Council - Regular Meeting

Okay, we'll call the meeting to order. Please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, welcome everybody. This is our regular city council meeting.

Weber? Yes. Hanna? Yes. Moore?

Yes.

Persauder?

Here.

Maynor?

Present.

O'Loughlin? Yes. Appleby? Yes.

Next we move to item number three. I need a motion to approve the agenda. So moved. Second. I have a motion to second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Passes 7-0. Next we move to public comment. Item number four. Adam and Brady, which one of you would like to go first?

You go alphabetically.

Are there any new businesses coming to town?

Come up to the microphone, please.

Are there any new businesses coming to town for change? State your name and your address, of course. Adam Easley and then 214 Easy Street went through.

Okay, sure. New businesses coming to town. We have a couple that are moving around within town. The old McDonald's, which is out on First Street West, is now going to be owned by the owners of Del Rio. I don't know what they're going to do exactly, whether it's the same thing or what. It'll be something different. on the corner where First Street Deli used to be. That's been purchased by the same owner as the spot, and we don't know for sure exactly what he's going to be doing with it. In terms of other new businesses, anybody have anything else that they think is going in currently?

Right across the street from me, they purchased the old accounting building, and I'm not sure if she's going to be running... her baby's clothes out of there or if he's going to be running a Lego store out of there or a combination of both.

And one thing that it's not a new business, but we have two grants for two of our larger industrial businesses in town that just got big grants for several million dollars where they're going to be adding on to their building and that's pre's and also Gator. At Gator Manufacturing. So that's going to add a lot of new jobs as well as other things as well. But Preece has already started their construction. Gator has not, to my knowledge. Can I help you with anything else?

No, that's all.

Okay. Just so that people know what's going on, East Buchanan has a program with their school where their social studies students come in and they can get... Credit or extra credit? What would I say? How would I call that? It's required.

Oh, it's required.

Okay. You look like you're really enthused about it. Okay. We'll have the next one then.

Brady Van Gorder, 2514 West Queen Diagonal Boulevard. I was just wondering if there's any plans to work on any roads, problems, all that.

Sure. We've had a lot of road work going on, as everybody is well aware. We've had quite a few sewer breakages, and they've been trying to do the repairs on those and then the roads. We also have a program for... rehabilitation of different roads. What we've done over the years is we've created a plan of which are the roads that are in most need of care. And those are the ones that get first. And we do it on a five-year rotating plan. So I believe that those are pretty close to being started at this point, if I'm not mistaken. I know engineering's done. I think we're ready to start those. So they would be starting soon. We don't have any other current road projects. We've applied for a grant, a federal grant for a road project out that would be going out First Street West, but we did not get the grant this year, and we haven't talked, the council has not talked about it yet in terms of what we're going to do in terms of reapplying for the following year. So that's what I know. Anything else? Thank you for coming.

Thank you.

Okay, Mr. Kenninger, I think you're up next.

Jason Kenninger, 301 7th Avenue Southeast, but let's start off by meeting part of the team here. I'm standing here tonight because the everyday taxpayer of this city are facing a profound crisis of equity. Regular citizens in the heart of our community are handed mandatory excessive bills just for standard city maintenance. Street repairs. We are told the general fund simply cannot absorb localized upkeep. Yet this administration aggressively pushes through annexation strategies and massive TIF districts to freeze the tax base on raw land and build millions of dollars in brand new infrastructure for outside corporate developers. When one of our local elected council members dared to do her job, and demand basic financial transparency regarding these developer handouts. She wasn't met with that as she was met with explosive profanity laced tirade from the mayor.

You've lost your mind.

Are you kidding me?

I have nothing to do.

I do not work for Roberts and Eddie.

I'm not an employee. You swear to God what? Don't you dare talk to me with that. And you talk, you can talk to me that way.

When you're acting that way, you will get it where you tore it. Yes.

in a public meeting, I will have you fucking moved.

Do it. I'm so sick of you.

We listened to this audio online, and like so many residents in our community, we are absolutely appalled by your behavior toward a member of this council. That outburst that you just heard is a clear violation of parliamentary decorum and an abusive overreach of mayoral authority. It forces every taxpayer in this room to ask a very dark common sense question. If the mayor is willing to blatantly attack and curse at an elected official right in public, what are you saying about ordinary citizens behind our back? Especially mine, with the amount of times that I've been up here talking to you guys about the stuff that's going on with this city towards me. He is proving that he does not serve the people of this city. He is serving his own hidden agenda. And I have to take a moment to look directly at Police Chief Ryan Lau. Chief Lau, your department is expected to ensure professional enforcement of the law equally applied to all. Many people in this room tonight know me and they know exactly how aggressively this city enforces its rules when it comes to my own ongoing issues with this administration.

Parking tickets.

Pulling my family members over. the stares and glares from your police officers. That's why you guys got the little three by fives of my family. So I ask you tonight, Chief, since you and the city track everyday citizens under a microscope, where is that strict enforcement when the absolute worst behavior, the loudest disruption, and the most explicit profanity in this room are coming straight from the mayor's chair? Is there a standard of decorum for the public while the mayor gets a badge of immunity for workplace harassment? The issues run deeper than a lack of professional decency. It is a matter of transparency. We see the city pushing corporate TIF subsidies to benefit private development spaces on one end while simultaneously turning right around to drop massive new construction project bids squarely onto the backs of local property owners. You've got 30 seconds. I'll take as much time as I want to. I don't think so. You know what? Finish your five minutes. This is the problem. This here is the problem. You guys pass amendments as soon as I get done talking. You guys come up with amendments just to shut me up. You did it with my toilet because you didn't like my flower pot. There's proof of it. I'm going to tell you right now. I made a phone call and I made it to... The auditor. I made it to the state auditor about your guys' little shindig that you have going on here. Because you, Mr. Mayor, because of the law firm that you're involved in having the monopoly on your little pet project you got going on here. Your time's expired. Guess what?

Your time's expired, sir.

The auditor knows what's going on. Good. They're going to investigate.

Good. Thank you. Appreciate it. Mr. Ms. Kenninger, did you want to speak as well?

Good evening. I am staying, oh, sorry, I live with him. I'm standing here tonight to echo the concerns just raised and to speak directly to the human and financial toll this administration's double standards take on regular households and independence. I haven't spoken at these meetings about any of the ongoing issues with the city until now. Watching the absolute breakdown of leadership has forced me to break my silence. When you target our families with strict enforcement and hand our neighbors excessive bills for maintenance, you are taking money out of the pockets of families. We are told to budget, we are told to follow the law to the letter, and we are expected to take it quietly. And for what? According to verified metrics... AND OTHER PROPERTY TAX DATABASES, THE CITIZENS OF INDEPENDENCE ARE ALREADY SQUEEZED BY A MEDIUM EFFECTIVE TAX RATE OF 1.74%. WE MATHEMATICALLY PAY THE HIGHEST PROPERTY TAXES IN ALL OF BUCHANAN COUNTY, COMPLETELY BEATING THE COUNTY BASELINE AT 1.45%, Eclipse IN THE IOWA STATE AVERAGE AT 1.55%, AND NEARLY DOUBLING THE NATIONAL AVERAGE AT 1.02%. When we look at our leadership, the rules are completely different. We listened to the audio line, as you guys just heard, and the mayor's behavior towards a council member when she called out a conflict of interest, telling him point blank, you work for Roberts and Eddy. The mayor hid behind the convenient defense, I do not work for them, and even if I did, I don't have a vote. When she demanded that they close the annexation until an independent legal review was done, because this setup was pretty questionable, the mayor completely lost his composure. Tax codes and development budgets are not my area of expertise, and I won't pretend that they are, but I know a Trojan horse when I see one. We see this city pushing TIF subsidies while turning right around to drop massive new construction project bids squarely on the backs of local property owners. And it is rumored that they plan to vote on annexing the new areas out by Walmart to go to the independent light and power, forcing a predatory switch that will cause utility bills to double for those impacted. We are constantly hearing of running projects over budget, manipulating the grid through deceptive promises, and passing the check to taxpayers, and now your private Private Legal Circle handles the real estate contracts. It smells like a system designed to inflate public costs and deflate our wallets for private gain. This runs deeper than the lack of decency. It violates the law. The city manager explicitly stated that Robert Zanetti are the only ones under development in this area. By admitting that, this administration just confirmed a complete monopoly. When the mayor hides behind the claim that he simply doesn't work there, he ignores that his name and face are right on the 2026 website team webpage. And so let us look at the law. Iowa Code 362.5 explicitly prohibits any city officer from having a direct or indirect interest in contracts or services tied to their city. Forcing a pipeline where the only firm handling local corporate infrastructure is the exact firm tied to the mayor's executive chair is a textbook conflict of interest. Why is our families expected to live under a microscope while the highest-ranking official acts like a playground bully without a single consequence from the chief of police or the city attorney? We demand an immediate, formal censure of the merit and full disclosure of every tie to these annex developments. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, let's move to item number five, which is the proclamations. We'll start with the Hunger Action Month. Whereas hunger is a vital concern in northeast Iowa, where 12% of people, including one of every six children, experience food insecurity, and whereas every person deserves access to the food and resources they need to live a full, healthy life, yet millions of people in the U.S. experience food insecurity, and when people don't have enough to eat, It impacts their health, education, and future opportunities. Whereas the City of Independence of Iowa is committed to taking steps to combat hunger in every part of the community and to provide additional resources that are needed, and whereas the City of Independence of Iowa is committed to working with the Northeast Iowa Food Bank to educate people about the role and importance of Feeding America Network and how it stands alongside neighbors facing hunger to ensure everyone has access to the food and resources they need to thrive. And whereas more than 2,100 individuals in Buchanan County access food from the Northeast Iowa Food Bank annually, and whereas Northeast Iowa Food Bank distributed more than 425,000 meals in Buchanan County, in their most recent fiscal year through a network of agency partners, food pantries, meal programs, and other community organizations. And whereas the month of September has been designated Hunger Action Month to bring communities together to elevate the voices of people who experience food insecurity and inspire everyone to take action in the movement to end hunger. And whereas food banks across the country, including Northeast Iowa Food Bank, We'll host numerous events throughout the month of September to bring awareness to help and end hunger in their local community. Now, therefore, I, Brad Bleichner, do hereby recognize September 2026 as Hunger Action Month in the City of Independence of Iowa, and I call this observance to the attention of our citizens. I've signed this. Did you guys want a copy? I'm sorry.

I'm going to put this back. I would love to have a copy.

Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize.

Don't give it to her then.

Thank you.

Thank you, guys.

Okay, the next proclamation I have is the... The National Sea Trax Think Train Week, whereas Sea Trax Think Train Week is held across the U.S. from September 21 to 27, 2026, whereas 2,273 rail-grade crossing collisions resulting in 764... personal injuries were responsible for 287 fatalities in the United States during 2025 and whereas educating and informing the public about rail safety, reminding the public that railroad right-of-ways are private property, enhancing public awareness of the dangers associated with railway rail grade crossings in ensuring pedestrian motorists are looking and listening while near roadways, excuse me, near railways and obeying established traffic laws will reduce the number of avoidable fatalities and injuries caused by incidents involving trains and citizens. Whereas the International Association of Chiefs of Police, National Operation Lifesaver, Inc., United States Department of Transportation, and all local, state, county, and railroad law enforcement officers, first responders, and railroad corporations commit to partnering together in an effort to educate a national level all aspects of railroad safety and to enforce applicable laws in support of the National Sea Tracks Think Train Week, Therefore, I, Brad Bleichner, Mayor of Independence, Iowa, do hereby attest my full support, proclaiming September 21 to 27, 2026, National Sea Treks Think Terrain Week, and I encourage all citizens to recognize the importance of rail safety education. And I've signed this as well. Is anybody from the railroad here? Okay. All right, let's move to item number six, which is the oath of office. Officer Becker, do you want to meet me up here, please?

Picture takers on his way.

I, Wyatt Becker, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States. That I will support the Constitution of the United States. Faithfully and impartially. And that I will faithfully and impartially. To the best of my ability. To the best of my ability. Discharge all duties of the position of patrol officer in the city of Independence. Discharge all duties of the position of a patrol officer in the city of Independence. As now or here and after required by law. As now and here after required by law. Okay. If you could sign that one for me and I'll give that to you. He can keep whichever copy he likes.

As long as I get one back.

Okay. Thank you. Can they all come along? Yeah. Sure.

Probably one of the largest crowds for a new officer here. It should be. Absolutely, you've got every right to be very proud.

All right, I think I've got everybody. Three, two, one. All right, thank you.

Thank you to the family for coming and supporting and we all appreciate it too. Hey Brett, can you see if I left my pen sitting there? Okay, let's move to item number seven, which is I need a motion to accept and approve the consent agenda, which includes the following. The minutes of the August 24, 2026 regular meeting. Permission to Buchanan County Historical Society annual Oakwood tour taking place on September 19, 2026. Request to hunt within city limits from Kent Young Jr. for October 1, 2026 to January 10, 2027, bow hunting season. Request to hunt within city limits. From Tom Wegland for October 1, 2026 to January 10, 2027, bow hunting season. Request to hunt within city limits for Ben Wyatt for October 1, 2026 to January 10, 2027, bow hunting season and ownership amendments to the three Casey locations within Independence for their liquor licenses and retail tobacco permits. Do I have the motion first? Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Pass the 7-0. Next, we move to item number 8, which is the approval of the claims. I need a motion to approve the claims for payment. So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Pass the 7-0. Next, we move to item number 9, which is bank reconciliation. This is for information only. Anybody have any questions with regard to that? Hearing none, we move to item number 10, which is revenues and expenses to date. Again, this is information only. It's in your packet. Anybody have any questions with regard to this? Hearing none, we move to item number 11. For item number 11, I need a motion to approve and authorize the mayor to sign a resolution that approves pay application number one in the amount of $528,650 to Woodruff Construction for wastewater treatment plant modification project and authorize the transfer of funds from the sewer utility fund to the project fund. So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. Can't remember whether we talked about this specifically or not already, but I don't know about the amount. But we knew that Woodruff had started work on the project. And once they started work on the project, they had to pay for their different insurances, bonds, things like that. So all of those are front loaded with regard to a contractor. So that's what most of the initial pay application is for. Anybody have any further discussion with regard to this?

When will we have the reduction done that you guys talked about?

This is a different company. This is for the contractor, not the engineer. This is for the contractor.

So this is for the engineering that we got the reduction?

Yes, and that will come up later in the agenda.

That has to do with this one specifically only to the engineer or to the project?

This resolution here is only with regard to the contractor. It's a pay application for his initial work on the project. It has nothing to do with the engineer.

Okay, but it does have to do with the project.

It does.

Yes, so I'm saying you guys discussed the project being reduced. Have you done that conversation? Because otherwise you're paying on a percentage of what that overall project is. That's why you're paying this, right? You're putting a down payment on a home and you haven't yet discussed how much the cost of the home is. Correct?

Those discussions are still underway. Okay.

Okay, so you're giving a down payment for an undisclosed amount because you're still supposedly working on it.

There's a contract approved. This is the first step of the...

Anybody else? Hearing none, this will be a roll call vote.

Hanna?

Yes.

Moore?

Yes.

Broussarder?

Yes.

Maynor? Yes. O'Loughlin? Yes. Appleby? No. Weber?

Yes. That passes 6-1. Next, we move to item number 12. The next five projects are all... very similar. They all deal with TIF LMI set-asides. TIF stands for tax increment financing and part of when you have TIF you have a LMI which is a low to moderate income set aside administration plan. We take the money that's from the TIF LMI set aside and we hold that money until we have homeowners that are requesting money for repairs to their homes. Those people then are pre-qualified in terms of their financial status. And once they've done that, they get the contractors to give them the estimates on the work, and then it comes before council for approval. So that's what we're here to talk about and start with item number 12.

Can I ask a couple questions?

Absolutely.

How much money is in that account?

That's exactly what I was wondering.

I'd have to look. I don't have that number off the top of my head.

Any ballpark figure? Anywhere over $100,000 or right at that?

It's over $100,000. I can tell you that.

Second question, how long can they apply for this yet?

This application period goes until next, not this Friday, but the Friday after.

What is the income requirements?

It's based upon the household size and it has to be 80% of, I can't think of it, but it has to meet that. We do not do the income verification here, but I need all the documents and then I send it to Intercog and they do the income verification to make sure people that apply do meet that.

So it's based on the percentage of their cost of their overall home or what do you mean?

No, their income.

So the percentage of overall income, you don't have a set?

There are set amounts, but it varies on the household size. It's in the application packet.

Okay, so what's the total, you know?

I don't know it. I think it goes up to like an eight-person household in the packet, but I don't have those numbers at the top of my head.

I just meant like not per household. Let's say it's a single family home. Do you know how much of an income they can have before they get it?

It is based upon the household income and it is in the application packet.

The application packet?

I don't have one on.

And is it up to $10,000 they can get?

Yes, the city will pay up to $10,000, anything over that the homeowner is responsible for.

It's a good program.

And this is another form of how TIF funds are important to help other than just new businesses coming into town, it's also to help low-income homeowners based on their needs. Anywhere dealing with any improvements as far as doors, windows, furnaces, air conditioning, many different aspects fall into play. If anybody wants more information, they can check here at City Hall, the paperwork, get a hold of Susie or one of her aides, and they will help you with it.

So I'm going to start with item number 12. Staff is recommending a motion to approve and authorize the mayor to sign a resolution to approve the homeowner agency repair program project according to Independence TIF TMI set aside administrative plan. This is for the project located at 214 Fifth Avenue Southwest. It's a project that involves window repair replacement. and door repair replacement. The cost is $8,838.02, and the contractor is Crawford Carpenter LLC. So first I need the motion. So moved. Second. And then I've got a motion and a second. Is there further discussion with regard to this particular project one? Hearing none.

Can this tip money be used for a sewer project?

Excuse me?

Can the tip money be used for the sewer project or not?

This is a separate type of a program.

It's all in the same account.

No, it's not in the same account. This is a special set-aside account that comes from the TIF money that it's set aside for this particular purpose and no other purpose. No other purpose. Correct. Okay, so then we will do, this will be a roll call vote then.

Moore?

Yes.

Broussarder? Yes. Maynor? Yes. O'Loughlin? Yes. Appleby? No. Weber?

Yes.

Hanna?

Yes. It passes 6-1. Next we move to project number two. which is item number 13. The motion will be the same with the exception of this is for 205 5th Street Northeast. It's a project for furnace heat source replacement and water heater replacement. Cost is $7,950. The contractor is Johnson Plumbing and Heating and Cooling. Can I have a motion? So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. Further discussion with regard to this project number two? Hearing none, there'd be a roll call vote.

Persauder?

Yes.

Maynor? Yes. O'Loughlin? Yes. Appleby? Yes. Weber?

Yes.

Hanna?

Yes.

Moore?

Yes. That passes 7-0. Next, we'll move to item number 14. Again, it's the same motion with the exception of the address, which is 511 2nd Avenue Northeast. The project is window repair replacement. The cost is $9,895. The contractor is Iowa Vinyl Windows. Have that motion, please. So moved. I have a motion and a second. Further discussion with regard to project number three? Okay, hearing none, this is a roll call. Vote also.

Maynor? Yes. O'Loughlin? Yes. Appleby? No. Weber?

Yes.

Hanna?

Yes.

Moore?

Yes.

Versader?

Yes. Okay, that also passes six to one. Next, we'll move to item number 15. Again, this is the same motion with the exception of the location. This would be 812 8th Avenue Southwest. The project is siding. The cost is $7,953.70. The contractor is Michael McDonald. So moved.

Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any discussion with regard to project number four? Hearing none, this will be a roll call vote.

O'Loughlin? Yes. Appleby? No. Weber?

Yes.

Hanna?

Yes.

Moore?

Yes.

Grisauder? Yes. Maynor?

Yes. That also passes six to one. Now we move to the final one of these, which is item number 16, which is project number five. Same motion except the address is 808 8th Street Northeast. The project is door repair replacement. The cost is $5,340. The contract is Michael McDonald Construction. So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. Further discussion with regard to project number five? Hearing none, this is a roll call vote.

Appleby? No. Weber?

Yes.

Hanna? Yes. Moore?

Yes.

Broussard? Yes. Maynor? Yes. O'Loughlin? Yes.

I'm sorry, did she vote yes or no? She voted no.

Okay, it passes six to one. Next, we move to item number 17. Staff is recommending a motion to approve and authorize the city manager to sign amendment number one to the December 5, 2025 agreement for bidding and construction-related services from Strand Associates. I have a motion and a second. This is where we talked about this at the last work session. Strand has come to us and agreed to a $75,000 decrease in their price. As we talked about at the time, this is the first time Strand can recall ever having given a decrease like this, and I believe that We're not aware of anybody else that's ever been able to get a decrease in it as well, but it's a $75,000 decrease. Did I get the motion yet? Yes, I have a motion and a second. Okay, so further discussion with regard to this? Okay, hearing none, this will be a roll call vote.

Weber?

Yes.

Hanna? Yes. Moore?

Yes.

Grisauder? Yes. Maynor? Yes. O'Loughlin? Yes. Appleby? Yes.

That passes 7-0. Next we move to item number 18. This is a motion to authorize the city manager to move forward with partnering with Larson Construction to facilitate the movement of a 30-inch main across the entire parcel at a cost not to exceed $160,000. Can I first have a motion?

So moved. And can I get a second?

Second. Okay. Matt, we talked about this at the work session, and we talked about it a little bit differently, but I think that Matt wanted to talk about this further.

Yeah, so I'll be the first to admit I did not do a very good job of explaining this during the work session that we talked about this last Tuesday. There was some question about the original $250,000 cost, thinking that Parise was paying that entire $250,000 for the relocation of the 30-inch main. That's the original quote that they got. That's not correct. $100,000 of that $250,000 was for the private sewer improvements that are on their own property, not related to the city's gravity main that runs through there at all. So of the $250,000 that they had initially planned to spend, $150,000 of that would have been to relocate the 30-inch main out of the road of the building expansion that's going on. So when I talked with Doug about it, I offered what we discussed during the work session and he declined that and I asked him what would it take if we wanted to do this and he gave me the dollar value that's in the memo. Do you have maps attached to that as well for them? There are, yes, thank you. Yeah, there are three maps attached. Yeah. Okay, so I'll walk through those maps for you real quick too. Map one shows the green line that's on there is where the existing 30-inch main runs. This is the main that runs from the lift station all the way to, it's a force main up until this part where it turns green, and it's gravity from here on. out to the sewer treatment plant. The area that's outlined in blue is the expansion of Prees' facility. The outline in red is the new parcel that they purchased. from a Larson development that owns that entire parcel that's adjacent to it. And then map two shows what they would have done or what the pre's would do if the city chooses not to do this. And that is just the relocation of the 30-inch main as necessary to build their project. It still leaves a 30-inch main that runs across the middle of an empty field that we expect at some point will be developed in the future. If the city does agree... That would be the option that's shown in Map 3, which would show the new 30-inch main running along the south side of 17th Street southeast all the way until it gets to the treatment plant property and then dropping south, which opens up that entire area for future development so that this main does not have to be relocated again in the future, so that we also don't have to do the pumping that's necessary to do this. In order to do the pumping to relocate this main, it's a 2 million gallon per day pump that has to be put in there, and you have to have a backup. It's sizable. So that's where a fair amount of the cost comes from, not just the relocation.

Is this built far enough off of the right-of-way?

As it stands today? I mean, the line that would be planned to be put in would be. There's some question about the existing building. That's over the top of it there on the other end on the very West End And I have a couple questions if are you done dead at this time?

Yes It reclose Removing this and redoing it and everything Does an engine is does an engineer or? It has to be involved in this? It's already been involved. Parise has Fairgram doing that, and Fairgram has designed both options at this point. Okay, so an engineer was involved. And does DNR have to be involved in this also?

Yes.

And they've already been contacted also?

They're already involved.

And it's been approved by it? DNR?

I don't know off the top of my head if DNR has approved it or not, but I know they've looked at the plans on it, and I mean, they'll approve whichever option the city decides to, or the pre's decides to go with.

And if this does get passed, we're looking at Map 3 as the final, because that is the most logical to free up that land for further expansion down the road, correct?

That would be...

And it's a matter of opinion, but yes, I would think that would be the proper... Well, on map two, it cuts basically right through the middle of that big empty lot. Yeah, if we did what's on map two... Which would not be a very logical way of doing it. We'd have to, at some point in the future, it'd have to be relocated again. Depending on when and who goes in there, what goes in there and everything. Yeah. That's all the questions I have. Anybody else?

I'm not a map reader, but... We don't want to build this and then say, oh, this is on the city right-of-way and it's not right.

Help me understand why would it not be right to have it along the south side of 17th?

I just wonder if it's too close to the city right-of-way.

I wouldn't think that it is. It's adjacent to the city right-of-way there, so it would not be actually in the road right-of-way. The only way that I could see it ever being too close is if 17th Street was to be expanded, and I don't see that happening. It only goes from 150 over to the treatment plant road that's there.

Do you know roughly how far that is off of that road?

I don't. One of the few dimensions I didn't look at. Further discussion from anybody?

So we're not really sure if it's far off the right-of-way, are we?

It's where the engineer, it's where Fairgram designed it.

What's your concern about it being that close to the right-of-way?

Because we have things around the right-of-way that aren't supposed to be.

Does that one of them, though, get sewer line off of there?

It's very normal for a sewer line to be placed in the right-of-way. This isn't in the right-of-way. This is adjacent to it.

Does it become a problem ever?

I don't believe it would.

And the sewer line is in what color here?

The yellow dashed line would be the new sewer line. Okay. The red is? The solid green is the existing sewer line. The red is the property that they purchased. And then the blue outline is the new building footprint.

Okay, so I'm asking, is the blue far enough away from the red then?

Well, the blue oversets the red, because that's the piece of parcel that Priest, that's the piece of ground that Priest purchased. As far as is it far enough away from between the blue and the yellow dashed, I would say yes. Did I answer your question? I want to make sure I answered them.

In my eyes, not really. Are you talking about the setback, Deb?

Yeah.

Okay. So you're talking about from their property line or what we would consider the setback if it was residential or commercial. So I'm not sure what that is.

So outside of the sewer line, then. You're just talking about if it was far enough away from the right-of-way line, from the red line. Matt, do you want to speak to that? I mean, Preece's expansion meets our setback requirements as they exist today for that zoning.

Yeah, absolutely it does. About the sewer line...

The sewer line can be in that setback.

Yeah. But the building part of it. The building part, yes, meets our setback from the right-of-way. That was rezoned, if you all remember. M1, right? M2. M2.

Yeah.

Did I answer?

I was hoping it doesn't get built and then down the road we say, oh, you know, they're too far to our right of way and it's not really. We've got that ironed out.

We've got that ironed out. That's one of the things we absolutely check because we've got. As we've seen recently, there's plenty of places where those issues exist, and we're trying to make sure those don't happen anymore.

One thing to remember in the whole design, the grand scheme of things, that's their voting box, not the whole end. Anything built over that line would be payback for their encroachments and stuff like that. Right.

What should be on their property?

Access to it. Certainly, beyond our standards.

We got one of these messes in town already, so.

We're not creating one. I know.

So I don't want another one.

Not going there. It's just going to be just a regular driveway. Really wide, but it's a regular driveway. We're going to load and unload on the north end.

Ralph, do you have something else?

Yes, dealing with your blue lines, the heavier blue line is the outline of the building. The smaller, thinner one running parallel with the street, is that the property lines?

That's the property lines, yes.

So based on this picture here, if the picture's 100% accurate, the red outline is right on top of that blue property line.

Correct, because that red outline is the parcel that they purchased, not the building footprint. The thick blue line is the building footprint.

is the building, the big thick one. I'm talking about the light blue one, which is the property lines. And the sewer line will set just inside south of the property line. Correct.

Okay. Anybody else? Okay, let's have a roll call vote on it then.

Hannah?

Yes.

Moore? Yes. Persauder? Yes. Maynor? Yes.

Yes.

O'Loughlin?

Yes.

Appleby? Yes. Weber?

Yes. That passes 7-0. Next, we move to item number 19. Does anyone want to make a motion to pause the urban renewal and TIF action related to annexation pending a second legal review?

So moved. Second.

Okay. In your packet, there's a legal opinion from Doug Herman, who's the city attorney, legal opinion determines that there is no conflict of interest.

I'll try to go ahead and let's go ahead and look at this independent review. I asked for it on September the 8th. And it was completed by September 9th?

Sure. That doesn't surprise me.

That's awfully quick. I wonder why. Well, probably because this attorney is paid for by our city funds, okay? And who are his bosses, but the mayor and the city manager?

No, the city council is the boss of the city attorney. The city attorney is appointed by the city council and reports to the city council.

How did he get an independent review done that quickly?

You asked for it that evening. The next morning, I reached out to Doug and asked him if he would complete it.

And he got it done that quickly?

Yes.

How did he do it?

Because I told him he needed to make sure that it was a priority and get it done.

What information did he find on it? Where is that?

It's in your packet.

This insult to my intelligence? Let's see what it says.

It suggests that the mayor, without a vote, can control... Stop one second. The entire legal opinion from the attorneys in there. We waived attorney-client privilege so that this could be a public document so anybody can see it. So this isn't a situation where he's giving a legal opinion and then based upon attorney-client privilege he's holding on to it. We specifically waived the attorney-client privilege so everybody can see a copy of that legal opinion.

What is your point with that?

Do I have to have a point? I'm giving you information.

You're saying some statements.

I'm giving you information.

Okay. Well, in it, it says to suggest that the mayor without a vote can control the vote on the annexation could be interpreted as an insult to the independent decision-making capabilities of the city council members who would be counseling this request. I wonder why he would say this. I wondered that. I wonder why our city attorney would say this in his review. Is it because I have questioned the actions of the city council has been making? This is the questions I've asked. So if Mr. Kinninger is up here tonight, you know why Mr. Kinninger is up here tonight? Because he sent him a letter telling him he had to remove his toilet, even though you didn't have a city ordinance to do so. So what do you do? You make a city ordinance to do so. How about we talk about those streets, you know? Those streets? I'm talking, so if I recall, you told me not to talk.

Mayor, can we stay on topic? Talking, please. We're not on topic.

We are on topic because this is an independent legal review that is BS and lies.

No, it's not. We're talking about item number 19. You can talk about item number 19 all you want to. We're just reminding you that we're talking about item number 19. We're not talking about other things. The only item on the agenda...

I am talking about that because it puts into question whether or not I am, and I'll go back to it since you seem confused, to suggest that the mayor without a vote can't control the vote on the annexation could be interpreted as an insult to the independent decision-making capabilities of the city council members who will be considering their requests. Why would he say that? Did I say that these council members at any time could not make an independent decision? Why would he put that in there? Is that because I question things?

You'd have to ask him. I don't know. I didn't write the opinion. I was interviewed for it. I gave the answers to him with regard to the issues that he asked me about, and he wrote the opinion letter.

Should we have him at our next meeting?

We can request that if the council would like us to. Yeah.

I'd like to be on the agenda next week.

You can't talk right now. I'm sorry, sir.

Okay, a question I have on this. A question I have on this is we're dealing with putting the whole thing on pause right now. Are you talking about just the one parcel or are you talking about putting our whole potential plan of the school territory, everything, or are we talking only this one particular parcel? That I couldn't decipher the way it was written on here. Are we talking just this one particular parcel or are we talking the entire potential project of everything?

On the background section, during the September 8th work session, Ms. Appleby formally requested the city pause any urban renewal or TIF increment financing related to a proposed annexation. So that would deal with everything. Related to that proposed annexation. Just for annexation.

Right, for that territory. Pending a second legal review. Correct. Okay, just for clarification.

So what records or billing statements prove that the mayor has not done independent contractor work for Roberts and Eddy PC in about six years? How do the mayor and the developers own shares, office space, referrals, and expenses while working out of the same local firm? Does working so closely together in a small town create the appearance of a conflict of interest that should be publicly disclosed? What emails, calendar invites, or messages should when the mayor first heard about the BCM Development LLC? Did the city attorney do an independent investigation or did he simply take the word of the mayor? Has the mayor ongoing relationship with Roberts and Eddie ever touched on any past or present city matters involving this developer? And what official tax or personal records from Roberts and Eddie prove the mayor was never an employee? What accounting ledgers or invoices show that no billing work has been performed? I go on and on. Go ahead. I'd like to see a real, true, independent legal review done. about this because there is a conflict. Whether you hate me or not doesn't make a difference to me at all. We should do an independent review. Why? Because you work for them. And you can, as the lawyer put it towards the statement, He has also stated he has no information whatsoever to support what I understood to be the allegations that the mayor is working for Brian Eddy, as he put it in quotes. Anyone rather a member of the public or a council member making such an allegation should be sure they are supported in facts and not merely speculation. Well, let's do that then. Let's get the facts, and let's get it, and let's get a real legal review of it. And then let's question on the second part of this whether we use this TIF money towards this or towards other projects, including the sewer. There's questions to be had here. It should be answered.

A couple of things that you may be missing is that, number one, the development company itself is not Robertson Eddy.

He owns it.

Brian Eddy owns a number of different businesses.

Okay, he does own it.

He owns that law firm. He owns the development company. He owns the real estate company.

Yeah, we are aware he owns a few things.

He owns other things as well. The only thing that's involved with regard to the annexation is the development company and the real estate company. I had never even heard of those companies before we got the pre-annexation agreement.

Let's have an independent review to check that.

Okay, you continue to call me a liar. I mean, I'm telling you.

You're calling me one.

What's your point?

I'm telling you I want an independent legal review so we don't have to question it.

I was talking, okay? The other part of this is that I never was an employee of Roberts and Eddy. I worked for Roberts and Eddy as an independent contractor. I formed a firm years and years ago when I was in California called Bleichner Law. Bleichner Law does all of the legal work that I'm involved in. I was never an employee. I never had any health insurance. I never had any of the benefits that an employee would have. And I only worked on the types of projects that I am a specialist in. And that has nothing to do with real estate. I am not a real estate attorney. I've never been one. I've never been a transactional lawyer. I'm a litigator with regard to personal injury, property damage. And insurance coverage, things of those matter. That's where my expertise over 40 years has been. It's nothing to do with the type of work that you're talking about. So no, I, you know, you're, and okay, and even if I had, even if Roberts and Eddy was part of the annexation, which they're not. And I did some work for them. And it still doesn't get to the fact that I don't even know if this development company is a client of Robertson Eddy. I have no idea. Because I didn't have anything to do with it at all. But if there's a conflict of interest that's a potential conflict of interest, then you disclose And everybody knows the information has been disclosed. When was it disclosed to me? We've been talking about the fact that I had done work for Robertson Eddy before you were on council.

So before I was on council?

I've been here over four years, and I know we've talked about it when I first came on board.

So you knew about it. What about me? So was that disclosed to me?

Well, I would have talked about it at a meeting. I'm sure I talked about it. This topic of conversation with you accusing me of doing this has been going on for... This is the fourth meeting, I believe, that this has taken place. So even if there was a conflict of interest that existed...

So you're telling me this is the fourth time that I've accused you of this?

at least the fourth time. Then the other part of it is that if you decide that there's a potential conflict of interest, then I recuse myself from voting. I don't have a vote anyway. There's no vote that I can control. There's no vote that I'm involved in. So I'm sorry that you feel the way that you do, and I hate the fact that you want to not believe what I'm telling you, but I don't have a conflict of interest from a legal basis. I mean, I've been involved in ethics courses. I've got the highest rating that you can have with regard to an attorney, with regard to not only skill, but also with regard to ethics. I've had a Martindale-Hubbell legal review for 40 years probably as one of the top lawyers. I've got all kinds of information. Nobody's ever indicated that I've been... lying about anything before you've done this at this point in time. So I don't care what the council does with regard to this. I think you've got a legal opinion that you've got. We can vote on whether to pause it. The other thing is that there is not any current TIF thing relating to Roberts and Eddy. Roberts and Eddy is only, not Roberts and Eddy, but whatever the development company's name is. CLM or whatever it is.

BCM.

BCM. BCM. BCM is, in terms of their annexation, The TIF, they've not applied for TIF benefits. They've not applied for anything in regard to urban renewal. They're in the county, and they want to voluntarily annex in and pay their taxes to the city.

BESCOP wants a voluntary.

Voluntary?

Voluntary.

Voluntary.

Because I spoke to BESCOP, and they're not volunteering anything.

BESCOP's not involved in this part right here. Could I ask who you spoke with at BESCOP?

No. Couldn't tell you?

Well, because, see, the annexation that's before council is not the BESCOP annexation. There's been discussions with BESCOP as well, according to Matt. I've not had any conversations with BESCOP. But the conversation with regard to BCM, or whatever the right name is, they want to voluntarily annex into the city so that they can build their development in the city so that they pay city taxes rather than county taxes and that they get city... They don't want to be annexed in? No, they want to be annexed in.

Excuse me? My contacts at BASCOP have been the plant manager and the owner.

That will get them... find his name, but no. That was the answer. He does not want to be... He said he did not benefit from Tiffany.

Okay, but... We're getting off track when you start talking about BestCobb because BestCobb has nothing in front of us.

What council has in front... And that the law firm is involved in it. The law firm? How would I know? Not law firm from Eddie, from BestCobb. So if they're in so cahoots of being okay, why are they hiring a lawyer to fight?

Okay, we're confusing two different things. Just one second.

We're still talking about the annexation and the money going to it. It's all a part of this.

Okay, there's only one annexation that's been brought before the council. and that is the BCM property. There's been discussions about others as a possibility, but none of that is before council. The only thing before council is whether or not to approve a voluntary annexation, and that hasn't even come to a vote yet. That isn't even on the agenda yet.

Are you done talking so that I can speak and finish or not?

Sure.

So, like I said earlier, Ms. McKenninger was told by our city manager and mayor that he had to remove his toilet because of a complaint.

Okay, you're off topic.

No, it's not off topic. Yes, you are.

He's off topic. It's not.

I will show you the direct relationship if you allow me to speak.

It's off topic.

The same attorney who's reviewing this information is the same attorney that went over when I asked for you guys to legally review and have me have the information of the Kenninger and the McGrath study, and you all voted no to allow me to even look at that information. It was the same lawyer involved with that. It's the same lawyer that's accused me of this.

Actually, to catch us up where we're at right now is that we've had a... a motion on the floor and a second for the investigation that you're asking for. Is that correct, Susie?

Yes.

So we're ready for a vote.

I got two questions, Chad, a couple questions. Sorry, go ahead. BCM, what does that stand for? I have no idea.

Why do I know that? Well, I guess we probably know if we look at the pre-annexation agreement or the annexation request because the signature block will have the name of the person that are the officers of that company. I'm assuming that Brian Eddy is one of the officers, but I saw the pre-annexation agreement at one point in time because it came before council, and then we partially voted. We approved it 4-2-2. for the pre-annexation, and then they were going to go back and do some other work. They came back and said, we're willing to withdraw the Tempest House. We're willing to withdraw, redraw the lines. If we redraw the lines, then there's no need. There's no island created anymore. If there's no island created anymore, there's no need for... For right now. Right. then there's no need for anything further on it other than the fact that it's a voluntary annexation then. So you've got this group with a voluntary annexation request, and that's all that's before.

But is it one person? Is it ten people?

Who is owner? Well, I don't know. An independent legal review might have told us that information, but we don't have one.

But as you asked, we do have a motion, and you seconded it. So now at this point, we would vote for that in that investigation you're asking for.

But we have a discussion about it first, and that discussion is telling you this is a real independent legal review. This is a joke.

Keep in mind that he's our city attorney.

He's employed by, and directly has to answer to you two.

No. No, he has to answer to the council. He's Lynch Dallas law firm, actually, is who he works for. It's on the letter.

I can show you in the court of Iowa.

The city attorney reports to the council. Let's see you all act on that then. Does this look like an interview?

Oh, he absolutely has to.

Does this look like a real review to you?

Yeah, absolutely.

I bet. I bet. I bet it does.

So I had one other question to ask and I could not answer it. And it's, have we gave anybody in town TIF money before it's TIF district and then roads with it? And then what with it? Then roads with it. Because... You know, this could be, as far as I'm concerned, phase one, phase two, until everything's done out there. So is he gonna come along and ask for TIF money to put roads out there? And have we done that before is the question. Yeah, in that addition I live in, Debbie.

Not for roads, water, sewer, and storm water, like the basic infrastructure. We use the cost of the roads to help figure out the other part of the agreement, but we don't give money for roads.

Okay. I believe we had one that we just had a, we had a development proposal here about six months ago that was very similar in that. Where there was some trade off where the owner that was asking for tip money and- Old station? No. It would have been for- No, it was, yeah, it was a different one that just never came to fruition.

Not Henderson either?

Okay. But so can we get a list of who's under this BCM?

So I pulled up the pre-annexation agreements. Brian C. Eddy is listed as a member. Chad Runnebaum is listed as a member. Chad Runnebaum and Candace Runnebaum are listed as a successor trustee and revocable trust and then Amy Sloan is listed as a successor trustee and Candace Runnebaum as a revocable trust is also listed. Those are the four signatories that would be on the pre-annexation application or the pre-annexation agreement.

And what actually does BCM stand for? Is that somebody's names?

I have no idea. They have a website. See, the only one of those people that I know is Brian Eddy. I don't know who any of the other people are.

I've just heard somebody totally different, and what I've heard sounds like it's probably legit, but I'm not going to be the one to put that name out there.

Okay, well, let's get... I'll call the question. We'll call the... Yes. I'll hold it. If you vote yes, you're voting for pausing. If you vote no, you're voting to not pause. I withdraw that yes. No.

Persatter.

No.

Maynor.

No.

O'Loughlin.

No.

Yes. Weber.

No. Yes is a pause.

Yes is to pause. No is to keep moving forward.

If you vote yes, are you voting to pause? But then if we do that, we won't have the city attorney come in here and explain any of their things?

If the council as a whole voted yes, then I would go out and engage a third-party attorney to do a review.

I don't want a third-party one, but it seems like maybe you don't have all the questions answered by the attorney that did this.

Brett?

So that's what I'm saying. Can he come in and talk to us? That's what I'm saying.

Yeah, the deposit.

The attorney can always come in and talk to you about something.

So for that reason, I won't know.

Okay, so then that's six plus.

You need to vote yes if you want a deposit.

I got to vote yes to deposit? Yes to deposit. Yes. Sorry, thank you.

It's 5-2.

Yeah, 5-2 to deposit, so it fails.

Okay, let's move then to... May I make a statement?

No.

Pardon me? I think I get to decide who makes a statement or not. Not you. I can't remember you being elected mayor, but I'll try here.

What do you got?

Is there a possibility, since it was brought up, that Matt could possibly have, I'm just one person out of seven, that the attorney could come in for further explanation or you just want to let it lie? Just a thought.

We can talk about it. Well, and I'll ask a question. Can Melissa reach out to that lawyer and ask the question she wants to ask? We're allowed to do that, right?

Well, you guys have already voted not to have further... That's another person. But you're going to spend money doing this if you're going to do it. I mean, I don't care.

But we can spend so much money as counsel people talking with lawyers. We've had that discussion.

Yeah, and they blocked me before.

I'm just asking because... Not my call. I don't do it. I'm asking a question so I don't have to answer, but that's what I'm asking.

I think it's an independent legal review should have a review to cover that information. They haven't done their due diligence, which is getting a real legal independent review. You're saying this is an unacceptable, which it is, unacceptable independent legal review. You're kicking a bat and asking for a real attorney to review it.

I think Doug wouldn't be happy if you didn't call him. He said it wasn't a real attorney. I believe he's passed the bar and he's practicing law for a number of years and he's He's a city attorney for at least, I don't know how many different cities, but a number. Multiple. Multiple. So it's not like he represents just us. He represents a number of cities. And in addition to that, he represents a lot of other clients with his firm as well.

And that can be very close to slander.

Okay, so we're going to... Kind of like calling me crazy? We're going to item number 20, which is the PD monthly report. Anybody have any questions with regard to the report? Hearing none, we move to item number 21. This is the fire department monthly report. Anybody have any questions with regard to the fire department's monthly report? Hearing none, we move to item number 22, which is the building department monthly report. Anybody have any questions with regard to the building department monthly report? Hearing none, we move to item number 23, which is the ILP and TEE monthly report. Anybody have any questions with regard to that report? Okay, let's move to council member reports. Brett, do you have anything?

I have nothing, Mayor. Brett, do you have anything? I got my list from Monday night. Can we have an update on Tysons or is that not allowed here?

There's no update to provide.

Well, yesterday at 315, there wasn't one car. There's not one car in the back parking lot. There's a dozen in front. Neighbors have been telling me they're moving everything out. And I think with the money that we have put into that, we as a city need some answers. And I've had calls about it. I've just put that out there.

Okay. Follow up on that.

Another thing is the Crawford property. I'm going to call it across the street from me. Does Donnelly own that or does the city own it? And same with the other one that Donnelly bought.

They're both still under the ownership of the city. We are waiting on, I think he was, the city attorney was working on closing that as soon as possible.

I can't believe it's taken this long. Like Melissa said, it took one day for him to write that conflicted letter, and I bought property before, and I've got property in my name within a week. And I just don't know. When Donnelly acquires, though, she's got 90 days to tear them down, and we're talking 90 days into winter. And again, the only time that Crawford properties got mowed is twice when I've called about it and they've mowed it. It's a hay field. It looks worse when Crawford owned it. And the other one down there has not been mowed. So I'd say with an attorney, get on the ball, get those into Donnelly's name and let Donnelly get that stuff done. Okay, enough on that. Bike signs. A lot of the intersections downtown don't have those bike signs out. Do we still have some?

I think we still have some left over, but what we talked about with the council was that they would be placed at the perimeter of the downtown business district. That's what's been done. If the council would like us to order more of them to put them at intersections downtown, we can absolutely do that.

Well, if we want them to work, we have to, because when they get on some of these corners, there's nothing to tell them.

If in order to get to those corners, they have to ride their bike to that corner, and there's already one prior to that corner.

Not all of them. I could give you a lot of examples. He lived in a house over here behind scooters, and he'd come up here. There's nothing that says, I've got to stop here at these intersections. And when I've seen the bikes, I kind of look to see where they're at. That's just my opinion, so I don't know. Okay, that's it. Thank you.

It's interesting Deb brought that up because that was one of the things I was going to suggest. On our main business district downtown, basically right at the corner here of City Hall all the way to the bridge, I think there should be one on each major intersection as you go down on both sides.

Well, not going to get to the bridge. There isn't even one, I tell you.

No, but that's why I say down to the edge of the bridge. And I think they should be on both sides at the intersections. Just a personal opinion.

On the other side of the bridge, is there one near the Burger King, or where's it at?

It would be at, I believe, 3rd Street. 3rd Avenue. Sorry, yes, 3rd Avenue. Because when you're riding down 1st Street West, 3rd Avenue is the beginning of the business district.

It's the beginning of the business district, but what I'm talking about is right in the heart of the business district.

Right, and that's why I said what I did. We placed them at the perimeter of the business district. They are at the perimeter. Every sidewalk that crosses the perimeter of the business district has one installed.

So when you get inside the perimeter, you don't see it, no?

Correct. So if we want them downtown, we can add them. We were doing that as an initial way to try to address it, but not spend as much money.

Can we possibly get that on an agenda to find out the entire council's opinion on that?

I don't think it needs to be on an agenda. I can take care of it.

Well, yeah, but I'm just one person mentioning it. I don't know how the rest of the council feels.

I feel like you've heard my opinion on it, is that in order to get into the business district, you have to go across those areas. There might be a few homes that are within this district, but I would think after a short period of time, you're going to find out that you shouldn't be riding in it. It's been no different my entire life that I've lived here. You shouldn't be riding a bicycle, a skateboard, any of that stuff in this area. Yeah. That's just my opinion, I guess. Effective, anyway.

Other than that, that's it? I have nothing, Mayor. Thank you.

I have nothing. Well, I'm here to testify that last Friday I got clipped by another scooter when I was hauling furniture out of Adam's furniture. So obviously they're not adhering to our rules. I don't know if we need more enforcement or what, but...

So are you saying you think they should be on the main drag?

I don't know what the answer is, but they should. They already know. I mean, once this kid went by me. Was it on the sidewalk or street? Sidewalk.

Yeah. Yeah. So I haven't personally witnessed anybody getting pulled over, but I've heard stories of people getting pulled over, bicyclists or scooters, things like that. And I think that, in my opinion, that this would take time in order for it to actually get out there and say, oh, it looks like the city is actually trying to enforce this. It's not going to just be a hard stop to something overnight unless we pay an officer to sit downtown all the time. Yeah.

Chief Lau, do you have any information for us about that?

Yeah, so the signs that have been placed in that outer perimeter, I believe have helped tremendously. I've seen a lot of kids that get up to that area, they get off their bikes, they get off their scooters, they walk them. I think we're always gonna have the ones that are gonna try to bend the rules or they're just not paying attention or they haven't been talked to yet. So I would say there was a day that prior to school starting I actually paid to have two people sit in the downtown area and they didn't have a single bike in the morning. So it really, I mean, it just depends day to day, but I would encourage that if anybody does see that to call or have whoever calls you as a council person call us directly and report what they've seen and what that person was wearing, et cetera, so that way an officer can locate them and either start enforcement or start education to that teenager or that youth to inform them. We're just not getting the calls is the problem. Everybody says it happens, but nobody calls us to report it, so we can't locate that person and address that at that specific time. But in reference to the signs and the approaches, I think those approaches have helped a lot. And that's what I remember as a kid growing up is when I was on my bike or whatever it was, and if I was going to the downtown area, That's where you look, is you look ahead of you to where you're driving. You don't necessarily look at the signs on a post. So I do think those are very, very helpful, regardless of whether or not you guys choose to put them elsewhere in the downtown area, but I do think the ones on the exterior have helped a lot.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. Anything else, Mike? That's it. Melissa?

Yeah. In regards to the ordinance change, because of Mr. Keninger, to change it from what it was to the right-of-way, and the letter's being sent out. Adam Trombley definitely is saying that he's hiring on an attorney, and he wanted me to make you aware of that.

Okay. Great, thank you. Okay, Matt. I have nothing. I don't have anything either. Any other department head? Matt, do you have anything? I didn't have anything else. Okay, then I'd entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting. So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Stand adjourned.