inspection.

Chief Stidham, did you have anything you'd like to talk to us about on this?

Sure. Good evening.

Uh, basically what it was is our fire inspector came to me and he was talking to me about some of these ordinances. And, uh, this was one of them that stuck out to him. A lot of the businesses in our community doesn't have a problem paying the $75. So they don't even care to take care of the problems. And then it's taken his time to continuously go out there and re-inspect the We've got a couple businesses currently that we deal with often with violations. And so we kind of looked around at some of the surrounding areas and around the state of Indiana alone and kind of looked at a lot of their fees. A lot of their fees are a lot more. You know, it's something I'd like to visit sometime in the near future about maybe those types of inspection fees. But it's a lot more. A lot of them charge for the first time of coming out. They charge, you know, $500. Ours has been at $75. We just want to increase it a little bit to $200 to have, you know, a little bit more of a stance of, hey, you know, we want to make sure you guys get these items fixed. We've had multiple incidents where we had to call the state fire marshal's office to come in because we have some businesses that don't want to, comply to our standards and the fire codes. So it's just kind of a little bit of an incentive for us to say, hey, we just want to charge a little bit more in our ordinance.

Okay. Anybody have any questions for him?

So our guys are going out over and over and they're just ignoring it, basically, in a way. Correct. Let them pay for it.

I move we read Ordinance 2626 by title only. Seconded.

Would you be a second? Yes. Okay. Roll call, please. Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye.

Oh, shoot.

Sorry. I got in the wrong column. Common Council, City of Frankfort, Indiana, Ordinance Number 26-26, an ordinance amending Ordinance 14-08 regarding fire reinspections.

I'll move to pass Ordinance 26-26 on first reading. Second. Roll call, please.

Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye.

Okay, ordinance number 26-26 passes on first reading. Next, we have ordinance 26-27.

So in Jefferson, there is a street called Washington Street that nobody uses that name for. Everybody who lives on the street and colloquially, it's been 450 West. When residents call Central Dispatch for a 911 call, they will... say that they're on 450 West, and then that will get confusing because Central Dispatch knows it as Washington Street as it was originally platted. This ordinance would rename that street to 450 West so that we would not confuse Central Dispatch anymore. All of the homeowners who live on that street already believe it's 450 West. Most of the public does. The only thing that is presently still Washington Street is the original plat and the Central Dispatch documentation. So we would request that we rename that street to... South County Road 450 West as opposed to Washington Street in Jefferson.

Okay.

I'll move to read by title only.

Second.

Second.

Roll call, please.

It was the second. Steve Beardsley. Aye. Isaac Chavez. Aye. John Large. Aye. Robert Stevens. Aye. Clarence Worthen. Aye. Eric Woods. Aye.

I realize since that they've been annexed in that Frank yes, South Washington Street.

What there's other streets to bits the same way several areas in the county they have the same yeah. Ready for me to read yes, please.

Common Council city of Frankfurt Indiana ordinance number 26 dash 27 and ordinance renaming Washington Street to county road for 50 West.

The motion.

Before the motion, the fire chief and police chief are all in agreement.

Yeah, you can come speak to it.

I don't know where this came from. I've been speaking for a couple of years now. It's a city and we need to name it a roadway that is not a county road. And I think the fire chief and I have been working on that. And so we have some issues with dispatching similar roads in Jefferson. We tried to change some road names a few years ago, had some pushback. So I would ask that you not do this, that we come up with a roadway name that is for a city. I don't know. I travel a lot, and any time a park gets annexed, it changes from a county road to a city street, even state highways. I've asked to move Walnut farther out to the interstate. We're on— Walnut, but we have to call it 28. So my opinion is, is that this be not be voted on. And we have some sort of group that actually ring. There's several roads out there. Jackson Street, Indiana Street, Park Street. So I don't know why this one.

This one was this one was brought to our attention because there was a. 911 call out there is my understanding and they did have confusion with Washington Street and it got delayed And so because all of the homeowners already called it 450 West That's what I was told.

I just hold on Liz not so fire chief or police chief. We're not involved in this at all So I do I'd like that on the record

I would note this got called in because I maintain the 911 layers. Renee Crick had called me. I came to talk to Judy about the problem. I actually have no opinion whether it's a different street name or whether it's 450, but I think the desire was not to forcibly change addresses. And so... You know, that was where it came to. There's no conflict. It's 450 from the new State Road 28 to the alley there. And then you have Platt at Washington from the original Platt from the 1800s. And there's four addresses that are affected. And it's in the two blocks between that alley, which people call Indiana Street, but it's actually not. Indiana is north-south and further over. There's a weird issue there. And then I think it's—is it Jackson, the northern one? Yeah, so there's two blocks. And then north of that, it's 450 again. So obviously there's other Washington streets. I don't think—Renee also had no opinion whether it be a name, although I would argue if it's a name, it should start at 28, not have 300 foot of 450 north of 28, and then two blocks of a name, and then 450 probably. The name should be changed from the north side of Jefferson at Jackson to— 28 so then those four houses would have to well it's a church and three houses would have to change all of their addressing so i think the only reason 450 was discussed was because there was a desire when i brought the issue to the attention not to force landowners and churches to re-change all their addresses But it is Washington Street as plotted and as assigned in 1993 as the 911 addresses for those four homes. So Central Dispatch cannot change their database to say 450.

Can they not?

They cannot because it's not actually the road name. So the road name can only be changed by the legislative body, which is now... city council the ordinance so if the city council does not change the road name to whatever if you say it's washington well then we're gonna have to send letters to those four houses to say you are washington street if you don't call in using washington street you will not get an ambulance or a police response at least not efficiently, because it's not going to come up for central dispatch, so they're not going to be able to pass that on accurately. Now, I guess somebody's going to figure out 450. There's only one of those, but that's what created the issue. So if it stays, it can stay Washington Street, but those for landowners are going to need to get a letter to tell them they need to change all of their paperwork to Washington Street, because they all think they're 450, because the signs all say 450, except one of them that will need to be changed.

Is there a street sign?

Two of three of them say 450. One of them says Washington. That would have to be changed to say 450.

That's not a deal, is it?

Brian? No. So we noted. But no, as far as what Scott said, if we want to pick a different name, if we want to do all of Jefferson, I agree. When you have similar names, it's very confusing. It's just whether you want to force the address change on the residents or not.

I agree with the chief.

in all of Jefferson or only this road? You have a church and three homes that are addressed off 450 in this two-block stretch. Everything else faces Old State Road 28 or faces Jackson Street on the corners. And then the old school, if it gets redeveloped into houses, that's north of Washington Street. So those will be 450 addresses regardless. So...

I agree with the chief because... Once you annex a small town in, we don't want county road names inside our city.

And I also think it is confusing having the same name, even if it is different north, south, east, west, whatever. One suggestion I had a while back when this was first being annexed is let's engage the residents of Jefferson and make a kind of fun forum of, hey, help us rename your street and anything that is redundant to anything in Frankfurt, rename those and let them have the fun of redoing it. The other thing that I've been suggesting is anything in Clinton Prairie District, we have all these hot dog signs in town. Let's make gopher signs for them. and really welcome them into our community.

Would you like building services to send letters of some effect or coordinate with the mayor on that? I will note, usually, we've done mass address changes across the county because of 911 issues. Normally, residents are not happy to have to redo all their banking and everything.

But I do think it's cool to let them pick their own streets. But long term, yeah, it is going to... It's confusing. We didn't take this job to do the easy decisions. And long term, it's the right thing. Long term, it doesn't make sense to have the same name, different parts of the community. Yeah, it's painful. There will be some people that aren't going to be thrilled about the fact that we do it. But engaging them and putting the gopher signs might help. help that somewhat.

I think State Road 20 is different because of how it interacts with outside the community. But these roads here, they're going to generate confusion. Scott's right. You have Jackson Street. You have Jackson and Frankfurt. You also have Jackson and, like, three of the four small towns. So... Yep. What would your preference be then in terms of if Rob and I coordinate to decide what extents which houses are going to get letters? Obviously, you can't go north of Jefferson, I guess, unless you maintain. I'm not sure, Brian, who maintains 450 south of zero to the north side of Jefferson? Is that the county or you?

We have two houses. So the very last house we do get...

So you pave everything on 450 to zero?

Not to zero. We stop at that last house.

Okay. So you won't be able to transition there. You're going to have to either pick Jackson Street or see if the commissioners will coordinate with you between Jackson and zero because it would be very difficult to have an arbitrary point next to a house in the middle of a road to put a street sign where there's no intersection. And then you're... East West are going to be pretty self-explanatory. They end in Caldasax or they end in Mulberry Jefferson. Now, you'll have to decide if you're going to change Mulberry Jefferson. I think there may be just a handful of addresses. But again, you're going to be like 300 foot of Mulberry Jefferson that you would swap out. So you'll just need to figure out what extents we're going to send letters to and how we want to set up that format for feedback, for suggested names.

What about if we just have further discussion on this and bring it up at another meeting?

Yeah.

Perfect. Okay, do you have anything you need me to bring?

Because we're not going to settle it tonight. No.

Okay, I'll let Renee know, and then if somebody can let me know what you need from me, if you want me to bring any mapping or anything to help you figure that out.

All right, we'll help you change those signs.

We can't change the sign. Right now, Washington Street, you change the 450s back to Washington. But then if you're going to change the road again, it doesn't make any sense. My advice would be to leave the signs, figure out the road name, and then change them once.

I would like the fire chief and the police chief to be involved in this in some way. I think their input is very important. They deal with this all the time. I think that's something that they need to really be involved with.

And I'll apologize on that. I had approached city leadership, and this was the direction I was told to go. But yeah, I don't have any problem with that.

Is it better to table this or let it die? Let's let it die.

Because we're going to redo the whole thing anyway.

So do we need anything in the minutes?

No, we just didn't get a motion to approve. Yeah. Okay.

So it's done.

Okay. Unfinished business.

Okay. Does anybody have any unfinished business?

I kind of do. I have some days. Have we made any decision on budget times? We had talked about the 5th. We also had talked about the 19th. I got with Jerry today. He has October 5th, 6th, 12th, 13th, 19th, 20th and 21st. But I think in order to meet that November 2nd deadline, I think the 19th is probably the last date. That's the last date we can. And we have to have this advertisement in 10 days before.

I know I'm out of town the week of the 5th, and I know Eric's out of town the week of the 12th.

Which we could do the 19th. get it advertised on the 9th, and that still gives us enough time, but we would have to call... I see a special meeting on November 2nd for the approval of the budget. Is the 19th a regular night or would that be a special meeting? That would be a special meeting as well.

It would because our October meeting is Tuesday the 13th. Our scheduled meeting is Tuesday the 13th due to Columbus Day. So we could actually... So unless we meet on October the 13th, any of those dates are going to be special called meeting?

Now, this would be for our department heads. Would you want to do department heads all day and then have the meeting that night to approve that? Would you rather meet with the department heads? See, that's what's going to be bad because... We looked at one day or two. We've been saying two, but sometimes we're done in one.

What do you say? We'll say two. 19th and 20th.

It can't be the 20th.

Yeah, because we have to be done, I think, by the 19th. We have to advertise on the 9th, have the meeting the 19th, but then we would have to meet with the department heads and then have first reading.

Is there anyone that can't dedicate the day on the 19th? I'm sorry? That cannot dedicate the day on the 19th if we put it all together?

Talk about budget hearing? Yeah, for that day.

Make one big meeting? Yeah. And just know that it might be a long day.

I mean, what we could do is advertise the department heads on the 19th from 8 to 5, and then we could have a meeting set a time. So you probably need to get with Jerry to make sure we can do all that. But that's the way I understand it. And then on November 2nd, which is a Monday. We have to adopt it. That's our last date to adopt.

So that would be a special meeting?

That would be a special meeting as well.

And that is absolutely drop dead. We can't. There's no November 3rd option. It's November 2nd.

Any reason to believe we can't get a quorum on that November date?

And that November date cannot be attended remotely because you have to be present for a final passage of budget.

Yeah, we can do this earlier in the day to help parallel.

Earlier in the day, which, oh, on?

I got normal council time.

November 2nd meeting, you mean?

I didn't know that affected everybody's work schedule. Probably better in the evening than everybody here.

November 2nd. Does that work for everyone?

What time? That'd be a regular council meeting.

Regular, yeah, special council meeting, November 2nd, 7 o'clock. 7 o'clock, okay. And that's adoption of the budget, and you have to be present.

And then you'd also have a special meeting on the 19th.

And then the 19th, yeah, is a special meeting as well.

Budget hearings during the day, special meeting at night.

To pass it on first reading. Yes. And then you'd have the second reading on November 2nd.

Okay. Check that for sure with Jerry, but I'm sure that's what he told us.

8 to 5 on for the budget, Eric. Okay.

If that's your preference, that's what we can advertise. That's typically the times we use.

But I would say be ready for it to go longer if it has to because we can't go to the next day. So you might advertise it into the evening and we don't have to stay until then.

Well, we still have to advertise the special meeting as well.

But I'm saying advertise it the whole day. Okay. If you don't take the whole day, but so that if we need it, because we can't do it the next day.

What time do you prefer for the special meeting that night?

Okay. Do you want to do seven? Let's do seven then. For both of them. Correct.

Okay. Perfect. Okay. Okay.

That's all I had. Also, Carol, I think, did they get a copy of this as well? Yes. Copy of the report from the Aquatic Center for this year.

So for the Aquatic Center this year, our total is actually a little bit higher than that because we also got $4,571 that we've invoiced Farmers Bank that they sponsored the Labor Day Free Day. Okay. which was our last open day of the year. And you can see by the breakdown that we do quite well taking credit cards. So that's definitely a service that we're proud that we can offer. We don't pay the fee. It's passed directly to the customer. And they're made aware of that prior to paying. And that's true for all of our departments.

Do we have anything else do we have to do we have to sign anything tonight?

We have several things to sign second.